17.08.2023
What do the device data mean?
Experts from the Ministry of Defense came to the conclusion that the plane crashed over the Black Sea due to a possible error by the co-pilot, who mixed up the control levers, as well as low altitude and overload.
After a complete decoding of the black boxes of the Tu-154 that crashed at the end of December 2016 in the waters of Sochi - parametric and speech- Experts from the Ministry of Defense can actually accurately name the causes of the plane crash.According to experts, the plane with its passengers was destroyed by a combination of several factors:went on the last flight overloaded, and the co-pilot Alexander Rovensky on takeoff, perhapsmixed up the landing gear and flap control levers. When the crew noticed the mistake, it was already too late: the heavy Tu-154 simply did not have enough altitude for a rescue maneuver, so itThe tail part of the fuselage hit the water and collapsed.
Heavy and unmanageable
A Life source familiar with the investigation into the causes of the disaster said that the notorious human factor was recognized as the priority version of the Tu-154 crash.
The data from speech and parametric (recording the operation of all aircraft components) recorders, studied by experts at the Research Center for Operation and Repair of Aircraft Equipment of the Ministry of Defense in Lyubertsy, says that in the third minute of the flight, when the airliner was at an altitude of 450 meters above sea level, the system sensors were triggered directional stability, - a source told Life. - The car began to sharply lose altitude due to problems with the flaps.
According to experts, this could have happened after the co-pilot, 33-year-old captain Alexander Rovensky, instead of retracting the landing gear, retracted the flaps.
Because of this, the plane went into an extreme angle of attack, the crew tried to turn the plane to reach the ground, but did not have time to do this, the Life source added.
As it turned out, the situation was aggravated by the overload of the Tu-154. Everything in the luggage compartment was filled to capacity. The tail section of the plane was pulled down. It was impossible to save the car: there was not enough speed and height.The tail section touched the water first, and then the Tu-154at high speedhit the sea with its right wing and collapsed.
According to Life’s source, the emergency situation came as a complete surprise to the crew: in the first seconds, the plane’s commander, 35-year-old Major Roman Volkov, and co-pilot Alexander Rovensky were confused, but quickly pulled themselves together and tried to save the plane until the last seconds.
DECODING:
Speed 300... (Unintelligible.)
- (Unintelligible.)
I took the racks, commander.
- (Unintelligible.)
Wow, oh my!
(A sharp signal sounds.)
Flaps, bitch, what the fuck!
Altimeter!
Us... (Unintelligible.)
(A signal sounds about a dangerous approach to the ground.)
- (Unintelligible.)
Commander, we are falling!
This is how the experts realized that the plane had problems with the flaps due to the fault of the crew.
The pilots who flew the Tu-154, with whom Life spoke, confirm the conclusions of experts from the Ministry of Defense that the cause of the disaster could have been pilot error.
On the Tupolev, the landing gear and flap retraction handles are located on the visor of the pilot's cabin, between them, above the windshield. You can confuse them, especially if the co-pilot sitting on the right, whose responsibilities include controlling the flaps and landing gear during takeoff, is tired,” Honored Pilot of the Russian Federation Viktor Sazhenin, who himself flew on the Tu-154 for eight years, told Life. - Because of this, the plane went into an extreme angle of attack, hit the water, and its tail fell off.
This version is also considered acceptable by test pilot Hero of Russia Magomed Tolboev.
On the Tu-154 control panel, the flap and landing gear toggle switches are located above the windshield. The flaps are on the left, the landing gear is on the right. The co-pilot, who sits in the seat on the right, is responsible for them. It is possible that the pilot could have mixed up the levers or been distracted by something, so the plane took off with the landing gear extended and the flaps retracted,” Tolboev told Life.
According to Tolboev, one cannot exclude the possibility that after takeoff the crew exceeded the speed and the flap mechanism collapsed, causing the plane to fall to the right, lose speed and crash into the water.
Tragic experience
Another factor in the Tu-154 disaster in Sochi could have been the lack of sufficient knowledge among the ship’s commander and co-pilot on how to act in an extreme situation.
