The main causes of aircraft crashes. Causes of plane crashes
In recent days, news feeds are literally full of news about tragic incidents in the American army. Of course, the Stars and Stripes have had emergencies before, as elsewhere, they happen regularly. But so many at once!
Pilot killed in US Navy F-18 aerobatic team crash in Tennessee On the same day, an F-16 of the Thunderbirds aerobatic team crashed in Colorado: the pilot survived, ejecting in time.
At the same time, information came that three servicemen were killed and six more were missing in the area of the Owl Creek training ground in Texas. The incident occurred due to the fall of an army truck into the river.
The American military has no luck outside the country either. So, in Estonia, where the large-scale exercises Baltops started the day before, the first emergency occurred even before the start of the maneuvers: one of the three American B-52s did not fly to Tallinn due to a breakdown. Fortunately, there were no casualties here.
Colossus with feet of clay
The US Army positions itself as the strongest, most powerful and invincible. According to the Global Firepower Index (Global Index of Military Power) portal, which regularly analyzes the state of military power of 126 countries of the world, the United States really ranks first in the ranking of the most militarily powerful states (Russia is in second place, China is in third) . As a rule, GFI experts evaluate the state of the armed forces, in accordance with the total population, the economic state of states, and also compare specific indicators of the technical equipment of the army and navy.
Meanwhile, this is not the first time that signals have appeared that testify to the discrepancy between these rating studies and the real situation. At the "colossus" of the American army, "clay feet" are increasingly exposed. For example, recent congressional hearings addressed the alarming situation in military aviation and expressed concern about the growing number of aircraft accidents.
The head of the Armed Services Committee, Congressman Mark Thornbury, was blunt: in his opinion, the troops are not ready to fully implement the US military strategy. In 2016 alone, the Marine Corps aviation recorded 3.96 accidents for every 100,000 flight hours, while earlier the average recorded over the past decade did not exceed 2.15. The number of various incidents in the aviation of the ground forces has also increased significantly.
At the same time, these incidents were far from always associated only with pilot errors. The US military notes that in a number of cases, problems arose due to poor training of equipment, an insufficient level of maintenance, and a lack of repairs and upgrades in the required amount. And this is in aviation, and what can we say about the ground forces!
James Hasik, a researcher at the Brent Scowcroft Center for International Security, in a recent article for the National Interest magazine, pointed out that due to a shortage of funds, the US army has no real plan to replace Abrams tanks, Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and Paladin self-propelled gun mounts before 2030. The analyst quoted in his publication the words of General David Bassett, who is in charge of purchasing ground weapons for the army: "years ago we were limited by technology, today we are limited by lack of money."
Money down the drain
The generals are generally not particularly diplomatic, not versed in the intricacies of politics, they tend to "cut off the shoulder." Thus, speaking not so long ago before the House of Representatives committee as part of the discussion of the new defense budget for 2017, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, frankly stated that in the coming years, they will not be able to withstand the threats that the country may have to deal with. all branches of the armed forces.
Problems with combat readiness (and the general had in mind exactly them) he explained by years of "unstable financial situation." In particular, according to Dunford, the Navy and Marine Corps will not be ready to operate at the required level until 2020, the Air Force - until 2028.
However, analysts are convinced that the state of combat readiness, and especially the training of personnel, is far from always associated only with the "infusion" of money, which American military leaders traditionally demand. The defense budget of the United States already exceeds the indicators of other continents, reaching exorbitant amounts.
At the same time, as The Economist notes, countries such as Russia and China, if not superior to the United States in defense investments, then certainly win in terms of the efficiency of these expenditures. In the Russian and Chinese armies, the magazine draws attention, various weapons are being improved, and a special emphasis is placed on the training of personnel.
And yet the US military keeps repeating that the problems in their army are caused precisely by budget cuts. For example, retired Major General Robert Scales recently said that the US Army has been “beaten” for the third time since the middle of the 20th century. According to the general, cuts in military spending have led to a sharp decline in field exercises, untimely renewal of military equipment, and a decrease in combat capability. All this has a detrimental effect on the morale of the military, in connection with which Robert Scales called the leadership in Washington “ungrateful, anti-historical and strategically deaf.”
An army of suicides and rapists?
Indeed, there are many facts that testify to the other side of the problems in the state of the American army. We are talking about poor training of personnel, an extremely low level of moral readiness, indiscipline, and the dominance of crime.
Only in recent years, shooting incidents have been recorded at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas (two soldiers died here), at Little Rock Air Force Base in Arkansas (two wounded), at Fort Lee Base in Virginia (died military woman).
Three soldiers were killed and two were wounded in a firefight with each other at Fort Hood, Texas (shooter committed suicide). Two National Guardsmen were wounded in a "battle" at Millington Base in Tennessee. The fire even opened in the US Navy compound in Washington, where an officer dismissed from service for inappropriate behavior killed 12 and injured 8 people. The attacker was later shot dead by the police.
Human rights activists from Human Rights Watch recently presented a shocking report that reveals another secret side of the life of the US military, which affects the morale of the army. It turns out that in recent years, thousands of servicemen have been sexually abused.
Employees of Human Rights Watch in their report emphasized that the Pentagon is aware of the problem of violence, and US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter even urges his subordinates to "boldly report all such incidents that undermine the foundations of the American army." However, as noted by human rights activists, those who dared to report such incidents to the command were hastily dismissed under various pretexts.
