#3751949 - 03/16/13 08:34 AM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: Lieste]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
Only because there isn't an approach from the south to Sinop - you'd have to make a longer route to hit it from West Or East... While you can just head north in a straight-ish line via DETOS UW-99 ODIRA.
Departure practically due south. Of course ~ with relations being poor between Israel and Syria/Lebanon, there might routinely be a large detour over the Med, making SINOP slightly more probable... but I'd still favour DETOS/UW-99.
Another consideration indicating a turn at ODIRA is that the plot has the aircraft someway south of the nominal corridor ~ this could be the result of an early turn intended to make up time? Some additioonal info: 1. Press release (google translation from russian):Plane, say local experts from turkish Flight Services Control, at 12:29 local time (13:29 MSK) on Thursday passed the airport flight information zone Samsun on the Black Sea coast, in 12.40 - left the flight zone of Turkey Source 2. Press release from "Siberia" 1:OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT of Siberia Flight details SBI1812 The Tu-154 (RA-85693) was Flight SBI 1811/1812 from Novosibirsk, Sochi-Tel Aviv-Novosibirsk. On the way to Israel, landing in Sochi was performed in order to refuel. The actual timetable (time UTC): October 3, 2001 SBI - 1811 Novosibirsk - Sochi - Tel Aviv (DST 0909 - Vol 1338/1500 - TLV 1700). October 4, 2001 SBI - 1812 Tel Aviv - point Rabit (TLV 0800 - RABIT 0944). Estimated flight time based on actual weather: Novosibirsk - Sochi = 4 hours 38 minutes, Sochi - Tel Aviv = 2 hours 08 minutes. Tel Aviv - Novosibirsk = 6 hours 00 minutes. The actual flight time: Novosibirsk - Sochi = 4 hours 29 minutes. Sochi - Tel Aviv = 2 hours 00 minutes. Tel Aviv - RABIT = 1 hour 44 minutes.
Source 3. Press release from Siberia 2: Official Statement airline "Siberia"
NOVOSIBIRSK, October 6, 2001 (12:00 local time).
Unfortunately, the media may be full of inaccuracies and distortions. Most often distorted by the following:
1 The Tu-154 (RA-85693) Campaign followed the flight number 1812 from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk landing directly without intermediate in Bulgaria. Flight plan did not envisage such a landing. 2 Flight number 1812, adopted in accordance with the Russian civil aviation terminology, is a "charter on a regular basis." Departure of this flight from Novosibirsk is year round on Wednesdays. The first flight of "Siberia" in Novosibirsk - Tel Aviv was executed in 1995. 3 The exact title of Victor Alexeev, located in the crew of Flight number 1812 - The head of flight safety inspection airline "Siberia." It was not the deputy director general of airline "Siberia." 4 The exact title of Vladimir Tasun, head of the operational headquarters in Novosibirsk - the head of the West Siberian District Interregional Territorial Administration air transport ministry.
The airline "Siberia" will provide further information as it becomes available. ------------- Now, looking at map, that it could come up straight from ERGUN nav.point: , but "Siberia" also stated that the plane followed strictly the air roots (which is contrary to court documents.... Now should find out what is "airport flight information zone Samsun"...
Last edited by piston79; 03/16/13 09:16 AM.
|
|
#3756712 - 03/24/13 01:58 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
2. Press release from "Siberia" 1:OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT of Siberia Flight details SBI1812 The Tu-154 (RA-85693) was Flight SBI 1811/1812 from Novosibirsk, Sochi-Tel Aviv-Novosibirsk. On the way to Israel, landing in Sochi was performed in order to refuel. The actual timetable (time UTC): October 3, 2001 SBI - 1811 Novosibirsk - Sochi - Tel Aviv (DST 0909 - Vol 1338/1500 - TLV 1700). October 4, 2001 SBI - 1812 Tel Aviv - point Rabit (TLV 0800 - RABIT 0944). Estimated flight time based on actual weather: Novosibirsk - Sochi = 4 hours 38 minutes, Sochi - Tel Aviv = 2 hours 08 minutes. Tel Aviv - Novosibirsk = 6 hours 00 minutes. The actual flight time: Novosibirsk - Sochi = 4 hours 29 minutes. Sochi - Tel Aviv = 2 hours 00 minutes. Tel Aviv - RABIT = 1 hour 44 minutes.
