Crash "Superjet": the pilots made a fatal mistake

33
At the Moscow Sheremetyevo airport, the domestic regional airliner “Sukhoi Superjet 100” of Aeroflot Airlines crashed. According to the latest data, out of 78 people on board, 41 were killed, including one crew member. This is the first serious accident of this type of aircraft in the last 7 years. In 2012, in Indonesia, the Superjet performed a demonstration flight, during which the airliner crashed into a mountainside. The official reason for the tragedy was then called the crew’s ignorance of the terrain features.





But back to the disaster in Sheremetyevo. I note right away that the aircraft was practically new (tail number RA-89098). He made his first flight less than two years ago - on June 21, 2017. Three months later, the liner was delivered to Aeroflot, where it flew by no means for wear. The average flight time of this type of aircraft in the airline is only 3,6 hours per day, compared to almost 11 hours for Boeing and Airbus machines. Most of the time "Superjets" spend on the ground. Perhaps this was one of the reasons for the tragedy. I will explain why.

Just half an hour after the crash, the main reason for what happened was that lightning hit the plane during the flight. Indeed, as confirmed by the pilot Denis Evdokimov, who was landing the aircraft (AF), about 20 minutes after takeoff, an electric discharge hit the liner. He disabled the radio communication equipment of the aircraft, the operation of which was subsequently partially restored.


Here I would like to note that absolutely all modern commercial airliners are designed in such a way that they are not afraid of even a very powerful lightning strike. The last plane crash, caused by lightning, occurred in 1963. Then, as a result of an electric shock on a Boeing-707 of a Pan American airline, the fuel tank detonated. The plane crashed near the city of Elkton, Maryland, USA. All people on board died. Since then, all aircraft began to be equipped with static arresters, which remove electric charge from the surface of the aircraft during flight. Despite the fact that hundreds of liners are subjected to lightning strikes every year, over the past 50 years this has not led to tragedies.

The failure of the Superjet communication facilities is, of course, associated with the electric discharge entering the aircraft, however, the reason for this behavior of the equipment remains to be seen. The first thing that comes to mind is the flaws in the design, assembly and maintenance of the aircraft.

Let us return to the record of the explanations of the pilot of the fatal Superjet.

Due to lightning, we lost radio communications. And the transition of the aircraft to the minimum mode - direct control mode. And not through a computer, as usual, but directly. Emergency control mode,

- said the pilot.

There is no “direct control” on this type of aircraft. All interaction with the control planes of the liner occurs through a computer. However, there are two modes of operation. The normal mode is when the side stick (joystick) deviations are processed by the on-board computer, which uses various algorithms based on the position of the aircraft in space, the speed of the incoming flow, etc., that is, to some extent helps the pilot control the aircraft. Emergency mode (conventionally “direct”), when the control plane of the aircraft completely repeats the sidestick deviations. However, even in this case, the computer acts as an intermediary of signals. It is he who gives commands to hydraulic drives that deflect the steering surfaces of the liner.

The difference between the two modes is enormous: the plane reacts differently to the same sidestick movements. Of course, ideally, pilots should be able to control the aircraft in both modes, but in practice everything turned out differently. In this context, the statement of the pilot Denis Evdokimov seems extremely strange:

The speed was low for landing, normal. All according to the operational crew compilation. They approached the ground smoothly, with a decrease in vertical speed.


These words contradict the video published on the Web, which clearly shows how the plane "goat" in the strip. This is precisely due to the outstanding (too high) vertical speed of the aircraft. Simply put, the plane was dropping too fast. After a hard blow to the ground, the liner bounces like a ball and touches the ground again.


The last such jump becomes fatal for the aircraft. Due to a strong blow, the left landing gear pierces the fuel tank, and sparks from touching the tail of the aircraft on the ground provoke ignition of the fuel that flows out. Given that the tanks were completely full, the dynamics of combustion radically reduced the chances of escape by leaving the aircraft. Bottom line: more than half of the passengers died in the crash.




Of course, the desire of the pilots during an emergency to land the aircraft faster is understandable, but this was the crew’s mistake. Pilots made a progressive "scum", when with each subsequent jump the liner bounces off the ground even higher, and ultimately, having lost horizontal speed, it simply falls. In such a situation, you should immediately stop landing and leave for the second and subsequent circles. Most likely, the crew simply did not have experience in emergency control of this type of aircraft.