Is it possible to embrace the immensity?
However, US leader Barack Obama considers all talk of the country's decline and the weakness of its armed forces "political chatter." This is how he summed up the current rhetoric that "our enemies are getting stronger and America is getting weaker." According to the head of the United States, such statements are "the work of the Republicans who claim the presidency, who say that the United States is losing its position in the world, while its opponents are strengthening."
In his last State of the Union address to the US Congress, Obama once again declared - "The United States is the most powerful power on Earth." As for the state of the country's army, then, according to the American leader, "the United States spends more on its armed forces than the next eight powers combined." "No country attacks us or our allies because it knows it will be thrown into ruins," Barack Obama stressed in his message.
But be that as it may, the opinion of experts on the situation with the country's military power is far from being so enthusiastic. Assessing Obama's performance as the supreme commander in chief, many of them tend to give a predominantly negative assessment. In particular, according to James Carafano, a leading expert at the Heritage Foundation research center (a strategic institute engaged in the study of international politics), in recent years, the United States has not only experienced a decline in the number of personnel of the armed forces, but also a drop in combat effectiveness compared to that which was present in as of September 11, 2001.
According to an expert who cites the US military power index calculated by the Heritage Foundation, the ability of the US army to dominate at least two fronts of hostilities is currently assessed as "extremely weak."
It is the insufficient attention of the country's leadership to the issues of the real development of the army, the improvement of its technical component and, especially, the increase in the level of training of personnel, according to analysts, that ultimately leads to a sharp jump in the number of incidents and incidents.
According to experts, including the already mentioned James Carafano and retired General Robert Scales, the situation is also affected by the large-scale involvement of the US military in activities outside the country, including constant participation in hostilities. Attempts to "embrace the immensity" lead to the fact that the soap bubble called "US Army" is increasingly deafeningly bursting, leading to unreasonable casualties and losses...
Dmitry Sergeev
Pray that this will never happen to you, your loved ones, and to all people in general.
Air crash in Boston
October, 1961 The plane flying to Philadelphia. Immediately after lifting into the air, it crashed into Boston Bay. Reason: a flock of starlings. There were so many birds that they hit three of the four engines. And they died. And with them - 52 passengers of the airliner. Although rescuers quickly arrived at the crash site, almost no one was found alive.
Source: youtube.com
Another terrible plane crash in Boston
The plane barely gained a height of 400 meters, as it immediately collapsed. Everyone died, including the employee of the hangar, on which the plane fell. Reason: overweight. Later, during the investigation, it turned out that the weight of each of the passengers exceeded the allowable norm by 5 kilos.
Source: wikipedia.org
Plane crash in Kuibyshev
November, 1987. An Aeroflot airliner flew from Magnitogorsk to Grozny via Kuibyshev. Before landing in Kuibyshev, the senior pilot decided to show off his skills to the young and inexperienced crew. He said, they say, he can land this flying canned food without visibility, just on instruments. Argued with them.
As a result, I covered all the windows with special metal curtains, and let's sit down. Landing approached at an unacceptably high speed. As a result, the chassis could not stand it and gave way. The liner broke into two parts. A fire started. 70 people died.
Source: wikipedia.org
Once upon a time in Europe
January, 1997. Flight from Puerto Plata to Frankfurt am Main. Before takeoff, the plane was thoroughly checked, everything is OK. They took to the skies, and immediately the bugs began:
- autopilot failed;
- the instruments on the commander's panel and on the co-pilot's panel showed completely different data.
The crew tried to straighten the brains of the plane and manually control it. Failed. Outcome: collapsed to the ground, 190 deaths. In the course of the study, the reason was established - wasps: insects made a nest for themselves in a device for measuring flight speed and dynamic pressure.
Plane crash in Isparta
Isparta is a city in western Turkey. October, 1977. Flight from Istanbul to Antalya. The chief pilot asked the co-pilot to control the situation while he went into the cabin for a minute. The co-pilot agreed. As soon as the captain got out of the cockpit, the co-pilot saw the landing strip in front of him. I contacted the dispatchers. They forbade the plane to land and generally said that there was no landing strip there.
The Turkish co-pilot freaked out, they say, I see with my own eyes what is, and you are telling me here. And he began to land the plane.
The captain was shocked when he returned: the co-pilot was trying to land the plane on the highway in Isparta, 220 km from Antalya. He immediately tried to correct the situation by jerking the steering wheel towards himself. The plane trembled, caught on a hillock, and disintegrated. Nobody survived.
Plane crash in the Congo
There are small planes serving passenger “transportation” within the country. Most of these are in the USA and, oddly enough, in Africa. One of the strangest plane crashes happened in Africa. Namely: the year 2011, the plane, the flight, everything is flying quietly and peacefully. Nobody touches anyone. And then a crocodile crawls out of the luggage.
The violent reaction of the passengers led to the plane crash: everyone rushed to the cockpit → the plane pecked nose first. Only one person survived, and that same crocodile.
Verdict: in vain at African airports they do not check luggage before loading it on board.
Do not worry. If you have a trip ahead - feel free to choose it. Plane crashes are extremely rare, mainly due to a fatal combination of different circumstances. What are the reasons for the plane to crash?
Many people are afraid to fly due to the fact that, supposedly, there is no chance of surviving in a plane crash. This is nothing more than a myth. The probability of staying alive is approximately 95%. Thus, even if, by incredible chance, your plane has an accident, you will have a good chance of survival. Now that we have calmed down a bit, we can move on to the causes of plane crashes.
