Military Review

Causes of the crash of Tu-154 flying to Syria remain unclear

Causes of the crash of Tu-154 flying to Syria remain unclearA lot of enthusiastic researchers, but, unfortunately, not professionals at all, are struggling to unravel a number of mysterious catastrophes that happened in the last century. The reason for this is often the same - the desire of the authorities to "disown" from past events and remain "fluffy", not stained before the people. Therefore, ordinary people believe different rumors and gossip generated by pseudo-researchers who do not have the knowledge necessary for an objective investigation of events. At the same time, the causes of most tragedies lie on the surface, but this is rarely noticed.

So it was with the death of Valery Chkalov and Yuri Gagarin, as well as with the search for the expedition of Sigismund Levanevsky. Among the most “mysterious” incidents of the most recent times are the crash of the Tu-154B2 plane that was heading to Syria, which occurred on December 25 on 2016 of the year. She, by the way, is very similar to the tragedy of the IL-18В aircraft, which occurred in October 1972.

Then, shortly after takeoff (19 h 22 min) from Adler airport, at the height of 150 – 250, the car started right, and then went into a steep left turn and dropped into the water at a distance of 6,5 – 10,5 km from the coast. As a result, 118 people died. The weather for the flights was favorable: the sky was clear, the wind was weak, the air temperature was + 17 ± С, and visibility was over 5 km.

However, some eyewitnesses to the tragedy talked about some kind of flash near the plane just before its fall. Despite all the efforts, the main plane wrecks and flight recorders were never found.

Naturally, immediately after the tragedy of 2016, there was an assumption about some (mystical) connection of these events. But upon closer inspection, all this mystic had to be discarded, because this time the plane took off at night in adverse weather conditions and fell at a distance of about 1,7 km from the coast. Everything was very confusing, and the headline “The Secret Catastrophe” even slipped through to the media. So, maybe, this flight was indeed classified as secret, that only one commander knew about him from the crew?


On the failure of the official version of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation on this tragedy, many experts spoke. The only thing you can agree with is the fact that the plane was in good order, which is important.

The Tu-154B-2 liner is one of the highly reliable aircraft, and if you look at the statistics, you will not find the "fault" of the machine in severe flight accidents, except for a few cases. Moreover, this aircraft has the highest thrust-weight ratio and compared to other airliners at the time of its creation, it can safely continue flying if one of the engines fails.

In the case of the Tu-154B-2, which had the tail number RA-85572, several questions not previously voiced immediately appear. The flight to Syria is quite responsible, especially with such eminent passengers - the Ensemble named after A.V. Alexandrova. It has long been known that for such flights in the 8th aviation Special Forces divisions (adon) are usually provided with a double crew, and they are prepared in advance. Moreover, the car and crew must be on combat duty or, as they say briefly, “on the database”. In this case, there can be no question not only of the emergency recruitment of the crew, but also of the search for its commander. Yes, and passengers must be warned in a few days, since there are many civilians among them, whose collection by alarm is impossible. It is not a hay to haul for cows. So why did the command of the videoconferencing arrange an emergency?

Next question. The division includes not only obsolete Tu-154Б-2, but also newer Tu-154М, which have already been to Syria and are capable of carrying commercial cargo or 18 passengers for a distance of 180 km without an intermediate airfield. Its predecessor, the Tu-3900B-154 with a similar load, is capable of covering a distance of 2 km. Agree, a noticeable difference. But it's flowers.

The division has long-range IL-62M aircraft. They are able to carry a large load for a much greater distance. In addition, the IL-62M, with full refueling, can return home using unused fuel. Hmeimim’s airfield with a runway of length 2797 m (assuming an experienced pilot is at the helm of the aircraft, since the required runway length for it depending on the ambient temperature 3000 – 3250 m) allows, in theory, to receive this plane with a run-up length of 2250 m and 1000 m run. For comparison, the An-124-100 “Ruslan” aircraft requires a runway with a length of 3000 m, and it has repeatedly appeared in the sky of Syria.

However, for some reason this car was not offered for a flight to Syria. Why?