Be that as it may, soon we will find out the true causes of the disaster. As it became known on the morning of May 6, flight recorders have already been removed from the scene of the tragedy and sent for examination.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    6 May 2019 11: 57
    How not to "goat" when landing - teach freshmen. The commander and the entire crew, it seems, never worked in the "direct control" mode.
  2. -2
    6 May 2019 12: 24
    Now all the dogs on the pilots will begin to hang, but it is necessary to hang on those who made the designer out of the plane. In addition to the assembly, is there at least one domestic part in it?
    1. +2
      6 May 2019 12: 57
      Purely statistically, most often aircraft crashes occur due to the fault of the crew
    2. -1
      16 June 2019 22: 49
      Quote: Port
      In addition to the assembly, is there at least one domestic part in it?

      The fewer the better. So it turns out.
      As for the accident.
      The plane has "piloting features". There is nothing wrong with that, but they just forgot to warn the pilots about it. Not only these, everyone. Therefore, they did not land the plane as it should have been.
      The unconventional reaction of the aircraft to the quite traditional actions of the crew in such an environment led the PIC to confusion, and the aircraft to the first goat. Further, the FAC never recovered completely.
      However, one had to come across the opinion that the unconventional reaction of the aircraft was not due to the "peculiarities of piloting", but because of the excessive landing weight.
      I think the experts will figure it out. And just to hang this accident on the pilots will also fail, Aeroflot will not.
  3. +2
    6 May 2019 13: 35
    I will not be surprised that this tragedy occurred due to the saving of money. The tragedy in Kemerovo is proof of this.
  4. +4
    6 May 2019 14: 57
    You can also add that they landed at almost full load (without running out of fuel in flight). If the radio altimeter also failed, then the situation was unusual for the pilot. The video shows how he 'bites' the nose, pressing the plane to the runway, as if afraid to fly over the touch zone. In their defense, we can say that it is not easy to enter the go-around on such an aircraft, but for that and professional training twice a year ...
    1. +3
      6 May 2019 15: 05
      1. On the third jump, he had already flown over the touch zone.
      2. He was already leaving for the second round. This was the second attempt to sit down. Nothing prevented me from leaving for the third round. But the pilot decided otherwise.
      1. +1
        6 May 2019 15: 15
        It is unlikely that he has already decided something. The reflexes against "hold the wheel"
      2. 0
        8 May 2019 09: 36
        Nothing prevented me from leaving for the third round.

        Stop talking nonsense about what is "allowed" and what is "not." You weren't there (on board).
        There are official statements confirming the failure of on-board systems. It is not known what kind of systems. And how they influenced the decision of the pilots.
        But you "know" everything.
        1. 0
          8 May 2019 09: 44
          At the same time, there are official statements that it is impossible to understand the logic of the pilots' actions. There is also a transcript of the crew’s negotiations with the dispatcher, where the PIC says that “the landing is taking place normally”.
          1. +1
            8 May 2019 09: 51
            .... there are official statements that the logic of the actions of the pilots is impossible to understand.

            Formal statements are the statements of those involved in the investigation.
            And the statements of outsiders, albeit with experience in this field, are just a private opinion.
            There can be no official statements such as "it is impossible to understand the actions of the helots." Since the commission is created in order to understand these very actions. And make a conclusion. Whether they were correct or not.
            But for many, everything is "clear" without investigation.
            1. +1
              8 May 2019 10: 08
              For that matter, there were NO official statements regarding equipment failure. You accuse me of "nonsense", but they themselves invented something and smeared it on paper.
              1. 0
                8 May 2019 10: 59
                ... and they themselves invented something and spread it on paper.

                My "invented" was a response to your comment.
                I remind you ...

                At the same time, there are official statements that it is impossible to understand the logic of the pilots' actions.

                Don’t give a link, where and when were these kind of OFFICIAL statements?
                I would not answer in your place.
                1. +1
                  8 May 2019 11: 07
                  In my opinion, you are lost in time. Your message about allegedly “official statements” was FIRST:

                  There are official statements confirming the failure of on-board systems.