Most of the air crashes occur in a fairly short time interval. These are the first 3 minutes of the flight and the last 8. In aviation parlance, this concept is known as Plus Three/Minus Eight. 80% of all aviation accidents happen in those 11 minutes. The reason may be any of the following factors, or a combination of them.
Becomes the cause of 22% of air crashes. Despite the most thorough technical inspections before each flight, there is always a minimal probability of failure of any of the components of the most complex unit. To understand how tiny this probability is, imagine the work of flight attendants. They have been making daily flights for many years, but their profession is not even close to being on the top of the most dangerous.
A technical malfunction may be the result of a bird strike. But, again, this probability is extremely small. No wonder the classic example of such an accident is still considered to be the 1962 hit of a swan in the engine of a United Airlines aircraft.
2. Pilot error
Humans tend to make mistakes. That is why the participation of the pilot in the management of modern aircraft, thanks to technology, is minimized. Despite this, the notorious "human factor" causes 50% of aircraft accidents. It can be both excessive self-confidence, and a sudden heart attack. 
3. Weather conditions
Heavy wind, fog, snow are the cause of 12% of air crashes. Despite the most accurate algorithms, weather forecasts sometimes turn out to be erroneous. In most cases, the maximum that threatens passengers is of varying degrees, however, in rare cases, the consequences can be more severe.
4. Intentional acts
In 9% of cases, planes crash, like in detective thrillers. This includes terrorist attacks, hijacking attempts, planted explosive devices.
5. Other reasons
7% of air crashes happen due to other factors. These are dispatch service errors, aircraft collisions, navigational errors, insufficient calculation of the fuel supply ...
Now you know why planes crash, as well as the fact that this happens quite rarely. So fly to your health.
Old planes are to blame
The release date of the aircraft becomes the subject of close attention of both the layman and the authorities after each accident. Most often, the age of the liner is estimated at several decades, and this gives rise to the seemingly obvious conclusion: “They lifted a wreck into the sky - it fell apart.” The logic is clear: corrupt managers bring junk from the Arizona dumps, drive them along the routes in the tail and in the mane until they collapse. The authorities, in turn, get a reason to deal with old aircraft, most often of a particular brand. So, after the accident in Petrozavodsk on September 19 of this year, Dmitry Medvedev raised the issue of decommissioning all Tu-134 aircraft, and after the Yaroslavl tragedy, he questioned the flight fate of all Yak-42s.
How widespread is the myth?
Extremely.
What is really
Fedor Borisov, Senior Advisor, EPPA Russia:
The first reaction after any aircraft accident is usually very painful, sharp, but it, as a rule, has nothing to do with the nature of the event. Remember the old army expression: now I will figure it out properly and punish anyone? So, after a plane crash, everything is usually the other way around - they punish anyone, and only then they figure it out. And this is very bad, because it takes us away from the search for a real problem.
The first false trail, which is usually followed, is precisely old aircraft. It is false, because there are no old planes. There is no such definition in nature. For example, not so long ago I flew in Holland on an aircraft designed in 1931 and manufactured in 1943. Yes, of course, it was repaired many times, a lot of everything inside was changed, but I flew wonderfully on it, and it is not old. An aircraft manufactured both 50 and 70 years ago is safe in itself if it meets the flight safety requirements. If you have all the components certified, if you monitor its condition, then the problem of the old aircraft is not safety, but only its economic efficiency: how profitable it is for the airline to operate it.
Vasily Savinov, partner of Strategic Aviation Solutions Int. (SASI):
I would give an example for a simple layman. We have a lot of three-year-old cars on the street imported from abroad. And if you look at absolute statistics, then the number of accidents in Russia is strikingly higher than in the same Western Europe. But this is not because we have three-year-old cars, but they have new ones - they rode them and gave them to us so that we would crash on them. This is more from the culture of driving, the condition of the roads.
The situation is similar in aviation. If an imported aircraft is 10, 15, 20 years old, this does not indicate that it is in poor condition. A simple example. China buys exclusively new aircraft. Five years later, they begin to get rid of these cars, but no one takes them. Because a fresh car in five years of operation by the Chinese can come to such a state that it is unprofitable to continue to operate it: you will spend more on repairs than you will earn. At the same time, we are now taking a car of the 85th year of manufacture for our project in one of the CIS countries. It is in excellent condition, because it was operated by TNT, and they have one minute of departure delay already considered a delay, according to which the analysis is carried out. Accordingly, one can imagine the state of this machine - it works better than the Kalashnikov assault rifle. Here's the difference between a 5 year old car and a 25 year old car. It all depends on the hands that supported her.
Alexey, pilot of one of the leading Russian airlines:
From the pilot's point of view, there is absolutely no difference how old the aircraft is - whether it's a year, ten, or twenty. In any case, the pilot himself makes the final decision whether to fly or not. Because he, just like the passengers, wants to return home to his wife and children, and in no case will he fly with some kind of serious malfunction.
There is, let's say, a list of malfunctions officially authorized by the manufacturer, with which a flight is possible. But if the commander does not feel confident that he will fly with this malfunction, he will not fly. For example, autopilot. Imagine: you are driving a car, your cruise control has failed. This is problem? In general, no. But from the pilot's point of view, if the flight is long, far, and manual piloting is an additional burden on the crew, the commander can simply refuse.