" src="https://static..jpg" alt="" data-extra-description="">
Disaster with Tu-154 B-2 tail number DoD RA-85572 occurred on December 25, 2016. It was at 5:40 am Moscow time, 1.7 kilometers from the coast of Sochi. The Ministry of Defense plane was flying to Syrian Khmeimim from the Chkalovsky airfield, and in Sochi it was just refueling. There were 92 people on board the liner. A few minutes after lifting off from the runway, the plane disappeared from radar screens.
The crashed airliner was based at the Chkalovsky airfield near Moscow and was part of the Federal State Budgetary Institution "State Airline 223rd Flight Detachment" of the Ministry of Defense, which transports military personnel.
The Tu-154 B-2 modification is designed to carry 180 economy class passengers and was produced from 1978 to 1986. A total of 382 aircraft were built. Since 2012, Russian civil airlines have not operated the Tu-154 B-2.
Published 01/10/17 10:23Latest news about the crashed Tu-154 plane in Sochi: experts explained why a defense department plane crashed over the Black Sea on December 25 last year.
The cause of the plane crash in Sochi, last news: why the Tu-154 crashed over the Black Sea, experts from the Ministry of Defense said
Based on the results of a complete decoding of the parametric and voice flight recorders of the Tu-154 aircraft, in December 2017, experts from the Ministry of Defense spoke about the causes of the crash. According to experts, the airliner and its passengers were destroyed by a combination of several factors: the plane went to Syria overloaded, and co-pilot Alexander Rovensky mixed up the landing gear and flap control levers during takeoff, and when intkbbee The crew noticed the mistake, but it was already too late: the heavy Tu-154 did not have enough altitude for a rescue maneuver, and it was the rear part of the fuselage, after which it collapsed.
A Life source familiar with the investigation said that the human factor was considered the priority version of the crash.
“The data from speech and parametric (recording the operation of all components of the aircraft) recorders studied by experts from the Research Center for the Operation and Repair of Aircraft of the Ministry of Defense in Lyubertsy say that in the third minute of the flight, when the airliner was at an altitude of 450 meters above sea level, the directional stability system sensors were activated “The car began to sharply lose altitude due to,” the publication quotes a source.
Experts say this happened after the co-pilot, 33-year-old captain Alexander Rovensky, retracted the flaps instead of the landing gear.
“This caused the plane to go into an extreme angle of attack, the crew tried to turn the plane to reach the ground, but they didn’t have time to do this,” the source emphasized.
The situation was aggravated by the overload of the Tu-154, which caused the tail section of the aircraft to be pulled down.
The source claims that the emergency situation came as a complete surprise to the crew: the airliner’s commander, 35-year-old Major Roman Volkov, and co-pilot Alexander Rovensky were confused in the first seconds, but then pulled themselves together and tried to save the plane until the last seconds.
The pilots who flew the Tu-154, with whom journalists were able to talk, confirmed the conclusions of experts from the Ministry of Defense that the cause of the disaster could have been pilot error.
The commander of the ship is Volkov Roman Aleksandrovich and the assistant commander of the ship is Captain Rovensky Alexander Sergeevich
“In the Tupolev, the handles for retracting the landing gear and flaps are located on the canopy of the pilot’s cabin, between them, above the windshield. They can be confused, especially if the co-pilot sitting on the right, whose responsibilities include controlling the flaps and landing gear during takeoff, is tired. “The plane went into an extreme angle of attack, hit the water, and its tail fell off,” said Honored Pilot of the Russian Federation Viktor Sazhenin.
This version is considered acceptable by test pilot Hero of Russia Magomed Tolboev.
"On the control panel of the Tu-154, the flap and landing gear toggle switches are located above the windshield. The flaps are on the left, the landing gear is on the right. The co-pilot, who sits in the seat on the right, is responsible for them. It is possible that the pilot could have mixed up the levers or been distracted by something , so the plane took off with the landing gear extended and the flaps retracted,” he said, noting that one cannot exclude the possibility that after takeoff the crew exceeded the speed, which led to the destruction of the flap mechanism.
Another factor in the Tu-154 crash in Sochi could have been the lack of sufficient knowledge among the ship’s commander and co-pilot regarding actions in an extreme situation.
“Most likely, neither the plane’s commander, Roman Volkov, nor the co-pilot, Alexander Rovensky, who graduated from military schools in the early 2000s, underwent special flight training,” explained a representative of the commission investigating the accident in Sochi.
