Aircraft Crash in Moscow
Join Date: May 2010
Location: -
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To whom was this 'briefing' given? Or are we simply taking anonymous forum contributions as fact?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The chain reaction of the Internet is to be taken with a grain of salt. "Information" is taken from one site, repackaged, and reported in another. With all respect, most of what is available on any given thread should be held at arm's length. Self affirming opinion is rampant.
For me, photography is nice. Text not so much. I believe, and have an opinion here, relative to velocity, which I estimated from a video that was fortuitous.
The range of velocity opinions here runs from 30 knots to over 100. Unless and until some actual published and offical data is forthcoming, who really knows?
Argumentation is silly, til more is known.
For me, photography is nice. Text not so much. I believe, and have an opinion here, relative to velocity, which I estimated from a video that was fortuitous.
The range of velocity opinions here runs from 30 knots to over 100. Unless and until some actual published and offical data is forthcoming, who really knows?
Argumentation is silly, til more is known.
I don't understand the engines being commanded off ?
Were they trying to fly at that instant or stop? If they were trying to stop wouldn't they have been commanding reverse?
Were they trying to fly at that instant or stop? If they were trying to stop wouldn't they have been commanding reverse?
- Reverse thrust commanded
- Engines spooled up but reverser mechanism did not deploy, due to (either or both) jammed cockpit lever, or lack of WoW (due to wheelbarrowing on nosewheel due to excess speed (holes in cheese)).
- resulting in high FORWARD thrust
- emergency fuel cutoffs pulled as last resort to kill forward thrust
One pilot (FO?) started raising the flaps with the apparent intention of a go-around - but so far as I can see from the info so far, forward TO thrust was never intentionally applied (but occurred anyway due to the reverser glitch(es)).
It is an interesting conundrum that the braking devices in aircraft (spoilers, wheel brakes, reversers) only work or deploy if one is already slow enough to put weight on the wheels. If you are really too fast - they may not engage at all.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pattern_is_full, just little correction:
It is an interesting conundrum that the braking devices in aircraft (spoilers, wheel brakes, reversers) only work or deploy automatically if one is already slow enough to put weight on the wheels. If you are really too fast - they may not engage automatically at all.
It is an interesting conundrum that the braking devices in aircraft (spoilers, wheel brakes, reversers) only work or deploy automatically if one is already slow enough to put weight on the wheels. If you are really too fast - they may not engage automatically at all.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read that there are two modification of Tu-204. Old, where thrust reversal is not blocked and new, where thrust reversal can be used only when spoilers are already deployed. This was the new type.
In both ac you need to stop the lever at mechanical latch and wait for two green lights and after it continue moving the lever. They didn't follow this instruction.
Only speculation:
1. lack of deploying spoilers manually (After Pardubice discussion?), in consequence thrust reversal cannot be used
2. bad manipulation with levers sat forward thrust
Reportedly high speed landing was commonly used at RW, with initial breaking using thrust reversal.
In both ac you need to stop the lever at mechanical latch and wait for two green lights and after it continue moving the lever. They didn't follow this instruction.
Only speculation:
1. lack of deploying spoilers manually (After Pardubice discussion?), in consequence thrust reversal cannot be used
2. bad manipulation with levers sat forward thrust
Reportedly high speed landing was commonly used at RW, with initial breaking using thrust reversal.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aterpster:
ICAO rules (Chicago convention), annex 13:
ICAO rules (Chicago convention), annex 13:
Dispatch
7.4 The Preliminary Report shall be sent by facsimile, e-mail, or airmail within thirty days of the date of the accident unless the Accident/Incident Data Report has been sent by that time. When matters directly affecting safety are involved, it shall be sent as soon as the information is available and by the most suitable and quickest means available
7.4 The Preliminary Report shall be sent by facsimile, e-mail, or airmail within thirty days of the date of the accident unless the Accident/Incident Data Report has been sent by that time. When matters directly affecting safety are involved, it shall be sent as soon as the information is available and by the most suitable and quickest means available
Last edited by Karel_x; 20th Jan 2013 at 09:22.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another view - from inside the ditch, showing the up slope is not steep at all so there is not much for the airplane to hit frontally, except the guard rail.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jazz Hands:
We do have a bit of that around this board. 
I haven't seen any official comment that suggested this, only internet chat from people claiming to be in-the-know but who clearly aren't.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was reportedly found serious problems with training of pilots of Red Wings and their safety policy.
For example, after MAK checked 45 FDR data, related to one of pilots, in 21 cases a landing speed was too high, i.e. the landing from under GS, low AoA that could lead to the late touch down and a higher danger of overrunning RWY.
Source in russian:
«
For example, after MAK checked 45 FDR data, related to one of pilots, in 21 cases a landing speed was too high, i.e. the landing from under GS, low AoA that could lead to the late touch down and a higher danger of overrunning RWY.