Yes, in older aircraft, such malfunctions happen more often, but the decision always remains with the pilot.
Conclusion
Fedor Borisov:
We must proceed from the fact that aircraft are divided not into Western and non-Western, good and bad, old and new, but into ready-to-fly and not ready. Everything else is a matter of airline economics only.
Conformity of myth to reality
Does not match.
Myth 2
Bad pilots are to blame
Investigations of almost every accident find among the causes and the human factor. At best, this is crew fatigue from stress, at worst, alcohol, as was the case with the plane crash in Perm in September 2008. Passengers' confidence in the person at the helm has been declining lately. Well-known arguments: the pilot training system is bad, new good pilots are not taught, and the old good ones all go to foreign companies, and the worst ones remain on regional airlines.
How widespread is the myth?
What is really
Competition and willingness to learn
Pavel, pilot-instructor:
Only a citizen of Russia can be a flight crew member in a Russian airline. This position has remained since the times of the USSR, and its preservation was once lobbied by the Russian trade union of pilots. But there are more and more planes in the country, and they do not have time to train pilots. There was a time, about ten years, when people simply did not go into aviation, and at the same time trained pilots went, say, into business. There are a lot of them. Now there are enough young people, but they also come out very green, none, they need to be taught a lot.
And many graduates of institutes come to airlines without the desire for self-training. At the same time, salaries are huge, disproportionately large. Even a young pilot now gets a lot, and at the same time he does not have to fight for his place. The shortage of personnel is such that in any case, if they are expelled from one company, they will be taken to another.
On the one hand, this is good, because it’s pointless to put pressure on the pilot to take off with some kind of malfunction, because you won’t scare him by dismissal - how to dismiss a person if your “required” list is hanging, and there are pilots, pilots, pilots. And you're going to fire the person you're running around looking for?
On the other hand, this state of affairs of the pilots relaxes. If Russian airlines were allowed to recruit foreign pilots, as is done in many countries of the world, this would immediately remove many problems, including security. In addition, it would be easier to master a new generation of aircraft.
The level of education
Pavel, pilot-instructor:
Training should be adequate and modern. Well, why does a person who is graduating from a school need to know the energy of the Tu-154 B2, of which there are already a few left? Why memorize these figures if he goes to the Boeing 747?
People over sixty sit in institutes. And not because they are such good teachers, but because they have nowhere to go. And there are no young teachers.
There are a lot of "masters of the old school" among the pilots. If you look closely, you can see that Boeings of some of our major airlines take off like Tupolev, slowly, slowly. Because the commander is sitting there, who says: “It was like that on the Tu-154, which means that we will also take off here, and that’s it.” Because he is over fifty, why should he follow books, technology? And on the right, a young co-pilot is sitting and will not contradict him. Our people don't know how to listen. If you politely said to someone: “I would pay attention to this problem,” they will look at you and say: “So, what kind of young upstart is this?
Sit down and be quiet."
If you start teaching such a “master” something new, he will send you, because, well, he is a master. People negatively perceive the message that someone might know something better than them. Although this is the norm. And a true master is able to perceive the new. We do not have this culture.
About alcohol
Vasily Savinov:
Recall the disaster in Perm. As stated in the conclusion of the IAC, the commander of the aircraft was "not in the form of a flight", and the qualifications of the co-pilot did not allow him to pilot the aircraft. As a result, when the commander, being "not in the form of a flight", tried to take control of the aircraft, he simply turned it over, put it in a dive and stuck into the ground.
But I can say that now it is a relative rarity. In comparison with Soviet times, drunkenness at the helm has clearly declined. Because in the Soviet years, alcohol control on board was much less.
In addition, alcohol is, perhaps, the only thing for which today you can fly out of work on the move. At least in a responsible company, alcohol is the door to the exit. And the market is tight. Everyone knows everyone. Therefore, as soon as a person with such a diagnosis leaves the company, it is like a wolf ticket for life.
About maybe
Fedor Borisov:
Almost every catastrophe that has taken place in Russia in recent years is a human factor, and almost every one is where it was said mentally or aloud "maybe we'll slip through."
But this is not a problem for aviation, but for the country as a whole, which lives by the principle “I want the law to be respected, but I am always ready to make an exception for myself.” So do some pilots: I have a rule, I know it's dangerous, but I'll still fly. Not because a bad manager is standing over me, who will deprive me of something, but simply because I have to return home, because my wife is at home. And I am a master, and since I am a master, it means that I will cope with this task, because I have already taken off ten times in this situation, and everything is fine. And for the eleventh time, a small additional factor was added that no one expected - and that's it.
This maybe is sitting in a person’s head, and you won’t do anything with this avos until his co-pilot says to this person: “Sorry, father-commander, I’m going to the authorities now and report that I won’t fly with you because you want to kill me and you want to kill these beautiful people behind our backs. And what you're doing is unacceptable." And when he is not afraid to hear in response, “Oh, you young informer,” when he is not alone, but when there are two, ten, fifty of them, then it will become a system.
Although positive changes have begun, and this has happened, in my opinion, when airlines that either fly to the West or enter into global alliances simply realized that changing this culture is in line with their goals. The same Aeroflot began to move in this direction not yesterday, but when it was going to join SkyTeam as planned.
Conclusion
Vasily Savinov:
The cause of catastrophes by seventy-eight percent is one way or another the human factor. People who relied on chance. It is this, and not old aircraft and individual spare parts, that is the main and main reason that needs to be eliminated.
