Military Review

SSJ-100 emergency landing video posted in Tyumen

83
On Friday, November 01, a Yamal SSJ-100 passenger plane was forced to make an emergency landing at the airport in Tyumen, which is located in Siberia.




Allegedly, the cause of the incident was the failure of one of the two engines while the car was in the air. Starting from Tyumen in the direction of St. Petersburg, the aircraft pilots took the opposite course due to problems in the power unit. On board were 84 people, including crew members.

It is explained that during the take-off there was a blow. After that, the turbine of one of the power plants failed and, as a result, the left engine stopped working. The aircraft commander decided to use up fuel, barrage over the airport, and then land. Landing ended successfully.

There are no casualties. All passengers were promised delivery to their destination by a reserve board. As the representatives of the air carrier explained, the cause of the accident was getting a bird in the engine:

Bird hit.


The network has already posted videos dedicated to this incident. They featured a Sukhoi Superjet-100 aircraft landing on a single engine.

83 comments
Ad

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: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 2 November 2019 09: 07
    +30
    A good plane! He sat down on one engine, and didn’t even break anything for himself. No irony. All the same, pilot training is very important for flight safety.
    But the quality of the aircraft is no less.
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 2 November 2019 09: 10
      -24
      What kind of quality is this, if the positioned flagship of the civilian fleet has a disaster, then an accident?
      1. lexseyOGK
        lexseyOGK 2 November 2019 09: 16
        +19
        The bird was caught. It often happens
      2. Jerk
        Jerk 2 November 2019 09: 16
        +16
        Are you talking about getting BIRDS ?! What does quality have to do with it? !!! Just the quality is excellent - even in the case of force majeure sat!
      3. loki565
        loki565 2 November 2019 09: 18
        +17
        Two accidents caused by the crew, the plane has nothing to do with it
      4. AU Ivanov.
        AU Ivanov. 2 November 2019 10: 32
        +11
        The bird doesn’t care: what is SSJ, what is Boeing Three Axes.
        1. Slon379
          Slon379 2 November 2019 14: 09
          -6
          Only that something of ours is chosen constantly. Mystic.
          1. Piramidon
            Piramidon 2 November 2019 14: 35
            +7
            Quote: Slon379
            Only that something of ours is chosen constantly. Mystic.

            Landfills in the area of ​​airports need less to be organized. Local authorities hold accountable.
            1. Slon379
              Slon379 3 November 2019 10: 15
              -2
              You might think some superjets fly over landfills. Only birds with manic persistence climb into these engines! It’s time to be quick. All this is not casual, amid the general discredit of Russia.
              1. Piramidon
                Piramidon 3 November 2019 14: 55
                +1
                Quote: Slon379
                You might think some superjets fly over landfills. Only birds with manic persistence climb into these engines!

                Can you tell me which plane, not so long ago, landed on a corn field after a collision with a flock of seagulls?
                In order not to drive snowstorms here, you can familiarize yourself with the chronicle of major air crashes related to birds.
                https://360tv.ru/news/tekst/killer-birds/
                1. Slon379
                  Slon379 3 November 2019 20: 58
                  0
                  I’m not saying that a superjet is a bad plane, I’m focusing on the number of emergency situations, maybe they aren’t random and someone is crap. As for the blizzard, I do not drive her. About 300 airbases and about 70 superjets are operated in Russia. By your logic, for every bird in a superjet there should be 4 cases with an airbase? I didn’t hear something.
          2. slipped
            slipped 2 November 2019 14: 50
            +1
            Quote: Slon379
            Only that something of ours is chosen constantly. Mystic.


            The number of flying aircraft SSJ-100 is increasing.
      5. Sarmat Sanych
        Sarmat Sanych 2 November 2019 14: 09
        +2
        The leader of the redskins, the SSJ has had only two disasters in history - both due to the fault of the crew, not a single fault of the equipment. This is not 737MAX for you, in which there were accidents on every 2nd board plus THREE plane crashes, one about 30 wounded and two with almost 360 victims.
        SSJ100 is an excellent aircraft, much more comfortable than its competitors in the segment, 200 boards have already been launched and things are moving on. By the way, the percentage of Russian components over the course of several years has grown from 20 to 40%.
      6. datur
        datur 3 November 2019 01: 50
        +1
        A Boeing Dream
    2. NKT
      NKT 2 November 2019 09: 17
      +14
      All modern aircraft can continue flying on a single engine and “dry” is no exception.
    3. Doliva63
      Doliva63 2 November 2019 09: 22
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      A good plane! He sat down on one engine, and didn’t even break anything for himself. No irony. All the same, pilot training is very important for flight safety.
      But the quality of the aircraft is no less.

      It seems that the second engine worked before landing, it was just switched to small gas.
    4. beeper
      beeper 2 November 2019 09: 29
      +9
      Not only "sat down on one engine", already with exhausted fuel-lightweight, but, which is much more indicative, and TAKE OFF, with "full takeoff weight", ON ONE ENGINE!
      A good aircraft is "Sukhoi SuperJet-100", just the logistics of maintenance, simulators and training techniques for flight crews have not been sufficiently developed for it, this is all surmountable!
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 2 November 2019 09: 42
        +13
        This is a certification.

