Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Reason

Sukhoi Superjet 100 Has lost contact when having a demonstration flight

Recommended Posts

The a/c was having a demonstration flight since some LCCs have placed orders years ago. There are 40-50 people onboard including 2 russians pilot. Most of the passengers are journalists. This is a major blow for us since there used to be so many accidents/incidents occurred the past few years.

 

The authorities said the crash site was somewhere over mount Salak, which is 30-40 Kilometers away from my neighborhood, Bogor, (60 KM downsouth from Jakarta). The weather too has been unfriendly since last month

 

 

http://www.thejakart...r-mt-salak.html

 

http://en.rian.ru/ru.../173333864.html

 

 

My thoughts and prayers go out for the crews and passengers and their families.

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Ooops :(

 

Sorry to hear that, hope it's not what everyone's thinking. i know it's hard, but one never knows.

Share this post


Link to post

These are some pictures taken hours before losing contact. A member of indonesian flight-simming community "Indoflyer" took the pictures in Halim Perdana Kusuma Airport,

 

http://www.indoflyer...24&mpage=1&key=

 

Ooops :sad:

 

Sorry to hear that, hope it's not what everyone's thinking. i know it's hard, but one never knows.

 

Ooops?

 

They requested to descend from FL100 to 6000ft, that was the last contact

Share this post


Link to post

The aircraft looks real nice. The engines remind me the ones of the Airbus A330 Rolls-Royce models, but in smaller scale.

Share this post


Link to post

Frankly, this doesn't surprise me at all. Russian aircraft are especially known for their unreliability. In fact, as much as I truly love flying, I will never step on board a Russian aircraft if I don't have to. POS planes, if you ask me. But maybe nobody is asking haha. Sorry if I offended anyone... I just get sick and tired of hearing about how Russian aircraft and certain nationality foreign operators can't seem to maintain basic reliability and their planes are constantly crashing, killing thousands. I don't normally agree with how the government operates, but I do have to commend United States' and Europes regulations that keep their planes so reliable and safe. It's just stupid that so many planes are crashing unnecessarily. Sometimes it really is just an accident, but just the fact that hearing about a Russian aircraft crashing doesn't surprise me at all is kind of worrisome, don't you think? As a real-world pilot, I don't think about dying when I fly, but I swear if I had to fly a Chinese airline or a Russian aircraft (just for examples), I really, honestly would want to have all my stuff in order and be hoping we made it to the other side... on earth, not somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post

Frankly, this doesn't surprise me at all. Russian aircraft are especially known for their unreliability. In fact, as much as I truly love flying, I will never step on board a Russian aircraft if I don't have to. POS planes, if you ask me. But maybe nobody is asking haha. Sorry if I offended anyone... I just get sick and tired of hearing about how Russian aircraft and certain nationality foreign operators can't seem to maintain basic reliability and their planes are constantly crashing, killing thousands. I don't normally agree with how the government operates, but I do have to commend United States' and Europes regulations that keep their planes so reliable and safe. It's just stupid that so many planes are crashing unnecessarily. Sometimes it really is just an accident, but just the fact that hearing about a Russian aircraft crashing doesn't surprise me at all is kind of worrisome, don't you think? As a real-world pilot, I don't think about dying when I fly, but I swear if I had to fly a Chinese airline or a Russian aircraft (just for examples), I really, honestly would want to have all my stuff in order and be hoping we made it to the other side... on earth, not somewhere else.

That's not a fair assessment. Actually overall Russian planes are really tough and reliable (especially considering the conditions they operate in), their one weakness was poorer fuel efficiency. I used to fly in Tupolev Tu-154s, Tu-134s, and An-24s all the time - they are remarkably resilient aircraft and have a charm of their own.

 

There's been some crashes in Russia recently due to the age of the aircraft in use, lack of training and proper maintenance. But to make statements like this:

..............POS planes, if you ask me...........

is misguided and inappropriate. It may be just me, but that's what I think. Why not show some compassion instead for the people on the plane; and its not like non-Russian aircraft have a perfect safety record and have never had their fair share of issues.

