Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post Reply
fountainhall

Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by fountainhall »

Watching the film of that aircraft landing back at Moscow with its wings and tail in thick smoke and flames is surely every flyer's worst nightmare. One of the reasons given by the authorities is that the plane was hit by lightning resulting in an engine fire which could not be extinguished. I find that really hard to believe. I have been on at least three large aircraft hit by lightning. Apart from a loud bang, there was no other effect. All aircraft are provided with lightning protection for both the exterior and damaging power surges on sensitive interior equipment. In the USA no commercial aircraft has crashed due to lightning since 1967. But then this aircraft, the Russian made Sukhoi Superjet 100, has encountered several problems since it entered service in 2011.
“We took off and then lightning struck the plane,” the Komsomolskaya Pravda daily cited one surviving passenger, Pyotr Egorov, as saying.

“The plane turned back and there was a hard landing. We were so scared, we almost lost consciousness. The plane jumped down the landing strip like a grasshopper and then caught fire on the ground.”

The plane was flying to Murmansk, a Russian city in the Arctic circle, when the pilots reported an emergency onboard and turned back. Aeroflot, the carrier managing the flight, said that the reason may have been an engine fire.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... ng-13-dead
User avatar
Moses
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 10:41 pm
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Moses »

First reports of pilots: lightning was reason for failure of navigation and auto-pilot, then was hard landing, and fire as a result of hard landing...
Local private gay guides and companions
[*] in South East Asia http://siamroads.com
[*] in Thailand http://bkktour.info/
fountainhall

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by fountainhall »

For now we must obviously take the pilots' word for whatever they believe caused the failure. But -
It is estimated that on average, each airplane in the U.S. commercial fleet is struck lightly by lightning more than once each year. In fact, aircraft often trigger lightning when flying through a heavily charged region of a cloud . . .

Today, airplanes receive a rigorous set of lightning certification tests to verify the safety of their designs.

Although passengers and crew may see a flash and hear a loud noise if lightning strikes their plane, nothing serious should happen because of the careful lightning protection engineered into the aircraft and its sensitive components.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... n-lightni/

I wonder if the Russian built aircraft underwent such rigorous testing.
User avatar
Moses
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 10:41 pm
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Moses »

fountainhall wrote: Mon May 06, 2019 8:09 pm For now we must obviously take the pilots' word for whatever they believe caused the failure. But -
It is estimated that on average, each airplane in the U.S. commercial fleet is struck lightly by lightning more than once each year. In fact, aircraft often trigger lightning when flying through a heavily charged region of a cloud . . .

Today, airplanes receive a rigorous set of lightning certification tests to verify the safety of their designs.

Although passengers and crew may see a flash and hear a loud noise if lightning strikes their plane, nothing serious should happen because of the careful lightning protection engineered into the aircraft and its sensitive components.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... n-lightni/

I wonder if the Russian built aircraft underwent such rigorous testing.

08.12.63 Boeing 707-121
N709PA (17588/3) Pan American World Airways [year built: 1958]
Occupants: 8 crew + 73 passengers
Fatalities: 8 crew + 73 passengers
Accident Occured: Initial Approach
Location: Elkton, MD (USA)
Flight: Washington-Baltimore IAP, DC - Philadelphia IAP Flightnr.: 214
Total airframe flying hours: 14609; cycles

Comments: Inflight explosion of fuel tank due to lightning strike.


09.05.76 (14.35 GMT) Boeing 747-131F
5-8104 (19677/73) year built: 1970
Occupants: 10 crew + 7 passengers
Fatalities: 10 crew + 7 passengers
Freight loss
Accident Occured: Descent
Location: Madrid; nr (Spain)
Flight Tehran-Mehrabad IAP - Madrid-Torrejon AFB Flightnr.: 48

Comments: The Boeing was operated on a military logistic flight from Tehran to McGuire AFB via Madrid. The flight took off from Tehran at 08.20h GMT and climbed to a cruising altitude of FL330. After establishing contact with Madrid control, clearance was received to CPL VOR via Castejon. At 14.25h the flight was cleared to FL100. At 14.30 the crew advised Madrid that they were diverting to the elft because of thunderstorm activity, and at 14.32 Madrid cleared ULF48 to 5000ft and directed him to contact Madrid approach control. At 14.33 the crew contacted approach control and advised them that there was too much weather activity ahead and requested to be vectored around it. Last radio contact was when ULF48 acknowledged the 260deg heading instructions and informed Madrid that they were descending to 5000ft. The aircraft was later found to have crashed in farmland at 3000ft msl following left wing separation. It appeared that the aircraft had been struck by lightning, entering a forward part of the aircraft and exiting from a static discharger on the left wingtip. The lightning current's conductive path to the static discharger at the tip was through a bond strap along the trailing edge. Concentration of current at the riveted joint between this bond strap and a wing rib were sufficient conductive to cause the flash to reattach to this rivet and to leave the discharger. Fuel vapors in the no.1 fuel tank then ignited. The explosion caused the upper wing skin panel to separate, causing a drastic altering of the aeroelastic properties of the wing, and especially the outboard section of wing. The outer wing began to oscillate, developing loads which caused the high-frequency antenna and outer tip to separate. The whole wing failed a little later.

https://247wallst.com/transportation/20 ... g-strikes/
Local private gay guides and companions
[*] in South East Asia http://siamroads.com
[*] in Thailand http://bkktour.info/
User avatar
Captain Kirk
Posts: 707
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 2:48 am
Location: Pattaya
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Captain Kirk »

I guess we'll find out in time what the cause of the crash was. Watching the footage there appeared to be passengers disembarking down the chute with their baggage in hand. With people's lives in mortal danger some selfish bastards still think their bag is more important than the lives of others.
fountainhall

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by fountainhall »

Reference the flights in Moses post, these crashes were indeed said to be a result of lightning strikes. The latter was a military freighter belonging to the Iranian Airforce. The last commercial aircraft to be downed as a result of aligning strike is claimed to be the earlier Pan Am flight, although there was another LANSA flight in Peru in 1971.