Source in russian:
«
Thanks Karel_x. Here's the APN article google translated:
01/18/2013 Sergey Kuzmin
"Wings" Lebedev did not reach
Why planes do not just fall
December 29 at the airport "Vnukovo" aircraft "Tu-204", belonging to airline Red Wings, skidded off the runway, broke through the fence and broke into three pieces, fell to Kiev highway. Fortunately the plane back from the Czech Republic without passengers. However, the casualties could not be avoided - the deaths of four of the eight members of the crew. To convince people who know the aircraft, aircraft do not fall for a reason. Especially passenger, especially such reliable as "Tu-204". As a rule, with very few exceptions (about one per million), planes fall on a very specific reason.
Now available for editorial appeared the first results of the investigation of an accident at the airport "Vnukovo" December 29, 2012. These materials are provided me with some officials close to the leadership of "Vnukovo" and the airline on the condition of anonymity. But before considering them, I want to recall almost identical incident with the aircraft of the same airline at Novosibirsk airport a week earlier. Skidded off the strip, the plane fell into a ravine and so severely damaged. The repetition of the situation in "Vnukovo", "carcass" was only saved by the fact that after the ravine was not any major obstacles - just a few months before this incident power Tolmachevo demolished concrete wall, which was just behind the ravine. If it does not, then it is possible that a similar disaster happened and how on December 21.
It is these two seemingly similar incident gave occasion to say that the aircraft allegedly brakes failed. Immediately after the incident at "Vnukovo" in the press somehow magically appeared that, they say, due to the state of emergency in Novosibirsk Rosaviatsia has already sent a letter to the Bank "Tupolev" with a certain requirement to eliminate defects in the braking system of the first 204. That is, the airline is not to blame - it's workmanship. Here you have a version of brake failure. But the paradox is that, for these two professionals of identical incident clearly showed from the start that with the aircraft as it was in the time locks - and some serious errors made it crew. Why? Because it is necessary to understand that the aircraft landing brake is not like a car. This is a very complex process, which involved dozens of liner systems. And it is doubtful that they are denied all at once, and twice in one week, and on two different planes. And more to the modern passenger liners, and specifically on the "Tu-204", the braking system is duplicated (by the way, like all systems of the plane) and if after 5 seconds after the touch is not braking the aircraft, it begins to slow down on their own (I stress that describe very roughly, because once again - this is a very complex technical process). And if this does not happen automatically, then the conclusion is obvious - the pilots of powered flight, and made a mistake somewhere.
And now the first official information. Attention, removing first indications of control sensors with aircrafts at the airport "Tolmachevo" (Novosibirsk) December 20, and "Vnukovo" December 27 experts found:
- First signal "compression struts" left landing gear was missing in both cases (so far, take this information in a form below, I'll explain what that means)
- Secondly, engines 1 and 2 (in the case of "Vnukovo" at least one engine so worked) worked on a line drawn without relaying on the reverse thrust reversers
And third, the spoilers (flaps), and air brakes were retracted!
Just imagine, this means that in both cases the pilots or simply did not control the process of landing, or simply elementary did not know how their ship in this mode. More of the materials that fall at my disposal begins to show why the pilots were behaving that way in these incidents.
There is a clear axiom that leads to an accident a range of reasons. And look, as is the case with the "Red Wings".
Preliminary records of the investigation have shown that the pilots "Red Wings", most likely, simply were not adequately prepared. At least, they have not been trained on the simulator on a number of mandatory training for pilots, and I stress, it is on this plane - "Tu-204". Judge for yourself.
Mandatory training pilots on a simulator at operation with a ground proximity warning systems and prevention of collision with another vessel was not done. Here, the objective, in our country there is simply no simulator "Tu-204" with such opportunities. Training of crew carried in the cabin, but the airline did not have developed techniques such training.
Then, again in the book of pilots shall record that they have been training with the machine to prevent stalling the aircraft. But again in Russia there are no simulators, that is appears that this record - lime!
Finally the internal orders airlines allowed access to the pilots operating the vessel, was not confirmed, roughly speaking, their specific skills in the training center. And this is a direct contradiction of the requirements of federal law. Imagine if in the final materials investigation revealed that the company management dispatched into complex meteusloviya not trained crew, but still in violation of federal regulations? And judging by the documents that were available to me, it was all for it and goes.
But we go further. All of the above, it is still only part of the problem. As professionals, the ship begins its mission on earth.
Already, experts found that the internal control and audit of the airline just did not work. Roughly speaking, the airline did not study their mistakes - hence the two consecutive identical incident "Tolmachevo" and "Vnukovo". Further, it was found that the burden on the engineering staff airline was increased (either saved, or really good engineers is not enough) and the company management often uses the services of professionals, who simply do not bear any personal responsibility for the quality of the vessel. Moreover, in all the airlines, there was a Special flight instructor, who must decrypt all data on piloting aircraft airline pilots and provide a daily report on the safety management of airline pilot. Roughly constantly monitor pilots. But the airlines 'Red Wings' flight instructor simply did not.