He stated that if pilots had undergone special piloting training in extreme situations at the Lipetsk Aviation Center for Retraining Military Pilots or at the Gromov Flight Research Institute, then perhaps the disaster could have been avoided.
“In the military schools that the pilots graduated from, they were hardly taught how, if the flaps malfunctioned at low altitudes, set them to reverse in order to bring the airliner out of the extreme angle of attack,” he said.
In turn, engineers at the Research Center for Operation and Repair of Aircraft of the Ministry of Defense in Lyubertsy do not rule out that when the crew tried to turn the aircraft around in order to reach the ground, the board would have been saved if not for the overload.
“The overload is evidenced by the fact that when the plane began to lose altitude, it was the tail section that hit the water first, which fell off, and then the plane’s right wing caught the water and crashed into the sea,” explained a source in the Russian Ministry of Transport.
At the same time, according to him, it cannot be ruled out that the luggage compartment was simply overloaded.
“After all, this was almost the last flight of a civilian aircraft to Syria, and relatives and colleagues of the military personnel on a business trip could have asked the airfield management and the crew to take extra people on board. And during the flight and after landing in Sochi, the cargo could have been shaken. During takeoff from Sochi, the cargo moved to the rear of the airliner, and the plane was pulled down due to an emergency situation with the flaps,” the expert noted.
As he wrote, the Russian Defense Ministry aircraft Tu-154 B-2 with tail number RA-85572 crashed in the Black Sea on December 25, 2016. There were 92 people on board. They all died.
The media again returned to the death of the Tu-154 near Sochi, the military aircraft in which the Alexandrov ensemble died - as they say, a cultural symbol Russian army, And Elizaveta Glinka- Doctor Lisa, Mother Teresa of our Northern spaces. And several more teams of journalists died, for a total of 92 people.
The Tu-154 flew from Moscow, from the Chkalovsky military airfield to Syria, to Damascus on the eve of the New Year to raise the morale of the Russian Aerospace Forces personnel at the Khmeimim airbase.
The flight was like a flight, the crew was under the command of the pilot Volkova I have flown this route more than once. At the Chkalovsky military airfield, near Moscow, it is known - this is a military airfield, a mouse, it would seem, would not slip through, everyone boarded. The plane was heading to Damascus over the Caspian Sea, then had to refuel in Mozdok, fly over Iran, Iraq and through all of Syria to Damascus.
But this time Mozdok was closed and the plane flew for refueling to Adler above the Caucasus, from the Caspian to the Black Sea. For an airplane it’s like for a car to go to refuel at the nearest gas station, well, let’s refuel at another one, by the standards air transport- just a stone's throw away.
In Adler, the plane refueled, and allegedly no one got off or boarded the plane in Adler. They took off and disappeared from radar within a couple of minutes. And then they found the wreckage of the Tu-154 in the Black Sea.
The newspapers wrote about all this in detail immediately after December 25th. And they seem to have started to forget about Tu. And suddenly just before the murder in Kyiv Voronenkova, and before the massive riots in Moscow, suddenly again, look, a new piece of supposed information about the death of the Tu-154.
More precisely, this is not new information, but an interpretation of part of the information that we already had.
Apparently, somewhere in the high spheres of those managing our mental health, they decided that the version of the pilot’s error, which they carefully pushed to us all these months, looks unconvincing and so they add interpretations.
I remember the main complaints about the pilots.
They (in essence, we are talking about one, the main pilot - the commander of the board Volkov) are accused of things hitherto unheard of in investigations of aircraft deaths, namely:
- loss of orientation in space;
- in an illusory perception of reality;
— the flight was at night and therefore difficult.
They say that the commander of the ship Volkov (now they began to say that the 4 thousand hours he had flown was not enough to call him an experienced pilot, but earlier they said that Volkov was experienced), mistook the stars reflected in the sea for stars in the sky and behaved accordingly, began to descend, instead of taking off.
Fellow pilots were indignant against such defamation of their deceased comrade. Still some significant part of them.
They reported that night flights are commonplace and half of the flights are night flights, nothing extraordinary.
That in a night flight the ship’s commander “looks only at the instruments,” because what kind of stars are there! That the Tu-154 has a large flight team, that several crew members continuously report to the commander the altitude and everything that is needed.
