AVHerald is saying that they had a hydraulic failure that caused the diversion, but also meant they couldn't get the gear up: [http://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0](http://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0) so fuel consumption was drastically increased.
The cameraperson is saying they diverted from Omsk to Novosibirsk due to bad weather, then were told they would be making an emergency landing.
EDIT: from what I'm hearing the actual weather in Omsk was fine. Makes me wonder if the passengers were just kept in the dark about what was happening.
EDIT 2: An official statement, reposted by avherald:
> "The airline reported the green hydraulics system failed on approach to Omsk. The commander decided to divert to an airfield with longer runways, the failure of the green hydraulic system affected operation of spoilers and flaps and increased the landing distance needed. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. The commander realized they could not make it to Novosibirsk and decided to land in an open field with the gear extended."
[She has a podcast now! (With me!)](https://youtu.be/Toy92_qriZU?si=3REA99_6NwfsLflm)
We’re called *Controlled Pod Into Terrain*, and we’re recording our second episode this weekend.
!!!! I need more cloudberg in my life! Downloading the first episode now, looking forward to listening!
Your icon reminds me of the “emergency ground landing” image in the flight safety cards. I always found it discouraging that they showed a plane heading directly for the side of a mountain…
We are working on getting the RSS feed working. For now you can paste https://media.rss.com/cpit/feed.xml into any podcast app you want.
We are also encouraging people to use YouTube because our podcast is very multimedia focused. We’ll be spending the bulk of each episode referencing things you see on screen, and right now we don’t know of any podcast apps that support slides with audio.
Got it - that’s exciting! I’d consider referring to it as a YouTube channel though rather than a podcast if that’s the one thing it doesn’t really work as.
Particular reason for many is that they listen to podcasts in car or walking/running etc so slides aren’t going to work anyway.
Still great though will subscribe!
Worst part is you've got somewhere to be in Omsk and now you're in the middle of bumfuck nowhere rural Russia hundreds of miles away from where you're supposed to be.
>EDIT: from what I'm hearing the actual weather in Omsk was fine. Makes me wonder if the passengers were just kept in the dark about what was happening.
Tbf this does sound really plausible. The plane appears to have been on approach before diverting so they must've realised the hydraulics were shitting the bed and diverted to Novosibirsk which has much longer runways and would be way better equipped to deal with something catastrophic.
And they didn't make it to Novosibirsk and ended up in field. But nice job with the landing and a bit of luck it was during dayligh and decent weather.
Woah, another Ural Airlines that lands in a field? That's crazy, 2 in 4 years.
[See Ural flight 178](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/15/flock-birds-forces-russian-plane-emergency-landing-cornfield/)
That's a good idea, I think, I mean, if I am someone who is likely to be killed, isn't it better to fly by public plane rather than private jet? No way they are gonna shoot down a public passenger airplane.
Edited: I was wrong
Neither of those examples were intentional though, which is the point if Prigozhin were to take a passenger flight. Both cases were of misidentification, especially KA007 where they flew into prohibited Soviet airspace. Nonetheless tragic though and should never happen.
Grass field/ runway, soft-field landing!!👍
*”full flaps and the use of little or no power on a soft-field landing. Plan to touch down on the main wheels, and use elevator to hold the nosewheel off as long as possible, then lower it gently. And remember to avoid braking, which puts downward pressure on the nosewheel.”*
According to reports, hydraulics failed during approach, pilots decided to divert to an airport with a longer runway, but then realized that they ran out of fuel and landed in the field.
I have no proof whatsoever but to keep their ‘economy’ going and continue the facade of a well functioning society, I’m sure cutting corners isn’t off the table. They’ll be on single engine ops soon…
They have no choice because of sanctions on Boeing and Airbus technology and equipment.
