UTair Boeing 737 crash landed in USK
 

UTair Boeing 737 crash landed in Usinsk, Russia. The photos show the plane turned across the runway with MLG broken. 94 onboard. No fatalities, one injured.

https://ria.ru/20200209/1564454632.html

https://usinsk.online/news/samolet-u...tkuyu-posadku/

Can we avoid the "Boeing has more crashes than Airbus" argument? That's already being done to death on the Pegasus thread.

Looks like very nasty conditions. Only one injury. Good result.

A video from the cabin is available at VKontakte. Can't post the link though as it's required to be logged in on that site. Rumors are they touched down before the piano keys.

Video from inside:

Ouch....

No break?

Looks to me as if he crosses the fence an then immediately touches down.
Did he actually make it to the rwy?

"Bit late on the Roundout Hoskins" as they used to say in Flight.

Not a lot of flare visible on the video. Glad the outcome seems to have been OK wrt to injuries etc.

-700 and he slammed it on.
Question is why? Just a sh... landing or a technical issue?
We have had several incidents with very heavy elevators during flare.
Comes as a big surprise and have the potential to ruin your day.

That video makes it look like they “touched” down in the undershoot. Before the piano keys but also before the paved surface.

The start of the paved surface may explain the separation of the main landing gear.

It's a 737-524, VQ-BPS.

More details along with photos on AVHERALD Accident: UTAir B735 in Usinsk on Feb 9th 2020, gear collapse and runway excursion on landing

Even stranger. One of the easiest aircraft to land.

Good to see that vodka and cigarettes made it :mad:

Luckily no fire this time (Aeroflot Flight 1492 fire was presumably caused by the main gear rapturing the fuel tanks). Hmm.. actually it seems there is fuel leaking!
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....18e16a4038.jpg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....7c0c3192bb.jpg

Runways
 

In order to reuse the aircraft, it is quite desirable to confine landing to the runway proper. Going off the far end or landing short ends up adding a lot of polishing to get the plane back on the line.

Yikes.

A -500 that stops in seconds without all round things, don't expect that to be repaired, it is going to end up being a container for borsch. Pity.

It may be worth making the transition from the grass into the pavement a bit less abrupt, possibly a gentle slope of tarmac underneath the turf leading to the beginning of the runway..

Ideally, pilots would land in the touchdown zone like they're supposed to but this isn't the first time that landing gear and fuselage have parted company because the paved surface was a couple of inches higher than the surrounding area and it won't be the last.

What is your solution to this problem for EMAS equipped runways?

I'll roll the dice:
1) ILS/GS NOTAMed
2) APPR lights NOTAMed
3) Visual cues degraded by snow cover
4) RA inop/deactivated?

Looking at the video, I thought they were higher than it turns out they were, until the last second. Short trees outside look "low and far away." The only cue they are low is the obviously high angular speed.

I don't think EMAS solves this problem, does it? I would expect the same or even worse result.

Somewhere here there's a thread explaining that EMAS sits on top of concrete, which itself is at the same level as the rest of the runway. Unless it's different outside the U.S.

The circumstances aren’t dissimilar to Air Canada flight AC624 except in that case the outcome was already set well before they reached the runway. Any idea what percentage of runways are EMAS equipped ?

Air Canada flight AC624


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ad601cff9.jpeg

What is your definition of "runways" - cleared space? sand? grass? gravel? asphalt? concrete?

83 airports have EMAS on one or more runways, worldwide (2019 numbers). There are about 10,000 airports with scheduled air service with aircraft of more than 50 seats. So about 0.8% of those have EMAS.

But call it "On the order of 1%" to allow some statistical wiggle-room - since someone is sure to claim that any grass glider strip counts as a "runway," or point out that a 9-seater BN2 Islander may count as "scheduled commercial service." ;)

Reading the comments on AVHerald, I got curious: what kind of braking action would that runway have? People are slipping on what looks like ice/compacted snow. I bet landing on that is a bit interesting even without a underrun! Also, is that why they seemingly deployed the reverser ?

RESAs and delethalization are already ICAO airport design standards which are in place and designed to reduce the risk of damage to an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway.

Clearly this will not prevent all damage to the a/c, but is designed to increase the survivability of these types of accident, something which fortunately appears to have been the case here.

The a/c is replaceable, people are not.

For those who would like to inform themselves about ICAO standards (as opposed to rewriting them from scratch) for runway construction, aerodromes even, I recommend a jolly good read of CAP 168, Chapter 3, the UK CAA's publication, much easier to read and better presented than the ICAO equivalent (in which see 3.5.11). As you might guess, someone has already thought about aircraft touching down in the undershoot and running without damage onto the runway; bearing strength is one issue, obstructions also, and feathering the runway pavement edge, if needed, another.

If USK does not meet the ICAO standards for its published level of licensed operations, that's the issue, not the standards.

It looks to me as though they landed with Flap 15?
If so that would be a curious choice for a 2500m ice-contaminated runway.

Why not assume wind shear?

I was wondering when I saw the video, if the flaps were less than normal. As for landing short, I also wondered if there could have been a flat light situation combined with no PAPI/glideslope. It looks OK out the side window due to the trees but perhaps the forward view was more whiteoutish.

That being said, there does seem to be pavement visible for the runway instead of 100% snow cover so, who knows.

Eheh! Flat light may well be a player, I have little experience in landing visually in snow country on a snow covered runway but from what I have done can well understand they were so distracted with descrying runway from bundhu that they simply misssed calling 'Flap30'.
And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends as they seem to have done than any undershoot turns into something altogether different.

Quote...'And if the airport had built up snowberms on the runway ends' These could have produced some turbulent windshear.
Also the snowed up runway would make it hard to spot where the white runway markers were.

Aviation Herald: Preliminary report is available.
Accident: UTAir B735 in Usinsk on Feb 9th 2020, landed short of runway, gear collapse and runway excursion on landing

The meat: Once on RNAV approach, airport was just a minimums. Aircraft was low on approach, EGWPS was functional, runway was visible at 700 ft AGL, PNF commented on low altitude twice, PF increased thrust but did not correct GS. Main gear hit 1.1m snow berm 32m before runway threshold, with vertical G of +1.6G and longitudinal G of -0.7G. Touchdown on runway (30m past threshold) at 1.86G, one main gear separated, the other collapsed. Runway condition noted as 2mm frost, friction factor 0.38.

Captain did not immediately recognize gear had been damaged.