True, among fellow pilots there were those who actually blamed the pilot for the death of Tu, one “comrade” said so, I have already quoted him, that 4 thousand flights flown are not enough, he romantically said that “only after 10 thousand flown flights does the pilot begin to feel bird."
Returning to the formulations given in the media, in particular, to these “loss of orientation in space” and to “illusory perception of reality,” I said to myself: excuse me, but these are symptoms of what happens to a pilot during an electronic attack.
The version of an electronic attack was at one time dismissed by the investigation.
But she was. And supporters of this version referred to interesting data.
On the eve of the tragedy, it turns out that the French reconnaissance ship Dupuy de Lome entered the Black Sea, which can disable all the aircraft’s electronics with a radio pulse.
The authors of the version claimed that an electronic attack on the Tu-154 could have been launched from this ship. Russia also has means of electronic jamming, supporters of the version argued, saying that it was nothing fantastic, and the plane was military, so those who carried out the attack might not feel like bloodsuckers and murderers.
The status of the flight was the highest that exists (a military ensemble, even a conductor, a lieutenant general, a flight to Syria and similar international political importance).
The nature of the debris and the nature of the injuries inflicted on the bodies (the divers claimed that they were finely chopped into a pulp), as well as the scattering of the debris over a long distance, indicate an explosion on board. If the plane had broken up on the water, the debris would have been large. And the bodies would not have been chopped into small pieces.
And finally, even the fact that the next morning all civilian ships were prohibited from going to sea in that area, and another fact: the National Guard was posted at the coastal edge, speak for the fact that they are hiding the true cause of Tu’s death from us.
And now comes the second piece of misinformation. Apparently, those at the top decided that you and I might still have doubts about the veracity of the accusations against the pilots.
That’s why they’re putting additional pressure on them. A well-known technique in the criminal world is that murders are always blamed on dead comrades.
Now about the airfield in Chkalovsky.
Pilot Krasnoperov: “I flew from Chkalovsky to the east. And there was no inspection, the security was much worse than at civilian airports.”
Writer Limonov: “And I flew from Chkalovsky... There was no inspection, no passports were looked at, no luggage was checked. Well, okay, I’m a famous person, but there were three guards with me, and they didn’t ask for their passports or inspect their luggage.”
The crash of the Tu-154 airliner of the Russian Ministry of Defense, which crashed near Sochi on December 25, 2016, continues to remain in the center of public attention. For a long time, commission members and civilian experts could not understand why the plane fell into the Black Sea almost immediately after takeoff and what happened on board. Finally the mysteries were solved...
Specialists who are investigating the Tu-154 crash near Sochi have established that all systems of the aircraft before it came into contact with the water surface were in good working order and working normally. It was also found that explosion on board or near it before it hit the sea either. Obvious actions by pilots that would indicate their piloting errors Couldn't find it either. The only thing that was able to be established by means of objective control was the incomprehensible actions of the aircraft commander. The commander used rudder pedals, which are never used during takeoff. It was unclear why he did this until they discovered damage to the blades of the left and top engines. Such damage could not have been caused by birds. What actually happened?
The commission got the impression that some strange obstacle suddenly appeared in front of the liner, which the commander tried to get around. In this case, the use of the rudder pedals by the pilot becomes quite understandable. It was necessary to quickly evade some counter “influence.” In addition, the commander’s remark also becomes clear "Uh, oh my". Apparently, it was not possible to avoid a collision with some object and the plane crashed, despite the crew’s attempts to save the situation.
There was no bomb on board, nor was there a shot from a MANPADS. But the plane exploded immediately after contact with the water surface. The so-called volumetric explosion, with which Rostechnadzor is well acquainted. So what tore the fuselage and people into small pieces?
The main condition for a volumetric explosion must be damage to the fuel tanks. The airliner continues to fly for some time, shrouded in a fog of tiny droplets of fuel. And a small spark or detonation is enough for such a large explosion to occur. In this case, it occurred at the moment the Tu-154 hit the water. Therefore, for such an explosion to occur, it was necessary to first damage fuel tanks airplane. It’s not possible to do this on the ground, which means it happened immediately after takeoff, that is, there was a collision with something in the air. The birds immediately fall off, they are too soft for this. A large plane also does not pass, the locator would have seen it. All that remains is unmanned aerial vehicle.
