Aircraft down in residential area of Karachi?

[ATCO1962]

Just about every airworthy IL 76 is operating through our airspace in the Middle East, servicing a little dispute to the north of Oman. You wouldn't believe the sheer number of them plying the routes up to Afghanistan.

If the average quality of the fleet is to be judged by the ones we actually see here, then we will be waiting for more of these disasters.

Sadly, the Russians build great aircraft but don't have the will/resources/culture to continue to maintain and fly them in a manner that ensures safety.

[Phileas Fogg]

MontrealGuy,

Whilst many Antonovs may be built in the Russian Federation Antonov are actually a Ukrainian company and also have/had plants in Ukraine, Uzbekistan etc.

I find it unusual, by your list, that the Antonov incidents of 2010 all involve Russian built machines!

[captplaystation]

The main problem is that the countries/companies they have ended up operating for are either morally/financially, or in some cases both, bankrupt.
No fault of the robust products from the ex-soviet empire per se, just that the maintenance and tlc they need ain't forthcoming, and the rule books have been long forgotten.
Quite amazing how un-regulated this sector of aviation is, and a large part of the blame must fall on "much more Western" nations who turn a blind eye, just to get the job done at the lowest price.

The $ is King

[lomapaseo]

There is one hell of a stretch here to take a far away video of a plane flying with a fire ball so low that it might have even hit a ground obstacle before crashing and turning the thread into an airworthiness maintenance discourse.

Sure there's questions but can we have just a trifle more on-scene information before going two pages deep in a thread.

No wonder the news media gets confused.

[Montrealguy]

MontrealGuy,

Whilst many Antonovs may be built in the Russian Federation Antonov are actually a Ukrainian company and also have/had plants in Ukraine, Uzbekistan etc.

I find it unusual, by your list, that the Antonov incidents of 2010 all involve Russian built machines!

You are quite correct, several of the machines I listed as Russian were built in the Ukraine, some at a time when Ukraine was part of the USSR, others after independence. Machines such as the AN-26 and the An-32 were built in the Ukraine, while the An-28 is built in Russia, the An-12 was built strictly in Uzbekistan (although none were involved in fatal accidents in 2010) and the An-2 was built in Poland. But if we were to follow that logic, the IL-76, all of which were built in Uzbekistan, is not a Russian machine at all and should be listed as Uzbek.

What really counts ? The country where the designers are located or the country where the plant that assembles the aircraft is located ?

The Soviet Union left us a situation which is quite weird for "westerners". Antonov is Ukrainian. The Aviastar aviation factory in Ulyanovsk, Russia, builds Antonovs, Tupolevs and has now begun building Ilyushins as well. But about half of An-124s were built at Aviastar (before and after the end of the USSR). Are they Ukrainain or Russian ?

But all this is besides the point. Lets look at fatal accidents of 2009, if 2010 was not convincing enough, by type this time

Airbus 310 1
Airbus 330 1
An-2 1 (Soviet/Ukraine design, Polish built)
An-12 2 (Soviet/Ukraine designed, Uzbek built)
An-26 1
An-32 1
ATR-72 1
BAE 146 1
BAE 32 1
BAE 41 1
BAE 125 1
Beech 99 1
Beech 1900 1
BN-2 3
Boeing 707 1
Boeing 737 2
Canadair 600 1
CASA 212 1
Cessna 208 3
Cessna 650 1
DHC-6 3
DHC-8 1
DC-3 2
Emb110 1
F-27 1
Falcon 20 1
Falcon 100 1
GAF N22 1
GAF N24 1
Hesa 140 1 (Ukraine designed, Iranian built)
IL-62 1
IL-76 4 (Soviet/Russian design, Uzbek built)
Lockheed C-130 3
MD-11 2
PZL M-28 2 (a Polish built and modified An-28 with US engines)
TU-154 1

If we go by country of last assembly:

16 US
7 UK types
5 Uzbek
5 Canadian
5 French
3 Polish
2 Russian
2 Ukraine
2 Australian
1 Iranian
1 Spanish
1 Dutch
1 Brazilian

By Country of Design

16 US
10 USSR
7 UK
5 Canadian
5 French
2 Polish
2 Australian
1 Spanish
1 Dutch
1 Brazilian
1 Ukraine (the HESA 140)

Despite the many shady operators of ex Soviet machines, the statistics do no reflect the poor reputation they were given.

