Breakthrough communiqué of the Smolensk Subcommittee!
Published: January 10, 2018
The left wing of the Tu-154 M aircraft was destroyed as a result of internal explosion. There were several sources of explosion, and the birch tree had nothing to do with the original destruction of the wing. The spokeswoman of the Smolensk Subcommittee for Re-examination of the Air Disaster of Tu 154M (“Sub-Committee”) Marta Palonek issued an important communiqué on behalf of the Subcommittee.
As reported on this day at the plenary assembly of the Subcommittee, Frank Taylor, an international expert in the field of aviation accident investigation, after hearing the evidence of the Subcommittee, stated that:
1. the left wing of the Tu-154 M aircraft was destroyed by an internal explosion;
2. there were several sources of explosion: in the wing, slot, and also in the center wing, confirmed by the analysis of the mechanism of the door's impact on the ground, and
3. the birch tree did not cause the original destruction of the wing.
"I have no doubt whatsoever that there was an explosion. The vast majority of the damage can only be explained by an explosion. These were classic signs of an explosion. It would be very, very surprising if any professional investigator came to any other conclusion." - says Frank Taylor.
These conclusions are consistent with the findings of the members of the Sub-Committee and will constitute one of the key pillars of the technical report.
For the first time, such a firm statement that a sabotage took place in Smolensk was formulated by a recognized foreign expert in the study of aviation crashes. What's more, Frank Taylor – one of the foremost experts on aviation crashes - formulated his conclusions after carefully studying the evidence. This statement ultimately undermines the narrative of Lasek, Miller and Tusk who discredit any attempts to challenge their report as “conspiracy theories of PIS pseudospecialists."
These are, of course, strong statements that completely undermine the official version of the Russian and Tusk-led Miller and Lasek reports on Smolensk but such conclusions have been repeatedly presented in the form of theses by scientists cooperating with Antoni Macierewicz.
Now, however, for the first time - and after carefully studying the evidence - the renowned foreign aviation expert acknowledged that explosion brought down the plane - that is Frank Taylor from Great Britain.
This scholar affiliated with the Cranfield University has been involved in aerospace research for years and has worked as a lecturer in aviation and security systems. He was the director of the Flight Safety Center at the College of Aeronautics in Cranfield. In 1998 he was awarded with the prestigious Jerome A. Lederer Award for technical excellence in air crash research by the International Association of Aircraft Investigators.
Three years ago, after reading the Russian MAK report and Polish Miller’s report, Taylor recognized that in the process of explaining the disaster there were "serious shortcomings, including negligence and failure to provide explanations of various key factors that could affect the final conclusions."
He then appealed for a further study of the Smolensk tragedy that would cover all its aspects. According to the British expert, fragments of reports devoted to the behavior of aircraft structures during destruction and the analysis regarding passenger survival were superficial and did not meet international standards. Doubts from a British specialist were also raised by the displacement of some parts of the wreck on the day of the disaster - within the first 24 hours. It is important because according to Frank Taylor, "description and analysis of the wreckage do not seem to explain some of the extraordinary damage to the plane." Today, the Briton analyzed the full evidence in great detail and is now confident that official MAK and Miller’s reports are a lie.
The involvement of Frank Taylor in the work of the Smolensk subcommittee would not be possible without the personal efforts of Antoni Macierewicz, the former head of the Defense Ministry. Those who, after removing him from this position, were happy that he would stop talking about "Smoleńsk" were mistaken. Antoni Macierewicz went away, but other experts, including Frank Taylor, carry on. And in them all hope is placed to finally discover the full truth about Smolensk.
Click on the thumbnails below to view screen dumps from the detectors used to examine the wreckage and seats from the Polish president's plane crash in Smolensk. An "X" denotes the presence of the detected explosive substance and its type. The underlined Polish word "Probka" or "probka" in the screen dump 1 and 2, means "Sample"
Why did they all fly on the same plane?
Synopsis: January 12, 2013, Toronto, Canada. The wife of the late Deputy-Minister of Culture Tomasz Merta: "What I am about to tell you now, are suspicions - and not even my own - but, rather the [suspicions of the] individuals in the inner-circles of the [Polish] military... I heard a statement that was made - but, I am not taking any responsibility for how credible, or not credible it is. [I heard that] had the generals and journalists' not been re-assigned to different aircraft, it wouldn't have been the Tupolev [Tu-154M], but rather the Casa [transport aircraft] that would have been taken out.
Because the Generals were no longer onboard the Casa, there was no reason for it to get airborne. And for this reason it was the Yak[-40] that flew off to Smolensk. This Casa [transport aircraft] was never examined in any way. It was not subject to any examination. Aside from a single note in the deposition given to the military, no one was interested why this aircraft didn't fly [to Smolensk]. Perhaps, this is someones crazy phantasy, but perhaps it isn't.
Some [Polish] military personnel had suggested, that it [the Casa] had to stay behind at the Okecie military [tarmack], so that the explosives could be removed from it - because they were no longer needed [...] I am only repeating what I was told."
"Disarming" Explosives ...
It is worth for us to retrace the entire process of "disarming" the case of explosive substances at the crash site. It all started with the publication of Cezary Gmyz in "Rzeczpospolita" on October 30, 2012, and information that the detectors, which were used by experts in Smolensk (in late September and October) showed traces of TNT and nitroglycerine.
As it turned out, the journalist was also reporting about the indication of Hexogen. The storm broke. The prosecution denied the publication, and ultimately, the editor-in-chief of "Rzeczpospolita," Cezary Gmyz and two other journalists lost their jobs. The entire editorial staff of one of Poland’s most popular weeklies, "Uważam Rze", was also silenced.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views the SmolenskCrashNews.com. All information is provided on an as-is basis, and all data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. The Smolensk Crash News DOT COM makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use.