During an oncoming collision (impact) with the Tu-154, the drone crashed into the plane or fired a shot into the lower part of the left wing. The plane was fatally wounded. The airliner continued to fly, but its fuel tanks were already damaged, apparently the nacelle with landing gear also suffered damage, and small fragments from this collision hit the left and upper engines, damaging them normal work. Fuel from the damaged tanks began, like those of downed bombers during the Second World War, to generate a deadly fog of tiny droplets, which led to the explosion, says an expert who explained to the Russian News Agency.
Probably, the Ministry of Defense commission has long since made the necessary conclusions based on the evidence received and reported the results of the investigation to senior management, the site reports. Now these materials are not advertised due to preparations for a meeting with the new US President, Donald Trump. At this meeting, there will certainly be trade for zones of influence, and the Russian leadership needs to have an additional trump card for them. Remember the submarine situation? "Kursk". Then the matter was hushed up, Putin did not advertise the information that Kursk was hit by an American submarine. As a result, it was possible to avoid an escalation of the conflict and receive multi-billion dollar reparations, both in the form of direct cash subsidies and investments in various sectors of the economy. This is planned to be repeated now. And depending on how these negotiations go, the public will be presented with a “real” or “fictitious” version of the plane crash.
We have discussed other versions of the airliner crash in detail in previous articles. See links to them in the comments under this news.
Below, watch a video about one unique institution. There is information that it was from here that an important passenger was brought on board the Tu-154 to Sochi.
Experts continue to collect data on the fall of the Tu-154 of the Russian Ministry of Defense, which crashed in the Krasnodar Territory - the first black box has already been found and delivered by a special flight to the Moscow region. Military pilot 1st class Alexander Plentsov helped FederalPress understand the data on the plane crash and reviewed the main versions of the tragedy put forward in the media.
What happened in the air
The tragedy that happened on December 25 still leaves more questions than answers. It is known that the Tu-154 airliner, making the flight Chkalovsky - Heimim, fell into the sea near Sochi almost immediately after taking off from the Sochi airport, where it stopped to refuel.
There were 84 passengers and 8 crew members on board. Among the passengers were 64 artists of the Alexandrov Ensemble, nine media representatives, the head of public organization“Fair Aid” Elizaveta Glinka (Dr. Lisa), Head of the Culture Department of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation Anton Gubankov, Head of the Alexandrov Ensemble Valery Khalilov.
The plane took off at night, at 05:24 am, in difficult weather conditions, which, according to experts, is extremely important factor to understand the cause of the disaster.
Communication with the crew was cut off literally after 2 minutes of flight - the Tu-154 commander did not respond to the air traffic controller’s request. A few seconds later the plane disappeared from radar. A recording of the airliner’s last communication session has already appeared on the Internet:
“The Tu-154 took off at 05:24:39. At 05:26:44, the commander confirmed receipt of the command from “Sochi-tower” (the call sign of the Sochi airport control room - approx. FederalPress). For two minutes and five seconds the flight went normally, the altitude was 750-800 meters, the speed was 450-500 kilometers per hour. It was after two minutes of flight that the situation became emergency. At this time, according to the flight plan, the board was supposed to begin turning to the right at an altitude of 800 meters. It was after the start of the reversal that the catastrophic development of the situation began,” commented Alexander Plentsov on the data.
At an altitude of 800 meters, the Tu-154 began to perform a right turn. The plane then entered a right-hand downward spiral, made a turn of approximately 130-150 degrees, and at that moment hit the water.
What do the device data mean?
“What happens at the moment of roll: the right half-wing of the plane goes down, the left half-wing rises up, and the plane begins to roll to the right. What pilots see on the main attitude indicator on the instrument panel: the horizon line on the instrument has tilted to the left. Pilots see the opposite bank. At such a moment, the pilot must correctly understand his spatial position and use the correct actions - turning the helm to the left - to bring the plane out of the right roll,” explained Alexander Plentsov.
Understanding what preceded the further increase in the right roll of the aircraft is the key to what happened. Among other things, the occurrence of optical illusions cannot be ruled out in difficult weather conditions, the expert emphasized.
