Another video, as the passengers evacuate. Horrifying:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5OnYm5uIE8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5OnYm5uIE8
Crash at Moscow Airport.
- Thread starter PimTac
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by Hounds
Suffice it to say, I'm skeptical of the pilot's (supposed) explanation that a lightening strike ultimately led to this crash landing. What I see is a terrible "landing" (sic) as the proximate cause of the fire that consumed the airplane.
Ultimately, yes, a bad landing is the cause of the fire that took passenger and crew lives.
The next question is why the return to the airport that forced this landing? And what considerations may have influenced it being a bad landing? Preliminary indications are the landing was overweight (or close to it) and the plane was supposedly being flown in direct law (ie: no envelope protections). Another case of pilots not understanding how to fly the plane without computer protections? Seems to be a fair number events like that in recent years.
Regardless, not a good outcome and RIP the victims.
Suffice it to say, I'm skeptical of the pilot's (supposed) explanation that a lightening strike ultimately led to this crash landing. What I see is a terrible "landing" (sic) as the proximate cause of the fire that consumed the airplane.
Ultimately, yes, a bad landing is the cause of the fire that took passenger and crew lives.
The next question is why the return to the airport that forced this landing? And what considerations may have influenced it being a bad landing? Preliminary indications are the landing was overweight (or close to it) and the plane was supposedly being flown in direct law (ie: no envelope protections). Another case of pilots not understanding how to fly the plane without computer protections? Seems to be a fair number events like that in recent years.
Regardless, not a good outcome and RIP the victims.
Originally Posted by MNgopher
Originally Posted by Hounds
Suffice it to say, I'm skeptical of the pilot's (supposed) explanation that a lightening strike ultimately led to this crash landing. What I see is a terrible "landing" (sic) as the proximate cause of the fire that consumed the airplane.
Ultimately, yes, a bad landing is the cause of the fire that took passenger and crew lives.
The next question is why the return to the airport that forced this landing? And what considerations may have influenced it being a bad landing? Preliminary indications are the landing was overweight (or close to it) and the plane was supposedly being flown in direct law (ie: no envelope protections). Another case of pilots not understanding how to fly the plane without computer protections? Seems to be a fair number events like that in recent years.
Regardless, not a good outcome and RIP the victims.
We do not know what the pilots were dealing with. This is more than a bad landing.
An interesting discussion here:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/621198-sheremetyevo-superjet-100-flames.html
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not.
Originally Posted by Hounds
Suffice it to say, I'm skeptical of the pilot's (supposed) explanation that a lightening strike ultimately led to this crash landing. What I see is a terrible "landing" (sic) as the proximate cause of the fire that consumed the airplane.
Ultimately, yes, a bad landing is the cause of the fire that took passenger and crew lives.
The next question is why the return to the airport that forced this landing? And what considerations may have influenced it being a bad landing? Preliminary indications are the landing was overweight (or close to it) and the plane was supposedly being flown in direct law (ie: no envelope protections). Another case of pilots not understanding how to fly the plane without computer protections? Seems to be a fair number events like that in recent years.
Regardless, not a good outcome and RIP the victims.
We do not know what the pilots were dealing with. This is more than a bad landing.
An interesting discussion here:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/621198-sheremetyevo-superjet-100-flames.html
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not.
And as far as the luggage thing goes, unfortunate to see any passengers with their carry on luggage on the way out in these circumstances. Was that the cause of unnecessary loss of life? We don't know that yet either. Certainly appears that fire/smoke/heat were in the interior extremely quickly.
As is normal with accidents like this, there is usually a chain of events that lead up to the outcome, and us armchair types have only really seen the outcome- not everything that led to it. Initial media reports are often just flat out wrong - and this case is no exception.
Probably best just to sit back and let the investigators do their work and as hard as it is, not speculate how we got here. At this point, we don't know.
As is normal with accidents like this, there is usually a chain of events that lead up to the outcome, and us armchair types have only really seen the outcome- not everything that led to it. Initial media reports are often just flat out wrong - and this case is no exception.
Probably best just to sit back and let the investigators do their work and as hard as it is, not speculate how we got here. At this point, we don't know.
Originally Posted by The_Eric
Still, statistics say its far safer to fly.
