Sheremetyevo Superjet 100 in flames
The fact that it did bounce three or four times tells you that the gear was down.
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and if it had a lightning strike and all computer systems were damaged there is below direct law, mechanical backup (well, there is in the airbus ) trim wheel for pitch and rudder pedals for roll.
If that is the case I would like to see any of you heroes as it seems there is a plethora of here as always, do that perfectly in these circumstances especially the loud mouths telling us all how to land their C172.
If that is the case I would like to see any of you heroes as it seems there is a plethora of here as always, do that perfectly in these circumstances especially the loud mouths telling us all how to land their C172.
737 Driver-
yes indeed
atakacs
Was certainly part of the initial conversion onto Airbus/777 , but thereafter very rarely looked at . Simply too many boxes to be ticked during bi-annual sim , impossible to cover all scenarios . So, come the (unfortunate) day ,with no recent practice , and coupled with additional stress factors , a landing in direct law would pose some challenges . The aircraft handling would definitely be "squirrelly" , as our American friends would put it .
On the subject of Americans, I note the following in the comments section with regard to said article , in this case with reference to the SFO Asiana 777 accident---
Would be interesting to know to what extent compliance has taken place to date . 737 Driver made an observation in another thread ( now locked ) about an F/O not being aware of the existence of a stowable handle on the 737 manual trim wheel . Maybe the guy hadn't bothered to listen in class , but nevertheless it was rather shocking , coming from ( presumably) a major US operator . Difficult to then point fingers at 3rd world training departments .
Worth a read:
atakacs
Interresting read. Are direct law landings practiced in simulators?
On the subject of Americans, I note the following in the comments section with regard to said article , in this case with reference to the SFO Asiana 777 accident---
The FAA issued a revision to 14 CFR Part 121, titled “Qualification, Service, and Use of Crewmembers and Aircraft Dispatchers,” on November 12, 2013, intended to enhance US air carrier pilot training programs by emphasizing the development of pilots’ manual handling skills. Among the changes was a new section, 14 CFR 121.423, “Pilot: Extended Envelope Training,” which states, in part, that pilots must receive training that includes the following maneuvers and procedures: manually controlled slow flight, manually controlled loss of reliable airspeed, manually controlled instrument departure and arrival, upset recovery maneuvers, and recovery from bounced landing. Operators’ compliance with this section is required no later than March 12, 2019.”
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This training required reprogramming and validation of the simulators. In the past, Level D simulators were not required to replicate the full stall regime. BTW, this is not a "Boeing" thing. The FAA did not require it, so the sims were never designed to practice full stalls. Rather, we only practiced an approach to stalls and recovery. After AF447, the FAA changed the requirement to include full stall training as well as other elements of rarely seen flight characteristics.
In order to comply, the manufacturers had to collect the necessary flight test data and then the training devices needed to be programmed and modified. Apparently this is not just a matter of downloading a patch, and it took some time. The programming has now been completed on a number of our sims, and the EET training will be accomplished as pilots cycle through their normal training schedules.
.
737 Driver made an observation in another thread ( now locked ) about an F/O not being aware of the existence of a stowable handle on the 737 manual trim wheel . Maybe the guy hadn't bothered to listen in class , but nevertheless it was rather shocking , coming from ( presumably) a major US operator . Difficult to then point fingers at 3rd world training departments.
.
737 Driver made an observation in another thread ( now locked ) about an F/O not being aware of the existence of a stowable handle on the 737 manual trim wheel . Maybe the guy hadn't bothered to listen in class , but nevertheless it was rather shocking , coming from ( presumably) a major US operator . Difficult to then point fingers at 3rd world training departments.
.
Sadly, this wasn't a one off case of someone not listening. This training had been neglected due to, in part, the constant pressure in the training regime to stuff 10 lbs (or kg's) of stuff in a 5 lbs sack. I have made my displeasure known. I foresee this deficiency being rectified in the near future.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pergatory
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and if it had a lightning strike and all computer systems were damaged there is below direct law, mechanical backup (well, there is in the airbus ) trim wheel for pitch and rudder pedals for roll.
