Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Russian jet goes missing over Indonesia with 44 onboard

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Flight attendant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    59

    Russian jet goes missing over Indonesia with 44 onboard

    A Russian passenger Sukhoi Superjet 100 has gone missing over Indonesia, with at least 44 people onboard.

    Indonesian authorities said it may have crashed into a mountain, according to Russian news agency RIA Novosti.

    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/n...-indonesia-44-
    Last edited by KBP; 2012-05-09 at 14:46.

  2. #2
    Passenger
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Polska/Poland
    Posts
    4
    The airplane got permission to descend from an altitude of 10,000 feet down to 6,000, moving downwards in a rightward direction. According to the official, there is a 6,200 foot-high mountain in the area where the plane went missing. As Russia Today says, there were even 50 passengers on board, including 8 Russians and 36 citizens from other countries – mostly representatives from major airline companies.

    http://rt.com/news/sukhoi-superjet-d...ars-radar-838/

  3. #3
    Flight attendant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    59
    Aeroflot stewardess, Ekaterina Solovieva was fired for her twitter comment:
    why SJ is down? he-he, it's a shit, not an aircraft

    http://www.ntv.ru/novosti/296558/
    here is a legal order to cease the contract with Aeroflot. as well the personal page at twitter had been deleted

    https://twitter.com/#!/aeroflot/stat...588737/photo/1

  4. #4
    Passenger Argonaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    At home (home is where the TV is, and motherland - where you pay taxes)
    Posts
    8
    Here is some info from the horse's mouth: visit Indonesia's National Transportation Security Committee webpage here

    http://www.dephub.go.id/knkt/ntsc_av...04_Release.pdf

    The report vindicates the aircraft itself; the data from the black boxes demonstrates that the warning systems were doing exactly what they should (short of, perhaps, electroshocking the pilot unconscious and auto-piloting the plane out of danger).

    I tend to place most blame on the pilot, as his responsibility was to focus on keeping the people on board safe, not "entertaining" and "impressing" the customer.

    That said, the Indonesian ground control didn't have their house in order either, as the report delicately admits (like, why set up a demo flight in a mountainous area? why clear the aircraft to drop to 6,000 ft with a 6,200 ft mountain nearby?)

  5. #5
    Flight attendant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    59
    in 1973 they lost Tu-144 at Paris-Le Burget, no mountains, but the same bragging flight.

  6. #6
    First officer 1090 MHz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    F-CYYZ2
    Posts
    386
    Maybe the Captain of this flight also had his kid flying the plane, like the doomed Russian Flight 593.


  7. #7
    Passenger Argonaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    At home (home is where the TV is, and motherland - where you pay taxes)
    Posts
    8
    Actually, the Le Bourget disaster is markedly different from both Mount Salak and Flight 593.

    Le Bourget was an air show, where the airplanes are expected to, well, show off: low flybys .. touch-and-go's .. early rotations, steep climbs/turns and stuff like that. Such stunts are performed by skilled test pilots, flying at much below the aircraft's MTOW (no pax and only a small amount of fuel). Both Concord and Konkordski were revolutionary experimental planes at that time, and not mass-manufactured models with long safety records.

    You can surely find certain similarities between the Mount Salak and Flight 593 scenarios (such as the pilot's distraction and failure to respond to an escalating situation in adequate way), but I think the latter shows more commonalities with the AF447. In both cases, we talk about incompetent, irresponsible airmanship that lead - through an unfortunate, yet preventable chain of events - to the crash of a mechanically sound, safe as mother's milk passenger plane, flying in normal weather.
    Last edited by Argonaught; 2014-01-11 at 17:39.

  8. #8
    Flight attendant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    59
    for me both catastrophes are similar not technically, but behaviorally. in both cases pilots rudely ignored the safety. in former USSR countries many pilots bahave themselves often as machos, they are proud to "go over" any problem, ususally ignoring rules. in 2006 Tu-154 with 170 passengers was lost because the captain decided to fly over the storm front.

    in Le Burget Concord with more powerfull engines demonstarted the low flyby and steep climb. Soviet aviation authorities decided Tu-144 can repeat this next day. so Tu-144 pilots ignored some aircraft technical limitations, that was a reason of the stall and falling. the same safety ingnorance trying to be number one.

  9. #9
    Passenger Argonaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    At home (home is where the TV is, and motherland - where you pay taxes)
    Posts
    8
    It's ironic, though, how sometimes absolute respect for authority can lead to the same catastrophic results as sheer recklessness. If you keep an eye on the history of CFIT disasters, you would probably recall the flight KAL801 .. the crew kept telling (very politely, I presume) the captain that he was tracking a wrong signal, that the plane was descending too fast and that there was no landing strip in sight ..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •