Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 20, 2014, 06:43:48 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: NEW Follow LiveATC updates on Twitter and Facebook


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  Tupolev Red Wing Airlines Crash
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Tupolev Red Wing Airlines Crash  (Read 12768 times)
Saabeba
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71


« on: December 30, 2012, 12:37:30 AM »

Not an audio link, but the dashboard car cam capture.  If kosher to post, interested in reactions of forum.  Understand if deleted if not right for forum.

Brakes failure most likely?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/hEQdW6yS5o4

Logged
Jetblast1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113



« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2012, 06:29:56 AM »

Same video is also at Avherald, so I don't think it is a problem...

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45b4b3cb&opt=0
Logged
Aeroplanino
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2012, 11:49:07 AM »

There is audio of crash in Audio Archive. UUWW feed, 29-12-2012 1200z-1230z final (approx. after 25th minute) and 1230z-1300z is crash at 1231z.
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2012, 02:23:47 PM »

I posted a bit more general info here:

http://www.liveatc.net/forums/aviation-incidents/tu-204-operated-by-russian-carrier-red-wings-crashes-after-runway-over-run/
Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 107



« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2012, 07:10:06 PM »

There is audio of crash in Audio Archive. UUWW feed, 29-12-2012 1200z-1230z final (approx. after 25th minute) and 1230z-1300z is crash at 1231z.

There is some English stuff in the recording, but it seems all communication related to flight WZ-9268 and the crash is in Russian (?). Anyone able to translate?
Logged
Aeroplanino
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2012, 04:54:01 AM »

I'll try..
VP = Vnukovo-Precision, same frequency with VT
VT = Vnukovo-Tower, same frequency with VP
unint = unintelligible
? = unkhown. Probably RWZ-9268.
(?) = unlogical phrase


VP: unint 15.
390: We are go-around, Utair-390.
VP: On runway heading, on runway heading, climb 600, to Radar 126.0.
9268: Vnukovo-Precision, good afernoon, RWZ-9268, approach final, 400.
VP: RWZ-9268, Vnukovo-Precision, good afternoon, distance 12, right of track 200 meters, to right (?) final 400 until glidepath.
9268: maintain 400 until glidepath, RWZ-9268.

VP: RWZ-9268, distance 8500, approaching glidepath.
9268: RWZ-9268, roger.
VP: 9268, current surface wind 260 degrees, 7 gusts 15, runway wet 0.5.
9268: Roger, RWZ-9268.

VP: IFly-9223, good afternoon, wait.
9268: RWZ-9268, on glidepath, clear to land, unint.
VP: RWZ-9268, distance 4, on track, on glidepath, cleared to land.
9268: Cleared to land, RWZ-9268.
VP: 9268, surface wind 270 degrees, 7 gusts 15.
9268: .

VP: IFly-9223, expect after landing.
VP: IFly-9223, runway 19, line up and wait, surface wind 280 degrees, 8 gusts 12.
VT: IFly-9223, Tower, good afternoon, wait.
?: Braking, braking! (Slowing down, slowing down)
366: Vnukovo-Precision, Utair-366, good afternoon, on final 400.
?: Brakes!
366: Vnukovo-Precision, Utair-366, good afternoon, on final 400.
VP: 366, Vnukovo-Precision, good evening, execute missed approach, execute missed approach eh.. maintain 600 meters eh.. unint to Radar 126.0.
366: Roger, 126.0, Utair-366.
9223: unint
VT: IFly-9223, wait.

VT: unint, affirmative, unint, clear runway to left on Bravo 2.
VT: IFly-9223, contact Taxiing 120.45.
9223: unint
« Last Edit: December 31, 2012, 05:14:18 AM by Aeroplanino » Logged
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 107



« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2012, 07:53:39 AM »

@Aeroplanino: Thanks!

? = unkhown. Probably RWZ-9268.

?: Braking, braking! (Slowing down, slowing down)
?: Brakes!

This is obviously the most interesting bit. If this really came from 9268, then maybe the stress caused the non-flying pilot to accidentally press the transmitter button. Or was this a call from a shocked tower controller watching the plane dash towards the end of the runway?
Logged
Aeroplanino
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2012, 10:27:49 AM »

flyflyfly
Its calls not from controller of Tower or Precision - i'm sure! Different voices and sound of noise. And its not voice from PNF.
I think that was calls from RWZ near end of the runway (because calls from begining of the runway was not able to recieved by feed reciever - see calls from IFly) or other aircraft/technical staff from the ground.
Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 913


« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2012, 01:27:46 PM »


This was also caught on video. Someone driving on the M3 had a dashcam in their car, and caught it, as well as some of the debris impacting their car. stuttering stuff here.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/12/30/1716257/moscow-plane-crash-caught-on-passerbys-dash-cam



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEQdW6yS5o4&feature=youtu.be

BL.
Logged
Jetblast1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113



« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2013, 08:45:54 AM »


This was also caught on video. Someone driving on the M3 had a dashcam in their car, and caught it, as well as some of the debris impacting their car. stuttering stuff here.