And now, the next key point. Experts have found that the service safety of airline "Red Wings" "is not implemented in full." In particular, does not reveal the actual and potential safety hazards and take corrective actions necessary for keeping the safety performance. There is no actual analysis of errors in the technique of piloting crews. And then, frankly, all the hair stand on end:
- Of the 45 transcripts reviewed by the Board of one of the aircraft commander of the vessel, "Red Wings" in the 21 th case contains high speed landing, indicating way to care for piloting glisadu (that is, roughly speaking violations route touchdown) and landing on small angles pitch, resulting in a normalized flight landing area and the probability of rolling out beyond GDP
Can you imagine, it turns out that the airline "Red Wings" is actually long and hard was the death of four of its pilots.
I am sure that in the final materials to investigate the incident, "Red Wings" we learn a lot more glaring detail. And this stuff I want to finish a reminder almost a similar case in 2010, with the aircraft "Tu-204", owned airline "Aviastar-TU". Then there was a very similar incident. March 22 at the approach to the airfield "Domodedovo" plane missed the runway and landed in the woods. Miraculously, there were no casualties, as well as the aircraft was returning empty from Hurghada after the charter flight. But the plane was completely destroyed - also broke into three pieces.
Again wrote that the aircraft with flight refused onboard computer. But the commission of the International Aviation Committee found virtually the same set of violations, as in the case with the "Red Wings": pilots do not fully prepared, there are a number of violations in the airline, and together, all this has led to a severe accident. And in some detail just what event coincided with what happened in "Vnukovo" and "Tolmachevo". Then even a criminal case was instituted, and the airline does not even license taken away. And now I want to ask one question: how much we, potential passengers will tolerate all this - after all, what is happening today in some airlines - is the actual mass murder because of the negligence and greed of the owners of airlines. And to illustrate the end of another figure: the incident with the aircraft «RW» occur regularly (while only talking about this company.) This company operates a total of eight aircraft - all of them "Tu-204". And more recently - the main park began to come to the carrier in 2007. And if you take the official statistics, from 2008 to 2010 there was a total of 12 serious accidents involving airliners "Tu-2004", which really could have led to loss of life. Of these, seven of RW! That is, these statistics are just screaming that the "Red Wings" something was wrong, but no one responded until the case came to Mr. corpses. Is it possible that this time it can get away with owners and managers of airlines, because it turns out that they are responsible for the death of four people.
01/18/2013 Sergey Kuzmin
"Wings" Lebedev did not reach
Why planes do not just fall
December 29 at the airport "Vnukovo" aircraft "Tu-204", belonging to airline Red Wings, skidded off the runway, broke through the fence and broke into three pieces, fell to Kiev highway. Fortunately the plane back from the Czech Republic without passengers. However, the casualties could not be avoided - the deaths of four of the eight members of the crew. To convince people who know the aircraft, aircraft do not fall for a reason. Especially passenger, especially such reliable as "Tu-204". As a rule, with very few exceptions (about one per million), planes fall on a very specific reason.
Now available for editorial appeared the first results of the investigation of an accident at the airport "Vnukovo" December 29, 2012. These materials are provided me with some officials close to the leadership of "Vnukovo" and the airline on the condition of anonymity. But before considering them, I want to recall almost identical incident with the aircraft of the same airline at Novosibirsk airport a week earlier. Skidded off the strip, the plane fell into a ravine and so severely damaged. The repetition of the situation in "Vnukovo", "carcass" was only saved by the fact that after the ravine was not any major obstacles - just a few months before this incident power Tolmachevo demolished concrete wall, which was just behind the ravine. If it does not, then it is possible that a similar disaster happened and how on December 21.
It is these two seemingly similar incident gave occasion to say that the aircraft allegedly brakes failed. Immediately after the incident at "Vnukovo" in the press somehow magically appeared that, they say, due to the state of emergency in Novosibirsk Rosaviatsia has already sent a letter to the Bank "Tupolev" with a certain requirement to eliminate defects in the braking system of the first 204. That is, the airline is not to blame - it's workmanship. Here you have a version of brake failure. But the paradox is that, for these two professionals of identical incident clearly showed from the start that with the aircraft as it was in the time locks - and some serious errors made it crew. Why? Because it is necessary to understand that the aircraft landing brake is not like a car. This is a very complex process, which involved dozens of liner systems. And it is doubtful that they are denied all at once, and twice in one week, and on two different planes. And more to the modern passenger liners, and specifically on the "Tu-204", the braking system is duplicated (by the way, like all systems of the plane) and if after 5 seconds after the touch is not braking the aircraft, it begins to slow down on their own (I stress that describe very roughly, because once again - this is a very complex technical process). And if this does not happen automatically, then the conclusion is obvious - the pilots of powered flight, and made a mistake somewhere.
And now the first official information. Attention, removing first indications of control sensors with aircrafts at the airport "Tolmachevo" (Novosibirsk) December 20, and "Vnukovo" December 27 experts found:
- First signal "compression struts" left landing gear was missing in both cases (so far, take this information in a form below, I'll explain what that means)
- Secondly, engines 1 and 2 (in the case of "Vnukovo" at least one engine so worked) worked on a line drawn without relaying on the reverse thrust reversers
And third, the spoilers (flaps), and air brakes were retracted!
