Russian Emergency Landing

[maksim]

Another miracle by Ural Airlines, Novosibirsk, russia.

Video: https://t.me/Tsaplienko/39165

[ATC Watcher]

And with the gear down , whow ! ..but nice landing ...Could have been a glider pilot .

[maksim]

Preliminary, they got hydrolic system failure, and according FR 24 diverted from Omsk to Novosibirsk, but looks like run out of fuel on the way there.

[Revnetwork]

It seems Ural Airlines in Russia just put an A320 into a field. No fatalities or injuries were reported. Is this linked to the ongoing war and no spares? https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2023/09/russia-ural-airlines-flight-u61383-makes-emergency-landing-in-novosibirsk-region-the-morning-of-sept-12

[VHOED191006]

It seems that Ural has an addiction with landing in fields lol

Is this linked to the ongoing war and no spares?
If it is, they were insanely lucky with the outcome.

Hats off to the pilots!

[VHOED191006]

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1585x837/msedge_fkwshgsja8_a58fb960c52a05cda7c7fd7f291cca6b38be8b41.p ng
FR24 playback......... Interesting to say the least.

[procede]

It looks like they were trying to divert to Novosibirsk but ran out of fuel...

[Consol]

Looks like a good forced landing. Can't help wondering if the Green system failed.....

[Matra 4EB]

Respect to the pilots for landing an A320 in a field without killing everyone on board. That's quite an achievement.

As for Russian aviation: there'll be more incidents like this one in future. It's what happens when you repair stolen aircraft with fake or recycled parts.

[PoppaJo]

Well they have plenty of fuel, but no spare parts. Sounds like Iran, who have somewhat managed to keep itself together over the years, although with a with a diminished fleet.

Aircraft looks a bit ratty, certainly a few patch up jobs in certain areas when zooming in on a few photos.

Well now they have a whole A320 they can pull apart and re use.

[thnarg]

But no respect to the pilots for Hapag-Lloyding into what was a fortunately large, firm and dry field. Looks like manual gear and limited spoilers so yes a green failure followed by a fuel consumption miscalculation.

Never mind, plenty of Airbus spare parts to be trucked out of the farm.

[Pali]

Seems like sanctions bite though I meet again and again some Putin fans who believe that Russia is doing well and even winning the war.

Here is some footage shortly after evacuation:
https://twitter.com/maria_drutska/status/1701503503170941400

[DroneDog]

Sanctions are wonderful, for our competitors. other potential Airbus and Boeing customers will remember this. China's aviation industry is on the rise. Give it 10 or 20 years and we can say we shot ourselves in the foot.

[Less Hair]

Sanctions work as could be seen during the cold war.

[lossiemouth]

That's a very large field! Huge respect to the pilots, and to the aircrafts strength.

[Tu.114]

On Avherald, it is said that the green hydraulic system is suspected to have failed.

This has the following main consequences:

- Landing gear operation is severely impaired. If down, it cannot be retracted any more, carrying a fuel consumption penalty of 180% in case of closed landing gear doors.
If it was retracted at the time of failure, it can be extended by gravity only, the landing gear doors will stay open after this. This will lead to a fuel burn much more than the 180% malus mentioned, the exact value is not published by Airbus.

- Main brake is unusable, alternate braking with antiskid remains available from yellow hydraulic.

- Nose wheel steering may or may not be usable depending on aircraft version: on the newer 320 series, it is driven by the yellow hydraulic, on the older ones by the green system.

- #1 reverser is unusable and will stay stowed.

- 2 of 5 spoilers per wing are unusable.

- Slats and flaps may be slow but operable

The other flight controls are unaffected in principle - they may lose one of their power sources but fall back on their respective alternate.

The FMS however calculates its fuel estimates based on the original performance model and does not know the impaired performance status of the aircraft. Manual calculation of endurance, range etc. is required - in case of open landing gear doors and therefore in absence of Airbus published data, fuel flow and ground speed is an appropriate starting point.

If so, there may well be some similarities to the well known Hapag-Lloyd 3378 accident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hapag-Lloyd_Flight_3378) in this case.

[ORAC]

Video from further back in the field.

https://x.com/noelreports/status/1701471622471774662?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A

[doyouevenpilotbro]

Regardless of anything else that's great work from the pilots

[Mogwi]

I am not an airbus pilot but why put it in a field if is a hyd failure? Excessive fuel consumption on diversion leading to very quiet approach?

Mog

[VHOED191006]

I am not an airbus pilot but why put it in a field if is a hyd failure? Excessive fuel consumption on diversion leading to very quiet approach?

Mog
We are given to believe that it's the green system failed. That controls the normal braking system, leaving the aircraft on the alternate system (controlled by the yellow system). That's only limited to 1,000psi and around 7 applications of braking. That requires you to have a longer runway to land on. The gear is also controlled by the green system. Appears that it was stuck down with the loss of hydraulics. Looks like they really had no other choice!

[Tu.114]

@VHOED191006, that is only partially correct.