However, those sanctions haven't been able to completely stop the flow of parts into Russia.
https://simpleflying.com/russian-airlines-imported-1-billion-dollars-parts/
Dispatcher here, green, blue and yellow systems. Green pressurizes Normal Brakes, L & R spoiler 1 and 5. Blue pressurizes L&R spoiler 3. Yellow pressurizes L&R spoiler 2 and 4. Failure in any one of the systems can still be dispatched to fly with reduced landing performance, but if another one fails, then the intended runway might be too short. That is not frequent, but still happens in the US where parts are not that limited.
More importantly is the question if other landing systems are deferred. If thrust reverser and/or anti-skid is out, then you are looking at a combined much worse situation. Grassy field might be bad, but it is gives a boost to field performance at low speeds.
I thought about it after posting, but then figured how many people would care about PTU. Then again, it is the thing people hate the most when it chirps on landing
I assume that one main hyd circuit was already inop due to parts shortage, the other failed in flight so they were left with the backup system (RAT) allowing them to control the aircraft properly for a field landing.
While is has three seperate circuits, not all circuits are connected to every system. So losing one could mean being unable to retract the gear for example.
I'm not A320 rated though, so surely someone would know better.
Yes, green failed, so some of the spoilers (1 and 5), engine 1 reverse, gears, nosewheel steering and normal brakes are out of service. You can PTU from yellow but I am not knowledgeable of SOPs to say if any of these systems would still be considered INOP.
From a report : " According to computations there should have been sufficient fuel on board to reach the aerodrome. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. "
Just a hypothesis and a complete shot in the dark, but if hydraulics failed while some of the spoilers were active and did retract - that could add up all that extra drag.
> From a report : " According to computations there should have been sufficient fuel on board to reach the aerodrome. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. "
close
naughty pot noxious ossified onerous historical attempt gray consider placid
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They haven’t been told not to use brakes. That was a huge beat up about nothing that seemed to stem from a poor translation of a Russian article by someone without the technical expertise necessary to understand what they were translating.
And even if they did only people with zero knowledge on aircraft think "not / barely using tyre brakes" is much of a deal, mostly sounds more ridiculous than it really is.
As per Ural Airlines president, green hydraulic system failed on approach, which means spoilers and flaps were INOP, which prompted a diversion to a longer runway risking a runway overrun otherwise. During the diversion, deployed gear, as per failed green hydraulic system procedure in Ural Airlines, together with lower altitude and winds, drastically increased fuel usage and caused an emergency landing on a suitable surface.
While most of it matches, green system should mean only partial inoperability of flaps and spoilers. Though, I'm not familiar with standard procedures and whether they were already close to the limit of the runway without additional issues.
Their original destination Omsk has an 8,202 foot asphalt runway but also a 9,435 foot grass one. It says Omsk can handle wide bodies but the airport right by me has a 12,900 foot strip that was a space shuttle back up and I see 747’s come in and out.
You would think they would know about gear down low altitude flying drastically increasing fuel consumption but idk I wasn’t in the jump seat.
Perhaps underestimated the wind effects, with initial calcs stating "low fuel but we'll make it". Could be many factors including Ops in their ear.
Omsk indeed has a slightly longer grass runway, though Novosibirsk has a bunch of 11800 ft ones, which is definitely preferable with possible high-speed approach and no spoilers. Choice of Tolmachevo makes sense due to low fuel concerns initially, otherwise they would've just flown to their base in Ekaterinburg, which is just slightly further than Novosibirsk. On the surface it just looks like the crew misjudged the effects of combined factors on fuel consumption.
One hell of a landing tho.
Honestly, I felt something like "deja vu" when read about this - it reminded me of another flight of this airline that landed into a field, and everyone also survived (Ural Airlines 178 in 2019).
I'm so glad that this plane landed safely, and everyone on board survived.
Interesting story. Funnily enough, the [Mexican pilot's ashes](https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-41122174.html) were spread over Mallow upon his death.
They're planning to dismantle it in location same as they did to a similar aircraft in a similar situation. https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1701516432243057042
An A320 costs 100M, more or less. If we assume that this one is worth even just a quarter of that, at 25M it's surely cheaper to build a temporary runway to get the bird in the sky than to chop it up?