Moreover, the human factor is not necessarily the crew. This is a long chain. For example, the same egregious case with Perm. The commander was, to put it mildly, out of shape. But, besides this, there were violations in the training of pilots: after training, they flew their old aircraft for some time, and did not immediately transfer to new ones. And lost a new flying skill. That is, people were not very ready to fly on this plane. Secondly, the plane was released with defects, which, in principle, were non-flying: it had different engine thrust. All this in the aggregate is the human factor, and not just “Captain
got drunk and killed everyone.
Conformity of myth to reality
Compliant to a large extent.
Myth 3
Old airports are to blame
Infrastructure problems are brought to mind when accidents occur at provincial airports. Experts agree: only Moscow airports are technically equipped at the modern level, plus
three or four across the country. When, for example, a plane crashed in Petrozavodsk, it turned out that there was no modern landing system at the local airport. In turn, most of the old Soviet and Russian aircraft are not equipped with modern ground proximity warning systems. And bad runways at the same time do not allow to receive new planes.
How widespread is the myth?
What is really
Vasily Savinov:
Bad runways are more of a problem for airlines, which are forced to invest more in chassis repairs and change tires more often. But disasters do not happen from this. It's just that the airline makes a decision: we fly to this airport, but we don't fly to this one. For example, Aeroflot does not fly to Norilsk. Although, believe me, this flight is very cost-effective. But at some point, the airline decided not to fly: the chassis would be more expensive. There is a bad strip, it is known for its very large hunchback and weakness. The airport does nothing with it, and carriers vote with their feet. Here they voted.
Lighting and navigation equipment is also not the most important thing. I can give an example. I was one of the top managers of the Karaganda airport for about a year and a half. This is a category B airport. There are much better equipped airports in Kazakhstan - Alma-Ata, Astana. There and equipment, and radar - everything is there. But the weather there is always worse. Therefore, when the weather is bad, all super-class planes go to land in Karaganda, where the equipment is worse, but the weather conditions are better.
Conclusion
Alexey, pilot:
This issue needs to be looked at comprehensively. Of course, it's good to have good infrastructure, it's good to have a third lane. But this does not affect flight safety.
Conformity of myth to reality
Does not match.
Myth 4
It's all Levitin's fault
The question of the resignation of Igor Levitin from the post of Minister of Transport is raised after each plane crash. As well as the question of the competence of all officials who manage aviation - they didn’t build it, they overlooked it, they didn’t control it. Since civil aviation does not exist in a vacuum, and in our country everything is permeated with corruption, it also explains the fact that our planes crash: because someone paid and delivered the wrong part. And how now to determine how much personal responsibility in air crashes, and how much - collective?
How widespread is the myth?
What is really
Vasily Savinov:
The current state of aviation is not one man's problem. If you change the chief traffic cop in Moscow, will the cars stop beating? Of course not. Maybe something will change, maybe somewhere there, in a separate place, the roads will become a little better. But in general, the situation will not change dramatically. Now the same Levitin in the Ministry of Transport does not have a team, there is no concept that would show what Russian aviation should be like in five years, in ten years, that is, a clear understanding of where we are going, what we need to change.
Yes, there are plans to build up the country with new runways. But this is not a concept. This is a story about how regional budgets receive a lot of money, and then they master it. But it has nothing to do with security.
Fedor Borisov:
Security is made up of three components. The first is the regulatory documents that regulate safety. And in principle, in Russia, regulatory documents are normal. Something can be corrected, probably, but they do not contain anything that would program the murder of their own citizens.
The second is effective control. That is, this is the same official who will come and check the execution of this document. And with this we have some difficulty. Because there is a basic law: people commit violations when they are allowed to commit violations. For example, when it was said that small companies should leave the market because they are not safe, it was in fact the state that signed its insolvency as a market regulator. Because it raises its hands and says: “Guys, we can’t control, because there seems to be corruption, and therefore they break the law.” But it's a little funny. Because, guys, you yourself regulate this market. And now you're saying, "We're going to shut them down because we can't handle the regulation." Or, translating into Russian: “We take bribes, and therefore we will close them, because we cannot not take bribes, sorry.”
And the third is the culture of airline management. We are making progress with this, but the Federal Air Transport Agency and the Ministry of Transport have nothing to do with this at all. Progress is made at the expense of big companies, and they are led to this by global alliances, where they need to join in order to win in world markets.
Vasily Savinov:
In addition to flight safety, the aviation authorities have another important task - to help the airlines of their country develop the market, help people develop their business. But they cannot do it. Because in their understanding, business is kickbacks. Let's say you allowed airline "A" to fly to Antalya, but you did not allow airline "B", and the grateful airline "A" thanked you very much. This is what they are great at doing. But what can be done to make Russian airlines feel good, so that they can develop, so that they can compete on equal terms with foreign carriers and expand their market share - few of the aviation authorities know this. But it should be part of national policy.
Conclusion
Fedor Borisov:
Planes don't crash because of Levitin. He is just one of the elements of the overall chain. What is Levitin's fault as a minister is that when you fly on planes, you pay twice as much. If you are flying around Europe, you are probably wondering why a ticket from Munich to Rome costs half as much as a ticket from Moscow to Krasnodar? The first thought that comes to your mind is the bastards in the airlines. But a study of all the costs of airlines, the structure of the market, how it is formed, will convince you that, of course, airlines also take an active part in this system, but the aviation authorities make a significant contribution. It is they who provide small monopolies in various aviation directions, where people scoop up all transportation for themselves and dictate prices.
