Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Yak42 crash, Russia

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Yak42 crash, Russia

Old 9th Sep 2011, 02:42
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,171
Given the basic design and the actual pax, overweight seems awfully unlikely.

Jammed elevator? Gross mistrim? Both might cause failure to rotate.

Crew incapacitation at VR? Seems massively improbable, but ...?
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 02:58
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 97
it's not a huge aircraft, surely 2500M is enough.

and

after 1000m in the roll they must have known something was wrong so why not reject?
lurker999 is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 05:17
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 62
Posts: 8
IL76 take off at an airport in Australia

Is this routine take off ?

videoguy is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 05:50
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: EU
Posts: 218
According to Russian deputy minister of transport they started their take-off roll 150 from threshold,thus giving 2850m of runway left. It's actually twice a distance required given their load.
ron83 is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 05:57
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 5
Did they actually rotate and achieve and kind of pos-rate? If not dare I suggest gust locks? It has happened before and will happen again.
edit - Although in hindsight after reading that, surely upon realisation that the elevators were 'jammed' by such, an RTO would have been performed so I'm most likely miles off the mark.

Last edited by RingwayWrench; 9th Sep 2011 at 06:00. Reason: missed my point!
RingwayWrench is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 08:23
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,421
Is this routine take off ?
Videoguy,, to be honest although the answer should be no, the IL-76 had a reputation for this (mainly due to being overloaded). Saw it a few times at my local airport and they were subsequently banned from operating by the authorities.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 08:37
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Netherlands
Age: 40
Posts: 192
Flaps were out if you see this
ErwinS is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 10:08
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Age: 69
Posts: 66
news comes here

From ; MAK

Google Translator Översätt
scanhorse is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 12:36
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Copenhagen
Age: 69
Posts: 66
associated news comin live

Hi
Here is a news board with associated news
coming in more or less live ;

News Feed: Lokomotiv Yaroslavl Plane Crash | News | The Moscow Times
scanhorse is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 12:41
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:00
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: us
Age: 61
Posts: 206
Flaps and stabilizer set, investigators confirm: Crashed Yak-42 had flaps deployed and functioning engines

****
this pretty much takes care of all the prevailing theories floating around so far. Time to make new ones
vovachan is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:04
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6
Flaps and stabilizer set, investigators confirm
The whole matter reminds me on the Spanair crash at Madrid. Therefore the question is if the slats were set correctly, too?

azalea is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:16
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 802
Exact statement from MAK website:

...before takeoff, the stabilizer was set to 8.7 degrees "pitch up" and the flaps were installed in the aircraft take-off position - 20 degrees. The engines worked until the moment of collision with obstacles...
CVR/FDR reading in progress.

By process of elimination, if aircraft was configured properly and weights were within limits, the only remaining reasons why it would fail to accelerate sufficiently would be either insufficient thrust or set brakes... Working engines in my reading translates to all engines producing power at impact. Exactly how much power remains to be determined.
andrasz is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:30
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 57
Posts: 802
Originally Posted by azalea
...the question is if the slats were set correctly, too?
Yes, clearly visible on the video. Slats/flaps extend together, unless there is a malfunction (with associated warnings) you cannot have flaps 20 without extended slats. This accident seems to have nothing in common with Spanair.
andrasz is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:45
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Prague
Age: 53
Posts: 2
Flaps

Looking at the photo posted as #53 the flaps seem to me to be extended more than 20 degrees. Or is it just because of the lookout of the snap?
mervart is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:59
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Age: 50
Posts: 6
Video only tells that flaps/slats were deployed WHEN a/c hit the obstacle...
What about beginning of t/o run?
sky sailor is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 15:59
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 63
Posts: 303
Post 38 (CargonOne) states that derated take-offs are not an option on the Yak-42, assuming this to be true, why?
Can't see why a derated take-off can't be done with enough runway/low AUW, does the Yak-42 have a configuration that puts it in the bucket if you rotate at less than a given thrust?
Momoe is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 16:21
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: London
Posts: 48
According to Russian media the authorities disallowed refuling local fuel at Yaroslavl airport until further notice. The fuel is being transported from other regional airports by road tankers. There is seems to be a rumor that crashed Yak42 was refueled with contaminated fuel.
AucT is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 17:34
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Working engines in my reading translates to all engines producing power at impact.

Make that .... able to produce power

Most early releases of on-scene investigation will not have the fidelity to say how much power. The fidelity is at best something above idle. More detailed examination in a strip teardown increases the fidelity.

I simply infer from the press release that there were no outward signs of broken engine parts
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2011, 17:57
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 40 North 75 West
Posts: 16
So Where Was This Camera Located

First time poster, an SLF.
The head-on camera view at the end of the video on post #51 is intriguing. It appears the camera was not at ground level but elevated about 4 feet (just an estimate ???). Looking at the fenceline to the left adds to that impression. The foreground also appears like a grassy unprepared surface. Was this camera located on the extended runway centerline past the end of the runway or perhaps off to the side?
Also, if you look closely at the video, at about the 22 -23 second mark the aircraft lights appear to suddenly dip. Was that the moment the aircraft left the prepared surface and continued to roll out on the grass? The nose gear is clearly off the ground, viewed directly and by it's shadow on the ground but the main gear are still on the ground (or grass).
Just a few thoughts. Thanks for reading - any comments are encouraged.
SLF305 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.