Another Airline Crash

[Jim Young 2,356]

Just heard many of the passengers were trying to get their overhead baggage and a major reason why many in the rear of the aircraft died.

[mpw8679 428]

OMG

[Ray Proudfoot 8,932]

27 minutes ago, Jim Young said:

Just heard many of the passengers were trying to get their overhead baggage and a major reason why many in the rear of the aircraft died.

Reminds me of something similar at a US airport a couple of years ago when an aircraft caught fire. Human nature.

[fluffyflops 1,848]

mate of mine works for Air Bridge Cargo / Volga  and constantly tells me horror stories about Russian Safety Standards and the russian way of doing things.

they regulary have to pull lumps of concrete out of their tires from the crappy runway in SVO, the aircraft all fly amount with fudged paperwork relating to DMIs , MELS and CRASS's they put them in for checks as little as possible, they are constantly getting hit by highloaders,tugs and cherry pickers and pretending it doesnt happen ,  and the crew dont really have a proper FTL or FRMS system, they call them whenever they want for whatever duty they want.

When he raises safety issues they either tell him to get another job or stop being RussianPhobic.  Heres desperate to leave  

Edited May 7, 2019 by tooting

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

I didn't want to add to this thread initially but since tooting raised the issue, the Sukhoi Superjet has been plagued with structural issues since its introduction. The company that designed it was also cited for hiring engineers with fake credentials.

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/the-troubled-history-of-russias-sukhoi-superjet/news-story/52414ae381da16711fa2317a26703bad

That link is not behind a paywall like similar stories.

Maybe someone else can answer this. I always believed that commercial airliners were somewhat immune to lightning strikes. Apparently this is not the case. Second, was the aircraft carrying a full load of fuel? That probably didn't help the situation either due to both the weight and the fire risk.

[Bob Scott 7,716]

9 hours ago, Jim Young said:

Just heard many of the passengers were trying to get their overhead baggage and a major reason why many in the rear of the aircraft died.

If you've ever been in a traffic jam on a Moscow highway, you've witnessed this mind set.  Last time I was there it seemed like about every 10th car on the road had a flashing blue light on it signifying either "this is an emergency vehicle" or "I'm someone special" (mostly the latter), and those vehicles were just as caught up in the jam as everyone else...nobody gave quarter to anyone else, except maybe at gunpoint. 

[lzamm 143]

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

I always believed that commercial airliners were somewhat immune to lightning strikes

They mostly are, which is why I don't particularly believe that version of events.

Having said that, this immunity depends on there being a low-resistance path for the current through the aircraft structure, the currents involved are enormous and it only takes a small resistance to create large electric fields and consequent problems.  This has been made harder with the advent of composite components, the composites themselves are normally made conducting but bonding to the remainder of the structure now becomes critical.  It's a problem that gets worse with age (not a factor in this case) but may also be the result of bad workmanship.

 

[Ian S 214]

9 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Reminds me of something similar at a US airport a couple of years ago when an aircraft caught fire. Human nature.

Yes, I thought of that BA 777 at Las Vegas that caught fire and pax could be seen wheeling their bags across the tarmac.

[zmak 331]

10 hours ago, charliearon said:

They seem to be dropping out of the sky like candy from a busted piñata!  Not a good week for the aviation industry

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fourteen-dead-after-private-jet-crashes-between-las-vegas-and-mexico/ar-AAAYVeZ?li=BBnb7Kz

 

The picture of the jet looks like it was parked and then set on fire. Looks like it was an attempt at a landing as the bits are still together

 

https://www.9news.com.au/world/news-world-thirteen-feared-dead-after-las-vegas-flight-crashes/3cb69100-5924-43dd-bb5c-956155e228e5

[fluffyflops 1,848]

1 hour ago, lzamm said:

They mostly are, which is why I don't particularly believe that version of events.

Having said that, this immunity depends on there being a low-resistance path for the current through the aircraft structure, the currents involved are enormous and it only takes a small resistance to create large electric fields and consequent problems.  This has been made harder with the advent of composite components, the composites themselves are normally made conducting but bonding to the remainder of the structure now becomes critical.  It's a problem that gets worse with age (not a factor in this case) but may also be the result of bad workmanship.

 

ours get hit everyday at my airline its a ruse .  your never get a russian admitting their a/c is crappy

[fluffyflops 1,848]

12 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Latest BBC News report states pilots are saying aircraft struck by lightning. That is more credible than from pax.

 

ray as i said to you before, the press will take anything as a given, they dont and wont check facts, they will do anything to get a headline out quick.  remember the drones at Gatwick

The pilot that quoted it could of been a 17 PPL holder thats good enough for them beacuse the general public dont know the difference between a 19 year old l3 ctc rich kid from a TRI with 3 LPCs and 40000 hours .

In our OCC we have a phone that is red in colour and its number its only given out to the press and a selective few pople.  We littery call it the "red phone",  alot of our diverts or issues at airports will hit twitter within seconds not minutes, and then that phone will go off some 3 minutes later , so when it rings we know its either the press oir one of the 2 PR companies we use. One PR company  is for twitter monitoring and facebook , the other is for any "incidents" whether that be a long delay or some more serious.

I was working on both our recent problem flights, the cruise charter with the illness and the 747 with gear issue that held and then came in some hours later.  Both times the press constantly put out incorrect info, and hastily put together statements,  with pictures of little red a320s .  And as normal their experts where not simon calder but some unqualifed spotter or flightsim simmer rhat has never made it into the airlines.

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,932]

33 minutes ago, tooting said:

ray as i said to you before, the press will take anything as a given, they dont and wont check facts, they will do anything to get a headline out quick.  remember the drones at Gatwick

I'm pretty sure the BBC report was quoting from a Russian interview with the pilot. I saw a short piece of footage that showed the aircraft did not catch fire until the hard landing. The pilot reported all instruments were disabled by the lightning strike and they notified ATC via a separate backup system by sending a code which may have been 7600.

Everything else is speculation.

[zmak 331]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I'm pretty sure the BBC report was quoting from a Russian interview with the pilot. I saw a short piece of footage that showed the aircraft did not catch fire until the hard landing. The pilot reported all instruments were disabled by the lightning strike and they notified ATC via a separate backup system by sending a code which may have been 7600.

Everything else is speculation.

The ASI works on RAM air from the pitots so if not blocked its all they needed to land VFR.  Why it was such terrible landing is a mystery so far

[Ray Proudfoot 8,932]

36 minutes ago, zmak said:

The ASI works on RAM air from the pitots so if not blocked its all they needed to land VFR.  Why it was such terrible landing is a mystery so far

The reason for the heavy landing was the aircraft was full of fuel. I fail to understand why people with an interest in flight sim don't understand the basics. The aircraft was hit by lightning very soon after take-off and returned within minutes. It was far too heavy for a conventional landing so that's why it was a "terrible landing" to use your quote.

[188AHC 2,138]

I hope everyone here knows we are an international Forum and we do have visitors and members from Russia.

Please don't use comments hurtful to the entire country and its' populace when discussing this tragedy.

Prayers for the lost souls, the injured, and the survivors in this tragic event.