The effect You describe occurs when You have lost both green and yellow systems and are down to the brake accumulator. In that case, You are indeed down to about 7 brake applications before pressure runs out. However, if the yellow hydraulic system is pressurised, alternate braking with antiskid is available with an unlimited number of applications.

Ref. OM-B DSC 32-30-10 Braking modes

Until now, there is nothing indicating anything beyond a plain Green sys failure on the flight in question as far as I am aware.

What was the weather like at Omsk at the time of approach and is there a word on the runway condition maybe?

[VHOED191006]

@VHOED191006, that is only partially correct.

The effect You describe occurs when You have lost both green and yellow systems and are down to the brake accumulator. In that case, You are indeed down to about 7 brake applications before pressure runs out.

However, if the yellow hydraulic system is pressurised, alternate braking with antiskid is available with an unlimited number of applications.

Ref. OM-B DSC 32-30-10 Braking modes
Got to revise on my Airbus then 🤭

[DouglasFlyer]

Some pictures here:

https://mash.ru/nsk/news/177063

[krismiler]

There are three independent hydraulic systems on the A320 and even if for some reason the two primary ones fail, the aircraft is still controllable with the back up one though you’d have a lot of procedures to run through and would want to be landing at a decent airport.

A single failure wouldn’t be a major drama at all, you’d lose a few systems and have some ECAM work but a normal landing would be expected. Something obviously went seriously wrong to result in an off airport landing.

[Deep Throat]

Sanctions are wonderful, for our competitors. other potential Airbus and Boeing customers will remember this. China's aviation industry is on the rise. Give it 10 or 20 years and we can say we shot ourselves in the foot.

And you don't think a situation may develop where China may feel the need to apply sanctions.

Sometimes you have to pick sides. The world will know why.

[ettore]

They pretty quickly started dismantling the A/C: https://x.com/andrewperpetua/status/1701524614617206881?s=61&t=JwDassVm4cJ3snHPSDNP6w

[Luray]

They pretty quickly started dismantling the A/C: https://x.com/andrewperpetua/status/1701524614617206881?s=61&t=JwDassVm4cJ3snHPSDNP6w
Its an old video from similar accident. Few years ago they landed on a corn field due to eng failure.

[Less Hair]

This is not exactly the method to generate valuable spare parts?

[ettore]

Its an old video from similar accident. Few years ago they landed on a corn field due to eng failure.

Sorry. I did not know and didn't check properly the video. Shame on me

[JanetFlight]

Video 321, today's accident 320.

[Magplug]

Any crew that runs a jet out of gas dealing with an emergency should be thrown in jail as incompetent. Landing with no gear at the original destination would have been better than making a forced landing in a field. Had the transit been over water the outcome would have been totally different. Even a brand new FO could tell you that the FMC fuel predictions are nonsense with the gear down.

Was it really a good idea to gravity drop the gear before deciding that going elsewhere to a longer runway was a better course of action? Leaving 2500m of runway behind you in favour of 3600m at Novosibirsk and then running out of gas only half way there is supremely incompetent.

Edit: Can't spell!

[Sailvi767]

We are given to believe that it's the green system failed. That controls the normal braking system, leaving the aircraft on the alternate system (controlled by the yellow system). That's only limited to 1,000psi and around 7 applications of braking. That requires you to have a longer runway to land on. The gear is also controlled by the green system. Appears that it was stuck down with the loss of hydraulics. Looks like they really had no other choice!

You have full braking including anti skid on the alternate system powered by the yellow hydraulics. You might mean a failure of both the green and yellow which would put you on the accumulator.

[RatherBeFlying]

Ural needs to ask Spindelberger to design a trailer for A320 gilders:p

The field looks long enough for a takeoff, but it looks like the cowls are assisting the MLG.

Braking action seems to have been pretty good, even with limited hydraulics. How long were the ruts?

[LEM]

A diversion with gear down that leads to running out of fuel is UTTER INCOMPETENCY!

[macdo]

I'm going out on a limb. Mistakenly dropped the gear. Diverted. Ran out of fuel. Not the first to have the gear down and run dry, nor the last. Good landing mind!

[sangiovese.]

At least they minimised wear on the brakes the CP will be happy….

[tdracer]

Ural needs to ask Spindelberger to design a trailer for A320 gilders:p

The field looks long enough for a takeoff, but it looks like the cowls are assisting the MLG.

Braking action seems to have been pretty good, even with limited hydraulics. How long were the ruts?
Yea, getting it out of there is going to be a challenge to say the least. Perhaps they can bulldoze something suitable if the rains stay away for a while to allow the ground to firm up - otherwise they'll have to disassemble and/or scrap it in-place.
Reminds me a bit of the 737-300 that landed on the dike outside New Orleans after losing both engines in a severe thunderstorm (which they did successfully fly out and returned to service).

[CreepyJoe]

Lets get to the important stuff! How was their RT?
CreepyJoe

[moosepileit]

Well, the PPruners are early on the kudos without R/T audio or transcript to judge their ICAO or host state radio comms, yet.

Pan? Mayday Fuel?

Na Zdorovie!