Source Here the probable root of Tu-154M from Ben Gurion to ODIRA (credits to Lonewolf357). Total distance from Ben Gurion to crash site - 1419 km, time of flight - 1 hour 44 minutes, average speed - 817 km/h (looks plausible)
Last edited by piston79; 03/24/13 03:47 PM.
|
|
#3756830 - 03/24/13 06:33 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: Lieste]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
I'd personally favour SIV-DETOS-UW99-earlyturn-UW96, but if there is specific information confirming being out of track position on the inbound leg to ODIRA, as well as the range indication that it was south of track 'outbound' towards Sochi.
Yes, you're right, I just didn't do it well... The information I've got recently (check couple of previous posts) is as follows: 1. According turkish experts - at 12.29 it passes Samsun, at 12.40 - it leaves turkish aerospace.(press release) 2. At 12.39.20 the ship called North-Caucasian center of ground controllers for passing ODIRA point.(internet - http://www.airdisaster.ru/reports.php?id=8) 3. It was outside the flight path and after radiocall from "Adler" airport it goes to the B-145 (clearly visible between 12.41 and 12.44 on ploating board)(court documents). 4. According a press release from "Syberia" the ship strictly follows the navigation roots (which is a bit contrary to point 3).(press release) ....... I wrote to turkish authorities about more details for it's path, but no answer...
|
|
#3763701 - 04/06/13 08:44 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: Hpasp]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
The strongest contributors to RCS are engines, so Tu-154, with three of them, should be somewhere between Tu-16 and Il-76. Strictly my IMHO. I would guess the Tu-154 RCS around 42sqrm. That gives 280km of 10dB lockon range for the GSN... So: RCS(tu-143)/range^4=RCS(tu-154m)/range^4
42 sq. m./280^4 = 0.3 sq. m./x^4thus make ~81.4 km range for Tu-143 (Reis) with 10 dB signal/noise ratio (IMHCalculations). Same ratio for Tu-154M would be achieved at say ~275-280 km.... Here, where target and Tu-154M should have been when RPN illuminates "something": Here, when the missile was launched (both objects are within the range of min 10dB signal over noise strength...):
|
|
#3983553 - 07/20/14 04:59 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
|
|
#4145772 - 07/12/15 08:00 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: Mdore]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
I think aircraft in SAM Simulator are probably modelled as large steel balls. I.E. radar cross section is the same, no matter what angle you're looking at.
Real aircraft are much more reflective at certain angles, maybe that could explain what you're seeing? You're right: Still the signal is too strong for Tu-154 at ~250 km IMHO
|
|
#4299631 - 09/28/16 03:46 AM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
|
|
#4518174 - 04/26/20 01:09 AM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
Not sure is it true or not.... Of course, it’s possible to tell, because I practically know everything, but no matter how they later banged me, after all, practically no one “sits” for these matters, and I think the forums are visited not only by us. At that time I was the head of the AKIPS department, I was sent there to prepare missiles for firing. The Vasilkov brigade was shifted for the firing exercise, my own station for checking the onboard equipment of the missiles was better than their old modification,, and I drove my 80K6 from Sevastopol, and I got prepared 2 missiles for the firing exercise on 4-th of October.
Believe it or not, but apparently someone’s guardian angel clearly didn’t want this to happen. On October 2-nd, the missile passed full verification control, all parameters are within tolerance, on October 3 it is taken to SAM site (30 km from me) and the missile was loaded on the launch pad but the missile does not pass functional control (FK), it is brought back to me at 1 O'CLOCK in the morning, I check everything thoroughly again , everything is normal, driven back, put on the launcher , control passed, at 12 o'clock shooting must be commenced.