Just imagine, this means that in both cases the pilots or simply did not control the process of landing, or simply elementary did not know how their ship in this mode. More of the materials that fall at my disposal begins to show why the pilots were behaving that way in these incidents.
There is a clear axiom that leads to an accident a range of reasons. And look, as is the case with the "Red Wings".
Preliminary records of the investigation have shown that the pilots "Red Wings", most likely, simply were not adequately prepared. At least, they have not been trained on the simulator on a number of mandatory training for pilots, and I stress, it is on this plane - "Tu-204". Judge for yourself.
Mandatory training pilots on a simulator at operation with a ground proximity warning systems and prevention of collision with another vessel was not done. Here, the objective, in our country there is simply no simulator "Tu-204" with such opportunities. Training of crew carried in the cabin, but the airline did not have developed techniques such training.
Then, again in the book of pilots shall record that they have been training with the machine to prevent stalling the aircraft. But again in Russia there are no simulators, that is appears that this record - lime!
Finally the internal orders airlines allowed access to the pilots operating the vessel, was not confirmed, roughly speaking, their specific skills in the training center. And this is a direct contradiction of the requirements of federal law. Imagine if in the final materials investigation revealed that the company management dispatched into complex meteusloviya not trained crew, but still in violation of federal regulations? And judging by the documents that were available to me, it was all for it and goes.
But we go further. All of the above, it is still only part of the problem. As professionals, the ship begins its mission on earth.
Already, experts found that the internal control and audit of the airline just did not work. Roughly speaking, the airline did not study their mistakes - hence the two consecutive identical incident "Tolmachevo" and "Vnukovo". Further, it was found that the burden on the engineering staff airline was increased (either saved, or really good engineers is not enough) and the company management often uses the services of professionals, who simply do not bear any personal responsibility for the quality of the vessel. Moreover, in all the airlines, there was a Special flight instructor, who must decrypt all data on piloting aircraft airline pilots and provide a daily report on the safety management of airline pilot. Roughly constantly monitor pilots. But the airlines 'Red Wings' flight instructor simply did not.
And now, the next key point. Experts have found that the service safety of airline "Red Wings" "is not implemented in full." In particular, does not reveal the actual and potential safety hazards and take corrective actions necessary for keeping the safety performance. There is no actual analysis of errors in the technique of piloting crews. And then, frankly, all the hair stand on end:
- Of the 45 transcripts reviewed by the Board of one of the aircraft commander of the vessel, "Red Wings" in the 21 th case contains high speed landing, indicating way to care for piloting glisadu (that is, roughly speaking violations route touchdown) and landing on small angles pitch, resulting in a normalized flight landing area and the probability of rolling out beyond GDP
Can you imagine, it turns out that the airline "Red Wings" is actually long and hard was the death of four of its pilots.
I am sure that in the final materials to investigate the incident, "Red Wings" we learn a lot more glaring detail. And this stuff I want to finish a reminder almost a similar case in 2010, with the aircraft "Tu-204", owned airline "Aviastar-TU". Then there was a very similar incident. March 22 at the approach to the airfield "Domodedovo" plane missed the runway and landed in the woods. Miraculously, there were no casualties, as well as the aircraft was returning empty from Hurghada after the charter flight. But the plane was completely destroyed - also broke into three pieces.
Again wrote that the aircraft with flight refused onboard computer. But the commission of the International Aviation Committee found virtually the same set of violations, as in the case with the "Red Wings": pilots do not fully prepared, there are a number of violations in the airline, and together, all this has led to a severe accident. And in some detail just what event coincided with what happened in "Vnukovo" and "Tolmachevo". Then even a criminal case was instituted, and the airline does not even license taken away. And now I want to ask one question: how much we, potential passengers will tolerate all this - after all, what is happening today in some airlines - is the actual mass murder because of the negligence and greed of the owners of airlines. And to illustrate the end of another figure: the incident with the aircraft «RW» occur regularly (while only talking about this company.) This company operates a total of eight aircraft - all of them "Tu-204". And more recently - the main park began to come to the carrier in 2007. And if you take the official statistics, from 2008 to 2010 there was a total of 12 serious accidents involving airliners "Tu-2004", which really could have led to loss of life. Of these, seven of RW! That is, these statistics are just screaming that the "Red Wings" something was wrong, but no one responded until the case came to Mr. corpses. Is it possible that this time it can get away with owners and managers of airlines, because it turns out that they are responsible for the death of four people.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This article sounds as a heavy delirium. 
This one is more interesting: Incident: Red Wings T204 at Moscow on Dec 29th 2012, thrust reverser did not correctly open on landing
This one is more interesting: Incident: Red Wings T204 at Moscow on Dec 29th 2012, thrust reverser did not correctly open on landing
Last edited by Kulverstukas; 20th Jan 2013 at 19:12.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: another place
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the Captain was responsible for the deaths if it was a handling issue.
Do you have any proof that Mr Lebadev was either aware or sanctioned flights operating outside the aircraft operation manuals.