[CargoOne]

This will come into CRM studies presentations in a year or two. They've lost green hyd, decided to divert from normal weather 2500m runway with FFRS cat 8 or cat 9 service, hugely underestimated the fuel burn on low level gear out flight and ended up how they ended up. At least this time everyone is alive and well. Aircraft is not supported by Airbus, so assessment and repairs are questionable.

[FUMR]

Boohoo Moose, the thing is that you, among others, still don't quite get it do you! If US airlines want to declare "an emergency" when flying in the USA so be it. DAL was not flying in the USA but was in a foreign country whose national language is not English. Hence the need to adhere to international standards. Here we have a Russian airline flying a domestic sector inside Russia. They can say whatever their training dictates and no doubt it will be in Russian.

[visibility3miles]

Some photos on BBC:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66785897

Looks like the field was clear of crops.

[McGinty]

ATC here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcU9nV0sXH4

[krismiler]

The case of diversion with increased fuel consumption is rarely catered to in flight planning, getting to half flaps with the gear down and having a failure which prevents further flap extension or retraction is quite possible. Out come the books and you find the runway isn’t long enough and with your new fuel flows you won’t make an airport with sufficient runway length.

Landing at the original airport and having an overrun with the emergency services in attendance would have been a better option compared to running out of fuel though.

[nomorecatering]

Maybe Airbus should offer a gravel kit and a High Float Gear kit. Could then trade in the Kingair for the farm strip.

[megan]

They've got the gear, you just need the gravel bit.


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x699/q1mha_3b3238147eda9eab5e5a5cf80059a341d4e72576.jpg

[FreqListener]

New (for now) R/T [rus lng]

[EDLB]

Wonder if they try to fly the A320 out of this field. The used airplane market in Russia today may be a lot different. Is there grass field take off performance data in the POH? FUD will be a big concern.

[jmmilner]

Some photos on BBC:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66785897

Looks like the field was clear of crops.

The same article claims:

A video on social media showed a heavy digger then dismembering the plane, lopping off the cockpit, tail and wings to more easily remove the plane from the field.

Either the BBC fell for the prior video or the investigation won't have much to go on in finding the cause of the hydraulics failure. Even if the plane was an obvious write-off, wouldn't taking it apart a bit more carefully improve the quality and quantity of the spare parts that will be harvested?

[procede]

I guess they could build a temporary runway, which would be an interesting military exercise. It would only need to be around 4000ft for a near empty aircraft.

In any case the pilots should have used superior judgement to not need their superior landing skills...

[shared reality]

Quick FlySmart calculation with an A320 CEO ldg (without knowing the actual weather/conditions at OMSK), assuming 10 kts tailwind, temp 15, QNH 1000, and RCC 5/5/5 (wet) at MLW 64.5 tons, with Green system reservoir lo lvl, gives an actual landing distance of 2148 meters.

There must be more to this story, or why on earth would they even contemplating diversion? A single hyd. failure on the 320 is not a great concern at all.

Regards.

[procede]

There must be more to this story, or why on earth would they even contemplating diversion? A single hyd. failure on the 320 is not a great concern at all.

Pressure from the airline to bring the aircraft back to an airport with a maintenance facility?

[DaveReidUK]

Wonder if they try to fly the A320 out of this field.

I very much doubt it - in fact I wouldn't be surprised if they simply remove the useful bits and leave the hulk in situ.

FUD will be a big concern.

Yes - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt shouldn't be underestimated ...

[Luray]

I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck.

[procede]

I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck.

That still does not explain why they barely made it half way to Novosibirsk, unless they were already close to minimum fuel before their aborted landing at Omsk.

[Black Pudding]

180% of extra fuel on top of what the original fuel to divert is a lot. If divert fuel was 2000 kgs, it’s now 5600 kgs (correct me if I’m wrong). If you don’t have it, you don’t have it.

[Dox]

Any crew that runs a jet out of gas dealing with an emergency should be thrown in jail as incompetent. Landing with no gear at the original destination would have been better than making a forced landing in a field. Had the transit been over water the outcome would have been totally different. Even a brand new FO could tell you that the FMC fuel predictions are nonsense with the gear down.

Was it really a good idea to gravity drop the gear before deciding that going elsewhere to a longer runway was a better course of action? Leaving 2500m of runway behind you in favour of 3600m at Novosibirsk and then running out of gas only half way there is supremely incompetent.

Edit: Can't spell!
Couldn't say it any better!

[scifi]

I seem to remember at a similar off-piste landing, it was possible to make a temporary runway to remove a stranded airplane. Can anyone come up with the details...?
There are reports that this aircraft has suffered a broken Nose-Wheel Strut, which might require a repair.

[sablatnic]

I seem to remember at a similar off-piste landing, it was possible to make a temporary runway to remove a stranded airplane. Can anyone come up with the details...?
There are reports that this aircraft has suffered a broken Nose-Wheel Strut, which might require a repair.

You could be thinking of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Flight_110

[CISTRS]

This one, I think...

Mexican Pilot Emergency Lands Plane At Mallow Racecourse, Ireland 1983
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F_g6rOe5wg

[bpmsmith]

I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck.
Whenever a penalty is greater than 100% (e.g., 180%), the clearest information for someone under pressure is to show the multiplier (e.g., 2.8x).