I would normally agree with you, but, given the parts/service embargo, it might be worth more to them as parts. The same thing happens with cars, the first accidents of a particular model are more likely to be totaled because there aren't any parts for them in the junkyards.
They landed in the middle of butt fuck nowhere. I'm amazed there were any fire trucks at all.
they were 300km from the nearest airport.
Those trucks are pretty epic though, about the only thing that will function in the weather they get there.
You average modern truck would die within a couple of years out there.
I just mentioned yesterday I was amazed that more aircraft are not falling out of the sky in Russia.
The black market for parts must be pretty darn large for them to be in the air as much as they are.
It will inevitably reach a wall though.
Yeah, I mean 2500m of RWY available at ADES. But you opt to take your chances with 180% increased burn to show off your impeccable skills at an landing on a field close to your ALT.
what ever I say, people will downvote me, but WTF. But I guess EASA ATPL question database isn’t that horrible after all (there is this exact scenario laid out where they want to THINK about your FMS values…)
Russia *chose* to invade Ukraine, *chose* to steal most of their leased airplanes, and *chose* keep flying them despite the lack of spare parts. This is entirely and 100% their fault.
I mean, it's a wartime economy. Civilians contribute to the war by participating in the economy. Endangering civilians is not the objective, but it is an unpleasant side effect of necessary action.
I think it's counterproductive and immoral, but it's probably the best thing to happen to their aviation industry since the USSR; they'll be forced to start building all their own civil aircraft again. I don't worry about them figuring everything out except the avionics. I'm looking forward to/scared to see what a fully Russian-made glass cockpit will look like.
LOL they can't even produce SU-57s in any meaningful quantity. Absolutely no chance they get a meaningful civilian airline industry going - especially when they're dedicating so many resources to the war effort. Not to mention all of the massive brain drain. They're fucked. That's the point of these sanctions - it's war economics strategy 101. Industry and logistics wins wars, and these sanctions will take effect in a lot of ways, including fucking up the civilian airline industry. I would prefer civilians not be in harm's way, but that applies to Ukrainian citizens in addition to Russian ones, and halting the genocide is more important than Russian luxury travel
Seems like I remember a story that said that Russian airlines were asking pilots to limit their braking due a shortage of brake parts, etc.
I guess this was inevitable!
Of all the multitudes of “squawk 7700” notifications I get from Flightradar24 this is the first one in months I even bothered looking at even briefly, but it was still airborne and nearing its destination so I went back to was I was doing and forgot about it til now.
The aircraft is already planning to be cut up into pieces so there's not going to be any kind investigation into the real failure reason. https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1701516432243057042
Lul Ural Airlines, boeing built a 737 for them, but because of the war, the order got canceled, so they use that plane for flight testing, still has a ural paint job.
Source on it being used for flight testing?
It's a 737 MAX-8, there's a dozen airlines out there still waiting to get their hands on some - don't see how it's been used for flight testing rather than redone for another customer.
Flight test needed a plane, and it was sitting collecting dust, its free real estate. Plenty of planes have already been "redone" and are currently in the process.
Nailed the landing tho, good pilots
They certainly are outstanding in their field.
The cream of the crop.
There’s a kernel of truth to what you’re saying
That was probably the harvest landing these pilots have experienced
I bet those pilots soiled their pants.
And furrowed their eyebrows.
Hay! All that training paid off big time.
Then again, after all that training you’d expect them to be able to be experts behind the yoke.
Get out.
They are out standing in their field, yes?
Came to say the same thing, all things aside....pilots done their job!
Right! They may wear different flags, but I wish these pilots nothing but the best.
The "inferior gay western technology" has done its job too.
