Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
MoonC wrote:Sukhoi Superjet of Aeroflot. RA-89089
thevery wrote:All evacuated, 6 injured.
thevery wrote:All evacuated, 6 injured.
Scarebus34 wrote:
Video of the landing as it was already flames:
https://twitter.com/news_executive/stat ... 36672?s=21
SpaceshipDC10 wrote:Scarebus34 wrote:
Video of the landing as it was already flames:
https://twitter.com/news_executive/stat ... 36672?s=21
Looks like main landing gear collapsed on touch down. The aircraft is sliding on the runway with a nose up attitude, probably because of the nose landing gear.
Scarebus34 wrote:I believe it was on fire before it even touched down which was the reason for the return to SVO.
mercure1 wrote:Looks like they might have turned it into the wind to have the flames blow backwards and it looks like engine #2 is still putting out thrust based on the flame patterns?
yikes
alfa164 wrote:MoonC wrote:Sukhoi Superjet of Aeroflot. RA-89089
That seems to be a problem-plagued aircraft type.
gosheto wrote:Wow, glad there are no fatalities. I find it strange, that at least on the videos I saw, it does not seem like they were met by any fire engines?
gosheto wrote:Wow, glad there are no fatalities. I find it strange that, at least on the videos I saw, it does not seem like they were met by any fire engines?
gosheto wrote:I find it strange that, at least on the videos I saw, it does not seem like they were met by any fire engines?
alfa164 wrote:MoonC wrote:Sukhoi Superjet of Aeroflot. RA-89089
That seems to be a problem-plagued aircraft type.
alfa164 wrote:MoonC wrote:Sukhoi Superjet of Aeroflot. RA-89089
That seems to be a problem-plagued aircraft type.
phatfarmlines wrote:thevery wrote:All evacuated, 6 injured.
That's amazing given the entire of the exterior was engulfed in flames.
SheikhDjibouti wrote:Note; after the first approach, during the 360deg orbit, two other flights were cleared to land in front of it. This does not suggest the aircraft was already on fire.
OA940 wrote:Perhaps an uncontained engine failure caused this?
OA940 wrote:Perhaps an uncontained engine failure caused this? I can't really imagine many other things that would cause such a blaze.
OA940 wrote:Also I don't get why we have to assume immediately it's the plane's fault. Once again people are jumping to conclusions. Just because there are spare parts issues doesn't mean the design is bad
SPREE34 wrote:phatfarmlines wrote:thevery wrote:All evacuated, 6 injured.
That's amazing given the entire of the exterior was engulfed in flames.
Except that, "the entire of the exterior was" NOT engulfed, as we see very clearly the forward section and people exiting.
Scarebus34 wrote:Video of the landing as it was already flames:
https://twitter.com/news_executive/stat ... 36672?s=21
N809FR wrote:Per AvHerald there are 10 fatalities. Scary sight, hope the initial reports of no fatalities are accurate.
gosheto wrote:SheikhDjibouti wrote:Note; after the first approach, during the 360deg orbit, two other flights were cleared to land in front of it. This does not suggest the aircraft was already on fire.
The fact two other planes were cleared to land before it, and the fact there were no emergency vehicles dispatched for the emergency landing (with fire declared or not) makes me even more concerned about the safety of the airport operations....
Scarebus34 wrote:N809FR wrote:Per AvHerald there are 10 fatalities. Scary sight, hope the initial reports of no fatalities are accurate.
RT reporting all escaped with 10 injuries. So perhaps some misunderstandings? Hopefully.
Ishrion wrote:Scarebus34 wrote:N809FR wrote:Per AvHerald there are 10 fatalities. Scary sight, hope the initial reports of no fatalities are accurate.
RT reporting all escaped with 10 injuries. So perhaps some misunderstandings? Hopefully.
Some are reporting one death: https://www.yahoo.com/news/russias-sukh ... nance.html
One is... reporting eleven?... https://twitter.com/JacdecNew/status/11 ... 3257226240
SheikhDjibouti wrote:Based on raw data and some guesswork....
SU1492 SVO-MMK (Moscow-Murmansk) took off at 15:03 UTC, climbed to FL100 and immediately initiated descent & return to SVO.
After a dummy approach at ca 2,500ft, orbited once and came back in to land at 15:31 UTC.
Pure conjecture here; the initial approach and orbit was either because they came in too fast/high at the first attempt, or... possibly to allow the tower to visually check if their undercarriage was down. Note that this initial approach was aborted some km short of the airport perimeter, but probably within binocular range for limited visual inspection.
Note; after the first approach, during the 360deg orbit, two other flights were cleared to land in front of it. This does not suggest the aircraft was already on fire.