Owners employ people who should have the knowledge to operate within standard and accepted procedures.
This will be either a tech issue mis handled or a manual handing error in my view. One thing I do remember was there were forecast strong crosswinds at VKO that day, always an attention getter on a snow risk airport and SVO won't take you if you feel the need to go somewhere with a more into wind runway.
Do you have any proof that Mr Lebadev was either aware or sanctioned flights operating outside the aircraft operation manuals.
Owners employ people who should have the knowledge to operate within standard and accepted procedures.
This will be either a tech issue mis handled or a manual handing error in my view. One thing I do remember was there were forecast strong crosswinds at VKO that day, always an attention getter on a snow risk airport and SVO won't take you if you feel the need to go somewhere with a more into wind runway.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Measurement from the AIP data suggests 15-20deg.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe tomorrow the Ministry of Transport will make a resolution if they ground Tu-204, temporarily or permanently stop the activity of RedWings. If they decide for some of this possibilities, the result will be probably the same. Ilyushin finance, the leaser of airplanes, already things about another customers for 7 pcs of Tu-204.
Source:
Rambler
Source:
Rambler
Last edited by Karel_x; 23rd Jan 2013 at 20:05.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driver of the Volvo car, which was hit by wheel at Kievskoe hwy, will sue RW. Two days after incident he was taked to hospital with fracture of the cervical vertebrae and a concussion. His car is totaled. He said that RW newer get in touch with him. (Via LifeNews).
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brighton
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From MAK
Chairman of the Technical Commission of Inquiry into the accident with the aircraft Tu-204 RA-64047 Airline «Red Wings» informs about the results of the preliminary analysis of the information of objective control and other information received.
Approach was carried out on runway 19 (length - 3060 m) to Vnukovo Airport. Piloting was carried by PIC. Before entering the glide the aircraft was in the landing configuration: Flaps - 37°, slats - 23°, and landing gear extended. Setpoint decision height was set at 60m, landing weight of the aircraft was approximately 67.5 tons, alignment - ~ 26.5%, which is not to exceed the limits set by Flight Manual.
During preplant preparation PIC has identified the target speed of the glide path as 210 km / h, with the PIC said that the need to withstand 230 km / h Reduction took place on the final approach in the director mode with disabled automatic throttle with an average speed of about instrument 255 km / h and vertical speed -3 ... -5 m / s. Reduction was performed without significant deviations from the glide path. Inner beacon marker was passed at an altitude of 65 ... 70 m, end of the runway (runway) was passed at the height of 15 meters and air speed of 260 km / h
Landing of an aircraft was within 5 seconds after the thrust lever (throttle) to mode "idle" at the speed of 230 km / h, at a distance of about 900 m from the 1000 input threshold, ahead of the left landing gear (left bank 1 ... 1.5 °), while there was a signal compression left strut. During the landing of the aircraft on the right side wind gusts reached up to ~ 11.5 m / s. The maximum value of the vertical congestion at touchdown was 1.12g on the record of objective control (hereinafter - MSRP). Since the passage of the true height of 4 meters to touchdown was about 10 seconds.
3 seconds after touchdown nose landing gear was lowered and there was signal of nose landing gear strut compression. Signal of compression of right landing gear strut at this stage not yet formed.
Almost simultaneously with the lowering of the nose landing gear crew moved the controls throttle engines to the "maximum reverse" in one motion and applied the brake pedal on.
Opening of valves reversing system on both engines did not happen. Also did not happen automatically release air brakes and spoilers. Issue spoilers manually crew did not make.
After the transfer of throttle to the "maximum reverse" mode registered an increase with both motors (forward thrust) to the regime Nvd ~ 90%, which actually corresponds to the nominal operation.
The pressure in the wheel brakes left (compressed) landing gear was up to 50 kgf / cm ², the pressure in the wheel brakes right (not compressed) landing gear was missing.
Minimum airspeed to which aircraft slowed after 7-8 seconds field landing was 200-205 km / h at ~ 0 ° pitch and roll of 1 ° to the left, after which the rate began to increase.
2 seconds after the transfer of throttle to the "maximum reverse" flight engineer reported on the non-inclusion of a reverse.
Throttle is in the "maximum reverse" for about 8 seconds, then the reverse was off. During this time the airspeed increased to 240 km / h
The increase in speed of the instrument led to additional "unloading" of the main landing gear. With fluctuations of the roll (from 4.5 ° to 2.6 ° to the left to the right) compression occurred then left, then right landing gear. Simultaneous compression of both main landing gear did not happen. Almost simultaneously with the reversal recorded off compression of brake pedal by left pilot to 60 °. As before braking was ineffective - the pressure in the wheel brakes was applied only when the landing gear strut is compressed.
5 seconds after turning off the reverse, a flight engineer after the words "Turn of Reverse! Reverse!". Registered retransfer throttle to "maximize reverse." As the first attempt, including the reverse has happened, both engines again took to the regime of a direct link (Nvd ~ 84%). Aircraft braking happening, airspeed was 230 ... 240 km / h After 4 seconds the reverse was off. At the time of re-enable reverse the aircraft was a distance of about 950 ... 1000 m from the exit threshold.