[ExSp33db1rd]

Montrealguy - there are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics ( oft repeated quote )

Statistics can be 'massaged' to prove whatever the author wishes.

[Phileas Fogg]

MontrealGuy,

So if a McDonnell Douglas built Harrier crashes do you regard it as a British (Tommy Sopwith) design incident?

[captplaystation]

Montreal (Yeah right ? ? ) guy.

I don't think this thread is being best served by discussing the politics involved in the break up of the former USSR , or the quality of design/construction of aviation products which were indeed all from there, no matter the name of the territory now.

Finally, these aircraft were designed to be operated/maintained in a certain way. The somewhat incomplete historical safety records available to those of us on the other side of the iron curtain makes any discussion of relative safety levels achieved WITH this benefit a bit of a nonsense. . . but, what is assuredly true, is that these birds most certainly are NOT being maintained/operated in any way likely to result in the safety levels anticipated by their designers.

Just to avoid confusion, this is not a Commie/USA discussion here, these aircraft are invariably now in the wrong hands, being operated by companies/countries who have a VERY poor track record.
If you doubt my take on this, I would ask you freely and without bias, look at how many Boeings have been crashed this last twenty years in Africa, or indeed South America QED?

A used car is only as good as its last owner, an aircraft is exactly the same.

[Phileas Fogg]

I have flown around the former USSR quite extensively on such types as AN-24's, Yak42's, Tu-134's etc. and maintenance does leave a lot to be desired.

There are IL-76's parked-up at airports all around the former USSR just waiting for "tin-pot" operators to sign them up and get them airborne, as an example just 'Google Earth' on Zaporozhye Airport to establish the airframes parked-up, at just one airport, available to, with a kick of the tyres etc, get airborne, unfortunately economical hardships dictate what is safe and what is not!

[Big Pistons Forever]

Originally Posted by Montrealguy

You are quite correct, several of the machines I listed as Russian were built in the Ukraine, some at a time when Ukraine was part of the USSR, others after independence. Machines such as the AN-26 and the An-32 were built in the Ukraine, while the An-28 is built in Russia, the An-12 was built strictly in Uzbekistan (although none were involved in fatal accidents in 2010) and the An-2 was built in Poland. But if we were to follow that logic, the IL-76, all of which were built in Uzbekistan, is not a Russian machine at all and should be listed as Uzbek.

What really counts ? The country where the designers are located or the country where the plant that assembles the aircraft is located ?

The Soviet Union left us a situation which is quite weird for "westerners". Antonov is Ukrainian. The Aviastar aviation factory in Ulyanovsk, Russia, builds Antonovs, Tupolevs and has now begun building Ilyushins as well. But about half of An-124s were built at Aviastar (before and after the end of the USSR). Are they Ukrainain or Russian ?

But all this is besides the point. Lets look at fatal accidents of 2009, if 2010 was not convincing enough, by type this time

Airbus 310 1
Airbus 330 1
An-2 1 (Soviet/Ukraine design, Polish built)
An-12 2 (Soviet/Ukraine designed, Uzbek built)
An-26 1
An-32 1
ATR-72 1
BAE 146 1
BAE 32 1
BAE 41 1
BAE 125 1
Beech 99 1
Beech 1900 1
BN-2 3
Boeing 707 1
Boeing 737 2
Canadair 600 1
CASA 212 1
Cessna 208 3
Cessna 650 1
DHC-6 3
DHC-8 1
DC-3 2
Emb110 1
F-27 1
Falcon 20 1
Falcon 100 1
GAF N22 1
GAF N24 1
Hesa 140 1 (Ukraine designed, Iranian built)
IL-62 1
IL-76 4 (Soviet/Russian design, Uzbek built)
Lockheed C-130 3
MD-11 2
PZL M-28 2 (a Polish built and modified An-28 with US engines)
TU-154 1

If we go by country of last assembly:

16 US
7 UK types
5 Uzbek
5 Canadian
5 French
3 Polish
2 Russian
2 Ukraine
2 Australian
1 Iranian
1 Spanish
1 Dutch
1 Brazilian

By Country of Design

16 US
10 USSR
7 UK
5 Canadian
5 French
2 Polish
2 Australian
1 Spanish
1 Dutch
1 Brazilian
1 Ukraine (the HESA 140)

Despite the many shady operators of ex Soviet machines, the statistics do no reflect the poor reputation they were given.

