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

Sheremetyevo Superjet 100 in flames

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

Sheremetyevo Superjet 100 in flames

Old 6th May 2019, 08:35
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many many pilots and a lot of instructors do not know how to salvage one.
You are basing this definitive statement on what exactly?
I can tell you that here in Australia, where I have trained and examined dozens of flight instructors, all of them were trained in bounced landings. I had to play student and try various ways of messing up the landing and they had to recover. The catch was I had to also be able to recover if they messed up the recovery. That gave me a great deal of respect for the design of training singles.
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 08:35
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 56
Posts: 2,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by A4 View Post
I know nothing about the SSJ. Is it FBW? Approach looked fast (flapless?) SSJ version of Direct Law? Stuck THS? Massive / multiple electrical failure can lead to any number of issues.
A4
Yes, its FBW. Apparently Liebherr, Honeywell & Thales supply the avionics & FBW stuff. Someplace it was mentioned that they were in "direct law" - no idea what that means on a SSJ100.
His dudeness is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:00
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Geosync View Post
Being in aviation claims Iíve seen my share of lightening strikes on all types of jets(albeit no Russian iron), to the point where they are the most benign claims I see. Not one of those aircraft crashed or so much declared an emergency. It makes me wonder about the design of the Superjet.
Not really benign, e.g.
https://www.baaa-acro.com/crash/cras...ier-do228-bodoThat one blew ot an elevator control . Lightning protection is a dynamic subject with more electronic systems and new structural materils and methods.
Thruster763 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:00
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher View Post
Looking at the last videos ... aircraft came extremely fast ( possibly no flaps)
Aftermath photos clearly show slats & flaps deployed (at about 25), by the look of it aircraft was configured for a normal landing.
andrasz is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:02
  #125 (permalink)  
A4

Ut Sementem Feeceris
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree that there are any number of phenomena that can compromise what happens from 50’ over the threshold to the end of the TDZ. But, as professionals, it is our responsibility to assess/analyse the effects of that phenomena and to take the appropriate and safest course of action. Exiting the TDZ still airborne be it due to floating or because of a bounce DEMANDS, BY SOP, a balked landing procedure to be executed at my company - about the only exception would be if you’re on fire or carrying a really significant technical issue.

Performing deep/long landings whether deliberate or as a result of questionable technique are indicative of a poor SOP culture. This potentially leads to a scenario where someone misjudges a landing....but it’s “ok” because we’re allowed to land outside the TDZ....and then you touch down at the end of the reciprocal TDZ....

Keep it standard. Keep it safe. Don’t put yourself in a position where you no longer know where you are beyond the threshold.......

A4

Apologies for the thread creep. Out.
A4 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:07
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Somerset
Posts: 157
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like one fire truck was there at about 2 mins, but then spent the next 30 secs wafting its cannon on the ground, up in the air and no-where near the front of the fire which is where the people might be. Very poor response in both time and capability.
Blackfriar is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:11
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Somerset
Posts: 157
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is video of people running to the hangars and fire trucks just setting off and driving past them. Sounds pretty poor. As usual it's always three things, initial problem, very poor (crash) landng ruptures fuel tanks, slow evacuation/poor fire response = deaths.
Blackfriar is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:13
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Traffic_Is_Er_Was View Post
If they were only alerted when the aircraft actually crashed, it appears they got there within the standard. 2 minutes can be a long time.
Assuming that the video starts about the same time as ATC would have raised the alarm, with a 5-10 second lag after the fire broke out, it took them 110 seconds for the first truck to reach the scene. While it is just within reccommended limits, this aircraft squawked 7700 for 6 minutes prior to landing, plenty of time for three units to have been positioned at each end and and abeam of the runway, like we see elsewhere at the slightest hint of any emergency (like chief purser chipping the varnish on a fingernail). In theory that positioning should permit reaching any position on or near the runway in maximum 30-40 seconds, and probably the first time in living memory it could have made a difference.

Last edited by andrasz; 6th May 2019 at 11:07.
andrasz is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:26
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Spain
Age: 67
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by e32lover View Post
I agree with the other poster. Baggage compartments should be locked during take off, landing and during emergencies. We will never know how many lives this would have saved in various accidents including this one.
A luggage compartment BLOCKING would lead to the worst scenario of all: people INTENDING INSISTENTLY to open the lids with no result.
The collapse would be badder than now...
guadaMB is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:34
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Southwest UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bags on board

The implementation of locks would introduce a lot of extra weight, certification, extra SOPs and new procedures. It's a big rethink and redesign. I doubt this will happen in the next 10 or even 20 years.

The quick and simple solution is what Ryanair and Wizz did, but only partially. Stop people coming on board with huge bags. They only allow certain amount of tickets to be sold with onboard luggage.

​​​​​​If however, airlines would stop cashing in on these and ban massive bags on board it would certainly stop these unnecessary deaths.

However this will stop them selling priority and it's a massive cash cow.
Ganzic is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:45
  #131 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Not commuting home
Age: 44
Posts: 4,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
andrasz: positioning a fire truck nearby landing runway, more significantly somewhere half-point abeam, with a partially uncontrollable aircraft approaching, does not sound like that much of a smart idea. I am not disputing your suspicion about the delay to start rescue efforts, just that the proposed could not have applied.