WITHcorrespondence of myth to reality
Partially complies.
Myth 5
It's all the fault of the "bastards"
Smaller airlines bear the brunt of almost every accident. After Petrozavodsk and Yaroslavl, on behalf of the president, the Federal Air Transport Agency and the Ministry of Transport are preparing documents that will force out from the market those air carriers that do not have ten, and a year later - twenty aircraft, from the market as early as next year.
How widespread is the myth?
What is really
On the purchase of new aircraft
Vasily Savinov:
The decision to buy new aircraft should not be imposed from above, it should be the decision of the airline itself. You can't force me to buy a McLaren - my Saab is enough for me, it suits my budget, my wishes and driving style. And if they say to me: “By the decree of the president, you must sell everything and buy a McLaren for a million,” I say: “Guys, I’m sorry, I can’t,
physically I can't."
The biggest problem for most of our regional airlines (except UTair) is that they are companies with two, three or four small aircraft. It is difficult for them even to maintain these aircraft in proper condition. Therefore, when they are told: tomorrow you have to buy a new Boeing, which costs 120 million (or even 10 million), where will they get it from? No bank will give them a loan: they have nothing to pledge.
And even if they find money for the plane, they need to spend half a million dollars on the retraining of one crew.
About regional transportation
Vasily Savinov:
Small airlines are easy to kill, in five minutes - just take and revoke the certificate or not renew the certificate of airworthiness for the aircraft. Yes, from the point of view of aviation authorities, a woman with a cart is easier for a mare. But then what will all the locals fly in the taiga?
Fedor Borisov:
There are some places where there is no railway communication in principle. Or, as in Baikal, there are points to which the plane will fly in two hours, and by train it takes six days. And at the same time, an airline flies there, which has five An-24s in its fleet, and their total cost is 2–3 million dollars, no more. Accordingly, in order to buy one foreign car, they need to sell all their own and something else.
Therefore, if we ban the An-24 and Yak-42, this will have the most unpleasant consequences. In reality, this will be the collapse of the regionals. Because there is no one to replace them. Large companies, firstly, will not come to these routes, because they do not have enough planes and pilots even for profitable flights - why should they divert resources to almost planned unprofitable ones? The same "Aeroflot" will go for it only in one case - if they call him from the place where other planes were banned, and they say: it is necessary to plug the hole.
But what does it mean to "plug the hole"? Regional transportation is likely to have to be subsidized. So, from somewhere you have to get a huge amount of money. And we seem to be facing a new crisis, we are talking about the need to slaughter the budget in all positions. But they will still get the money, because people in villages or towns will crawl out with posters to the square and say: we have been cut off from the mainland.
Then Savelyev (the head of Aeroflot. - "RR") will be called, asked: "Can you?" And then the second stage. They will find money for subsidies for him, and he will say: “But I don’t have planes that can fly there. I have a Superjet, but it will not land there, because only the An-24 turboprop can land there.” Where can we get the An-24? And already nowhere - everything, they are mothballed, and the airlines are disbanded.
In addition to the option of subsidies, there is an option to launch a monopolist and give him the opportunity to set prices himself. What will happen, I will explain with an example. Murmansk and Apatity are two neighboring airports. Four airlines fly to Murmansk - I don't know how it is now, but last year the cheapest one-way ticket cost 3,000 rubles. Moscow - Apatity - one carrier, Nordavia. And the ticket there is 20 thousand one way. Moreover, Apatity is 100 kilometers closer to Moscow.
Therefore, if small airlines are liquidated, we will have three things. Some of the routes will definitely be closed. Others will fly less often - not every day, but once or twice a week. Well, and the third is, of course, the growth of tariffs. Because small regional airlines make a huge contribution to the price environment, these "flyers" fly quite well and create competition.
Conclusion
Fedor Borisov:
Yes, of course, we are talking about the fact that large airlines have a better quality of service, security control, perhaps more reliable. But the problem with the quality of care is not treated by amputation, like an abscess on the leg.
Here we want to integrate into the world economy, and here in Moscow every second person speaks English, because the city lives by business, here you need to know English. And in the villages, no one speaks English, because there is a problem with teachers. So let's cut out their tongues there and remove this problem - they will have a good reason not to speak English. The second solution is to send teachers there. My point is that we should educate these small regional airlines. Yes, it's hard, like taking a country boy and turning him into a university graduate. This is more difficult than taking a Muscovite who studied at a special school, but it still needs to be done.
Conformity of myth to reality
Does not match.
Paradoxically for a program with a similar name, it was she who helped me mentally prepare for the first flight and even more: thanks to her, I I look at the sky with loving eyes- after all, now I notice not only the noise of liners flying over the city, but also their beauty! After 20 years, I was finally able to appreciate all the charm of life near the airport: after all, every day I can admire hundreds of beautiful planes taking off 🛫 and landing 🛬!
"Air Crash Investigation"- an educational documentary series produced by Canada, which can be viewed on the channel national geographic. Each of his episodes tells the story of an exceptional aviation accident - whether it's a terrible crash or a miraculous plane rescue. Filmed for 16 seasons and more than a hundred episodes!
These are stories about real events.
They are based on official reports and eyewitness accounts.