[vilas]

I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8
Silly mistake but incredible luck.
The original news said the crew managed to raise the gear only the doors remained open. So there's something wrong here. With only doors open they would have had sufficient fuel and with gear stuck down you never have that much fuel.to reach original destination or diversions.

[Magplug]

The original news said the crew managed to raise the gear only the doors remained open. So there's something wrong here.

Sounds like the crew are telling porkies to cover up a monumental cock-up.

Sadly the Russian establishment are strangers to truth so we will probably never find out exactly what happened.

[procede]

Sounds like the crew are telling porkies to cover up a monumental cock-up.

Sadly the Russian establishment are strangers to truth so we will probably never find out exactly what happened.
I am curious to what will happen with the flight crew...

[FlightDetent]

I am not an airbus pilot so can't verify latest report on that incident. Rumor is that they misunderstood fcom. FCOM states that you need 180% of extra fuel ,but they just multiplied it by 1.8 Silly mistake but incredible luck.

Every airline I saw train this or trained, the first batch of people do exactly that.

See a fuel penalty of 180% and assume the fuel burn will double. Nope, with doors hanging (additional +15% over FMC baseline), it triples.

Ugly trick the mind plays, all the other factors are in range (mostly) of 15-30%, so the 180 sure looks like a double. Badly wrong.

OTOH, S7 had a good training team and proficient aviators before, used to meet them and vigorously discuss things at a nearby ATO when the times were good. When we wanted to friends with them again.

Remember fellow flyers, debating and arguing is only purposeful if gain something for our own consicience out of the excercise.

For Airbus? Clearly built better than a local tank! (and yes, the old standard of forced landing with the gear out proved well)

[FlightDetent]

Whenever a penalty is greater than 100% (e.g., 180%), the clearest information for someone under pressure is to show the multiplier (e.g., 2.8x). Agreed 3x (+200%), the liveware design of the table is long overdue for a redesign.

[FlightDetent]

180% of extra fuel on top of what the original fuel to divert is a lot. If divert fuel was 2000 kgs, it’s now 5600 kgs (correct me if I’m wrong). If you don’t have it, you don’t have it.

Unsure about their ZFW, however on a standard loaded A320, from around 7t expected FOB at destination (!) you start hitting the MLW limit.

Meant to say, quite likely there never was more than 6.5 when the diversion started.

With the triple burn this would suggest an equivalent of 2.2 on a normal day, i.e. about 50 minutes [or markedly less] from resuming ZFW state.

In case that happened, kudos to crew for taking the necessary actions before running out of the juice competely.
​​

​​​​​

[kms901]

And I hear they are now planning to fly it out. Looking at aerial photos, whatever the crew got wrong, they chose the right field.

[DaveReidUK]

And I hear they are now planning to fly it out. Looking at aerial photos, whatever the crew got wrong, they chose the right field.

Source ?

[Zombywoof]

And I hear they are now planning to fly it out. Looking at aerial photos, whatever the crew got wrong, they chose the right field.They are going to fly an A320 out of a farmer's field? Only in Russia. Dashcams at the ready.

[giggitygiggity]

Every airline I saw train this or trained, the first batch of people do exactly that.

See a fuel penalty of 180% and assume the fuel burn will double. Nope, with doors hanging (additional +15% over FMC baseline), it triples.

Ugly trick the mind plays, all the other factors are in range (mostly) of 15-30%, so the 180 sure looks like a double. Badly wrong.

OTOH, S7 had a good training team and proficient aviators before, used to meet them and vigorously discuss things at a nearby ATO when the times were good. When we wanted to friends with them again.

Remember fellow flyers, debating and arguing is only purposeful if gain something for our own consicience out of the excercise.

For Airbus? Clearly built better than a local tank! (and yes, the old standard of forced landing with the gear out proved well)
Maybe Airbus will fix their parlance and sort this part of the FCOM out as likewise, it's a standard error of which you just need to 'know better than the manuals'. That being said, I don't know an A320 captain that wasn't aware of this gotcha. Even if they do fix them, no idea if Airbus are providing this lot with the latest manuals anyway?

[krismiler]

There was a Gulfstream which forced landed on a race course in Ireland and was subsequently flown out after a temporary runway was made for it, so the precedent is there. Strip out the seats, load minimum fuel, flaps 3, TOGA and away you go. A few hundred metres of temporary road if the field is a bit soft.

[ATC Watcher]

Ethiopian did just that in Arusha with a 767 ,:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSa-L-OkM8M
It started in Grass , hit the short asphalt runway ( 00.35 on the video,) left it again for grass 5 seconds later , but they made it . Everything is possible in Africa, so why not in Russia? .

[tdracer]

Ethiopian did just that in Arusha with a 767
Not to mention the TACA 737-300 that did a dead stick on a levee outside New Orleans and was flown off that same levee a few days later (after an engine change).

So, not a "Russian" phenomenon.