Within 6 seconds, reverse is in the off position, at this time the crew attempted to automatic braking, as evidenced by The in talks crew and transient appearance of single commands: "Automatic braking inclusive" for primary and backup subsystems.
In the area of the output threshold throttle were transferred to a small reverse mode.
Rolling out the aircraft as the runway was over 32 seconds after landing, almost on its axis, the air speed of about 215 km / h In the process of rolling out at the command of PIC flight engineer turned off the engine by means of the emergency brake.
Further movement of the aircraft took place almost on the runway extended. After turning off the engine, by braking when driving on snow cover for the runway and arrivals on irregularities occurred simultaneously compress the left and right main landing gear. Compression main landing gear led to the automatic release of air brakes and spoilers, as well as to roll direction valves engine thrust reverser. Clash of the plane with the slopes of ravines happened to ground speed of about 190 km / h
Approach was carried out on runway 19 (length - 3060 m) to Vnukovo Airport. Piloting was carried by PIC. Before entering the glide the aircraft was in the landing configuration: Flaps - 37°, slats - 23°, and landing gear extended. Setpoint decision height was set at 60m, landing weight of the aircraft was approximately 67.5 tons, alignment - ~ 26.5%, which is not to exceed the limits set by Flight Manual.
During preplant preparation PIC has identified the target speed of the glide path as 210 km / h, with the PIC said that the need to withstand 230 km / h Reduction took place on the final approach in the director mode with disabled automatic throttle with an average speed of about instrument 255 km / h and vertical speed -3 ... -5 m / s. Reduction was performed without significant deviations from the glide path. Inner beacon marker was passed at an altitude of 65 ... 70 m, end of the runway (runway) was passed at the height of 15 meters and air speed of 260 km / h
Landing of an aircraft was within 5 seconds after the thrust lever (throttle) to mode "idle" at the speed of 230 km / h, at a distance of about 900 m from the 1000 input threshold, ahead of the left landing gear (left bank 1 ... 1.5 °), while there was a signal compression left strut. During the landing of the aircraft on the right side wind gusts reached up to ~ 11.5 m / s. The maximum value of the vertical congestion at touchdown was 1.12g on the record of objective control (hereinafter - MSRP). Since the passage of the true height of 4 meters to touchdown was about 10 seconds.
3 seconds after touchdown nose landing gear was lowered and there was signal of nose landing gear strut compression. Signal of compression of right landing gear strut at this stage not yet formed.
Almost simultaneously with the lowering of the nose landing gear crew moved the controls throttle engines to the "maximum reverse" in one motion and applied the brake pedal on.
Opening of valves reversing system on both engines did not happen. Also did not happen automatically release air brakes and spoilers. Issue spoilers manually crew did not make.
After the transfer of throttle to the "maximum reverse" mode registered an increase with both motors (forward thrust) to the regime Nvd ~ 90%, which actually corresponds to the nominal operation.
The pressure in the wheel brakes left (compressed) landing gear was up to 50 kgf / cm ², the pressure in the wheel brakes right (not compressed) landing gear was missing.
Minimum airspeed to which aircraft slowed after 7-8 seconds field landing was 200-205 km / h at ~ 0 ° pitch and roll of 1 ° to the left, after which the rate began to increase.
2 seconds after the transfer of throttle to the "maximum reverse" flight engineer reported on the non-inclusion of a reverse.
Throttle is in the "maximum reverse" for about 8 seconds, then the reverse was off. During this time the airspeed increased to 240 km / h
The increase in speed of the instrument led to additional "unloading" of the main landing gear. With fluctuations of the roll (from 4.5 ° to 2.6 ° to the left to the right) compression occurred then left, then right landing gear. Simultaneous compression of both main landing gear did not happen. Almost simultaneously with the reversal recorded off compression of brake pedal by left pilot to 60 °. As before braking was ineffective - the pressure in the wheel brakes was applied only when the landing gear strut is compressed.
5 seconds after turning off the reverse, a flight engineer after the words "Turn of Reverse! Reverse!". Registered retransfer throttle to "maximize reverse." As the first attempt, including the reverse has happened, both engines again took to the regime of a direct link (Nvd ~ 84%). Aircraft braking happening, airspeed was 230 ... 240 km / h After 4 seconds the reverse was off. At the time of re-enable reverse the aircraft was a distance of about 950 ... 1000 m from the exit threshold.
Within 6 seconds, reverse is in the off position, at this time the crew attempted to automatic braking, as evidenced by The in talks crew and transient appearance of single commands: "Automatic braking inclusive" for primary and backup subsystems.
In the area of the output threshold throttle were transferred to a small reverse mode.
Rolling out the aircraft as the runway was over 32 seconds after landing, almost on its axis, the air speed of about 215 km / h In the process of rolling out at the command of PIC flight engineer turned off the engine by means of the emergency brake.