✈ O breaking moment:"Investigations" introduces us to aviation: the structure of the aircraft, the basics of aerodynamics, professional vocabulary. With their help, we learn that, contrary to popular belief, aircraft are lifted into the air not by magic, but by lift! What if, at the most crucial moment of the flight, the pilots are discussing whiskey, tango or foxtrot, this does not mean at all that they are tipsy! And that without spoilers on the plane in any way! Don't be afraid - you can do it all without being technically savvy! Key points are explained in a more than accessible way with visual illustrations:
Hydraulics are the lifeblood of an aircraft. It allows you to apply force to the controls: retract / extend the landing gear, control the flaps. If not, you can just throw the steering wheel out the window.
We are also introduced to the work of the aircraft crew, dispatchers and experts. The program includes the best representatives of these responsible professions, real fans of their work, who infect with their love for aviation.
✈ P helots are the central characters of the story. And sometimes they really heroes! Those who do not panic in a critical situation and do not give up to the last - remembering that the lives of hundreds of passengers are in their hands; those who remember everything they have ever learned, improvise and try the most incredible ideas - just to reach the ground; those whose instincts are sharpened so much that it seems as if they merge with the plane - they feel the wounded car so subtly - these are the pilots who work wonders! These people cause sincere admiration and incredibly inspire!
Through horrendous trial and error, the commander determines what the damaged aircraft can and cannot do.
At that moment, I felt the weight of these four stripes on shoulder straps. I am the aircraft commander. If I do nothing, we will all die.
✈ B flight attendants- not just the face of the company, with a smile greeting you on board the aircraft. The main task of a flight attendant is not at all to provide for the everyday needs of a passenger like lunch or a warm blanket - his main task is to ensure safety in flight. The conductors are trained in actions in case of fire or landing on water, they are able to provide first aid, and it is on their shoulders that the preparation of the cabin for a hard landing and the organization of the evacuation of passengers falls. The lives of people in a critical situation depend on their speed and self-control.
I focused on being helpful. Maybe for your own sake - when you calm someone down, you yourself calm down.
We simply did not have time to be frightened - we had to prepare the cabin for an emergency landing. I got scared only when I took myplace.
✈ D dispatchers observe the fate of each side from the ground. Usually their task is to bring the plane to the desired course and altitude, report weather conditions, allow takeoff or landing - they do this a hundred times a day. But there are days when instead of the usual " I understand you, I am occupying flight level 3000" or " Taxiing to Alpha lane"Headphones ring out words that every dispatcher hopes never to hear:" Mayday! Mayday! Mayday! I'm in distress! ". And sometimes the dispatcher can only helplessly watch the dot on the radar, praying that the crew can cope, because only the moment when this dot disappears from the screen and silence fills the radio air can be worse than a distress message ...
I heard that the Boeing 767 had just landed safely. The plane remained intact and we screamed with joy - after all, all these people will spend the night in their own beds tonight!
At the airport, the feeling of horror intensifies. Two aircraft disappeared from the approach control locator. An air traffic controller's worst nightmare is a mid-air collision.
✈ P passengers: Those who survived the disaster share their memories of the ill-fated flight - about the atmosphere that prevailed in the cabin, about how people around felt. It is impossible to imagine what it is like to see a burning engine through a window or a rapidly approaching earth and not know what fate awaits you - whether you will see your loved ones again or these terrible minutes - the last minutes of your life. Relatives speak of the dead. We are used to dry statistics like: " N passengers and n crew members were killed", but you need to remember that behind each figure there is a whole person - a whole world! With his own history, his plans and dreams.
We sent them her photo. She should not be for them only a place number or the amount of material compensation - they must understand that she was a person.
The woman was sitting next to me, and her husband was sitting on the other side of the aisle. And they pulled their hands to each other, trying to touch at least with their fingers to say goodbye.
✈ WITH researchers- these are modern Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Houses from aviation. After each serious incident, they have to thoroughly study all the materials and conduct hundreds of analyzes, and often reveal the whole ins and outs of the crew and airlines, brushing aside attractive options like "lupus" and "vasculitis" along the way, in order, in the end, to come to the only correct diagnosis. and, finally, rid aviation of this infection forever. But seriously, what is the course of the investigation? First, investigators need to get to the scene, which is sometimes problematic - after all, planes crash in a variety of places - in the mountains at an altitude of several kilometers or a hundred meters from the runway, in the middle of the ocean or in the middle of the desert, over swamps infested with crocodiles , or over the impenetrable jungle.
On the first day we had eight snake bites, three broken legs and one cardiac arrest.
Already at the first glance at the crash site, you can draw some conclusions about what happened. For example, by the radius of dispersion of the wreckage of an aircraft, one can judge whether it fell apart in the air or remained intact before hitting the ground. Along the length of the destruction strip, you can set the angle at which the plane entered the ground. And by the state of the blades, it is possible to determine whether the engines were working right up to the collision itself, or whether they stalled while still in the air, which, perhaps, provoked a catastrophe. To accurately establish the whole picture, it is necessary to find recorders, as well as collect and study all the fragments of the aircraft.
It's like a detective's job, because you're looking for clues that might point to what led up to what happened.
While information is being extracted from damaged black boxes, investigators put forward the most daring theories. If there has been a sudden failure of systems or some strategically important element has failed, whether it be an engine or an elevator, then the lives of thousands of passengers around the world traveling on the same aircraft model are at risk. Investigators resort to the help of a variety of specialists - from metallurgists to meteorologists, carefully examine the collected parts, interview eyewitnesses and study documentation in order to find confirmation or refutation of their assumptions.