[JanetFlight]

... and was flown off that same levee a few days later

Allow me a small correction...The aircraft was towed from the levee to a nearby NASA base, fueled to the minimum amount needed and took off from Saturn Boulevard, a road which had previously been an aircraft runway at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility.
By the way...Captain Dardano announced his retirement last week ;)

https://www.aviacionline.com/2023/09/mission-accomplished-carlos-dardano-the-one-eyed-pilot-who-landed-a-boeing-737-in-the-mud-retired/?utm_content=cmp-true

[scifi]

Take off may not be so easy without a prepared surface. Remember this airplane was leaving three ruts in the ground down to walking speed, and landed with Zero fuel. To get it out you will need to add enough fuel, for the 180 kms flight. Also they will have to repair the faulty hydraulic system as well.
Pictures on another web site show that some of the rescue vehicles were also making ruts in the ground.

[Magplug]

So what we are saying is..... Not only did the crew incorrectly calculate the fuel required for a gear-down diversion to Novosibirsk, but they also incorrectly calculated the landing distance required with a G HYD failure at Omsk which precipitated the flawed diversion decision in the first place! They really did not do very well.

[Hawking]

So what we are saying is..... Not only did the crew incorrectly calculate the fuel required for a gear-down diversion to Novosibirsk, but they also incorrectly calculated the landing distance required with a G HYD failure at Omsk which precipitated the flawed diversion decision in the first place! They really did not do very well.
As I am informed the first officer calculated it correctly and reported to the captain, that Omsk runway sufficient enough. Captain decided to divert to Novosibirsk because there is a good repairing facility available of another (S7) airline

[Magplug]

As I am informed the first officer calculated it correctly and reported to the captain, that Omsk runway sufficient enough. Captain decided to divert to Novosibirsk because there is a good repairing facility available of another (S7) airline
No doubt taking the pax somewhere other than they wanted to be, and retrieving the aircraft from a farmer's field has proven to be a sub-optimum business decision on the part of the Captain. No doubt he will disappear without trace.

[blind pew]

Not the first time a well thought out operational decision has gone wrong or the books were wrong. A Trident 3 took out the approach lights during a night take off from Malta with the stick shaker going as the manuals had used a take off distance 1 km too long.
A sister ship diverted to Madrid after an engine failure after take off from Malaga but had to do a late go around due to a typical Spanish ATC cock up; unfortunately it was outside of the WAT limits and continued to descend ..the captain accelerated down a valley, cleaned up to min drag and managed to carry out a circuit. In this case the numbers were in the books but needed to be extracted from the take off charts.
Slightly off subject but similar I had to do a go around inside the OM on a route check..following SOP left the speed dropping with go around thrust and everything dangling..after thinking I would probably get a stick shake if I retracted the land flap and a gear warning if I raised the undercarriage I decided to lower the nose first..nothing was said in the debrief nor were procedures ever changed..
At least the crew made a good decision putting her down in a field

[Less Hair]

Wouldn't it be possible to just correlate measured actual fuel flow, whatever the actual drag might be, speed/distance and range prediction? Higher drag and shorter range could be expected, but wouldn't this be a great use of moving maps available in non-normal situations?

[Uplinker]

So what we are saying is..... Not only did the crew incorrectly calculate the fuel required for a gear-down diversion to Novosibirsk, but they also incorrectly calculated the landing distance required with a G HYD failure at Omsk which precipitated the flawed diversion decision in the first place! They really did not do very well.

Presumably, they do not have access to Airbus Flysmart? Very simple with that to plug in failures and weather to compute LDR.

Maybe Airbus will fix their parlance..........no idea if Airbus are providing this lot with the latest manuals anyway?

Same answer?

[megan]

Aircraft landed with 200kg of fuel, being prepared to fly out.

https://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/750x485/ural_a320_ra_73805_omsk_230912_6_96506d5aa7a951bcc59f86f1afc 371b1cee4cf98.jpg

[DaveReidUK]

Well they've shut the doors and put covers on the engines, at least ...

[Equivocal]

At least the nose gear is pointing in the correct direction again!

[grizzled]

Aircraft landed with 200kg of fuel, being prepared to fly out.


I'm not sure flying the aircraft out is a great idea. And I'm not sure a thorough and proper risk assessment and resultant operational plan is in place. Having said that, best of luck to them.

[bobbytables]

A temporary runway should be possible, even if the ground is quite soft. If the damage is minimal I don’t see why it can’t make it out, and there’s precedent for such takeoffs.

[Zombywoof]

Given Russian failures of late, I'm sure no expense will be spared to make sure this succeeds. The state media demands it. Maybe they could asphalt the cornfield.

[Valdiviano]

Just bring a couple of pilots from Aerosucre Colombia, experts at short field and overloaded T O.
Just google their track record.

[pax britanica]

Is there a real problem with flying this aircraft out asuming
1 Its landing gear and engines have not been badly damaged
2 Hard enough surface and enough of it -
3 All grass and bushes etc cut down to stop FOD on the take off roll.
I imagine if they can flatten the take off path and wait until late Novermber -it will be frozen, they might screw up hi tech stuff but the Russians are usually pretty good at dealing with harsh environments as they have a lot of them

[DaveReidUK]

Where there's a will, there's a way.