The opinion of the military pilot is supported by data from sources law enforcement referenced by the media. Thus, TASS data is almost similar to the expert’s opinion: “The disaster occurred when the pilots were removing the mechanization (in the extended state, the wing increases the lift - approx. FederalPress). At the same time, for reasons that are not yet clear, the plane was flying at a high pitch angle. Apparently, he fell off the echelon during a maneuver to the right. As a result, at the end of the turn, he collided with the surface of the water with a left bank at a speed of about 510 km per hour,” TASS quoted a source in the security forces as saying.
Experts dismissed the version of the terrorist attack
Some experts have already suggested that something happened inside the cockpit - something instantly “turned off” all the pilots on takeoff. However, criminologists have still not found traces of explosives or signs of other foreign influence on the found fragments of the plane and on the remains of the dead. “The version of the terrorist attack has not been confirmed at the moment,” Interfax quotes the words of an anonymous informant. “No signs of an explosion or flame affecting the plane were found,” a TASS source in law enforcement agencies confirmed.
The testimony of witnesses also makes it possible to dismiss the version of a terrorist attack, another Interfax source said. He explained the lack of an SOS signal by saying that the crew was under stress and was trying to save the plane in the last seconds.
Alexander Plentsov agrees with these theses. According to him, theoretically, a terrorist attack could really cause a disaster. However, practically the probability of such a scenario occurring is one in a million.
“Firstly, quite thorough measures are now being taken to prevent terrorist attacks. Secondly, the hijacking of an aircraft is a case of science fiction. After all, the flight was not just random passengers, everyone was, as they say, “their own”: artists, public figures, journalists, the plane belonged to the Russian Ministry of Defense. A terrorist who got on such a plane and shot the pilots is absolutely not an option,” the pilot noted.
He also noted that the surveillance video showing the flash over the sea is unlikely to be a recording of an airplane explosion. “Imagine the flames from the explosion of 33 or 35 tons of aviation kerosene - if the plane’s fuel exploded, we would definitely see a large ball of fire that would illuminate half of Sochi,” the expert commented on the post.
Failure of aircraft equipment or pilot error?
Two more (note, obvious) versions, which are currently adhered to by official bodies - technical difficulites or pilot error. All of the listed factors speak in favor of a fatal breakdown (for example, control failure) - and first of all, the fact that the pilots did not have time to inform the ground about what was happening.
“In the event of any breakdown, there would be an immediate report to the controller with plans for an emergency landing. This is inherent in the pilot from the first moment of his training. But there were only four of them in the cabin, and each of them should and could have reported what happened. But nothing of the kind, as we see, happened - the plane hit the water while the crew was silent,” notes Plentsov.
The assumption that the plane turned around and went back to land is supported by the data that the Tu-154, at the time of flight over the sea, deviated from the planned course almost in the opposite direction. This version is also based on witness testimony - according to a coast guard employee, the plane's descent really resembled an emergency landing.
“The plane’s descent from an altitude of 800 meters lasted approximately 15-18 seconds. This could only happen if the plane entered a steep (so-called death) spiral. In such a situation, the plane is no longer under control. Therefore, in no case, I emphasize - in no case should the crew be blamed for the disaster,” noted Alexander Plentsov.
According to him, with a high degree of probability, a few seconds before the impact, seeing the lights of the city, the pilots nevertheless determined their spatial position. They brought the plane out of the roll and took the helm instead of themselves, practically “breaking” the plane, trying to bring it out of the descent. However, the low altitude and large drawdown of the aircraft did not allow the aircraft to climb. The rear fin of the plane hit the water.
“Almost exactly the same, only during the go-around, in the same place in 2006, an Armavia A-320 fell. In exactly the same death spiral, the B-737 descended into the ground in Perm and Kazan. In all these accidents, the pilots at the most critical moment could not understand their spatial position in order to operate the control rudders correctly. The false, illusory aircraft attitude device installed in the cockpits of all these aircraft did not allow the pilots to correctly navigate the flight and complete the flight safely,” the expert concluded, noting that, among other things, this device does not meet airworthiness standards and should not be installed in airplane cabins.
However, it will be possible to speak with complete confidence about the causes of the tragedy only after the investigative authorities complete their checks and Transport Minister Maxim Sokolov announces his verdict.
FederalPress will follow developments.