But I consider the main issue to be different: why the flight took place at night, and not in the morning, because there is nothing to fly to Syria. Would quietly land at Mozdok, as was done more than once, and forward, to the final destination of the route. But that did not happen.


Of the above, the only conclusion that suggests itself is that this flight was originally conceived in order to conceal its purpose from Western special services and militants of the Islamic State (IG, prohibited in the Russian Federation). The fact is that the Mozdok airfield as a military object is probably under the control of US intelligence, which records which board flies there and which one flies away. The attitude of the government and the President of the United States to Russia has long been known, and it is very likely that the Pentagon would share its intelligence with the opposition. The appearance of the Tu-154 or Il-62 in Mozdok (they are currently operated mainly in the VKS) will immediately alert them.

Another thing is the civil airport Adler. When was the last time civilian planes flew to Syria? True, the pilot Volkov on the Tu-154 two months before this took off from Adler. But why and where? Or maybe it was a training flight before the planned voyage to Syria? And the flight itself at a low altitude above the sea, and at night, is not an invention of the crew commander, but rather an order, since it allowed to hide the true intentions of the command. Perhaps it was a good idea, since the experience of Ukraine made it easier to deal with a civilian plane.

But flying at a low altitude is a very complicated matter, especially over land, and requires special training. Above the sea, it is much simpler, especially at the height of 300 m. Passed an imperceptibly necessary section - and gain height in the direction of Turkey (it cannot be excluded that there was an agreement with it), to the place where you are not expected. Only the commander could have known about this. The rest of the crew had only to carry out his orders, and no questions. This was the key to success.

Such mystery should have been promoted by refueling at the airport without unloading passengers so that no one could see them. And this is a violation of all the instructions on preparing the aircraft for re-flight. And if a fire? The car was powered, besides, the auxiliary power plant had to work, not only feeding the necessary minimum of equipment, but also updating the air in the salons.

The flight over the sea was supposed to take place under the condition of radio silence, why the earth did not hear anything after leaving the runway. If this is so, then it becomes clear why they didn’t use the services of IL-62М, because to control such a hulk at low altitude hardly anyone would dare.

Now a few words about overloading the machine. In the media, the words of the crew commander addressed the dispatcher, asking him to start the run-up from the start of the runway (in other words, from its butt) because it is “heavy”. In this regard, another question arises - why was it necessary to overload the car in such a way? Yes, everything is very simple: a low-altitude flight is associated with an over-expenditure of fuel. And this is another confirmation of the version of the secrecy of the mission.

For flight in adverse weather conditions at night, everything necessary was onboard: two artificial horizons (not including emergency ones), a low-altitude radio altimeter (not including barometrics), a list of roll and slip, and a variometer (vertical speed indicator), although somewhat inertial barometric. These devices are quite enough to overcome the initial part of the path at a low altitude. But…

In this situation, it is impossible to exclude poor training (for flying at low altitude) of the crew commander and the absence of such experience from the co-pilot. But it’s not the crew’s fault, but the organizers of the action, which hardly anyone will admit, since it’s easier to blame everything on the crew, which you won’t return.


There is in this stories another vague point. As is known, the flight composition of all aircraft, whether civilian or military, is clearly regulated by the so-called flight time, after which any crew member may refuse to fly. This also leads to another question: when did the RA-85572 board commander expire on his flight time, did he have a reserve to fly to Syria?

In conclusion, the final question (since there may still be a lot of them): why was it necessary at all to arrange this window dressing? Indeed, in Syria, there are military people who are prepared for wartime. In addition, the military are not present on a permanent basis, they are rotated. So, they could do without concerts. The answer to this question is also the surface. The organizers of this action needed a political effect, no more. And they actually got it. And what are the relatives of the victims - after all, close people cannot be replaced with material compensation.

It is high time to learn that December is the most intense month of the year, especially its last days, when people, hurrying home, often commit rash acts. Examples can abound. And we, as the successor of the USSR, seem to have a desire to present “gifts” with surprises for holidays and anniversaries. With this vicious practice, it's time to stop.