                  And my message was just the answer to yours.
  5. +1
    6 May 2019 15: 23
    All experts. And how did Tu22 land in Karelia? Thank God at least half of the people survived. That there is no fuel discharge is sadness. And the grandmother said in two that it would be better to sit down with half-empty tanks with such a vertical. Not a tough look.
    1. +4
      6 May 2019 15: 59
      It's not just the expertise. Surely the PIC was an experienced pilot, and under normal circumstances (and probably not even under completely normal ones) he knew how to land a plane. That is the question why he made so many mistakes this time (and there is little doubt that there were mistakes). I even drum into beginners: no need to 'save' a bad fit. While the plane is flying, there is no fire and there is fuel, try to land at least a hundred times, there is no shame in that. Yes, the Sukhoi is not a D-40 or a Cessna 172, but the pilot also probably flew more than 40 hours. An-148 in Moscow last year crashed due to an elementary lack of discipline in the cockpit, the failure of speed sensors is, so, an inconvenient reason. So what happened here? Did the sensors fail? So it is possible visually, there is radar data, GPS, finally. There is a time, after all, they said there was no fire. So why put the car in such a hurry?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        6 May 2019 16: 37
        https://www.facebook.com/groups/217193648374343/permalink/1735802299846796/
      3. 0
        6 May 2019 16: 37
        It’s very difficult for Garnayev to object.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. +1
        6 May 2019 19: 57
        About the rush question of course. But no one knows what happened there. Maybe you really needed, or maybe not
    2. +2
      6 May 2019 16: 29
      By the way, in the case of the Tu-22 was a very important factor: the weather. While holding a heavy plane on the glide path, you can forget about the speed of descent, and when switching to visual, 5 seconds before touching it may not be enough to notice your mistake. Here the weather was perfect.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. 0
    6 May 2019 16: 27
    More and more often I (quite naturally) have to hear the question: ... "and how in the modern Russian Federation one can honestly 100% LAWY a young man to become a full-fledged professional Civil Pilot"?
    Everything is more embarrassing and embarrassing to lie to me ... but it is all the more unbearable to tell the Truth - now in general there is NO
  8. +1
    6 May 2019 20: 42
    The training of civil aviation pilots, like all higher education, has reached a critical point. Teachers are paid a penny, there is almost no one to work. The "average" salary, as the management salaries are almost overtaken, and lies. The equipment for flight training is almost gone. The government decides only one issue - economy in everything, but at the same time it does not forget about itself. Even the death of people will not force them to make a detailed analysis of the industry, what if the state of affairs will require and will have to be taken away from itself?
    1. 0
      20 May 2019 15: 48
      The government solves only one issue - economics in everything, but at the same time does not forget about itself. Even the loss of life will not force them to make a detailed analysis in the industry, but what if the state of affairs of expenses will require and it will be necessary to tear yourself away?

      Vladimir, you are wrong! The government quickly responded to this catastrophe and urgently included Mr. Serdyukov, who fastened epaulettes on his chest, in the leadership of the aviation industry. So, Lord Serdyukov will quickly restore order in civil aviation - and soon planes will fall much more often.

      The steamer is good, the plane is good, and deer are better!
  9. -7
    6 May 2019 21: 09
    healthy men grabbed their bags. prevented evacuation instead of helping people in the tail. Russians have their own shirt closer to the body.
    1. +4
      6 May 2019 21: 34
      Well, are you not ashamed to reduce such a tragedy to a national character! But what about the flight attendant who sacrificed his life to save passengers? But egoists are among any people.
    2. +2
      7 May 2019 11: 08
      What nationality will you be? Write and I will give you examples of the animal behavior of your nation.
    3. +1
      7 May 2019 11: 09
      Invented! No evidence is available either on the video footage or from the witnesses. UNPretty! (you have no manhood).
      1. +1
        7 May 2019 14: 18
        A chto skajut "experti" zdeshnie na to chto pasajiri vixadili iz samaleta s bagajom ??? Kto im pozvolil vo vremya pojara vzyat bagaj? I poteryat bestcennie sekundi? Gde bil ekipaj? ... Polnimi bakami avarino posadit samalet! Nu neznayu.
  10. +2
    7 May 2019 15: 37
    Yeah ...... the plane is burning ..... no rescue services are visible .... obviously, they are sleeping ... or they JUST ARE NOT READY !!! So maybe all the same, it’s not necessary to blame everything on the pilots, but to put the bureaucrats from the Federal Air Transport Agency and the airfield leadership?
  11. 0
    8 May 2019 09: 29
    These words contradict the video published on the Web, which clearly shows how the plane "goat" in the strip.