If that is the case I would like to see any of you heroes as it seems there is a plethora of here as always, do that perfectly in these circumstances especially the loud mouths telling us all how to land their C172.
If that is the case I would like to see any of you heroes as it seems there is a plethora of here as always, do that perfectly in these circumstances especially the loud mouths telling us all how to land their C172.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At my Airbus operator we use a LPC / LOE structure for our annual training and thus get quite a lot of direct law landing / go around practice. I presumed that was normal!
Join Date: May 2019
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very gentle flare initially. You have to pay attention to engine casing pitch, also the camera inertia (latency) in the video. This would normally correspond to a gentle stick manipulation and a/c pitching moments. The black box should confirm it later.
By the 2:45 the aircraft was well in the nose high attitude, landing smoothly the main wheels (check the tube videos and pics to see the Suchoi level on the ground engine casing pitch to horizon). Then, at 2:45, several centimetres from the ground, it looks like a little more back pressure was added to arrest the descend. So, as the airframe responds and gains the pitch up momentum, unlucky but not uncommon for everything that flys (swans including), the main gear chirp the ground, or a wind gust adds the odds and aircraft lifts again- you can observe ballooning happens a lot of times during the normal landing, plenty of videos on the tube. The ship is ballooning and no spoilers triggered. The pilots either go around or continue landing focusing on maintaining the pitch (as opposed trying to direct aircraft vertical speeds- PIO), so the ship eventually lands itself. Again there are lots of good videos on the tube giving good and bad examples. They also show many situations in which aircrafts are very forgiving.
From what I can see on this video, after the balloon, the Superjet pilot did NOT provoke the aircraft with aggressive stick moves. Based on all the information available now, my opinion only, given the scenario of speed, weight, balance and mechanisation used - no one can do better with this airplane.
I hope the black box information will be available soon. In the mean time give other pilots a go recreating the speeds, weight, balance and mech in the current version of Superjet sim. How does the model performs? It should be very accurate, as the Math in Russia is the strongest part.
By the 2:45 the aircraft was well in the nose high attitude, landing smoothly the main wheels (check the tube videos and pics to see the Suchoi level on the ground engine casing pitch to horizon). Then, at 2:45, several centimetres from the ground, it looks like a little more back pressure was added to arrest the descend. So, as the airframe responds and gains the pitch up momentum, unlucky but not uncommon for everything that flys (swans including), the main gear chirp the ground, or a wind gust adds the odds and aircraft lifts again- you can observe ballooning happens a lot of times during the normal landing, plenty of videos on the tube. The ship is ballooning and no spoilers triggered. The pilots either go around or continue landing focusing on maintaining the pitch (as opposed trying to direct aircraft vertical speeds- PIO), so the ship eventually lands itself. Again there are lots of good videos on the tube giving good and bad examples. They also show many situations in which aircrafts are very forgiving.
From what I can see on this video, after the balloon, the Superjet pilot did NOT provoke the aircraft with aggressive stick moves. Based on all the information available now, my opinion only, given the scenario of speed, weight, balance and mechanisation used - no one can do better with this airplane.
I hope the black box information will be available soon. In the mean time give other pilots a go recreating the speeds, weight, balance and mech in the current version of Superjet sim. How does the model performs? It should be very accurate, as the Math in Russia is the strongest part.
What did for those in the back (as others have noted above) was the G-force effect of the first and second bounce. I suspect most of the pax behind the CoG were incapacitated by severe fracture/ head and spinal injuries / loss of consciousness, or blocked in by other pax suffering those injuries. I've seen what a 50-seat bus looks like when it's rolled, and I doubt it was much different inside SU1492, even before the fire broke out. A handful of trolley bags on the escape slide was the least of their worries.
The two crew survived were pictured without obvious signs of smoke inhalation (soot) so were probably seated in the forward cabin.
It is hard to assess the vertical component of the impact from the video, but mitigating factors are the aircraft did not come to an abrupt halt and energy was absorbed by struts and the deformation of wings.