I understand what your trying to say, but that doesn't mean I need to use statistics to make decisions.
That's what my brain is for. So far, it hasn't lead me astray.
Still, statistics say its far safer to fly.
I understand what your trying to say, but that doesn't mean I need to use statistics to make decisions.
That's what my brain is for. So far, it hasn't lead me astray.
There's a reason for that awful landing.
Probably due to some flight controls and computers being messed up.
I'm not very familiar with that plane, but just being in direct law wouldn't result in that kind of messy landing.
There's a FlightAware track of the flight floating around. After the strike. That track became very erratic. Looks like they had major control issues.
Lightning strikes happen from time to time, but I'm not familiar with any which would cause so many control issues. I am pretty confident that this was mainly an engineering problem. Computers need to be well protected against the effects of a strike, and Russians sure ain't known for great engineering.
Probably due to some flight controls and computers being messed up.
I'm not very familiar with that plane, but just being in direct law wouldn't result in that kind of messy landing.
There's a FlightAware track of the flight floating around. After the strike. That track became very erratic. Looks like they had major control issues.
Lightning strikes happen from time to time, but I'm not familiar with any which would cause so many control issues. I am pretty confident that this was mainly an engineering problem. Computers need to be well protected against the effects of a strike, and Russians sure ain't known for great engineering.
Originally Posted by Jcountry
There's a reason for that awful landing.
Probably due to some flight controls and computers being messed up.
I'm not very familiar with that plane, but just being in direct law wouldn't result in that kind of messy landing.
There's a FlightAware track of the flight floating around. After the strike. That track became very erratic. Looks like they had major control issues.
Lightning strikes happen from time to time, but I'm not familiar with any which would cause so many control issues. I am pretty confident that this was mainly an engineering problem. Computers need to be well protected against the effects of a strike, and Russians sure ain't known for great engineering.
The reason for that awful landing:
Bad flying.
Allowing the distraction of some reported system failures, perhaps caused by lightning, to let you crash the airplane on the runway so hard that you broke it up, causing structural failure and fire.
That's just bad flying.
There's a reason for that awful landing.
Probably due to some flight controls and computers being messed up.
I'm not very familiar with that plane, but just being in direct law wouldn't result in that kind of messy landing.
There's a FlightAware track of the flight floating around. After the strike. That track became very erratic. Looks like they had major control issues.
Lightning strikes happen from time to time, but I'm not familiar with any which would cause so many control issues. I am pretty confident that this was mainly an engineering problem. Computers need to be well protected against the effects of a strike, and Russians sure ain't known for great engineering.
The reason for that awful landing:
Bad flying.
Allowing the distraction of some reported system failures, perhaps caused by lightning, to let you crash the airplane on the runway so hard that you broke it up, causing structural failure and fire.
That's just bad flying.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
[/quote]
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not. [/quote]
I travel in cargo pants and Columbia shirts … lots of pockets …
Passport, wallet, Rx meds, iPhone are what you need … keep hands free … get moving …
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not. [/quote]
I travel in cargo pants and Columbia shirts … lots of pockets …
Passport, wallet, Rx meds, iPhone are what you need … keep hands free … get moving …
Last edited:
Originally Posted by 4WD
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not. [/quote]
I travel in cargo pants and Columbia shirts … lots of pockets …
Passport, wallet, Rx meds, iPhone are what you need … keep hands free … get moving …[/quote]
I agree. I love cargo pants for travel and my favorites have zippered cargo pockets. In places like Manila and Bangkok they are a bit more secure against the pickpockets and street kids.
As with all these types of accidents the discussion starts up about passengers taking their carry on bags with them off the plane. Every second matters in a evacuation like this.
In my case, when I fly I have a small personal bag with medicine and my tickets and passes with me at all times. That saves me from going to the overhead bins. I keep my passport on my person always.
Luggage is replaceable. Lives are not. [/quote]
I travel in cargo pants and Columbia shirts … lots of pockets …
Passport, wallet, Rx meds, iPhone are what you need … keep hands free … get moving …[/quote]
I agree. I love cargo pants for travel and my favorites have zippered cargo pockets. In places like Manila and Bangkok they are a bit more secure against the pickpockets and street kids.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Yep … my coworker had his passport picked in Manila … 4 days later got a flight home …
Did the fire start in midair? Could it have destroyed some flight controls, hydraulics, or something?