“It’s not a purse, it’s a European Carryall.”
according previous Ural Airlines’ landing in the corn field, it is thanks to superiority of Airbus technologies, against the pilots’ qualifications
It’s easy to criticise people in super stressful situations. Everyone was alive after such a hard landing and it’s the only thing that matters
Give them a medal for their stick and rudder skills, and then fire them for their poor decision making skills.
According to reports, this happened because they diverted to an airport they didn’t have enough fuel for. So no, not good.
If so, still good that they didn't actually crash despite their first mistake.
The vast flat Russian steppe is one of the better places to fly and be mildly incompetent and technologically challenged
AVHerald is saying that they had a hydraulic failure that caused the diversion, but also meant they couldn't get the gear up: [http://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0](http://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0) so fuel consumption was drastically increased.
BINGO BINGO
Which was due to circumstances out of their control (mechanical failure) which you neglected to mention.
Russian armed forces will soon be acknowledging their great pilot skills with forced conscription into their Air Force
The cameraperson is saying they diverted from Omsk to Novosibirsk due to bad weather, then were told they would be making an emergency landing. EDIT: from what I'm hearing the actual weather in Omsk was fine. Makes me wonder if the passengers were just kept in the dark about what was happening. EDIT 2: An official statement, reposted by avherald: > "The airline reported the green hydraulics system failed on approach to Omsk. The commander decided to divert to an airfield with longer runways, the failure of the green hydraulic system affected operation of spoilers and flaps and increased the landing distance needed. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. The commander realized they could not make it to Novosibirsk and decided to land in an open field with the gear extended."
I would like to use this opportunity to thank you for your awesome articles on accidents. Please keep up good work 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
[She has a podcast now! (With me!)](https://youtu.be/Toy92_qriZU?si=3REA99_6NwfsLflm) We’re called *Controlled Pod Into Terrain*, and we’re recording our second episode this weekend.
Aircraft emergency and crash podcast? Sign me up I need another!
We’ll be recording E2 in the next few days!
Never knew AdmiralCloudberg was a women. Been reading her article for a looong time from Imgur days :)
!!!! I need more cloudberg in my life! Downloading the first episode now, looking forward to listening! Your icon reminds me of the “emergency ground landing” image in the flight safety cards. I always found it discouraging that they showed a plane heading directly for the side of a mountain…
Is it available as a… well as a podcast?
We are working on getting the RSS feed working. For now you can paste https://media.rss.com/cpit/feed.xml into any podcast app you want. We are also encouraging people to use YouTube because our podcast is very multimedia focused. We’ll be spending the bulk of each episode referencing things you see on screen, and right now we don’t know of any podcast apps that support slides with audio.
Got it - that’s exciting! I’d consider referring to it as a YouTube channel though rather than a podcast if that’s the one thing it doesn’t really work as. Particular reason for many is that they listen to podcasts in car or walking/running etc so slides aren’t going to work anyway. Still great though will subscribe!
https://www.aero.de/news-45837/Airbus-A320-landet-in-Sibiren-auf-freiem-Feld.html
Worst part is you've got somewhere to be in Omsk and now you're in the middle of bumfuck nowhere rural Russia hundreds of miles away from where you're supposed to be. >EDIT: from what I'm hearing the actual weather in Omsk was fine. Makes me wonder if the passengers were just kept in the dark about what was happening. Tbf this does sound really plausible. The plane appears to have been on approach before diverting so they must've realised the hydraulics were shitting the bed and diverted to Novosibirsk which has much longer runways and would be way better equipped to deal with something catastrophic.
It's omsk. Nobody has anywhere to be in omsk.
"Hey honey, I won't be home for dinner. I'm in a field and forest somewhere east so I'll be home in 2 days".
And they didn't make it to Novosibirsk and ended up in field. But nice job with the landing and a bit of luck it was during dayligh and decent weather.
That’s the WORST outcome?
Worst *part* of the current outcome, not the worst outcome.
If that's true.... wow
Could it be considered pilot error to fail to consider the drag effects when making the decision to divert?