Hope to read your comments and account on the situation as more information unfolds, if you will have time later.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:52
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightDetent View Post
andrasz: positioning a fire truck nearby landing runway, more significantly somewhere half-point abeam, with a partially uncontrollable aircraft approaching, does not sound like that much of a smart idea. I am not disputing your suspicion about the delay to start rescue efforts, just that the proposed could not have applied.
By abeam I meant at the appropriate position outsde the runway safety zone. All airports in their emergency response plans have such designated assembly positions for all runways (or they should), with what you say taken into consideration.

EDIT: Auxtank thanks for the video of the VS landing below, that is exactly how it should be done.

Last edited by andrasz; 6th May 2019 at 10:23.
andrasz is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:55
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Every time there's an evacuation, we always get the usual droning on about pax taking their bags.
What do pax do every normal flight? They grab their bags and get off.
What do people do when frightened? They revert to type.

If you want to stop them taking their bags in an evacuation, put them in the hold.

Until the airlines are prepared to do this, there's not much point complaining about our passengers' behaviour, is there?
Nomad2 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 09:58
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If this started with a lightning strike, I hope it happened because they were denied flying around the TS.
The combination of TS and Moscow is very bad. You ask for a diversion around the weather, and get NEGATIVE from ATC. There are so many restricted areas and very limited space to fly in.

ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:03
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: earth
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What about special seals for the baggage compartments? Similar to the ones used for catering trolleys, but much stronger? Mechanical locks would need approval, be expensive, etc, but this sort of seal would be very cheap and easy to approve.

The hat rack could have 2 holes (easy to add to existing AC) where the seals would go though, these seals would have a large band hanging from them with stripes on it or something signaling the hat rack is locked. Time-permitting, the pax could be allowed 2 mins before the cabin is secure to get their precious passports and Ipads from their bags and after that the bags would go to the luggage compartment that would be sealed straight away. So now everyone has their precious sh*t with them and they know that the compartments are sealed and not to be touched.

Plus if someone would try to force the compartment on ground, the guy standing behind would definitely push the idiot and no bag would be retrieved, the other pax wouldn't see any bags coming out and wouldn't try to get theirs.

Seriously, how difficult is this to implement?
exekcabincrew is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:10
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Uka Duka
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightDetent View Post
andrasz: positioning a fire truck nearby landing runway, more significantly somewhere half-point abeam, with a partially uncontrollable aircraft approaching, does not sound like that much of a smart idea. I am not disputing your suspicion about the delay to start rescue efforts, just that the proposed could not have applied.

Hope to read your comments and account on the situation as more information unfolds, if you will have time later.

Four fire trucks and support vehicles within feet of engines before the thing has even stopped moving...
Virgin Atlantic VS43 Boeing 747- 400 G-VROM Emergency Landing, Gatwick.

Auxtank is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:32
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Never mind the apparently newsworthy symptoms of industry-wide poor evacuation strategies (strategies which result in easy trolley evacuation for those so disposed nearest the exits), I am becoming sick of repeated airings on Sky News at least of the apparent official Aeroflot statement claiming evacuation was achieved in 55 seconds and invitation to compare that to the "industry norm" of 90 seconds. Forty odd people (more than half) did not successfully evacuate and died, so the Aeroflot statement, if correctly reported, is perfunctorily abject nonsense. Notwithstanding their embarrassment, has the entire industry really learned so little about evacuation imperatives since 55 died in the fire at Manchester on British Airtours 28M in 1985?
slip and turn is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:36
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 78
Posts: 7,331
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there is no technological exports what so ever.
... apart from Military equipment?
MPN11 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:44
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by slip and turn View Post
Never mind the apparently newsworthy symptoms of industry-wide poor evacuation strategies (strategies which result in easy trolley evacuation for those so disposed nearest the exits), I am becoming sick of repeated airings on Sky News at least of the apparent official Aeroflot statement claiming evacuation was achieved in 55 seconds and invitation to compare that to the "industry norm" of 90 seconds. Forty odd people (more than half) did not successfully evacuate and died, so the Aeroflot statement, if correctly reported, is perfunctorily abject nonsense. Notwithstanding their embarrassment, has the entire industry really learned so little about evacuation imperatives since 55 died in the fire at Manchester on British Airtours 28M in 1985?
I think most agree from the footage - at 90 seconds many had perished, they already had I guess at 55 seconds.

I expect the bags issue was a small % of those that could have survived but did not.

If you were behind the wing your chances were low - all that smoke and flame that entered the cabin was going up hill toward the cockpit - you see several videos of it exiting the cockpit (the pilot and co-pilot had oxygen and smoke goggles).
That sort of smoke will take you down in just a few breaths.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 10:49
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by slip and turn View Post
I am becoming sick of repeated airings on Sky News at least of the apparent official Aeroflot statement claiming evacuation was achieved in 55 seconds and invitation to compare that to the "industry norm" of 90 seconds.
For anything, the available video (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/621198-sheremetyevo-superjet-100-flames.html#post10463896) clearly shows that it took 103 seconds from the time the door was opened till last person coming down the slide. It then took another 37 seconds till cockpit was evacuated using the ropes. A full minute later a crew member (probably cockpit) climbs back in, probably after having realised that there were still people inside.

andrasz 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 © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.