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Did the fire start in midair? Could it have destroyed some flight controls, hydraulics, or something?
The fire started after landing, during which the plane was bouncing down the runway.
Structural failure, leading to ruptured fuel tanks.
Caused by a very bad landing.
That's what it looks like so far.
When I say bad landing, I mean, horrible, atrocious, crash. It bounced 20 feet into the air and nosed back down into the runway, hitting so hard that it broke up. The footage is of an airplane that was crashed during landing. In that crash, it broke up. In that break up, it leaked fuel and caught on fire.
At the time of the bounce, it was not on fire.
Did the fire start in midair? Could it have destroyed some flight controls, hydraulics, or something?
The fire started after landing, during which the plane was bouncing down the runway.
Structural failure, leading to ruptured fuel tanks.
Caused by a very bad landing.
That's what it looks like so far.
When I say bad landing, I mean, horrible, atrocious, crash. It bounced 20 feet into the air and nosed back down into the runway, hitting so hard that it broke up. The footage is of an airplane that was crashed during landing. In that crash, it broke up. In that break up, it leaked fuel and caught on fire.
At the time of the bounce, it was not on fire.
Last edited:
Ok. I get it now. Shocking and horrible.
In the video, I see people evacuating still while the back of the plane is already a flaming skeleton. Awful.
Don't planes usually flip over on their backs after a bounce and then slam down that causes gear failure?
In the video, I see people evacuating still while the back of the plane is already a flaming skeleton. Awful.
Don't planes usually flip over on their backs after a bounce and then slam down that causes gear failure?
It would depend on how the gear fail, angle of impact, velocity, etc. I've seen planes do some odd things when the gear collapses, but generally, the wings keep them level.
Take a look at this page:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-19/brakes-unused-on-russian-plane-killed-41-report-says/11127638
Second video down shows the "landing" and it is a horrific bounce.
The fire begins at the moment of the second observed impact. I suspect that was actually the third impact with the runway, the first one occurring off camera to the left.
Why the bounce?
A lot of speculation on lightning, flight control problems, etc. I've blamed the pilots - which, to be fair, is a guess at this point. But it's a good guess...
Take a look at this page:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-19/brakes-unused-on-russian-plane-killed-41-report-says/11127638
Second video down shows the "landing" and it is a horrific bounce.
The fire begins at the moment of the second observed impact. I suspect that was actually the third impact with the runway, the first one occurring off camera to the left.
Why the bounce?
A lot of speculation on lightning, flight control problems, etc. I've blamed the pilots - which, to be fair, is a guess at this point. But it's a good guess...
Last edited:
Word on the street (pilots) on this crash:
Electric failure in flight put airplane into direct flight control law.
Pilots set up for over weight landing.
Winds gusting to 30 knots.
Pilots ignored multiple wind shear warnings on final.
Crossed threshold very fast, 170 knots. Plane oscillating between -2 and +6 degrees of pitch (!!!).
First landing at 158 KIAS, with vertical load of 2.5 G (above design load) and bounced up to 6 feet.
Second landing at 155 KIAS. NOSE FIRST. +5.8 G
Third landing at 140 KIAS and over 5 G.
Airplane broke up on third landing.
Electric failure in flight put airplane into direct flight control law.
Pilots set up for over weight landing.
Winds gusting to 30 knots.
Pilots ignored multiple wind shear warnings on final.
Crossed threshold very fast, 170 knots. Plane oscillating between -2 and +6 degrees of pitch (!!!).
First landing at 158 KIAS, with vertical load of 2.5 G (above design load) and bounced up to 6 feet.
Second landing at 155 KIAS. NOSE FIRST. +5.8 G
Third landing at 140 KIAS and over 5 G.
Airplane broke up on third landing.
The video looks like a complete crash landing from start to finish. Unbelievable.
Yep...
Hence my "pilot error" hypothesis/presumption.
While the news media was going down the "lightning strike" path, as if it was ignited by lightning...
But that's not how lightning works with airplanes.
Hence my "pilot error" hypothesis/presumption.
While the news media was going down the "lightning strike" path, as if it was ignited by lightning...
But that's not how lightning works with airplanes.
- Status
Similar threads