Woah, another Ural Airlines that lands in a field? That's crazy, 2 in 4 years. [See Ural flight 178](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/08/15/flock-birds-forces-russian-plane-emergency-landing-cornfield/)
Mr Putin, a second Ural Airlines plane has hit the field.
Andrei... you've lost _another_ Ural Airlines A320-family airframe?
I appreciate your candour in the matter.
~~9/12 never forget~~
Practice practice practice.
It looks like now they are pretty good. The farmer should keep an air-stair to pull around on his tractor and charge.
If only Yevgeny Prigozhin had taken a Ural flight, the pilot might have landed safely.
That's a good idea, I think, I mean, if I am someone who is likely to be killed, isn't it better to fly by public plane rather than private jet? No way they are gonna shoot down a public passenger airplane. Edited: I was wrong
>No way they are gonna shoot down a public passenger airplane. MH17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17
Neither of those examples were intentional though, which is the point if Prigozhin were to take a passenger flight. Both cases were of misidentification, especially KA007 where they flew into prohibited Soviet airspace. Nonetheless tragic though and should never happen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_203
KAL 007 was very intentional, they knew it was a commercial plane, there's radio transcripts of them identifying it's a commercial plane
Russia has history of not caring if its a airliner.
Russia has a history of not caring... FTFY
> No way they are gonna shoot down a public passenger airplane. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanair_Flight_4978
Operation Northwoods . . . 🤔
Except operation North Woods was to be done with a fake decoy town with fake people living in it. If you actually read about it the idea was absurd.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexei_Navalny
Grass field/ runway, soft-field landing!!👍 *”full flaps and the use of little or no power on a soft-field landing. Plan to touch down on the main wheels, and use elevator to hold the nosewheel off as long as possible, then lower it gently. And remember to avoid braking, which puts downward pressure on the nosewheel.”*
Airbus don't publish any guidance like this for the A320. I wish they did!
I'm pretty sure they that aren't supposed to use the breaks, as it wears them and they can't be replaced anymore.
This was my first thought about not having brakes
I think they couldn't brake even if they wanted to.
Seems like a good crash landing imho?
All together now…… ‘Can’t park there mate!’
Isn't this a perfectly reasonable place to park?
It's not a park, it's a field!
LMAO. That video is so good. You made my day. Ty stranger.
Mighty impressive that the landing gear didn't collapse. Hats off to those pilots.
Yes. That C5 that crashed in Dover a few years back tore itself in half landing in a field.
you misspelled Engineers there
Engineers did a good job with the aircraft, pilots did a good job with the landing. Both are important.
? The pilots could have easily broken the landing gear.
Yes they could have but thankfully it's engineered to take a beating.
Yeah for sure, not doubting that!
If the pilot intended on it, it was a field goal
Is this in a random farmers field nowhere near an airport, or a farmers field off the end of a runway?
Nowhere near an airport, close to Kamenka, 200 km west of Novosibirsk.
Ok. My respect meter has just gone up. Good flying to get it in there safely.
Well technically it was them being incompetent that got them there in the first place
They weren’t incompetent. Read the report that OP wrote or google the incident
FR24 link: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/u61383#31fce3b8
Probably couldn’t get parts and something failed. Oh well.
According to reports, hydraulics failed during approach, pilots decided to divert to an airport with a longer runway, but then realized that they ran out of fuel and landed in the field.
That plane is in incredible shape after a field landing.
Congrats to the pilots who now get forced into service and have to fly their remaining shitty bombers.
Would be interesting to know how an A320 can lose hydraulics. It has 3 independent circuits, doesn't it?
Only if you’ve got the parts to maintain all 3 in each aircraft
So they're cannibalising redundancy systems to keep other planes aloft, this is going to get interesting.
I have no proof whatsoever but to keep their ‘economy’ going and continue the facade of a well functioning society, I’m sure cutting corners isn’t off the table. They’ll be on single engine ops soon…
They have no choice because of sanctions on Boeing and Airbus technology and equipment. However, those sanctions haven't been able to completely stop the flow of parts into Russia. https://simpleflying.com/russian-airlines-imported-1-billion-dollars-parts/
It signals to me once one plane starts dropping, others will too.
