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, 12:30
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like a bounce followed by a hard landing;

Airclues is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:35
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,495
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
For the avoidance of doubt, anyone who has ever looked closely at Russian aircraft will know that Russia is more than capable of designing and building high quality safe reliable products.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:38
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,092
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It seems that a hard landing led to fuel tank(s) rupturing and fuel then igniting.

Would one expect a similiar rupture with other comparable aircraft (eg C Series) after a comparable landing or does it seem particularly unfortunate that the fuel tanks did not remain intact ?
davidjohnson6 is online now  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:43
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Total speculation, but...maybe
Lightning strike, electrical failure. Thus 7600.
its a glass cockpit jet, so maybe limited speed info. So bring it in at a safe, but fast speed.
Land, electrical failure, so no spoilers. Bounce....
The rest we've seen.
Nomad2 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:47
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: earth
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Interflug View Post
That's indeed childish nonsense, considering the Russian space program didn't lose a man since 1980 or so. Vs the US lost two complete ships with all souls on board since. Surely the Russkis are not a technological power house of innovation, but particularly the space program - the only one that currently safely flies people into space regularly, including the US astronauts - is a badly chosen example for exposing their backwardness.

Interesting: https://www.boeing.com/news/frontier...nfeature1.html
The Russkis might not have the technological wealth of others, but they certainly have the brains for it.
I don't want to turn this into a discussion about Russia, but the Russian space programme relies on Soviet-made rockets and technologies. All that stuff is around 50 years old and very reliable, that's why it has been working, up until recently when rockets started to fall one after another. An engineer earns around 25K roubles (400 bucks) to assemble space components, same goes to guys assembling the SSJ. What sort of quality can you expect?
exekcabincrew is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:48
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Where databases don't crash
Age: 46
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by f1yhigh View Post
What do you think of airliners introducing an automatic cabin baggage lock in emergency situations? That would stop people from trying to grab luggage in the cabin in emergency situations.
That might slow people even more, as they are feverishly trying to open a locked compartment. Especially if a few have opened due to impact, but not "theirs", the ones with valuable duty-free, inside.

WingSlinger is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:49
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: England
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Saddath View Post
I second this. I'm a first responder too (not in the aviation-sector). I've seen people in panic and fear for their life, while trying to rescue them. Some people will act completly irrational and they may be doing things without thinking about it.

I've seen people jumping out of burning buildings, people that were completely frozen, people that are totally erratic and need to be grabbed and calmed down.

Most pax only experience with leaving airplanes is:
- Grab your luggage
- leave airplane

I think some of them haven't tought about it through while acting.
Just a tought before everyone criminalizes the people leaving with the luggage.
Thanks for this, Saddath.

I'd like to add that emergency evacuation goes against everything passengers have been 'trained' to do over years of flying as pax. We're taught that it's vital we are submissive and quiet. We queue between the ribbons, obediently. We empty our belongings into a tray, obediently. We wait until our seat row is ready to board, obediently. We present our documentation, obediently. We sit in our assigned seats, obediently. We fasten our seatbelts, obediently. We restore our seats to the upright position, obediently. We switch off our electronic devices, obediently. We collect our hand-luggage and leave by the indicated exit, obediently.

We know the routine off by heart, and we know that we have to accept the routine and adjust ourselves to minor changes such as leaving by stairs and bus instead of air-bridge..

We fail to watch the safety drill, because we've seen it several hundred times before, and it's designed cleverly to suggest that it's an exercise in box-ticking. The airline absolutely doesn't want you to think that flying is dangerous, and they especially don't want you to think that flying with THIS airline is more dangerous than with others.

Passengers don't get trained for emergencies, like crew. We have no muscle memory, we are all startle factor. Even with flames and smoke, the cabin crew screaming unfamiliar instructions instead of "Take care when opening the overhead lockers..." may not compute.

Airlines WANT docile, unthinking passengers. If we didn't tacitly agree to be docile and unthinking, airlines would go bust.
PaxBritannica is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 12:56
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
In the video taken from right front, the smoke does not start coming from the cockpit windows and RF door until approx 1:40 after the aircraft stops. The people who escape during the 1st 60 secs generally get up from the bottom of the slide and walk/run away. In the remaining 40 secs the very few that use the slide stay collapsed at the bottom, or walk away and collapse. If the smoke from the door indicates the interior finally caught fire, it was all over well before then due heat/smoke/fumes.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 13:04
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: by the seaside
Age: 73
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Icarus2001

Based on what I've experienced mainly in Europe over 50 years, heavy jets, light aircraft, gliders and ultalights. (Even paragliders with wind shear below 40ft).

And to answer wrt TDZ and SOP; specific bomb threat, slow spooling up low bypass, positive wind shear at low level, rotor, significant terrain in the overshoot, low fuel and running out of flight control authority..all realistic possibilities that I've come across when how to correctly handle a bounce is essential.
From one of the videos it shows the aircraft is pitched nose down after the first bounce and at the last moment pitched up which would have rotated the gear into the runway.

blind pew is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 13:10
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wintermute
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Auxtank View Post
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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqDP-FMgTy8
Certainly an interesting interpretation of the video, meanwhile : aircraft stops moving at time 1:43, first vehicle parks up next to aircraft at 2:24, 41 seconds later . . .

Fd
fergusd is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 13:20
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 58
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fergusd View Post
Certainly an interesting interpretation...
FD, I think Auxtank meant that as a figure of speech, the trucks were in position about 25-30 seconds after the plane came to a halt, the best one could expect under any circumstances (as oppsed to more than 90 at SVO).
andrasz is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 13:38
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Early this morning it was stated this was an immediate return to land, due to control difficulties experienced by the crew after take off (no fuel dump) The plane was said to have been hit by lightning shortly after take off - maybe disabling the radio, comms, and other systems, reported Russia's Interfax news agency.

The reported first attempt to land ended in a GA due aircraft too fast and high, (need confirmation of this GA) and the second landing was sadly very fast & unstable, baulked and control was lost - hard landing, one or both main gears collapsed and huge split fuel fire erupted during the long ground slide.
(aircraft seemingly NOT on fire prior to landing)
Flats and LE slats were deployed for the Landing.

Overhead bins did not seem to fall down, or open on the heavy landing from video evidence.

Rear exits both unusable - no over-wing exits fitted to this type - EVAC signal and chimes heard in pax video, EVAC was from from doors 1L and 1R (amazing that the 1L slide survived the fire)
Any over-wing exits fitted may anyway have been breached/unusable by the ferocity of the fire up to midships.

Fire services were not on scene immediately to provide foam over the serious fuel fire, but were in situ whilst the EVAC was still in progress.

The cross wind did blow the fire back away from the mid and forward fuselage, allowing exit from both forward doors. But the fire was very close, or even under door 1L.

The rear flight attendant remained on board assisting everyone to try to be evacuated but he died in the fire, unable to open the rear doors.
rog747 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 13:53
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: wishing to be in YPCC but stuck near EGSS
Age: 74
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The issue of pax taking cabin baggage with them in emergency evacuations rears its' head yet again. Only legislation will prevent large bags being taken on board as, has been mentioned above, baggage is a revenue source.

Having experienced a cabin free of baggage on a flight, I can say it hastened loading and unloading of SLF and was altogether a pleasant experience. Sadly this experience was as a result of 9/11.

I was booked on the first flight out of LGW on 9/12 and check-in staff had no idea what to do, and delayed check in whilst a decision was made. The instruction was given 'no cabin baggage except passports and essential medication'.

100 pax opening hold bags to stuff in hand baggage in a check-in queue was a mess, but it happened. The resulting flight was comfortable with no one getting up to access lockers, and disembarkation was swift.

I for one would like to see a 'no cabin baggage' rule, or at least an enforced maximum of 12 x 12 x 6 inches or a foreign equivalent.

Last edited by A. Muse; 6th May 2019 at 13:56. Reason: Spacing
A. Muse is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:00
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: wishing to be in YPCC but stuck near EGSS
Age: 74
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a thought, (my name is after all A. Muse). Why not save weight and expense by not installing overhead lockers in the first place?

Last edited by A. Muse; 6th May 2019 at 15:03. Reason: typo
A. Muse is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:00
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: BRS/GVA
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rog747 View Post
The reported first attempt to land ended in a GA due aircraft too fast and high, (need confirmation of this GA) .
There was no-first attempt and GA, look at the FR24 trace posted multiple times in this thread
hoss183 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:03
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wintermute
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by andrasz View Post
FD, I think Auxtank meant that as a figure of speech, the trucks were in position about 25-30 seconds after the plane came to a halt, the best one could expect under any circumstances (as oppsed to more than 90 at SVO).
Appreciated, comment was more to demonstrate that with the distances involved and the variability of the situation, practically there will always be delays and not insubstantial ones.
fergusd is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:07
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
open hat racks - we done it before

Originally Posted by A. Muse View Post
Just a thought, (my name is after all A. Muse). Why not save weight and expense by not installing overhead lockers I the first place?
Really? It will never catch on...


DC-8 KLM 1960's
Photo c airliners.net
rog747 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:14
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hoss183 View Post
There was no-first attempt and GA, look at the FR24 trace posted multiple times in this thread
Thanks and yes indeed I have followed the thread - Just that various reports say that this was a 2nd attempt at a landing - FR24 can play up too?

Thanks for confirmations.

rog747 is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:17
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: EDLB
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Andrasz video is a must see for airport fire fighters. 30 seconds can make a lot of difference. As earlier they can cool the cabin, as more people have a chance to escape. Also all the small vehicles standing in the way of optimal positioning the water canon fire trucks.

EDLB is offline  
Old 6th May 2019, 14:18
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,092
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
As humans, we like to believe a catastrophe like this will never happen to me - it can only affect other people

The first airline to impose a policy drastically limiting hand luggage for safety reasons (as opposed to 'not enough space in overhead lockers') will likely see a significant fall in sales revenue while competitors continuing to allow hand luggage unchanged will see a commercial gain.

If limiting hand luggage in a significant way is to happen, it has to either be via Govt passing law, or by airlines imposing a monetary charge for hand luggage (thus leading to many pax choosing to save money and cutting their hand luggage voluntarily). The events of 9/11 were a one-off and people accepted the hike in security screening temporarily because it was a one-off... persuading that 9/11 was the new normal was never going to work
davidjohnson6 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.