A different reader may be associated with complete nonsense ... But do not rush to conclusions, because the author’s version, as a last resort, will only be judged by time. When you take on such opuses, you involuntarily ask yourself questions: how right are you in your conclusions and are there any technical errors in the text? Therefore, you have to reread the written several times, stretching this procedure, checking every word. Very much questions and the conclusions that come to mind are responsible. But every time you make sure that everything is logical, you just have to wait for the reaction of those involved in the tragedy. Will she follow?

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avia12005
    avia12005 20 August 2017 06: 42
    The author is very far from aviation, and, especially, from the military. Flight laws are written in blood. And not one pilot will not agree to violate them voluntarily, and drag others along to the grave. Dandy may be. Some are not justified by any assumptions. Another fortune telling on the coffee, or rather bloody thick.
    1. UAZ 452
      UAZ 452 20 August 2017 08: 00
      Much in this article looks like nonsense (first of all, the necessity of flying on a shaver to conceal the arrival of the Alexandrov ensemble in Syria - but would Turkey fly too, clinging to the tops of trees?), But your opinion on the scrupulous implementation of all the accumulated pile of pointers in military aviation and instructions - idealism.
      Then try to explain: why was the rule about the necessity of disembarking passengers during refueling ignored? Why was the crew recruited "pine forest"? And this is just what hide failed. And the question arises - what other rules have been violated, but no one will know about this?
      I do not pretend to have sacred knowledge, but the explanation for the tragedy is very simple in my opinion: the crew, who did not really know before departure what their name was, not to mention what to expect from (knowledge of individual psychological characteristics, mutual lapping, co-ordination - there was nothing of this by definition), crew members had sufficient experience, BUT (!) —the experience of flying in general, and not on a particular machine, they were thrown from one type of aircraft to another depending on need, so stable skills specifically the Tu-154B-2 piloting simply had nowhere to come from. This alone is enough for what happened to happen. And since the above approach is common for military transport aircraft, we are waiting for the next catastrophe.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 20 August 2017 10: 50
        Quote: UAZ 452
        Then try to explain: why was the rule about the necessity of disembarking passengers during refueling ignored?

        Pancake! In 1987, he flew from Angola to Il-76MD. We were put in for refueling in Syria. When the plane taxied to the parking lot, the tanker drove up to it. We were surrounded by military men with machine guns for preparation and were not allowed out of the plane ... We barely barely asked one to go to “sign” on the rear landing gear ... The puddle, I tell you, was huge ... but it somehow made me feel better right away ...
        So, they break little by little where it is possible and where it is impossible. Hence the results.
      2. avia12005
        avia12005 20 August 2017 11: 10
        There is nothing to explain. In the Air Force, the exit rule of passengers during refueling is not necessary. He himself sat on the plane many times at such moments. Regarding the crew and others, to say the least, your statements, the question is - how do you know? Serve on Chkalovsky?
        1. UAZ 452
          UAZ 452 20 August 2017 11: 30
          In civil aviation - mandatory, but in military, even when transporting civilian - optional? Even at a civilian airport? And how can this be regarded, otherwise, how much less concern in the BTA about passenger safety?
          "How do you know?" Have you followed this topic in the press? Repeatedly they wrote, and in reputable sources, quoting the commission’s report (there were no refusals from the leadership of the VKS, so you can believe it turns out) that the crew was assembled from the military personnel of three squadrons, that many crew members did not have enough raids on this type of aircraft.
          PS If, according to your opinion, only BTA representatives can participate in the discussion of this issue, then what do you do here yourself? Or did you prepare this flight and its crew for the flight? If so, then just your words would have to be believed last.
          1. Mik13
            Mik13 20 August 2017 19: 40
            Quote: UAZ 452
            In civil aviation - mandatory, but in military, even when transporting civilian - optional? Even at a civilian airport? And how can this be regarded, otherwise, how much less concern in the BTA about passenger safety?