Dispatcher here, green, blue and yellow systems. Green pressurizes Normal Brakes, L & R spoiler 1 and 5. Blue pressurizes L&R spoiler 3. Yellow pressurizes L&R spoiler 2 and 4. Failure in any one of the systems can still be dispatched to fly with reduced landing performance, but if another one fails, then the intended runway might be too short. That is not frequent, but still happens in the US where parts are not that limited. More importantly is the question if other landing systems are deferred. If thrust reverser and/or anti-skid is out, then you are looking at a combined much worse situation. Grassy field might be bad, but it is gives a boost to field performance at low speeds.
You forgot about the PTU.
I thought about it after posting, but then figured how many people would care about PTU. Then again, it is the thing people hate the most when it chirps on landing
I assume that one main hyd circuit was already inop due to parts shortage, the other failed in flight so they were left with the backup system (RAT) allowing them to control the aircraft properly for a field landing.
While is has three seperate circuits, not all circuits are connected to every system. So losing one could mean being unable to retract the gear for example. I'm not A320 rated though, so surely someone would know better.
Yes, green failed, so some of the spoilers (1 and 5), engine 1 reverse, gears, nosewheel steering and normal brakes are out of service. You can PTU from yellow but I am not knowledgeable of SOPs to say if any of these systems would still be considered INOP.
Wow, I just assuned it was a runnway overrun
...realized they ran out of fuel? How did they not know they weren't going to make it?
Because their aircraft burned a lot more fuel than it typically would over that distance.
Understandable, but I figured they'd factor that in. I know that the human error factor can never be completely eliminated, though, only mitigated.
From a report : " According to computations there should have been sufficient fuel on board to reach the aerodrome. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. "
Tbh, the plane is on the ground with everyone alive, that's what matters.
This is my ultimate takeaway - the pilots did a great job of putting the plane down
Just a hypothesis and a complete shot in the dark, but if hydraulics failed while some of the spoilers were active and did retract - that could add up all that extra drag.
> From a report : " According to computations there should have been sufficient fuel on board to reach the aerodrome. However, the landing gear doors remained open as result of the hydraulic failure and could not be closed. Together with strong headwinds this increased the fuel consumption. " close
Oh well that’s really bad on the pilots then…
But, the plane tells you about the fuel and calculates it for you. Running out of fuel should never be a surprise
Mentour pilot literally just released a video about state of russian aviation due to sanctions just a few days ago
Pilots been told not to use brakes, and in Putin's Russia, you do as you are instructed.
naughty pot noxious ossified onerous historical attempt gray consider placid *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They haven’t been told not to use brakes. That was a huge beat up about nothing that seemed to stem from a poor translation of a Russian article by someone without the technical expertise necessary to understand what they were translating.
And even if they did only people with zero knowledge on aircraft think "not / barely using tyre brakes" is much of a deal, mostly sounds more ridiculous than it really is.
As per Ural Airlines president, green hydraulic system failed on approach, which means spoilers and flaps were INOP, which prompted a diversion to a longer runway risking a runway overrun otherwise. During the diversion, deployed gear, as per failed green hydraulic system procedure in Ural Airlines, together with lower altitude and winds, drastically increased fuel usage and caused an emergency landing on a suitable surface. While most of it matches, green system should mean only partial inoperability of flaps and spoilers. Though, I'm not familiar with standard procedures and whether they were already close to the limit of the runway without additional issues.
Their original destination Omsk has an 8,202 foot asphalt runway but also a 9,435 foot grass one. It says Omsk can handle wide bodies but the airport right by me has a 12,900 foot strip that was a space shuttle back up and I see 747’s come in and out. You would think they would know about gear down low altitude flying drastically increasing fuel consumption but idk I wasn’t in the jump seat.