Also keep in mind the Sukhoi Superjet was developed with considerable assistance from Boeing - there was substantial co-operation with numerous Western partners in developing the plane.

 

******************

...........

Development of the Sukhoi Superjet 100 began in 2000. On 19 December 2002, Sukhoi Civil Aircraft and the American company Boeing signed a Long-term Cooperation Agreement to work together on the plane.

.....

******************

 

This is a serious blow for the Russian Aviation Industry and the Sukhoi Superjet in particular. I'm sad to hear about it and hope the people on the plane are OK.

 

http://aviation-safe...p?id=20120509-0

Share this post


Link to post

That's not a fair assessment. Actually overall Russian planes are really tough and reliable (especially considering the conditions they operate in), their one weakness was poorer fuel efficiency. I used to fly in Tupolev Tu-154s, Tu-134s, and An-24s all the time - they are remarkably resilient aircraft and have a charm of their own.

 

There's been some crashes in Russia recently due to the age of the aircraft in use, lack of training and proper maintenance. But to make statements like this:

 

is misguided and inappropriate. It may be just me, but that's what I think. Why not show some compassion instead for the people on the plane; and its not like non-Russian aircraft have a perfect safety record and have never had their fair share of issues.

Also keep in mind the Sukhoi Superjet was developed with considerable assistance from Boeing - generally there was substantial co-operation with numerous Western partners in developing the plane.

 

******************

...........

Development of the Sukhoi Superjet 100 began in 2000. On 19 December 2002, Sukhoi Civil Aircraft and the American company Boeing signed a Long-term Cooperation Agreement to work together on the plane.

.....

******************

 

This is a serious blow for the Russian Aviation Industry and the Suckhoi Superjet in particular. I'm sad to hear about it and hope the people on the plane are OK.

 

http://aviation-safe...p?id=20120509-0

 

Well said sir. You're showing your quality, I appreciate that. Some people are just in a rush concluding things. I hope it was caused by the bad weather, not the aircraft itself.

 

Normally we are not allowed to turn on our mobile phone during flight but some passengers' mobile phone were active when the authorities tried to contact them, even until now. Perhaps when non commercial flight like this, they are allowed to turn on their cellphones? This may an indication that there are survivors thou the calls haven't been answered

 

however, the rescue team will continue tracking the crash site tomorrow since the weather is not friendly. They have confirmed that the plane did crash.

Share this post


Link to post

Yup, hopefully mobile phones will be useful in locating the passengers and crew - although there may be poor reception wherever the plane ended up.

 

The fact that some passenger's phones are on is hopefully a positive indicator.

 

There's no way to know what the reason for the accident is at this time - it could be weather, the plane, human error or a mixture of things. Whatever it was, it is damaging (hopefully not too much) to the Superjet's reputation - especially with the general bias that already exists against Russian aircraft (which I feel is unfair).

 

I hope the passengers and crew are alright, in the end that's the most important thing. It looks like the weather over there is turning foggy.

Share this post


Link to post

For those interested, here's a photo taken about 30mins before the flight went down, If you look closely at the TAWS system you'll see that the Terrain awareness system is turned OFF, Now I'm not gonna pretend to know a lot about this aircrafts design, but I'd place money on that being one of the causes of the accident....

 

web.jpg?ver=13365489070001

 

Capt. Rónán O Cadhain.

Share this post


Link to post

Whatever the whyfors and wherefors, nevertheless, any loss of aircraft or lives is to be regretted and feelings and sympathies to somebody somewhere who has lost a loved one aboard that a/c, be it the Russian aircrew or the Indonesian journos.

 

R.I.P.