Further movement of the aircraft took place almost on the runway extended. After turning off the engine, by braking when driving on snow cover for the runway and arrivals on irregularities occurred simultaneously compress the left and right main landing gear. Compression main landing gear led to the automatic release of air brakes and spoilers, as well as to roll direction valves engine thrust reverser. Clash of the plane with the slopes of ravines happened to ground speed of about 190 km / h
Last edited by Bandures; 24th Jan 2013 at 14:22.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There, guys
I hope I put 1 hr of my time and effort into good use trying to refine the translation.
If you don't think this version is helping I will kill it so that this long post will not occupy too much space here.
Chairman of the Technical Commission of Inquiry into the accident with the aircraft Tu-204 RA-64047 Airline «Red Wings» informs about the results of the preliminary analysis of the information of objective control and other information received.
Approach was carried out on the runway 19 (length - 3060 m) from Vnukovo Airport. PF was the Captain. Before entering the glideslope the aircraft was in the landing configuration: Flaps - 37 °, slats - 23 °, and landing gear down. Decision height was set at 60 m, landing weight of the aircraft was approximately 67.5 tons, CG - ~ 26.5%, which doesn’t exceed the limits set by the AC flight manual.
Going through Before landing checklist Captain has identified the Vref speed as to be 210 km/h, and added that the actual speed should be set at 230 km/h. Descent took place in the FD mode with disabled automatic throttle with an average instrument speed of about 255 km/h and vertical speed -3 ... -5 m / s. Descent was performed without significant deviations from the glide path. NDB outer marker was passed at an altitude of 65 ... 70 m; threshold of the runway was overflown at the height of 15 meters and with airspeed of 260 km/h.
Landing of the aircraft was within 5 seconds after the TL (throttle) was set to "idle" at the speed of 230 km/h, at a distance of about 900 – 1000 m after passing the threshold, left main landing gear touched down first (left bank 1 ... 1.5 °), -and WoW signal from the left main gear was registered. During the landing of the aircraft wind gusts (from right side) reached up to ~ 11.5 m/s.
The maximum value of 1.12g on the FDR was recorded. It was about 10 seconds since the passage of the true height(absolute altitude) of 4 meters to touchdown.
3 seconds after first contact (by MLG) with the runway the nose gear touched down and WoW from it was registered. At that point in time no WoW signal from the right main landing gear was recorded.
Almost simultaneously with the nose landing gear touch down crew moved the TL(reversers) to the "maximum reverse" in one motion and applied the brakes (using pedals).
Reverse flaps of the engines didn’t deploy. Also auto-spoilers didn’t come out. After the TL were set to the "maximum reverse" engines N1 indication was showing ~ 90%, which actually corresponds to the nominal operation.
The pressure in the wheel brakes of the left landing gear (with strut compressed) was up to 50 kgf / cm ², the pressure in the right (no WoW signal) landing gear wheel brakes was missing.
Minimum airspeed to which aircraft has slowed after 7-8 seconds after touchdown was 200-205 km/h at ~ 0 ° pitch and roll of 1 ° to the left, after which the speed began to increase.
2 seconds after the transfer of TL(reverse) to the "maximum reverse" it was followed by a report from the flight engineer that reverse was inoperative.
TL(reverse) is in the "maximum reverse" about 8 seconds, then the reverse was turned off. During this time the airspeed increased to 240 km/h
The increase in the speed led to additional "unloading" of the main landing gear. With fluctuations of the roll (from 4.5 ° to 2.6 ° to the left to the right) strut compression occurred only to the left main gear, then separately to the right landing gear. Simultaneous strut compression of the both main landing gear did not occur.
Almost simultaneously with the turning off of the reverse, the pressure on the brake pedals was registered from left pilot seat (down to 60 °). As before, braking was ineffective - the pressure in the wheel brakes is applied only when WoW from the corresponding landing gear exists.
5 seconds after turning off the reverse, and after the words from flight engineer "Deploy Reverse! Reverse!” TL(for reverse) was registered to be set at full reverse for the second time.
As it happened during the first attempt, reverse deployment didn’t happen again, both engines again took to the regime of a direct thrust (N1 ~ 84%). No braking was happening, airspeed was at 230 ... 240 km / h (IAS). After 4 seconds the reverse was off.
At the time of re-engaging reverse thrust levers the aircraft was at distance of about 950 ... 1000 m from the exit threshold of the runway.
Within 6 seconds, reverse was in off position, at this time the crew attempted to use automatic brakes, (according to CVR) – several short commands can be heard on the recording – “Automatic braking turned on” (for primary and backup systems).
In the area of the exit threshold, TL (for reverse) was set to idle-reverse mode.
Aircraft exited the runway after 32 seconds from landing, with AC being on the center line, the IAS was at about 215 km/h during the process of rolling out.
Captain commanded to turn off the engines (using stop valves). The flight engineer switched off the valves after the command from the captain.
Further movement of the aircraft took place almost along the center line of the runway extension. After turning off the engines, when moving through snow surface (after departed the runway) AC started to slow down and due to irregular terrain surface simultaneous WoW signal from both main landing gear was registered. That led to the activation of spoilers and reverse mechanisms of the engines.