            As far as I remember, in civil aviation it is also not necessary to drop off passengers when refueling.
            It is enough to have a ramp and a fire truck with the 2 aircraft. and you can refuel. EMNIP, Ershov repeatedly mentions this procedure and someone else.
          2. avia12005
            avia12005 21 August 2017 08: 07
            A typical sign of a dunno is a reproach of what he does not know himself, to his opponent. I served in the Air Force 25 years. And you?
            1. UAZ 452
              UAZ 452 21 August 2017 08: 25
              And I repeatedly flew a passenger, including the sides of the BTA. And if you think that the accident rate does not concern potential passengers, and they have no right to discuss this topic, I will not dissuade you, I just want to remind you that the same Titanic was built and operated exclusively by professionals.
              1. avia12005
                avia12005 21 August 2017 20: 40
                In aviation, you can not guess.
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 21 August 2017 09: 25
      Quote: avia12005
      Another fortune-telling on the coffee, or rather, bloody thicket.

      The scans of the official result of the investigation look convincing. It seems to me that everything is already quite clear. The article didn’t come out on time or something? Probably it should have been published before the publication of the results of the investigation.
  2. P0LYM
    P0LYM 20 August 2017 07: 01
    I like to read conspiracy theorists ... in their presentation even the fairy tale about Little Red Riding Hood will sound bright and exciting ...)))
  3. Grim Reaper
    Grim Reaper 20 August 2017 07: 32
    RenTV. But the question is: why on topvar?
  4. krops777
    krops777 20 August 2017 07: 46
    The reason, as always, is simple, without these secrets and bells and whistles, but the consequence is clearly a protracted fact.
    1. svp67
      svp67 20 August 2017 08: 20
      Quote: krops777
      The reason, as always, is simple, without these secrets and bells and whistles, but the consequence is clearly a protracted fact.

      Let's just say DECLARATION OF RESULTS OF THE CONSEQUENCE. Since these results are already clear and understandable, otherwise there would not be those permutations in Chkalovsky
      1. UAZ 452
        UAZ 452 20 August 2017 11: 34
        And where are they going? And only in Chkalovsky. or in the BTA manual too? You can still believe in a situation where the mess in the peripheral part, and the Moscow leadership does not know about it, but that there is no order in the "court" part, and the higher ones who are nearby - neither by sleep, nor by spirit, this is already beyond the limits of what is possible.
        1. svp67
          svp67 20 August 2017 13: 56
          Quote: UAZ 452
          and nearby higher ones - neither by sleep, nor by spirit, this is already beyond the bounds of the possible.

          Judging by the latest criminal history with the First Detachment, everything is possible in Russia. And someone before this incident understood what and how they "fooled" under Serdyukov? No. All modern progress began after this disaster.
      2. PPD
        PPD 20 August 2017 14: 22
        In Chkalovsky, people were fired just like that, without understanding. Almost immediately after the plane crashed.
        Like you did not serve. Evidence - and the plane crashed here and there is evidence.
  5. Gray brother
    Gray brother 20 August 2017 08: 14
    Complete nonsense.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Budilnik
    Budilnik 20 August 2017 10: 37
    maybe Gergiev’s laurels “For the Liberation of Palmyra” were haunted by someone?
  8. Tsoy
    Tsoy 20 August 2017 11: 27
    How many people have tried to popiaritsya on the tragedy? Shame should be. Especially to write such nonsense. Top secret mission with ensemble aboard? You what?
  9. Mikhail Feldman
    Mikhail Feldman 20 August 2017 11: 28
    I do not presume to completely exclude this version for obvious reasons. But there are too many sorts of “if”, “maybe”, m, etc. in it.
  10. vlad007
    vlad007 20 August 2017 12: 14
    Ironically speaking, it is possible to discuss the death of the Titanic, because there, too, not everything is clear.
    1. Ace Tambourine
      Ace Tambourine 20 August 2017 12: 34
      That .... With the Titanic it was immediately clear, the Kremlin’s hand ... The great-great-grandfather of the GDP on a polar bear was digging the board ...
  11. kunstkammer
    kunstkammer 20 August 2017 12: 58
    The organizers of this action needed a political effect, no more.