Utterly meaningless statistics. The only meaningfull way to compare statistics between aircraft is accidents per 100,000 flying hours and even this does not account for operational differences like short haul vs long haul, operations at 2nd or third tier airports etc.

However the latest numbers I have seen put the accident rate per 100,000 hrs of ex soviet block aircraft at 15 times higher than all operators using Western built aircraft. No amount of jiggery pokery will hide the fact the IL and Antonov aircraft crash at much higher rate than Western aircraft. The cause of that discrepency can be debated but not its existance.

[captplaystation]

Thank you gentleman, by your real world experience,you confirm what my gut feeling told me all along.
Montrealguy, no hard feelings, but this is BS for everyone involved in it, so, at least, don't deny the reality, and help everyone stuck with it, to MAYBE?, move forward.

[Dairyground]

Big Pistons Forever

The only meaningfull way to compare statistics between aircraft is accidents per 100,000 flying hours and even this does not account for operational differences like short haul vs long haul, operations at 2nd or third tier airports etc.

Given that most accidents occur on take-off, approach or landing, and relatively few in the cruise, is not accidents per sector a more useful statistic for type/operator/regime comparison than accidents per hour?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Originally Posted by Dairyground

Big Pistons Forever



Given that most accidents occur on take-off, approach or landing, and relatively few in the cruise, is not accidents per sector a more useful statistic for type/operator/regime comparison than accidents per hour?

Obviously the more granularity the better the data. The problem becomes getting data that you can be sure compares like to like. Total flight hours is the easiest to obtain and is not subject to different intreptations. Therefore I think the accident per 100,000 metric seems to be the most commonly used when broad comparisons are made

[jcjeant]

Hi,

Flying Or Driving: Which Is Safer?

[Montrealguy]

Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever

However the latest numbers I have seen put the accident rate per 100,000 hrs of ex soviet block aircraft at 15 times higher than all operators using Western built aircraft.

That would be convincing information, if true. Care to share where you saw those numbers.

[Montrealguy]

News reports state seven of the occupants were Ukrainians, and one was Russian. THE Aircraft was Georgian registered and and belonged to Sunway Airlines, which I had never heard of. It seemed to be based in the UAE these past years, first as Kyrgyzstan Airways EX-036, then as Georgian National Airlines 4L-GNI before going over to Sunway. It started life as Aeroflot's RA-76785.

[grounded27]

Soo many russian aircraft are written off as mechanical flying into areas where ATC is worse then theirs and hostility is more rampant than many others wish to venture. Sure Russian built fleet's are old but they are an easy target for the horse**** CAA's of these regions.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Montrealguy's statistics are interesting. It is a statistical fact, however, that you are infinitely safer travelling with a 'western' airline than one from outside that geographic (and cultural?) area. You can argue whether or not that is due to the presence of western (ie Boeing or Airbus) aircraft or Russian ones, and we would all acknowledge that the issue is more complex than that. Many operators of ex-Soviet aircraft are financially strapped to such an extent that regular maintainance and training that would be considered 'must-haves' in the west just go to the bottom of the shopping list in favour of survival. Cultural attitudes that discourage adherence to SOPs and the clear questioning of error in a flight deck colleague to save face are overwhelming difficulties that pervade much of non-western aviation practice. It is therefore very difficult to blame the massive safety gap between western and non-western operators on Russian aircraft alone. There can be no doubt, however, that such a gap exists. Denying that is merely part of the tragic process of denial in the face of overwhelming evidence which characterises these debates.

[alainthailande]

This is a rumour network, right?

While googling for that aircraft's registration number, I have hit several interesting articles mentioning that it once belonged to a company called Sakavia. That company was supposedly linked to the suspected russian arms and drug dealer Viktor Bout who was recently extradited from Thailand where he has been held for quite a while to the US. The plane was then sold to Sky Georgia, the privatized successor of the Georgian National Airlines and as such was photographed at Sharjah (SHJ) airport in January 2010:
Photo Sky Georgia Ilyushin IL-76TD 4L-GNI
I'm not suggesting anything about the current owner of that ill-fated airframe. I just though it was worth mentioning its troubled past. If it wasn't, shoot me.

[Wannabe Flyer]

I just though it was worth mentioning its troubled past. If it wasn't, shoot me.

Just wondering if you meant troubled past of the aircraft or it's prior owners. Cannot see any airworthiness related issues in the articles......