AC collided with the side of the slope at ground speed of about 190 km / h
I hope I put 1 hr of my time and effort into good use trying to refine the translation.
If you don't think this version is helping I will kill it so that this long post will not occupy too much space here.
Chairman of the Technical Commission of Inquiry into the accident with the aircraft Tu-204 RA-64047 Airline «Red Wings» informs about the results of the preliminary analysis of the information of objective control and other information received.
Approach was carried out on the runway 19 (length - 3060 m) from Vnukovo Airport. PF was the Captain. Before entering the glideslope the aircraft was in the landing configuration: Flaps - 37 °, slats - 23 °, and landing gear down. Decision height was set at 60 m, landing weight of the aircraft was approximately 67.5 tons, CG - ~ 26.5%, which doesn’t exceed the limits set by the AC flight manual.
Going through Before landing checklist Captain has identified the Vref speed as to be 210 km/h, and added that the actual speed should be set at 230 km/h. Descent took place in the FD mode with disabled automatic throttle with an average instrument speed of about 255 km/h and vertical speed -3 ... -5 m / s. Descent was performed without significant deviations from the glide path. NDB outer marker was passed at an altitude of 65 ... 70 m; threshold of the runway was overflown at the height of 15 meters and with airspeed of 260 km/h.
Landing of the aircraft was within 5 seconds after the TL (throttle) was set to "idle" at the speed of 230 km/h, at a distance of about 900 – 1000 m after passing the threshold, left main landing gear touched down first (left bank 1 ... 1.5 °), -and WoW signal from the left main gear was registered. During the landing of the aircraft wind gusts (from right side) reached up to ~ 11.5 m/s.
The maximum value of 1.12g on the FDR was recorded. It was about 10 seconds since the passage of the true height(absolute altitude) of 4 meters to touchdown.
3 seconds after first contact (by MLG) with the runway the nose gear touched down and WoW from it was registered. At that point in time no WoW signal from the right main landing gear was recorded.
Almost simultaneously with the nose landing gear touch down crew moved the TL(reversers) to the "maximum reverse" in one motion and applied the brakes (using pedals).
Reverse flaps of the engines didn’t deploy. Also auto-spoilers didn’t come out. After the TL were set to the "maximum reverse" engines N1 indication was showing ~ 90%, which actually corresponds to the nominal operation.
The pressure in the wheel brakes of the left landing gear (with strut compressed) was up to 50 kgf / cm ², the pressure in the right (no WoW signal) landing gear wheel brakes was missing.
Minimum airspeed to which aircraft has slowed after 7-8 seconds after touchdown was 200-205 km/h at ~ 0 ° pitch and roll of 1 ° to the left, after which the speed began to increase.
2 seconds after the transfer of TL(reverse) to the "maximum reverse" it was followed by a report from the flight engineer that reverse was inoperative.
TL(reverse) is in the "maximum reverse" about 8 seconds, then the reverse was turned off. During this time the airspeed increased to 240 km/h
The increase in the speed led to additional "unloading" of the main landing gear. With fluctuations of the roll (from 4.5 ° to 2.6 ° to the left to the right) strut compression occurred only to the left main gear, then separately to the right landing gear. Simultaneous strut compression of the both main landing gear did not occur.
Almost simultaneously with the turning off of the reverse, the pressure on the brake pedals was registered from left pilot seat (down to 60 °). As before, braking was ineffective - the pressure in the wheel brakes is applied only when WoW from the corresponding landing gear exists.
5 seconds after turning off the reverse, and after the words from flight engineer "Deploy Reverse! Reverse!” TL(for reverse) was registered to be set at full reverse for the second time.
As it happened during the first attempt, reverse deployment didn’t happen again, both engines again took to the regime of a direct thrust (N1 ~ 84%). No braking was happening, airspeed was at 230 ... 240 km / h (IAS). After 4 seconds the reverse was off.
At the time of re-engaging reverse thrust levers the aircraft was at distance of about 950 ... 1000 m from the exit threshold of the runway.
Within 6 seconds, reverse was in off position, at this time the crew attempted to use automatic brakes, (according to CVR) – several short commands can be heard on the recording – “Automatic braking turned on” (for primary and backup systems).
In the area of the exit threshold, TL (for reverse) was set to idle-reverse mode.
Aircraft exited the runway after 32 seconds from landing, with AC being on the center line, the IAS was at about 215 km/h during the process of rolling out.
Captain commanded to turn off the engines (using stop valves). The flight engineer switched off the valves after the command from the captain.
Further movement of the aircraft took place almost along the center line of the runway extension. After turning off the engines, when moving through snow surface (after departed the runway) AC started to slow down and due to irregular terrain surface simultaneous WoW signal from both main landing gear was registered. That led to the activation of spoilers and reverse mechanisms of the engines.
AC collided with the side of the slope at ground speed of about 190 km / h
Last edited by Sunamer; 24th Jan 2013 at 15:16.