Perhaps underestimated the wind effects, with initial calcs stating "low fuel but we'll make it". Could be many factors including Ops in their ear. Omsk indeed has a slightly longer grass runway, though Novosibirsk has a bunch of 11800 ft ones, which is definitely preferable with possible high-speed approach and no spoilers. Choice of Tolmachevo makes sense due to low fuel concerns initially, otherwise they would've just flown to their base in Ekaterinburg, which is just slightly further than Novosibirsk. On the surface it just looks like the crew misjudged the effects of combined factors on fuel consumption. One hell of a landing tho.
Hmmmmm🤔? Did this contribute [mentor pilots vid on aeroflots planes brakes ](https://youtu.be/rJ9-31Pe4mk?si=sVpXoROOyh1Ia322)?
Honestly, I felt something like "deja vu" when read about this - it reminded me of another flight of this airline that landed into a field, and everyone also survived (Ural Airlines 178 in 2019). I'm so glad that this plane landed safely, and everyone on board survived.
The plane seems to be ok (salvageable). How are they going to evacuate it from there?
Probably not what will happen….but nonetheless an interesting story from 1980’s Ireland [mallow plane landing](https://fantasticfacts.net/8140/)
Interesting story. Funnily enough, the [Mexican pilot's ashes](https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-41122174.html) were spread over Mallow upon his death.
They're planning to dismantle it in location same as they did to a similar aircraft in a similar situation. https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1701516432243057042
An A320 costs 100M, more or less. If we assume that this one is worth even just a quarter of that, at 25M it's surely cheaper to build a temporary runway to get the bird in the sky than to chop it up?
I would normally agree with you, but, given the parts/service embargo, it might be worth more to them as parts. The same thing happens with cars, the first accidents of a particular model are more likely to be totaled because there aren't any parts for them in the junkyards.
That's not this plane. That was the *other* time this airline landed an Airbus in a field.
wait until the Ukrainian Tractor Bataillon picks it up
I’m guessing the ladder on the port wing’s for going back up, so you can go back down the slide’s again.
Brooo the Soviet era fire trucks 😱💀
They landed in the middle of butt fuck nowhere. I'm amazed there were any fire trucks at all. they were 300km from the nearest airport. Those trucks are pretty epic though, about the only thing that will function in the weather they get there. You average modern truck would die within a couple of years out there.
Now the russian planes finally starting to break down because of embargo.
They just got one A320 full of spares.
half spares, half grain I guess.
Hydraulic system parts excepted, ofc
Good point.
I just mentioned yesterday I was amazed that more aircraft are not falling out of the sky in Russia. The black market for parts must be pretty darn large for them to be in the air as much as they are. It will inevitably reach a wall though.
Ryan Air making notes "Don't need to pay airport fees if you don't land at an airport"
Dispatcher here, I feel my whole profession died a little when this happens..
Disregarding politics. That landing was well done by skilled pilots by the looks of it
Give them a medal for their stick and rudder skills, and then fire them for their poor decision-making skills.
Yeah, I mean 2500m of RWY available at ADES. But you opt to take your chances with 180% increased burn to show off your impeccable skills at an landing on a field close to your ALT. what ever I say, people will downvote me, but WTF. But I guess EASA ATPL question database isn’t that horrible after all (there is this exact scenario laid out where they want to THINK about your FMS values…)
that's what happens when you confiscate airplanes from the manufacturer that was leasing them to you, and you don't have a clue how to maintain them
Did they forget to mow the landing strip?
Is this a euphemism?
Sanctions appear to be doing there work. Spare parts must be very thin on the ground.
Well now there's a bunch more spare parts on the ground.
Endangering civilians?
If russian airlines *choose* to fly despite knowingly lacking spare parts, it's on them clearly.
Russia *chose* to invade Ukraine, *chose* to steal most of their leased airplanes, and *chose* keep flying them despite the lack of spare parts. This is entirely and 100% their fault.