Share this post


Link to post

Frankly, this doesn't surprise me at all. Russian aircraft are especially known for their unreliability. In fact, as much as I truly love flying, I will never step on board a Russian aircraft if I don't have to. POS planes, if you ask me. But maybe nobody is asking haha. Sorry if I offended anyone... I just get sick and tired of hearing about how Russian aircraft and certain nationality foreign operators can't seem to maintain basic reliability and their planes are constantly crashing, killing thousands. I don't normally agree with how the government operates, but I do have to commend United States' and Europes regulations that keep their planes so reliable and safe.

 

This is about as insensitive a comment as it is uninformed: The SSJ has been approved to the same high standards European and US aircraft meet, and it is in fact not simply a 'Russian aircraft', like most aircraft these days, it is a joint partnership between many companies in many nations around the globe, among them, Alenia, Snecma, Boeing, Thales, Liebherr, Messier-Dowty, BE Aerospace, Curtiss-Wright, Honeywell, Hamilton Sundstrand and Goodrich. Quite a few US names there you will note, and plenty of Western European ones too.

 

And the next time you board a B737NG or an A320, you might also want to note that much of their construction is originated in China.

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post

For those interested, here's a photo taken about 30mins before the flight went down, If you look closely at the TAWS system you'll see that the Terrain awareness system is turned OFF, Now I'm not gonna pretend to know a lot about this aircrafts design, but I'd place money on that being one of the causes of the accident....

 

web.jpg?ver=13365489070001

 

Capt. Rónán O Cadhain.

Important to be aware that it looks like, in the photo above, that the Plane is on the ground as the External Power is connected and available and the plane doesn't look set up for flight with all the systems off. It doesn't show if they kept the terrain awareness system turned OFF during the flight or if they turned it ON prior to or during the flight.

 

Personally I see no valid reason to keep the terrain awareness system OFF for the flight or to fly without it (if it wasn't functioning). If they did do that, then it could have contributed to the accident - Not a good idea to fly an airliner without it around Indonesia.

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I see no valid reason to keep the terrain awareness system OFF for the flight or to fly without it (if it wasn't functioning). If they did do that, then it could have contributed to the accident - Not a good idea to fly an airliner without it around Indonesia.

 

Yes, we were discussing this over on our own EIN forums. What none of us could come up with was why it was in the "OFF" position. We except that the "FAULT", light is likely caused by the ADIRU's not being aligned on the ground, but sense that the OFF light illuminating means that someone had physically switched the switch to OFF. Now none of us can imagine doing this during normal ops, so it begs the question, did they switch it back on before they became airborne? Or did they even know it was turned off? It's not exactly one of those things you'd check frequently, it's one of those switches you expect to be turned on, unless otherwise said...

 

Keep in mind we're all Airbus pilots, the designs look similar, though we're sure that of course there must be differences.

 

Capt. Rónán O Cadhain.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, we were discussing this over on our own EIN forums. What none of us could come up with was why it was in the "OFF" position. We except that the "FAULT", light is likely caused by the ADIRU's not being aligned on the ground, but sense that the OFF light illuminating means that someone had physically switched the switch to OFF. Now none of us can imagine doing this during normal ops, so it begs the question, did they switch it back on before they became airborne? Or did they even know it was turned off? It's not exactly one of those things you'd check frequently, it's one of those switches you expect to be turned on, unless otherwise said...

 

Keep in mind we're all Airbus pilots, the designs look similar, though we're sure that of course there must be differences.

 

Capt. Rónán O Cadhain.

Not sure to be honest - the OFF light could be a difference in the design between Airbus and the SSJ, but I definitely see your point.

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure to be honest - the OFF light could be a difference in the design between Airbus and the SSJ, but I definitely see your point.

Again, we don't know either, only speculation at the minute, but we're guessing something along those lines...

 

Ró.

Share this post


Link to post

I was surprised to see that this is a sidestick equipped aircraft, does anyone know a bit about the flight controls on this aircraft? I can see some switches above the apu that suggest some kind of flight control configuration. The design does look a lot like airbus.