I'm just not convinced there's a will ...

[Maninthebar]

Where there's a will, there's a way.

I'm just not convinced there's a will ...
"Where there's a will, there's a wont'"

Old Suffolk saying I just made up

[bigjames]

Looks like they are getting ready...

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02EoQd4yA4H1QK8M1jtpXudcBC4Hm7Ho2t uf4MqzREDMqmv7PdLm84E8EzhzSVZRtAl&id=100065182291066&mibextid=K8Wfd2

[FullOppositeRudder]

I wish them well ... but having watched grain trucks loaded with just 28 tonnes of grain (40+ tonnes GCM) progress across the field to the nearby road and observed the tyres sinking into the soil with just this load spread over five axles and twenty load bearing wheels, I'm nervous. The rolling resistance here could be quite serious.

Everything will depend on the pre-existing compaction of the 'runway' and how much real estate is available in a direction which provides a nice long into wind excursion. The wheel marks left on the landing run are notable, however it was loaded at that point. It should therefore be much lighter for an attempted departure, but this is offset to some degree by the weight of the fuel needed to get to an anticipated destination - assuming aviation can be achieved. I am sure all of this will be considered, and perhaps there is an intention to roll the working area to further compact the soil profile, One other issue is whether the remnant vegetation will remain sufficiently anchored to the surface not be ingested into the engines. It looks like it was a grain crop of some kind. 'Twill be interesting ....

[DaveReidUK]

Looks like they are getting ready...

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02EoQd4yA4H1QK8M1jtpXudcBC4Hm7Ho2t uf4MqzREDMqmv7PdLm84E8EzhzSVZRtAl&id=100065182291066&mibextid=K8Wfd2

Simply connecting a GPU could be for a number of reasons unrelated to imminent flight.

[tdracer]

Simply connecting a GPU could be for a number of reasons unrelated to imminent flight.
True, but it also suggests that they don't plan to leave it there or scrap it in-place.

[DaveReidUK]

True, but it also suggests that they don't plan to leave it there or scrap it in-place.

Maybe not.

On the other hand, if I was going to start stripping out all the seats and interior, for example, I'd want some light to be able to see what I was doing. :O

[bobbytables]

Maybe not.

On the other hand, if I was going to start stripping out all the seats and interior, for example, I'd want some light to be able to see what I was doing. :O

removing them to reduce T/O weight, right?

[42go]

.......and how on earth do you heat the Samovar without a GPU?

[RatherBeFlying]

Roll the VR length flat, wait for it to freeze deep enough to support the gear and clear off the snow.

[DaveReidUK]

removing them to reduce T/O weight, right?

If it was planned to fly the aircraft out, then removing the seats would indeed be a sensible thing to do.

If it was planned to abandon it and reduce it to spares, then removing the seats would still be a sensible thing to do.

:O

[meleagertoo]

Does the Russian military really have no equivalent of PSP?

Note in Dave Reid's photo the wheels are standing on concrete pads so they are obviously concerned about bearing strength.

My guess is they'll roll the strip smooth, wait a couple of months until the ground is froxen solid and depart then.

[Revnetwork]

I hope the undercarriage retracts on any attempted takeoff this time. https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/ural-a320-field-landing-crew-did-not-realise-undercarriage-had-failed-to-retract/155122.article#:~:text=with%20GOOSE%20Recruitment-,Ural%20A320%20field%2Dlanding%20crew%20did%20not,undercarri age%20had%20failed%20to%20retract&text=Russian%20investigators%20believe%20the%20crew,it%20ran %20short%20on%20fuel.

[bobbytables]

I hope the undercarriage retracts on any attempted takeoff this time. https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/ural-a320-field-landing-crew-did-not-realise-undercarriage-had-failed-to-retract/155122.article#:~:text=with%20GOOSE%20Recruitment-,Ural%20A320%20field%2Dlanding%20crew%20did%20not,undercarri age%20had%20failed%20to%20retract&text=Russian%20investigators%20believe%20the%20crew,it%20ran %20short%20on%20fuel.

this is the latest of several explanations given… but if they didn’t know the gear was out then why did they fly the diversion at FL180 and slow (260kts ground speed on ADS-B)?

[fdr]

this is the latest of several explanations given… but if they didn’t know the gear was out then why did they fly the diversion at FL180 and slow (260kts ground speed on ADS-B)?

the term I believe is "obfuscation", a cousin to "deflection".

AI's FCOM has always been an opportunity for exploration in confusion, but, at TOC irrespective of the words of wisdom In the FCOM, does one not run a mental howgozit on fuel flow, fuel remaining and GS? Had one of the simple things that we used to do in planes, and still do in our cars not get done any more?

My current jets use instantaneous SAR and SGR to predict arrival status, which for all of the irritations that gives, it avoids overlooking the approaching "silence of the hams". A cross check at TOC gives an out to go to plan B, which doesn't involve planting in a wheat field. At least the airline won't be billed for crop damage, the field is as barren as Russia's promises.