The scene pictured on this video at 07 to 020 seconds shows perhaps one of the last conscious passengers off the plane. An unfortunate women with soot covered face and singed dress, struggling for breath. (note that the carry on bag next to her belongs to one of the passengers taking photos and initially ignoring her distress)
https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=aOnbL_1557230227
Cabin crew look immaculate in comparison (no disrespect intended)
@ mickjoebill, unlike structural firefighters, arffs response times are 3 minutes from time of call, get kit on and drive to incident, breathing apparatus if required donned, if internal, MUST report to entry control, this all takes time, risk assesment carried out, external fire controlled/ extinguished before commiting a crew internal.
Last edited by mickjoebill; 14th May 2019 at 02:14.
For the contract lawyers and behavioural scientists.
During safety briefing:
1/ “Only passengers who comply with emergency exit rules will be compensated for travel delays.”
2/ “Passengers who arrive at the assembly point without their bags will be rewarded with travel vouches.”
mjb
During safety briefing:
1/ “Only passengers who comply with emergency exit rules will be compensated for travel delays.”
2/ “Passengers who arrive at the assembly point without their bags will be rewarded with travel vouches.”
mjb
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the contract lawyers and behavioural scientists.
During safety briefing:
1/ “Only passengers who comply with emergency exit rules will be compensated for travel delays.”
2/ “Passengers who arrive at the assembly point without their bags will be rewarded with travel vouches.”
mjb
During safety briefing:
1/ “Only passengers who comply with emergency exit rules will be compensated for travel delays.”
2/ “Passengers who arrive at the assembly point without their bags will be rewarded with travel vouches.”
mjb
make it simplier... do not charge extra for loading the bags in cargo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People will still want to take them in the cabin as there are delays waiting for hold baggage, plus there are plenty of airports with light-fingered staff, and bags can get damaged. Not only will hold bags have to be free, the light-fingered staff and damage will have to be addressed, and it will have to cost as much to take more than a handbag in the cabin as it currently costs to take a hold bag.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People will still want to take them in the cabin as there are delays waiting for hold baggage, plus there are plenty of airports with light-fingered staff, and bags can get damaged. Not only will hold bags have to be free, the light-fingered staff and damage will have to be addressed, and it will have to cost as much to take more than a handbag in the cabin as it currently costs to take a hold bag.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suggest a few people have not read much.
There were several articles notably on Medusa in Russia, including of the last person to get out alive, who actually saw the severe lightning strike from his seat
The bags issue is a load of horse manure on here, - can't think why, and why it has taken up and wasted pages.
In some of the more recent articles in Russia there is a good deal of confusion even quoting the unfortunate Indonesian accident blaming the plane not the pilot.
You really couldn't make it up!
One accident with freak weather, and the rumour mill fills columns.
When the level of disinformation gets to this pitch, it's time to call a halt.
Next, one Russian press in particular filled with jealousy and schadenfreude plus some of the industry have the knives out for what is actually a very nice plane to fly on.
Now they even try to plug the MC21 "cos it's made mostly in Russia right"?
(One such "expert" Anastasia Dagaeva - an aviation columnist at Forbes, Vedomosti, Harvard Business Review... appears never to have flown on a SSJ).
People have short memories, especially of the various A320/AF/AF447 issues which TBQH resulted in far higher accident rates non survivable crashes but had a compliant state and press to "pick up the pieces".
(Let's not forget the decades of litigation blocked by cynical airbus lawyers and the absence of compensation for the A320 Mont St Odile crash, where most of the survivors died by freezing to death!)
FYI, here the rear passengers in this A/C were condemned to die by the fuel fire and CO poisoning.
Nothing would have saved them.
Some heroes carried on trying to help passengers out and died themselves.
It appears from the interview of the last one out, most people were NOT injured by the rough landing which was again speculated on, but those from the back rows that DID survive, picked themselves up and RAN as fast as possible for the forward exit while the A/C was still moving, and they realised rear exits would not work as they watched their windows melting...