 

Really sad to see those pictures of the crew and passengers happy onboard before the flight.

 

It is strange that the TERR switch is off.

 

Edit- it seems like they have found the wreckage, aircraft split in two and it doesn't look good for survivors. Let's hope the reports are wrong

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

I was surprised to see that this is a sidestick equipped aircraft, does anyone know a bit about the flight controls on this aircraft? I can see some switches above the apu that suggest some kind of flight control configuration. The design does look a lot like airbus.

 

Really sad to see those pictures of the crew and passengers happy onboard before the flight.

 

It is strange that the TERR switch is off.

 

Regards

 

Going again by what has been said on our own private forums, The Sukhoi-100 is FBW with FBW protections VERY similar to the ones in Airbus aircraft, sidestick is used, but the throttles are back-driven and do not use detents like Airbus.

 

Ró.

 

Taken from our forums

The flight control system has three modes - normal, degraded and minimum. Normal is where all primary flight control units (PFCU) and fight controls are functioning. Degraded is where some input signals are lost - for example, if data is missing from the air data or inertial reference system.

 

 

Minimum mode, when all PFCU, air-data or inertial-reference input is lost, is close to Airbus's "direct law", but with improved manual handling qualities as the damping is still available in roll, yaw and pitch channels. There is no envelope protection, but handling qualities are close to normal.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you Ronan, I was wondering the same as Rob! pilot2.gif

 

And I am very sorry about the tragedy.

First of all for the people involved, but also for the Russian aviation industry.

Share this post


Link to post

Following the sketchy news about this the best I can.. From what I can scrum together.

 

Air searched canceled, ground search on going and the report about the wreckage found and the graphic description of it which I won't repeat hasn't been confirmed and considered false. From what I've read one of the helicopter pilots thought he may have saw something right before they canceled the air search but it's just hearsay at this point.

Share this post


Link to post

Way too soon to know what happened. I see no reason to blame the aircraft or Russian Aviation industry when it could be so many possibilities.

 

Americans are not free of mistakes either. All nations are far from perfect. Human nature has no national origin.

Share this post


Link to post

Capt Rónán

 

Admittedly, we are discussing a tragic occurrence somewhere in Indonesia.

 

So, please bear with me. Off a tangent with this question to you. A few days ago Ch5 did a documentary on the World's Scariest Flights, and there were 3 utterly amazing displays of sheer airmanship shown in that documentary.

  • one was the Polish pilot of a LOT 767-300ER making a successful landing without landing gear from a flight out of New York in Poland.
  • the other was the pilot of the Ethiopian 767-300ER landing in the sea near the Comoros Islands in the Indian Ocean when his plane was hijacked out of Addis.
  • the third was of Capt 'Sully' with that A320 ditch in the Hudson and he admitted that he had thought of that Ethiopian aircrew making that ditch in the sea which inspired him.

My question is, as we all know herein that you are a very professional R/L skipper, and your opinions and thoughts are valued here, so, what amongst your erstwhile flying colleagues, specially the A320 air crews, is their evaluation of what Capt 'Sully' managed to pull off with that landing in the Hudson?

Share this post


Link to post

I will never step on board a Russian aircraft if I don't have to.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post

I guess that theory depends on what the checklists and CRM responsibilities are. I would assume that part of the panel is the P1's responsibility owing to its location, but I don't know for sure of course. If there is a 'lights out' policy for the overhead, one assumes they'd spot it, but of course if they did not, then it wouldn't be the first time something on the overhead has been left in an incorrect switch position.

 

Could be a lot of things caused the incident of course, even simply the weather - Indonesia has more thunderstorms than anywhere else in the world, and let's not forget that before the CFM 56 intake spinner was redesigned, the rain in that area was bad enough to flame out both engines on a B737 and cause it to make a forced landing in a river because they could not be restarted - and according to what I'm reading, it was apparently raining when the SSJ made that demo flight.

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post