[vilas]

With only Green system fail you can land anywhere as planned except cannot raise the gear once it's down. And with 180%FPF you aren't going anywhere else. Crew didn't know gear was down? If they knew G had failed when it was lowered then they should know it. Only thing that's not known is was the crew qualified on A320?

[FlightDetent]

No problems with crushable RESA for the planned departure .... :E

[JanetFlight]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1080x1534/ural_c600ba68a3ab4f56561af0e54268d63ff7e20e3f.jpg
Yesterday in Ural Academy...

[tdracer]

With only Green system fail you can land anywhere as planned except cannot raise the gear once it's down. And with 180%FPF you aren't going anywhere else. Crew didn't know gear was down? If they knew G had failed when it was lowered then they should know it. Only thing that's not known is was the crew qualified on A320?
Sorry, no first hand experience with this on an A320 (or any Airbus), but I've been on Boeing aircraft where we flew around with the gear down for one reason or another (test related). Even though most Boeing flight decks are somewhat noisier that Airbus, the noise made it perfectly obvious that the gear was down - you only need really need EICAS/lights to confirm they are locked, not down...
Is that not true with an A320?

[FlightDetent]

Bit of a speculation. Line crews commonly encounter L/G DN on tkof or g/a, where roaring engines are the loudest. No idea what the effect will be at 260 kts (but presume noisier). Devil is the noise being constant, from after the tkof/ga - thus perhaps not triggering any alert in the cognitive system if saturated already. It's not unheard of that in the SIM crews end up with the dunlops air ventilated far longer than they wished.

Not sure if the NW wheel bay doors were closed for these guys, might be another straw if so (more silent).

The awkward part is the lower EICAS, which either:
- shows a "STATUS" screen with listed inop items incl. "L/G RETRACT", or
- with L/G DN shows the "WHEEL" page with big green triangles (well, a common sight during standard final approach thus a short-circuited brain might wash that out)

The story leaks the most around the decision not to accept the first runway. I ran the numbers for ALD.

[AeroAmigo]

According to various sources, Ural Airlines has confirmed it is planning to fly the aircraft out of the field, following structural inspections and the removal of seats to reduce weight.

I'd include the sources as links but cannot post them yet, so they are: Aerotime, Aviation Source & @aviationbrk

[DaveReidUK]

I'd include the sources as links but cannot post them yet, so they are: Aerotime, Aviation Source & @aviationbrk

Twitter thread on which the other two sources appear to be based:

https://twitter.com/aviationbrk/status/1709180432841920778

[PanzerJohn]

CONFIRMED: Ural Airlines to attempt A320 take-off from field (key.aero) (https://www.key.aero/article/confirmed-ural-airlines-attempt-a320-take-field?utm_campaign=KA%20Social%202023&utm_content=266539948&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&hss_channel=fbp-379273805490083)

[172_driver]

I might be late to the party, is it clear yet whether the gears remained down or just the gear doors? I know little about the A320, but I can't imagine retraction is impossible with the failure of one hydraulic system?

[tdracer]

CONFIRMED: Ural Airlines to attempt A320 take-off from field (key.aero) (https://www.key.aero/article/confirmed-ural-airlines-attempt-a320-take-field?utm_campaign=KA%20Social%202023&utm_content=266539948&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&hss_channel=fbp-379273805490083)
I wonder what sort of bonus the pilots are being offered for the attempt...

[grizzled]

I wish them a successful take off and flight to wherever they plan to go with the aircraft; I really do. But if I were in Vegas that's not the bet I'd make.
If I were the Director of Flight Operations, or Head of Safety, or CEO of Ural, I'd want a LOT of boxes ticked before I even considered, never mind approved, this venture. Some of those requirements may already have been met but I'm fairly certain that not all have.

[Hawking]

I wonder what sort of bonus the pilots are being offered for the attempt...
1000$ for each and there will be a queue of pilots wishing to do this. A320 captain in Russia makes 4000$ net per month maximum

[bobbytables]

1000$ for each and there will be a queue of pilots wishing to do this. A320 captain in Russia makes 4000$ net per month maximum

did you miss a zero? If a bonus was paid for endangering your life [1], one week of pay seems unlikely to move the needle. Especially considering that $4k net per month is a very comfortable salary in Russia.

[1] IMO, if takeoff is indeed attempted, I doubt it will be as dangerous as some are suggesting. If they wanted to throw caution to the wind they could have attempted it already. With careful preparation of the aircraft and surface there’s no reason it can’t be flown out of there.

[Less Hair]

Wouldn't they risk ingesting half the tundra when spooling up?

[bobbytables]

Wouldn't they risk ingesting half the tundra when spooling up?

remove loose debris from the strip, compact it, maybe wait for ice. Or you could lay a temporary asphalt or metal-plank strip

[Less Hair]

They risk losing two almost good engines, the main financial value left of that aircraft.

[bobbytables]

They risk losing two almost good engines, the main financial value left of that aircraft.

If that’s a significant risk they won’t even attempt it. People talk as if they are some bush operation :rolleyes:

[atakacs]

Wonder if Airbus is in any shape or form involved in this (unofficialy of course).

