A few words about Russian jets

[tuppaware]

A few words about Russian jets – Plane Talking

The crash of a Polish government Tupolev TU-154 at Smolensk on Saturday, which killed the country’s president Lech Kaczynski and all of the other 95 people on board has brought out the usual cliches about Russian airliners.

That is, they are inherently unsafe and badly designed.

These claims are not entirely correct. The problem with Russian jets is much more about how badly they are flown than design limitations, and there has never been an airliner built that doesn’t come with a set of handling issues that are addressed by how they are flown by properly trained pilots.

An interesting blog entry by Ben Sandilands .
He does look at some causes behind the crash of the Russian Polish jet .

 

[harvyk]

I agree in principal with what has been said... However I think it's a little too early to state if the pilot simply "went down for a look" to use Ben words or something else was going wrong with the plane (eg altimeter fault, or nagivation fault)...

 

[tuppaware]

I agree. Why would an experienced crew ignore the control tower commands to divert unless something was wrong.

Reminds me of that USAF 737 crash in Croatia. Even though the airfield was closed due to bad weather the pilots continued the approach . 1996 Croatia USAF CT-43 crash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[markis10]

I agree. Why would an experienced crew ignore the control tower commands to divert unless something was wrong.

Pilots have often been placed under considerable pressure to press on regardless of the external advice received or any onboard failures, I would imagine the pressure to get a head of state to a location would be considerable, as an example there was a loss of a Navajo in 2005 near Mt Hotham where the pressure to get to the destination was a significant factor:

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/pdf/aair200503265_001.pdf

 

[harvyk]

Pilots have often been placed under considerable pressure to press on regardless of the external advice received or any onboard failures

I agree to a point. A pilot knows very well what could happen if they F up, especially something as critical as a landing. Very few pilots wake up in the morning and say "I feel like being involved in a plane crash today", thus even with a great degree of pressure a pilots survival instinct will usually kick in at some stage.

Just my 2c...

 

[NYCguy]

I agree. Why would an experienced crew ignore the control tower commands to divert unless something was wrong.

Reminds me of that USAF 737 crash in Croatia. Even though the airfield was closed due to bad weather the pilots continued the approach.

Military (and ex-Military) pilots can sometimes have the bigger-and-hairier syndrome when it comes to flying. For instance, if you were a Russian fighter pilot who could land his fighter-plane on the deck of an aircraft carrier in the middle of what the Russians call "the black blizzard", then landing a Tupolev in a fog probably doesn't present you with much of a problem. Until you hit the trees and then the ground, of course.

KAL had a problem with the military pilot syndrome for many years, until the company started sending pilots to an American carrier (I think it was Delta?) for CRM training.

 

[markis10]

Very few pilots wake up in the morning and say "I feel like being involved in a plane crash today", thus even with a great degree of pressure a pilots survival instinct will usually kick in at some stage.

Just my 2c...

And that survival instinct is often the survival of their job, surprisingly not their life, in many ways its just like long distance truck driving, sometimes the judgement is made that the means justifies the end.

I have on two occasions been the last person to speak to a pilot prior to their controlled impact with terrain, in both cased those pilots were working the dreaded bank run with very tight schedules, and in both cases they made mistakes because they did not take the safe option. I cannot imagine what it would be like to have been the pilot of that Tupolov with all that brass on board!

 

[straitman]

A bit OT but appropriate IMHO.

The pressure can be great but a smart passenger will/should understand when you explain.

I was once flying the Deputy Chief of the RAAF from Sydney to Canberra by helicopter when we came across a wall of thunderstorms near Lake George. On arrival in Canberra the DCAF was to get straight on a VIP jet with the Chief of the RAAF for a flight to Adelaide.

We elected to land near Lake George and have a coffee whilst the storms went by. Initially he was quite unhappy about the delay but then happily sat and had coffee with us once we explained what lightning can do to helicopter rotor blades. We were about an hour late at Canberra in the end but he thanked us for making the right decision. He was on board and the VIP jet was taxying before we were shut down.

 

[straitman]

Having just read Ben's article I have to say I agree that for the most part I have to agree that the Russian aircraft are generally well built but that maintenance and support can be an issue as can pilot training and recency.

 

[UP4014]

Military (and ex-Military) pilots can sometimes have the bigger-and-hairier syndrome when it comes to flying. For instance, if you were a Russian fighter pilot who could land his fighter-plane on the deck of an aircraft carrier in the middle of what the Russians call "the black blizzard", then landing a Tupolev in a fog probably doesn't present you with much of a problem. Until you hit the trees and then the ground, of course.

KAL had a problem with the military pilot syndrome for many years, until the company started sending pilots to an American carrier (I think it was Delta?) for CRM training.

Yes, more obvious with the old easter block airlines, we're going to land this plan or kill everyone trying.

 

[UP4014]

I cannot imagine what it would be like to have been the pilot of that Tupolov with all that brass on board!

There would certainly have been pressure on the pilots, maybe even 4 of them on board and in the coughpit, nobody likes to tell the "bosses" we need to divert. But, if the control tower is telling you something you would be foolish to ignore it and carry on your approach unless there was a problem with the plane.

When I'm a passenger, I'm always pleased when they divert or delay because of weather, flying should be a low risk exercise.

 

[markis10]

Mind you the tower (or more likely the radar approach controller) can tell the aircraft whatever they want but at all times the PIC has the responsibility for the safety of their flight, aircraft can and very occasionally do proceed without clearance at their own risk, for reasons only known to them. They do however create a lot of paperwork when they do things like that, or get the interest of an armed FA18 as was the case with the incursion into a restricted zone by a GA aircraft when Bush was in Sydney a few years ago.