Airliner Crashes In Russia, 62 Killed

W

WhatInThe

SF VIP
An airline jet in Russia crashed attempting to land in high winds. All 62 aboard killed. Several other planes had difficulty trying to land at that airport shortly before. Winds speed near the ground was 49 mph.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...board/ar-BBqDsGu?li=BBnb7Kz?ocid=ansmsnnews11

Plane was 737-800 from 2011 in "mint" condition and had an extensive inspection in January. Airline was a recent start up/discount airline.

RIP
 

The B-737 is not really a small plane, but is small in comparison to a lot of the other jets being flown. The B-737-8 is a stretch version of the smaller 737's capable of carrying about 200 passengers, depending on how it is configured. The B-737 is considered to be a workhorse for many U.S. airlines with Southwest Airlines being the largest customer as it uses an all B-737 fleet. On flights under 3 hours, the B-737 is the plane of choice by most airlines. According to the article, the engines were manufactured in France, which are probably GE. The engine listed is a very popular engine with a very good safety record.

As for the cause of the accident, first, Russia, as most people know, does not have a very good safety record with aviation. UAE, on the other hand, does have a good safety record. Here in the U.S., the FAA controls the industry with very stringent rules and policies, each must be adhered to by the airlines, whether they are foreign or domestic. The same goes for airports which was Russia. I don't believe the article specified if the winds were tailwinds, headwinds or crosswinds, but regardless, airports are to advise all planes of the wind speed and direction before landing and takeoff. Normally, crosswinds in excess of 30 kts. or 35 mph are considered dangerous and most airlines will not allow their pilots to land in heavy crosswinds.

Pilots receive up to date weather conditions while flying using a system know as METAR or Meteorological Terminal Aviation Routine which is a printed report that comes through the on-board computer. I also believe that two hours of circling is a long time. (JMO) Is it possible that they ran out of fuel? Yes, it is . Normally, pilots will carry what they need for the trip, plus 1-2 hours, in case of holding or diverting. The less fuel, the less weight equals better economic performance.

I guess that we will just have to wait and see what the investigation reveals. Tough to speculate with so little information. For the families of the victims, they have my sympathy. To die in a plane crash is not my preferred method of passing on.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely. The Captain has the final word and if he feels that it's unsafe to land, he will ask the tower for instructions to divert to the next closest airport that can handle his size of plane. Of course, it doesn't hurt for him to include the airline in his decision. I once flew from New York non stop to Dallas-Ft. Worth. We were alerted at take-off that DFW (Dallas-Ft. Worth) was experiencing light to moderate showers with heavier rain and winds expected in the next few hours. When we were about 80 miles from the airport, I received a weather update from METAR stating that DFW was reporting heavy rain, thunder and lightning with surface winds gusting to 45 kts. (50 mph). Our plane was all but maxed out on weight with 290 passengers, luggage, freight, fuel, etc., on-board. I conferred with my First Officer and we agreed to divert to Houston. I spoke with my supervisor and he told me to use my own discretion, which I did. What it meant was that passengers would have to re-connect back to Dallas. Some were not happy, but we were all safe.

The worse thing a pilot can do is to "think" that he can get his plane on the ground during a thunderstorm. Rule number one is to never fly into a cloud that contain lightning and to try to fly over or under them is also a high risk move. Crosswinds on the ground can and has caused many accidents. Here is a lucky man:

 
Last edited:
I just read the latest update on the investigation and someone from the investigation team had stated that the one wing struck the ground. If that is the case, (and we still haven't had the official released confirmation). it sounds like a loss of stability, which may have been caused by wind shear. I have seen planes that have had tail strikes on takeoff and have then landed safely, but a wing strike may have caused severe damage to the wing and that may have been enough to cause the plane to be slammed to the ground. From what I have seen in the pictures of the debris field, the plane did break apart in many small pieces.
 
I just read the latest news of this crash. The Russian version of the NTSB is reporting that either pilot error or mechanical issues brought the plane down. Only three things cause a plane to crash; weather, mechanical issues or pilot error. (I have excluded bombs and such for obvious reasons.) It appears that they have two out of the three covered. A plane that was to land in front of the fatal plane diverted. Even if wind is the main factor that brought the plane down, the agency may still put the blame on the Captain for making the decision to land after circling for hours before failing to land his aircraft on its first attempt. In these types of instances, it's always about the decision making of the flight crew, or in this case, the Captain. It's his choice whether to land, go around, circle or divert.