Yes, that's the same video as on top of this page...  evil
Logged
Allan Lazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #10 on: January 01, 2013, 08:18:36 PM »

Hi, Happy new year to everyone.
I was wondering, and maybe it is just a coincidence, but I can’t find any logical explanation to the flight data of 9268.  As recorded by “Flightradar24.com” RA-9268 was 17km/10,5miles from UUWW/VKO doing 176kt/326km.h. then 6km north of the runway he was at 131kt/243km.h. which I gather is normal, but then 2km from touchdown on rwy19 he is again doing 143kt/265km.h. Naturally I first suspected some kind of inaccuracy, but neither in VKO or in any other airport (I checked many other flights) does the plain speedup shortly before landing. That is not, except if he is performing a missed approach, which the communication recorded by Live ATC does not presume. Maybe they were throttling the craft after suffering a slump due to sudden tail wind? The wind was 260.  Or is that to wild a presumption. In any case the Russians say- the craft suffered a zhestkaia pasadka (Hard landing) which could suggest the unexpected speed of 143kt was not an inaccuracy. The majority of aircrafts, tu204 including, read aprox. 125 to 133 and the 9268 was empty and very light.
A
Logged
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 107



« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2013, 02:05:42 PM »

then 2km from touchdown on rwy19 he is again doing 143kt/265km.h.

METAR reported gusty wind conditions at the time, which alone could explain quick changes of (ground) speed. But even if the approach wasn't perfect and they were a little fast and maybe touched down a little late (as some people claim in other forums), that still wouldn't explain why they overran with such enormous speed. It was a very experienced crew - a basic flying mistake alone seems just too unlikely to trap them in such a terrible accident. Much more likely they were facing a massive problem they had never experienced before - and couldn't solve/comprehend within the few seconds of their landing roll.

Probably the best current guess is a connection to the TU204 advisory which Rosaviatsia issued on Dec 31st (two days after the accident), requiring pilots to keep thrust at idle for 2 seconds after deploying thrust reversers, and to double check yellow/green "thrust reverser unlocked" lights before advancing throttles to the "max reverse thrust" setting (see aviation herald link above).

Also, some days before the event, there was a TU204 maintenance advisory due to gear WOW (weight on wheels) switch failure issues.

Both combined could trigger a terrible situation: pilot selecting reverse thrust / thrust reversers not deploying due to failed WOW switches (which keeps the reversers locked to avoid airborne deployment) / pilot applying "max reverse thrust" anyway (now resulting in massive forward thrust instead) while wheel brakes were applied to decelerate (wheel brakes are not locked by missing WOW switches). This would also be consistent with the crash video, where spoilers do not seem to be deployed (would also be locked down by a missing WOW signal).

There's no official confirmation though, that the thrust reverser advisory is connected to the Moscow crash at all. So, the timing of this could be pure coincidence - or just be precautionary...

Edit: Details on the TU204 "revert thrust" and WOW advisories:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/tu-204-directive-warns-pilots-to-check-thrust-reverse-status-380606/

If this really caused the accident in Moscow, it'd be really tragic: the aircraft was very light, they could have decelerated easily even without using reversers at all...
« Last Edit: January 02, 2013, 03:33:32 PM by flyflyfly » Logged
Allan Lazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2013, 10:46:18 PM »

Good explanation, thanks. A
Logged
joeyb747
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Nothing Like A 747!


« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2013, 10:03:07 AM »

Other T204 Aircraft in the Redwings fleet are having issues with thrust reversers not functioning correctly. This is pertaining to T204 RA-64049, sister to RA-64047, the aircraft lost in the crash. RA-64049 had two issues with reversers with-in a 9 day period.

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45c5a110&opt=0

Logged

Aircraft Mechanic
flyflyfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 107



« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2013, 05:23:54 AM »

Russian investigators have released a factual report on the crash.

No indication of any malfunction, like faulty WOW switches. Instead, they just never got enough pressure on both main landing gear struts at the same time (very light aircraft, fast landing, strong crosswind), so the automatic spoilers didn't trigger and thrust reverser deployment was blocked. They immediately moved thrust levers to "max reverse thrust" anyway (without waiting for confirmed reverser deployment), resulting in 90% forward thrust. They applied wheel brakes, but hardly decelerated at all.

http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/01/25/tu-204-in-fatal-moscow-crash-landed-fast-and-never-decelerated-below-108-knots-on-landing/
« Last Edit: January 26, 2013, 05:53:37 AM by flyflyfly » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!