    it may very well be and then encouragement ...
    In 1986, by the anniversary of October, Major General Tarakanov drove people a red flag to hang on the pipe of the 4-th emergency power unit of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Why did he have to do this? Political effect to report to superiors. It seems that he then received the Hero of the Union.
    And they burned people ...
  12. iouris
    iouris 20 August 2017 13: 39
    Nothing new has been happening in aviation for fifty years ... eighty years. Every disaster has a position, first name and last name. Therefore, you should start by finding out (political?) The reasons why the causes of the disaster (allegedly) remain unclear.
  13. Monarchist
    Monarchist 20 August 2017 14: 06
    Author, you want to say that the ensemble im.Alexandrova and Dr. Lisa were VIP persons who had to be hidden from the attention of America and the barmales?
    I’m certainly not an expert, but flying at low altitudes is used in wartime, but is it really martial law?
  14. Monarchist
    Monarchist 20 August 2017 14: 08
    Quote: Budilnik
    maybe Gergiev’s laurels “For the Liberation of Palmyra” were haunted by someone?

    Alexandrov Ensemble and Dr. Lisa?
  15. eleronn
    eleronn 20 August 2017 15: 12
    I just read outright bullshit!
  16. Alex_59
    Alex_59 21 August 2017 09: 16
    Nikolay Yakubovich - as I understand it, this is a historian of aviation and the author of many books on our aircraft. Unfortunately, I have to admit that, before reading a number of his books, I doubted the competence of the author and, as a result, stopped his work and read and buy. And now after this text I was completely sad ...
    Above the sea it is much simpler, especially at an altitude of 300 m.
    Comrade Yakubovich must be made to fly over the night sea on the Tu-154. I would look at this attraction. True, he would be very short. Why is the Tu-154 better for night flights over the sea at an altitude of 300 meters than the IL-62 I do not understand ...

    Well and further. Complete nonsense. In garbage.
  17. Victor_B
    Victor_B 22 August 2017 07: 55
    Oh yeah!
    Conspiratorialism, it is such conspiratorialism ...
    No need to look for malicious intent where everything is explained by simple stupidity. (c) (Someone of the great)
    Well, just the Polish Minister of Defense on the wire!
    Well, I couldn’t, I just couldn’t completely drop the board for the reasons indicated in the investigation! Why couldn’t, but - because! Because I (!) Do not believe! All.
    Is there a chance that the MO is hiding something? Yes there is. They carried on board something "purely secret, before reading - burn", and why not? Well, they drove and what should the author report in detail, what, how much, where?
    This is where the author and all conspiracy theorists go with these questions - this MO can quite formulate.
    Let it be known to the author that planes are heavier than air, and military boards ... "where aviation begins, order ends." This is me military pilots for a "glass of tea" on a / b in Khorol shared.
    1. Baloo
      Baloo 23 August 2017 20: 09
      I read your komenty and here's a question for you from the amateur: can a drone get into the engine if you point along the beam for several tens of kilometers? I mean the presence of NATO ships in neutral waters.
      1. Victor_B
        Victor_B 25 August 2017 05: 50
        1. What for?
        2. It is impossible. Because it is pointless. From the word - at all! Who, when and why could calculate that military board No. will take off so-and-so?
        3. Unmanned aerial vehicles - this is a new fashionable feature, 90% of which are subsonic, with a speed less than corn.
        4. Incidentally, cruise missiles, too, are quite drones.
        5. Where are the wreckages of this prodigy?
        1. Baloo
          Baloo 25 August 2017 08: 06
          Quote: Victor_B
          Drones - this is a new fashionable chip, 90% of which are subsonic, with a speed less than corn.

          E = ms squared
          1. Victor_B
            Victor_B 26 August 2017 07: 21
            Yeah! Equally.
            And what?
            Carried a speck of antimatter in a saxophone or in red boots dancers?
            1. Baloo
              Baloo 27 August 2017 19: 37
              Quote: Victor_B
              Yeah! Equally.
              And what?
              Carried a speck of antimatter in a saxophone or in red boots dancers?

              And did not bring