Both missiles was in readiness state, both see the target, they launcedh the one that did not want to fly. The target (Tu-143 drone) starts, it is tracked almost immediately from the beginning, it is receiding from us, fully tracked it is at 1 km height, it is being lost at the U-turn, it is turned on for search, it works in MHI mode, thewre was not enough time, the crew didn't use FKM mode to measure the range (they afraid they would not manage to do the process in time), the RPC (Square pair) finds the target, but at an altitude of 11 km, nobody switches the scale of the altitude display device, they think that it is 1 km, the range is unknown, as I said they work at MHI mode, launched a missile, the GSN of the missiles sees and tracks the target. The stopwatch naturally works, knowing the approximate range of the impact, it is easy to determine the flight time of the missile to the point of impact. More than a minute passes the missile still in flight, it is already clear that something is wrong, it is urgent to turn off the power, but no one is doing this, “senior comrades” are behind the operators and the launch officer, well, then I think everything is clear.
I'm not talking about the fact that the corridors of the flight of aviation were closed not at the range that this shooting required.
Of course, I got off with a slight startle, the control check of the check saved me. To be precise, officialy from the papers and forms the missile was checked by a missile officer from the Vasilkovskaya brigade, who saw my station for the first time only there at the training ground, and he presented this check to the commander in chief and defense minister .
This is the situation, guys, but I didn’t want to serve anymore, and left the reserve. I went to church, put a few candles for the peace of souls of the people who innocently died on October 4, 2001.
|
|
#4533479 - 08/13/20 03:12 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 635
Alien_MasterMynd
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 635
Czech Republic
|
Not sure is it true or not.... Of course, it’s possible to tell, because I practically know everything, but no matter how they later banged me, after all, practically no one “sits” for these matters, and I think the forums are visited not only by us. At that time I was the head of the AKIPS department, I was sent there to prepare missiles for firing. The Vasilkov brigade was shifted for the firing exercise, my own station for checking the onboard equipment of the missiles was better than their old modification,, and I drove my 80K6 from Sevastopol, and I got prepared 2 missiles for the firing exercise on 4-th of October.
Believe it or not, but apparently someone’s guardian angel clearly didn’t want this to happen. On October 2-nd, the missile passed full verification control, all parameters are within tolerance, on October 3 it is taken to SAM site (30 km from me) and the missile was loaded on the launch pad but the missile does not pass functional control (FK), it is brought back to me at 1 O'CLOCK in the morning, I check everything thoroughly again , everything is normal, driven back, put on the launcher , control passed, at 12 o'clock shooting must be commenced.
Both missiles was in readiness state, both see the target, they launcedh the one that did not want to fly. The target (Tu-143 drone) starts, it is tracked almost immediately from the beginning, it is receiding from us, fully tracked it is at 1 km height, it is being lost at the U-turn, it is turned on for search, it works in MHI mode, thewre was not enough time, the crew didn't use FKM mode to measure the range (they afraid they would not manage to do the process in time), the RPC (Square pair) finds the target, but at an altitude of 11 km, nobody switches the scale of the altitude display device, they think that it is 1 km, the range is unknown, as I said they work at MHI mode, launched a missile, the GSN of the missiles sees and tracks the target. The stopwatch naturally works, knowing the approximate range of the impact, it is easy to determine the flight time of the missile to the point of impact. More than a minute passes the missile still in flight, it is already clear that something is wrong, it is urgent to turn off the power, but no one is doing this, “senior comrades” are behind the operators and the launch officer, well, then I think everything is clear.
I'm not talking about the fact that the corridors of the flight of aviation were closed not at the range that this shooting required.
Of course, I got off with a slight startle, the control check of the check saved me. To be precise, officialy from the papers and forms the missile was checked by a missile officer from the Vasilkovskaya brigade, who saw my station for the first time only there at the training ground, and he presented this check to the commander in chief and defense minister .