[CVividasku]

remove loose debris from the strip, compact it, maybe wait for ice. Or you could lay a temporary asphalt or metal-plank strip
Yes. A simple strip of 1000m should be more than enough. Wait for a good headwind, empty the airplane completely, and target a higher pitch from 90-100kt (soft field takeoff technique).

[Just a spotter]

Yes. A simple strip of 1000m should be more than enough. Wait for a good headwind, empty the airplane completely, and target a higher pitch from 90-100kt (soft field takeoff technique).

I wonder of this crew is available and type rated! :}

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyvY2GK9B3M

JAS

[tdracer]

They risk losing two almost good engines, the main financial value left of that aircraft.
Remember, it's not like they can just go out and buy a replacement - that certainly has to figure into the value they are putting on it.

[Hank Schrader]

Also means they don't technically have hull loss on the AOC, and insurance costs remain lower. If insurance is a thing.

[ATC Watcher]

. If insurance is a thing. Is this aircraft one of the "stolen" ones and illegally RA registered ? If yes I do not see how it can be insured.

[bobbytables]

Is this aircraft one of the "stolen" ones and illegally RA registered ? If yes I do not see how it can be insured.

I’m sure a Russian insurer has taken it on if it is. Possibly after being leaned on by the state to do so.

[DaveReidUK]

Is this aircraft one of the "stolen" ones and illegally RA registered ? If yes I do not see how it can be insured.

Yes it is, still officially on the Bermudan register.

[scifi]

Just give the Co-Ordinates to the Ukrainians, they will come up with a solution.

[OvertHawk]

Just give the Co-Ordinates to the Ukrainians, they will come up with a solution.

Why waste a missile on it - wait and see if they wreck it themselves!

[IlyaMuromets]

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russian-airline-aims-patched-up-airbus-take-off-field-where-it-landed-2023-10-09/

IM

[ATC Watcher]

Ural said the plane would stay in the field for several months, under guard, while inspections, maintenance and repairs are carried out.
So they wait for the ground to freeze. Make sense. and probably will work out.

[NutLoose]

They have now fenced it in..it is looking a bit crusty these days.

https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1726851417649078696


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/646x581/f_ccnpdwoaaahxv_04a4ea259c2bcc5570d84051ecdf093052ce7062.jpg


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/680x439/f_ccncnwaaa9qlo_34052432be7a6cc5f6d47d5ab795f49a419ec48f.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/679x399/f_ccnobweaasmqr_5bc5b028e4e44cef67208891936d1f64130e2f7b.jpg

[treadigraph]

Need the late Darryl Greenamyer for Kee Bird II Nice icy runway...

[ATC Watcher]

Strange that they plowed the field instead of damming it flat before it freezes, so take off is not apparently planned for tomorrow.

[DaveReidUK]

It's looking more like a Christmas tree every day. I expect the engines will be the first to be removed.

[gerintaethem]

using the timely Christmas tree reference……. has anyone heard anything further on it flying out? Nothing I can find after optimistic noises around Nov.

[NutLoose]

And it finally has succumbed to being a belated Christmas Tree, Ural Airlines have decided to scrap her.

The Ural Airlines Airbus A320 that was forced to land in a field is to be dismantled, according to new reports.Following a failure of its hydraulic system, the A320 was forced to land in a wheat field (https://airlive.net/emergency/2023/09/12/breaking-an-ural-airlines-a320-made-an-emergency-landing-on-field-in-russia/) after running out of fuel back in September 2023.

A Russian aviation Telegram channel, said that after a thorough evaluation has been completed, the decision has been made to dismantle the plane for parts and not attempt to fly the Airbus A320 out of the field as was previously proposed (https://airlive.net/news/2023/11/22/ural-airlines-could-wait-until-the-ground-is-frozen-enough-to-attempt-takeoff-of-its-stuck-a320/).

Aerotime (https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/ural-airlines-airbus-wheat-field-russia) revealed that Ural Airlines pays farmer year’s rent for wheat field holding the stranded Airbus until spring 2024.

The Ural Airlines plane remains in the field just outside Novosibirsk, in southern Siberia, protected by 24-hour private security in a fenced off area.

According to the region’s head, Ural Airlines entered into a lease agreement with the field’s owner to rent the field where the stranded jet lies for a year, and this could yet be extended for longer.

https://airlive.net/news/2024/01/12/ural-airlines-finally-took-decision-to-scrap-the-a320-that-landed-in-a-field-near-novosibirsk/

[Lake1952]

There is a desperate need in Russia for parts anyway.

[DaveReidUK]

FlightGlobal appears to have caught up: Ural reportedly abandons ‘impractical’ bid to fly stranded A320 out of field (https://www.flightglobal.com/airlines/ural-reportedly-abandons-impractical-bid-to-fly-stranded-a320-out-of-field/157733.article)

[llagonne66]

That's a real shame :E
Taking off from this field would have provided fantastic pictures and videos ;)

[DuncanDoenitz]

Ural Airlines tagline; "Still outstanding in our field".