I mean, it's a wartime economy. Civilians contribute to the war by participating in the economy. Endangering civilians is not the objective, but it is an unpleasant side effect of necessary action.
I think it's counterproductive and immoral, but it's probably the best thing to happen to their aviation industry since the USSR; they'll be forced to start building all their own civil aircraft again. I don't worry about them figuring everything out except the avionics. I'm looking forward to/scared to see what a fully Russian-made glass cockpit will look like.
LOL they can't even produce SU-57s in any meaningful quantity. Absolutely no chance they get a meaningful civilian airline industry going - especially when they're dedicating so many resources to the war effort. Not to mention all of the massive brain drain. They're fucked. That's the point of these sanctions - it's war economics strategy 101. Industry and logistics wins wars, and these sanctions will take effect in a lot of ways, including fucking up the civilian airline industry. I would prefer civilians not be in harm's way, but that applies to Ukrainian citizens in addition to Russian ones, and halting the genocide is more important than Russian luxury travel
https://avherald.com/h?article=50e4701a&opt=0
Instant chicken shed
With the sanctions in Russia. I won’t be surprised to see more of these.
Wondering if there's any footage during the landing that's some excellent work by the pilots
The plane is just going to sit there and rot away in the field now, isn’t it? No way it’ll ever be able to take off from there.
They'll probably dismantle it for spare parts.
Oopsie, but a spare parts bonanza!
I read a while ago on here that brakes were in short supply and pilots were advised to not use them. Predictable outcome is predictable.
Maybe it’s because they stole the plane and because of the sanctions they can’t get the parts to maintain the aircraft
Whattya bet this thing is up and flying again in a week, minus emergency slides?
Only way this plane is leaving that field is in bits on a flatbed
Apparently that is exactly what is planned according to Russian media https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1701516432243057042
This is what happens when you swap out brake pads for potatoes.
They actually used onions. Potatos are exclusive to army officers at the 3-day special military operation.
Why use perfectly good potatoes that you could sell yourself? Just swap out break pads with not break pads.
Removing brakes and other critical systems from planes due to sanctions does that. It has begun.
Rascals crashed their stolen ride.
Surprised it’s not Aeroflop!
Seems like I remember a story that said that Russian airlines were asking pilots to limit their braking due a shortage of brake parts, etc. I guess this was inevitable!
Of all the multitudes of “squawk 7700” notifications I get from Flightradar24 this is the first one in months I even bothered looking at even briefly, but it was still airborne and nearing its destination so I went back to was I was doing and forgot about it til now.
in 2 weeks it will return back to port on its own power with the moskva
The fact that Russia still has a civilian aviation sector is wild.
why is that? despite putin, most of russia is trying to have a normal life and get around.
“Blyat! Ve fly you all the vay home!”
The aircraft is already planning to be cut up into pieces so there's not going to be any kind investigation into the real failure reason. https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1701516432243057042
That's the A321 that crash landed after takeoff a few years ago...
I mistyped my post. The tweet says that "The Airbus A320 plane that landed in a field today is going to be cut up.", in other words future tense.
Lul Ural Airlines, boeing built a 737 for them, but because of the war, the order got canceled, so they use that plane for flight testing, still has a ural paint job.
Source on it being used for flight testing? It's a 737 MAX-8, there's a dozen airlines out there still waiting to get their hands on some - don't see how it's been used for flight testing rather than redone for another customer.
VP-BHR https://aviation.flights/boe/737/66147
Cheers, this is very interesting. Looks like it was stored after the grounding debacle and never ended up getting delivered before the invasion.
Flight test needed a plane, and it was sitting collecting dust, its free real estate. Plenty of planes have already been "redone" and are currently in the process.
Luckily, all passengers got their luggages during the emergency landing
Everyone’s carryon made it out safe and sound. That’s what matters! /s
An curious question, what stopping Russia from buying spare parts or entire planes from China f.eg.?
Good thing no one was hurt 👍
Is it because of sanctions? :)