Here in the U.S., all airlines use what is referred to as "CRM" or Crew Resource Management. Previously, before CRM was put into place, only the Captain made all of the decisions and usually would not ask his F/O for any assistance or guidance with making decisions. After CRM was put into place, more and more Captains would ask their F/O for input before making a decision such as whether they thought it may or may not be a good idea to land in a situation as the Dubai crash. Actually, the F/O had the right to make his feelings known to the Captain without being asked. A lot of the old school Captains were very hesitant at first to give up all of the power, but eventually many of them capitulated after they had heard stories from the cockpit about how well CRM was working for many of the Captains and the valuable input they had received from their F/O. Many foreign airlines have also accepted using CRM, but some still do not. This plan was originally developed at NASA.
 
I remember on one of the episodes of Air Crash Investigation, the captain was obviously making bad decisions but the FO wouldn't say so as in their culture (Egypt??), you just don't question a 'superior'. They crashed.
 
oldman said:
I just read the latest news of this crash. The Russian version of the NTSB is reporting that either pilot error or mechanical issues brought the plane down. Only three things cause a plane to crash; weather, mechanical issues or pilot error. (I have excluded bombs and such for obvious reasons.) It appears that they have two out of the three covered. A plane that was to land in front of the fatal plane diverted. Even if wind is the main factor that brought the plane down, the agency may still put the blame on the Captain for making the decision to land after circling for hours before failing to land his aircraft on its first attempt. In these types of instances, it's always about the decision making of the flight crew, or in this case, the Captain. It's his choice whether to land, go around, circle or divert.

Here in the U.S., all airlines use what is referred to as "CRM" or Crew Resource Management. Previously, before CRM was put into place, only the Captain made all of the decisions and usually would not ask his F/O for any assistance or guidance with making decisions. After CRM was put into place, more and more Captains would ask their F/O for input before making a decision such as whether they thought it may or may not be a good idea to land in a situation as the Dubai crash. Actually, the F/O had the right to make his feelings known to the Captain without being asked. A lot of the old school Captains were very hesitant at first to give up all of the power, but eventually many of them capitulated after they had heard stories from the cockpit about how well CRM was working for many of the Captains and the valuable input they had received from their F/O. Many foreign airlines have also accepted using CRM, but some still do not. This plan was originally developed at NASA.
Click to expand...

That's stunning video of the plane landing in high winds. That should be a training video for every pilot world wide.

I'm still trying to figure is the Dubai airline from Dubai or it's just the name of a Russian airline.

My guess is a lot burgeoning or developing countries with a growing airline industry are still old school with the Captain/pilot making all the calls. I'm wondering if low fuel was a problem?
 
WhatInThe said:
That's stunning video of the plane landing in high winds. That should be a training video for every pilot world wide.

I'm still trying to figure is the Dubai airline from Dubai or it's just the name of a Russian airline.

My guess is a lot burgeoning or developing countries with a growing airline industry are still old school with the Captain/pilot making all the calls. I'm wondering if low fuel was a problem?
Click to expand...

The airline was FlyDubai and was flying from Dubai to Russia.
 
According to my latest manual of airports and airlines, FlyDubai is a government owned fairly new start-up, low-cost airline, which is operated by the Dubai government.
 
Ameriscot said:
I remember on one of the episodes of Air Crash Investigation, the captain was obviously making bad decisions but the FO wouldn't say so as in their culture (Egypt??), you just don't question a 'superior'. They crashed.
Click to expand...

Back in the day, no member of the flight crew even suggested to the Captain that he should do this or that. Once the Captain came on-board the aircraft, he was in charge from that moment on. Don't quote me on this, but if memory serves me right, CRM began after a United Airlines plane went down in Oregon while the Captain was troubleshooting a landing gear problem. The gear was down, but one of the three green lights did not come on. While he was circling the airport trying to confirm that the bulb was burned out and that the gear was down, he ran out of fuel. The ironic issue here is that on that particular plane when the gear is down, a peg would pop up on the right wing, which could be seen from a passenger's window. The F/O confirmed to the Captain that the peg was up after he went back into the cabin and looked out the window, meaning that all three gears were down and locked, but he (the Captain) insisted on making sure that the 30 cent bulb was burned out. And like I have already stated, while doing so, he ran out of fuel, crashing the plane and killing some of the passengers and crew. (I forget how many.) The whole thing was needless. I remember on several occasions this accident was used in training when we were talking about carrying extra fuel. I believe this Captain had like 50% more fuel than needed for the trip, which is good even by today's standards.
 
WhatInThe said:
That's the route but where is it based? What country is that airline actually from? Could be an indicator of training & mindset.
Click to expand...

UAE United Arab Emirates. We fly Emirates airlines frequently and it's the best I've ever been on. Also the only airline where my ears don't hurt or get blocked.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top