Like it or not, we have to wait for a full report from the MAK to get to the bottom of this, and explain why Aeroflot are currently grounding a lot of them.
There were several articles notably on Medusa in Russia, including of the last person to get out alive, who actually saw the severe lightning strike from his seat
The bags issue is a load of horse manure on here, - can't think why, and why it has taken up and wasted pages.
In some of the more recent articles in Russia there is a good deal of confusion even quoting the unfortunate Indonesian accident blaming the plane not the pilot.
You really couldn't make it up!
One accident with freak weather, and the rumour mill fills columns.
When the level of disinformation gets to this pitch, it's time to call a halt.
Next, one Russian press in particular filled with jealousy and schadenfreude plus some of the industry have the knives out for what is actually a very nice plane to fly on.
Now they even try to plug the MC21 "cos it's made mostly in Russia right"?
(One such "expert" Anastasia Dagaeva - an aviation columnist at Forbes, Vedomosti, Harvard Business Review... appears never to have flown on a SSJ).
People have short memories, especially of the various A320/AF/AF447 issues which TBQH resulted in far higher accident rates non survivable crashes but had a compliant state and press to "pick up the pieces".
(Let's not forget the decades of litigation blocked by cynical airbus lawyers and the absence of compensation for the A320 Mont St Odile crash, where most of the survivors died by freezing to death!)
FYI, here the rear passengers in this A/C were condemned to die by the fuel fire and CO poisoning.
Nothing would have saved them.
Some heroes carried on trying to help passengers out and died themselves.
It appears from the interview of the last one out, most people were NOT injured by the rough landing which was again speculated on, but those from the back rows that DID survive, picked themselves up and RAN as fast as possible for the forward exit while the A/C was still moving, and they realised rear exits would not work as they watched their windows melting...
Like it or not, we have to wait for a full report from the MAK to get to the bottom of this, and explain why Aeroflot are currently grounding a lot of them.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Old europe
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emergency exits
A slight change of topic: shouldn’t a presence of an overawing exit improve significantly the survival rate on this accident? Maybe that certifications specifications should be updated on light to this accident?Regards, C.
But otherwise I agree.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the official investigation most of the aspects of the accident were a clear whitwash to clear Air Inter's name, as well as those of that of Air France, and the emergency team who were unable to locate the aircraft, thanks to "economies" specific to the case...exactly has happened to AF447.
I lived in Alsace in that time, and was well aware of the extreme weather on that day.
The victims and survivors have been treated like some sort of insect you can swot.
As you may well know, most "official investigations" which are anything to do with Air Frantic end up with the same results,-
corruption of the entire process and absence of any justice for the victims, just exactly the same as for industrial Asbestos which proved same cause and effect at the end of last year after decades and decades of fighting in the justice system.
The parallels are absolutely staggering.
If you know anything at all about the French justice system at all,- absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Nobody accepts the "official version" has any validity at all in Alsace.
I lived in Alsace in that time, and was well aware of the extreme weather on that day.
The victims and survivors have been treated like some sort of insect you can swot.
As you may well know, most "official investigations" which are anything to do with Air Frantic end up with the same results,-
corruption of the entire process and absence of any justice for the victims, just exactly the same as for industrial Asbestos which proved same cause and effect at the end of last year after decades and decades of fighting in the justice system.
The parallels are absolutely staggering.
If you know anything at all about the French justice system at all,- absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Nobody accepts the "official version" has any validity at all in Alsace.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 70
Posts: 991
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I know that very considerable research has been conducted into smoke hoods on and off over the years. It appears odd to me that it has never been adopted or approved for service.
Even the basic ones have achieved up to 10 minutes survival times in tests.
Though clearly only valid for smoke and toxic fumes, though not likely to help much with full on fire.
Be lucky
David
Even the basic ones have achieved up to 10 minutes survival times in tests.
Though clearly only valid for smoke and toxic fumes, though not likely to help much with full on fire.
Be lucky
David