We have been working on an aircraft that has been incredibly safe throughout its history - for 30 years now. We tried to prove that the round honors student has defects.
If the technical causes of the accident disappear, the attention of the investigators switches to the crew members. Often, decoding the voice recorder and the information from the flight data recorder put everything in its place. Psychologists help to understand the reasons why an experienced commander could confuse right and left, and why the co-pilot did not dare to point out his mistake. Investigators analyze the negotiations in the cockpit, study personal files and work and leisure schedules, talk with relatives, finding out all the details, down to what the pilots had dinner and what time they went to bed on the eve of the tragedy, communicate with their colleagues, trying to understand what kind of atmosphere prevailed in team, arrange real flights with professional pilots or simulate an emergency on a flight simulator to check whether the pilots could have avoided a disaster or were doomed.
Why did they do what they did. Or why they didn't do what they should have done.
Sometimes it takes more than one year to find the right answer.
so
✈ P why do planes crash? As a rule, a combination of several factors leads to a tragic outcome. A flaw in the design of the aircraft, a malfunction of an instrument, a defect in a part, an explosion, negligence of the maintenance personnel, an error of the dispatcher or crew, adverse weather conditions - this is not the whole list of possible causes of the crash. Even a bird strike can be a serious test for an aircraft. Needless to say, wasps were once the cause of a fatal accident... The purpose of the investigators investigating each incident is to identify the tragic chain of circumstances that brought the plane to the brink of death, and to propose ideas for improving flight safety that will help avoid such tragedies in future. Just imagine that there were times when smoking was allowed on flights, when only a curtain separated pilots from passengers instead of an impenetrable door with a combination lock, and when not every aircraft was equipped with flight recorders and elementary smoke detectors - sometimes there was such a smog in the cabin that it was hard to understand - it was smokers who tried or a real fire started on board!
We must learn from every incident. But unfortunately, these lessons cost us a very high price...
✈ M oh conclusions:
- Flights are getting safer. Every serious incident leaves its mark and affects the entire industry as a whole: the perpetrators are punished, conclusions are drawn, standards change, regulations are adjusted, designs are improved.
- We are all humans. Although most of the accidents occur due to the human factor, this is not a reason to refuse to fly. After all, we do not refuse taxis and buses, minibuses and trams, ferries and metro, but they are run by the same people who are also prone to mistakes.
- Which have not be avoided. You can be afraid to fly, spend your whole life locked up in four walls and still die in a plane crash - you can’t hide from fate ( as an example - flight 1862 El Al, which claimed the lives of 4 people on board and 43 more on the ground. I will not insert shocking photos here, I will only say that the 11-story building was cut by a Boeing like a knife).
- Miracles happen! Stories about people who survived the disaster ( take a look at the list of plane crashes with the only survivor - it's impressive! Take at least the stewardess Vesna Vulovich, who survived a fall without a parachute from a height of 10,000 meters, or seventeen-year-old Juliana Koepke, who got out to people 9 days after the plane crashed in the wild jungle!), inspire hope that even if a terrible thing happens to the plane, there is always a chance for salvation, albeit a tiny one!
✈ AND selected series :
2х01 Overboard / blowout(British Airways Flight 5390, June 10, 1990) - at 5,000 m above the ground, the windshield falls out, and the pilot of the airliner is pulled out.
3х04 Suicide attack / Fight for your life(FedEx Flight 705, April 7, 1994) - during a flight, a flight engineer attacks his colleagues in an attempt to hijack the aircraft.
4x10 ghost plane / ghost plane(Helios Airways flight 522, August 14, 2005) - a liner with a hundred passengers on board circles over Athens for a long time, not answering calls from the ground.
5х02 fatal landing / Gimli Glider(Air Canada Flight 143, July 23, 1983) - at an altitude of 12,000 meters, the engines stall, turning the huge Boeing into a helpless glider.
10x05Landing on the Hudson / Hudson River Runway(US Airways Flight 1549, January 15, 2009) - sinceafter 90 seconds of flight, the liner loses its engines as a result of a collision with a flock of birds.
11x13Explosion over Sioux City / Impossible Landing(United Airlines Flight 232, July 19, 1989) - fengine fragments damage the aircraft's tail, leaving it without hydraulics.
12x01 Struggle for control / Fight for control(Reeve Aleutian Airways Flight 008, June 8, 1983) - a propeller that has fallen off crashes into the fuselage, depriving the pilots of the aircraft's controls.
13х04 Tragedy on the Potomac / Disaster on the Potomac(Air Florida Flight 90, January 13, 1982) - immediately after takeoff, the airliner falls on a frozen river, breaks through the ice and goes under water.
P.S. Note to boys and girls that are still in search of yourself: if you have not yet exceeded forty, you are taller than a meter with a cap, but you do not hit your head against the ceiling, and you were also smart enough to keep your health from a young age - You still have a chance to try your hand at aviation. Honestly, I was so imbued with the beauty and thoughtfulness of the aircraft shown here, the complexity and responsibility of the pilot's profession, that I myself decided to go into the sky - that's just not out of growth ... So I can only be content with the airliners flying overhead, seeing them off with a dreamy look . But at least I have this beautiful dream, albeit a pipe one)