This is the situation, guys, but I didn’t want to serve anymore, and left the reserve. I went to church, put a few candles for the peace of souls of the people who innocently died on October 4, 2001.
Quite possible when they incorrectly reacquired the target as a result of losing target at near-zero radial velocity (someone forget to switch mode during this part of target's trajectory), remember our discussions here. The pressure during the test must have been very high and then mistakes arises. Remember also hpasp's photo he got somewhere showing the IFF response when the RPC was not in target tracking mode.
|
|
#4547149 - 12/04/20 08:59 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: piston79]
|
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 5
Fireman
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 5
ČR
|
Not sure is it true or not.... Of course, it’s possible to tell, because I practically know everything, but no matter how they later banged me, after all, practically no one “sits” for these matters, and I think the forums are visited not only by us. At that time I was the head of the AKIPS department, I was sent there to prepare missiles for firing. The Vasilkov brigade was shifted for the firing exercise, my own station for checking the onboard equipment of the missiles was better than their old modification,, and I drove my 80K6 from Sevastopol, and I got prepared 2 missiles for the firing exercise on 4-th of October.
Believe it or not, but apparently someone’s guardian angel clearly didn’t want this to happen. On October 2-nd, the missile passed full verification control, all parameters are within tolerance, on October 3 it is taken to SAM site (30 km from me) and the missile was loaded on the launch pad but the missile does not pass functional control (FK), it is brought back to me at 1 O'CLOCK in the morning, I check everything thoroughly again , everything is normal, driven back, put on the launcher , control passed, at 12 o'clock shooting must be commenced.
Both missiles was in readiness state, both see the target, they launcedh the one that did not want to fly. The target (Tu-143 drone) starts, it is tracked almost immediately from the beginning, it is receiding from us, fully tracked it is at 1 km height, it is being lost at the U-turn, it is turned on for search, it works in MHI mode, thewre was not enough time, the crew didn't use FKM mode to measure the range (they afraid they would not manage to do the process in time), the RPC (Square pair) finds the target, but at an altitude of 11 km, nobody switches the scale of the altitude display device, they think that it is 1 km, the range is unknown, as I said they work at MHI mode, launched a missile, the GSN of the missiles sees and tracks the target. The stopwatch naturally works, knowing the approximate range of the impact, it is easy to determine the flight time of the missile to the point of impact. More than a minute passes the missile still in flight, it is already clear that something is wrong, it is urgent to turn off the power, but no one is doing this, “senior comrades” are behind the operators and the launch officer, well, then I think everything is clear.
I'm not talking about the fact that the corridors of the flight of aviation were closed not at the range that this shooting required.
Of course, I got off with a slight startle, the control check of the check saved me. To be precise, officialy from the papers and forms the missile was checked by a missile officer from the Vasilkovskaya brigade, who saw my station for the first time only there at the training ground, and he presented this check to the commander in chief and defense minister .
This is the situation, guys, but I didn’t want to serve anymore, and left the reserve. I went to church, put a few candles for the peace of souls of the people who innocently died on October 4, 2001.
Quite possible when they incorrectly reacquired the target as a result of losing target at near-zero radial velocity (someone forget to switch mode during this part of target's trajectory), remember our discussions here. The pressure during the test must have been very high and then mistakes arises. Remember also hpasp's photo he got somewhere showing the IFF response when the RPC was not in target tracking mode. Just a note. If the scale of the height indicator does not switch, it would show the max value. So 5km
|
|
#4547285 - 12/05/20 08:04 PM
Re: Tu-154M of "Syberia" - what really happens?
[Re: Fireman]
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
piston79
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,011
|
Just a note. If the scale of the height indicator does not switch, it would show the max value. So 5km
Not sure at all.... If they didn't use FKM/Nonius mode, they cannot find the real height of the target, as the real distance is not known
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|