    The pilot had devices before his eyes. And you apparently know how to determine the speed of the video? Unique ability.

    Of course, the desire of the pilots during an emergency to land the aircraft faster is understandable, but this was the crew’s mistake.

    In addition to determining the speed from the video, do you have a huge experience in emergency landing?
    Not tired of doing boltology yet? Can we wait for at least some preliminary results of the investigation?
    Already in the media there are statements by representatives of the commission that there are no "fatal mistakes". Although, of course, there are just mistakes.
    1. +2
      8 May 2019 15: 01
      You are certainly right that you need to wait until the investigation is completed to determine the decisive factors in this tragedy. But I want to stand up for the author: his analysis is quite convincing. Specifically:

      The pilot had devices before his eyes. And you apparently know how to determine the speed of the video? Unique ability.

      You are again right in one thing: identify video speed by eye is difficult (but it is possible, if the frame rate, camera position, etc. are known, the commission of inquiry, by the way, will definitely do this in order to correlate the readings of the devices and the real speed). But this does not need to be done in order to conclude that the speed (by the way, relative to the air, not the ground) significantly exceeded the optimal one. It's about the physics of the landing. With a perfect landing, the moment you touch it, the flow stalls --- the plane stops flying and turns into a 'truck with wings'. In a normal landing, there is excess speed, which is quickly absorbed by friction, thrust release, etc. When landing at a significant excess speed, the aircraft 'bounces' off the ground. This is not due to the fact that the chassis 'bounces' (it just resists this) but due to the sagging tail, and, as a result, the change in the angle of attack. Due to the remaining speed, the wing develops lift and the aircraft takes off from the ground again. What follows usually makes landing impossible (or very difficult): the speed drops sharply, the plane takes off from the 'surface effect' and ... then you saw on the video.

      I will also add that I have experience in emergency landings, although not on an aircraft like the Sukhoi. And the door in the cockpit next to me was carried out, followed by depressurization, and the engine over the Arctic Ocean refused, and the instruments, at night when entering by instruments disconnected in a thunderstorm, along with landing lights. I won’t lie, I made mistakes, a lot. To begin with, much could have been avoided by simply refusing to fly at that moment, or to wait. But these are my sins. As a pilot, I wonder why the PIC did so, and not otherwise, so that don't do it yourself, if God forbid ...... And the desire to sit down as soon as possible, I very much understand, this is a human instinct. When teaching, I ask all the cadets a standard question (which, of course, they once asked me, and to which I answered incorrectly): Imagine that a bird has hit your tail. The plane flies, but does not obey the rudders, and shakes. The engine is all right, there is plenty of fuel. What do we have to do? Here is my instructor's answer many years ago: you have just been 'given' a completely different plane, gain height and learn to drive it. After that, you can approach the landing. And here, an unusually heavy (from fuel surplus) plane, you can’t always be ready for anything, what made the FAC hurry up like this? This is not a helicopter where advice is given at almost any speaker: sit down as quickly as possible.
  12. 0
    8 May 2019 12: 11
    ... Russia plans at the end of 2019 to abolish preferential rates for duties on the temporary import of foreign aircraft - competitors of the Russian Sukhoi Superjet 100 and MS-21, Interfax reported with reference to the Ministry of Industry and Trade. We are talking about aircraft weighing from 20 to 90 tons with a capacity of 50-300 seats. Now they have zero duties imposed by the Commission of the Customs Union in 2010. This may affect the most common models - Airbus 319/320/321 (now in Russia 262 such aircraft fly) and Boeing-737 of various modifications (172 aircraft), as well as the Brazilian Embraer (E-170 and E-175) ...

    I am not a conspiracy theorist. As an option. But everything can be. Hundreds of millions of dollars / euros are at stake. I wonder if our grandchildren Dzerzhinsky will dig their nose according to this version, even if not the main one.
  13. +1
    20 May 2019 15: 57
    And what are we arguing with the Lord about? In Russia, 40 enterprises have already ceased to exist! What technologies can we talk about? If in Russia they can no longer even produce their own bicycles. Medvedev said: "We will buy everything!" - I really didn't think they might not sell! And Putin said: "Well, palm oil is even useful" - and the Russians have already eaten 000 tons of this "very useful palm oil."