Sukhoi Superjet off runway at KEF
 

A Sukhoi Superjet 100 doing touch and go's at Keflavik Airport, Iceland apparently belly landed at around 0530Z this morning and slid off runway 11.
One engine reported broken off, one of 5 crew taken to hospital.

Pictures here

Flugslys á Keflavíkurflugvelli - mbl.is

Crew training? Flapless landing? No gear warning? Ooops? Pure speculation on my part of course, but it's been done before.

"I said cheer up, not bloody gear up...":rolleyes:

This, along with media reports this week that the programme is teetering on the brink of financial default, can't bode well for the SSJ.

Russia's aviation flagship project the Sukhoi Superjet on the brink of default ? RT Business

What where they doing in KEF?
Crosswind training?
As it was the Sukhoi's own aircraft?

The same type of aircraft that flew into a mountain in Indonesia last year whilst doing demo flights. One can't but wonder if this is the bravado factor again.

The plane has been there for one month doing various tests according to the local media.

There have been tests on landing in strong wind in Iceland

What where they doing in KEF?
 

Iceland is a great place to do crosswind development testing. With strong westerlies blowing from 1,000 miles of open Atlantic ocean, crosswinds of 30-40 knots are very common and predictable, usually without much mechanical turbulence.

Today, July 21, 2013, at 05.25 local time at the airport in Keflavik (Reykjavik, Iceland), there was the incident with the aircraft Sukhoi Superjet 100 , reg RA-97005.

In the final stage of certification tests to improve the conditions of operation - automatic landing (certification program for ICAO Category CAT III A) in a crosswind at the landing with a simulated failure of one engine, there was a touch of the runway with landing gear retracted.

During the incident on board were five people, including three crew members and two certification center experts. No one on board was injured during landing. During the evacuation from the aircraft one of the experts received a leg injury.

In the flight test program CAT III A was involved Sukhoi Superjet 100 serial number 95005. The first flight of the aircraft took place on February 4, 2010.

At the time of the incident all systems were working normally. According to preliminary estimates of specialists of CJSC "Sukhoi Civil Aircraft", the aircraft will be restored and continued the flight test program.

TRANSLATED FROM

Who was the mug who built the runway in the wrong direction then?! :p

It was buit by our American friends during WW2 and was originally known as Mekks Field. It had four runways - one every 45 degrees.

one every 45 degrees Hrrrm........... make that 90?

Not if you think reciprocals as well

I do beg JW's pardon - he said had 4 runways.' You can still see the 'missing ones' from the air.

BOAC:

Right; let's start at the bottom and go clockwise. In approximate terms, the four runways were 02/20, 06/24, 11/29 and 15/33.

So, four pieces of tarmac and eight directions if we count the reciprocals.

Furthermore, the Americans also built a fighter airfield called Patterson Field which had three runways and was only a couple of miles east of Keflavik and can still be seen on Google earth.

From the photos the nose gear appears to be down, similarly the left main, but sunk in the mud. If this is the final condition, then gear side-load at touchdown or drifting-off the runway edge could be candidate conditions. Add to these the possibility of a wet runway and/or effect of reverse on side-force in a crosswinds or the effect of gusts, then … … hazards of flight testing where the margins to the limit conditions may be unknown or decrease very suddenly.

- or. more simply, gear up? See post #13.

Since the airplane appears to be resting on the engines and aft fuselage and located off the right side of the extended centerline of the runway, I'm wondering if the ground contact occurred during or shortly following gear retraction on the go-around. Pure conjecture of course. Yeah, that'll buff right out and be flying again in no time. :cool:

I'm sorry to see this happen to a minor competitor in the global airplane production game. I hope they recover to join Embraer and Bombardier to keep A and B from completely controlling the world market in all size classes.

Looks like they should have used the aft exits.
Then injury to crew would have been unlikely.
Sitting on its tail like that, the forward exits were awfully high.:uhoh:

Of course, hindsight is 20/20.