The point is that a great deal was learned about lightning strikes as a result of those crashes. These advances were then incorporated into all passenger aircraft. It is surely of significance that there has been no downing of a western-built passenger aircraft as a result of a lightning strike for almost 50 years despite all commercial aircraft regularly being hit by lightning.
User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 21459
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 1306 times

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Gaybutton »

fountainhall wrote: Tue May 07, 2019 11:17 am there has been no downing of a western-built passenger aircraft as a result of a lightning strike for almost 50 years despite all commercial aircraft regularly being hit by lightning.
Until a full investigation as to the cause of the fire and crash is complete, we don't know what caused it. Maybe it was lightning and maybe it was some other cause.
fountainhall

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by fountainhall »

Gaybutton wrote: Tue May 07, 2019 11:35 amUntil a full investigation as to the cause of the fire and crash is complete, we don't know what caused it. Maybe it was lightning and maybe it was some other cause.
Agreed as stated earlier. If Russian aircraft are built to separate standards, lightning could perhaps have been the primary cause. But if so, then that surely opens questions about the reliability of that aircraft type. As quoted earlier, every passenger aircraft in the United States is hit by lightning at least once a year. Russia will have different weather conditions and may not encounter so many storms. But if lightning can so badly cripple one passenger aircraft, is it not surprising that there have been no similar incidents since 2011 when the aircraft entered service. Equally, if it was a result of lightning there is surely a more than reasonable chance that it will occur again with the same model of aircraft.
Conventionally, planes with an outer layer made from aluminum would conduct electricity well — and would allow for lightning to flow along the exterior of the plane and leave through another point.

Other planes, such as the Sukhoi aircraft, are made from composite materials, McNeal [aviation expert Wayne McNeal, president of aviation consulting company McNeal & Associates] explained.

While composite materials are not a good conductor of electricity, an industry standard is to combine the composite with a wire or metal mesh that would allow electricity to flow.

McNeal said the lightning strike could temporarily affect communications because it is a “staticky sort of thing” but that it shouldn’t have knocked out the systems entirely . . .

Russia’s main investigative body was also quoted by Russian news agencies on Monday as saying that investigators were looking into three main possibilities behind the cause of the disaster: inexperienced pilots, equipment failure and bad weather.
The cause could certainly have been a combination of all three. But two other issues. Russia can more or less do what it wishes in terms of the design of aircraft which fly exclusively within its borders. If the aircraft is exported, then by international law it must follow international guidelines. These are spelled out on the prune.org website.
Critical systems can not be significantly affected by the lightning transient, essential systems can be affected but must self recover (with no resetting of circuit breakers). The allowable recovery time depends on the system, but 10 seconds was a good rule of thumb.

So the short answer is that a lightning strike should NOT have resulted in widespread system failures.
This arcraft was sold to several international airlines. Two have phased out the jet because of maintenance problems and inability to obtain spare parts. Then there was a grounding.
A Mexican airline, Interjet, grounded Superjets in December 2016 and Russia’s aviation authority ordered inspection of all Superjets in the country in 2017 because of problems with rear stabilizers in the tail.
https://globalnews.ca/news/5244704/ligh ... ane-crash/

There was also one crash due to what appears to be dreadful pilot error -
On May 9, 2012, a demonstration flight hit Mount Salak in Indonesia, killing all 45 on board, after the pilot disregarded six alarms from the terrain warning system on the apparent assumption there was a problem with the terrain database, according to the report from Indonesia’s air safety regulator. The plane had unintentionally left a circling pattern after the crew was distracted by a prolonged conversation not related to flying the plane.
http://time.com/5584069/what-to-know-ru ... ane-crash/
Jun

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Jun »

I think it's slightly premature to decide the cause of this accident, but Russia does have a poor air safety record in the last decade or so.

Also, I'm not quite sure how the current aircraft fare, but the safety record of Soviet planes was poor. There are some very capable engineers in Russia, so my guess is that the newer planes will be better.
User avatar
Moses
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 10:41 pm
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Re: Russia Aeroflot Crash

Post by Moses »

2 Boings 737 "killed themself" with passenger on board within half year by reason of poor software programming, after it all 737 Max were landed for almost month...
all 787 were landed for one+ month because of self-ignition of batteries...

and all these "things" were with aircrafts manufactured by company with 70+ years of experiences... Sukhoy has only 10 years of experience yet and SJ-100 is their first civilian model...
Local private gay guides and companions
[*] in South East Asia http://siamroads.com
[*] in Thailand http://bkktour.info/
Post Reply