        Any aircraft in the world with a certificate must:
        - take off with full take-off weight on one engine, from the V1 stage (that is, when braking is no longer possible).
        - fly on one engine at a lower level, without loss of altitude or speed, below the regulations. For certification to the Atlantic, you need 3 hours to fly in this mode, for example. Without this, there will be no certificate.
        1. NKT
          NKT 2 November 2019 10: 59
          +3
          ETOPS for B777-300ER already 330 min, for A330neo 280 min
      2. Piramidon
        Piramidon 2 November 2019 14: 36
        +1
        Quote: pishchak
        and took off, with "full take-off weight", ON ONE ENGINE!

        He caught a bird after takeoff. After all, not on the runway.
    5. RUSS
      RUSS 2 November 2019 09: 58
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      A good plane! He sat down on one engine, and didn’t even break anything for himself. No irony. All the same, pilot training is very important for flight safety.
      But the quality of the aircraft is no less.

      Such aircraft are planted even without running engines, unless of course the engines fail immediately after take-off, although ours still planted on a corn field
    6. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 2 November 2019 10: 27
      -9
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      A good plane! He sat down on one engine, and didn’t even break anything for himself. No irony. All the same, pilot training is very important for flight safety.

      I don’t know what to say about the plane, but I won’t fly on such an airplane. But the crew again distinguished themselves, thanks to them, but not to Sushka. About accidents, etc. we remember, and quite recently, where people died, and how his flight life began with a disaster. I don’t know, but a superstitious man, I don’t go out to sea on the 13th and on Friday, and I don’t fly on airplanes either.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 2 November 2019 11: 52
        +5
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Don't know nov man superstitious
        May knock down a train at a pedestrian crossing.
        With superstitious this often happens.
        1. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 2 November 2019 12: 04
          -3
          Quote: Simargl
          May knock down a train at a pedestrian crossing.
          With superstitious this often happens.

          I'm sitting at home with a helmet on my head.
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 2 November 2019 12: 09
            +2
            And the neighbor from above had already torn the door off the microwave and put it above your bed.
            1. tihonmarine
              tihonmarine 2 November 2019 12: 12
              -4
              Quote: Simargl
              And the neighbor from above had already torn the door off the microwave and put it above your bed.

              Doors should be locked with curious neighbors and window grilles should be installed.
              1. Simargl
                Simargl 2 November 2019 12: 15
                +1
                Quote: tihonmarine
                Doors should be locked with curious neighbors and window grilles should be installed.
                The neighbor did not bring the microwave to you - he does it in his apartment. So a foil hat is a minimum, and better - chain mail or armor with grounding.
                It is now clear that the ancients were not fools.
                1. tihonmarine
                  tihonmarine 2 November 2019 20: 33
                  +2
                  Quote: Simargl
                  So a foil hat is a minimum, and better - chain mail or armor with grounding.

                  Everything is grounded, the neighbor burned all the wiring with high voltage, I learned from smart people that the foil does not hold electricity well, I bought two (with a margin) luminous pins for everyone and my wife and mother-in-law, I stood in line for three hours and go for grabs. My liked it, mother-in-law with a cat is not removed.
                  1. Simargl
                    Simargl 3 November 2019 06: 26
                    +1
                    Already better. But the neighbor, as I think, already bought the generator.
                    So pots can not do. Grounding plates are needed.
        2. loki565
          loki565 2 November 2019 13: 01
          +2
          May knock down a train at a pedestrian crossing.

          But sho is quite possible)))
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 2 November 2019 13: 46
            +1
            This is from a joke where the driver only caught up with the passing path in the field.
    7. parkello
      parkello 2 November 2019 13: 49
      0
      Of course Zheka plane, coupled with the crew, is always considered. yes the plane itself is very good. I heard from the pilots. And not Russian.
    8. armata_armata
      armata_armata 2 November 2019 15: 34
      +1
      A good plane!

      Good, but I won’t fly on it, just like on 737
    9. Avis-bis
      Avis-bis 2 November 2019 16: 37
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      A good plane! He sat down on one engine, and didn’t even break anything for himself.

      Takeoff with one failed engine is a prerequisite for certification. Accordingly, for a twin-engine aircraft, it takes off on one engine.
    10. The comment was deleted.
      1. armata_armata
        armata_armata 3 November 2019 00: 57
        0
        Even in the last accident, when he jumped three times ... planes of other manufacturers rarely experienced more than one jump, especially with full tanks, and then only the third time the landing gear broke through the fuel tank

        According to the certification, it was supposed not to jump, but to break right away when the kid got out to repay the blow, and in no case cause damage to the tank ..
        1. bayard
          bayard 3 November 2019 01: 06
          0
          If it had broken (as you insist), then the plane would not have sat on its belly, but would have landed on the wing, broken it (at such a speed) and flipped over in flames. Perhaps several times.
          TWO STANDS SYNCHRONOUSLY BREAKING ANYTHING WOULD NOT BE ABLE, and an imbalance in this process would lead to the above.
          The chassis, however, withstood two jumps and extinguished most of the impact force. Maybe that's why not all died. Although, of course, there was a crew error and the reason was in them (crew errors).
          1. armata_armata
            armata_armata 3 November 2019 01: 18
            -2
            If it had broken (as you insist), then the plane would not have sat on its belly, but would have landed on the wing, broken it (at such a speed) and flipped over
            TWO STANDS SYNCHRONOUSLY BREAK ANYTHING WOULD NOT BE ABLE AND AN UNbalance in this process would lead to the above

            Yes, I already understood that your specification was written by stupid people, and the superjet chassis is the best in the world ... Every second on this site has already yelled this nonsense, so there’s nothing new
            ps And by the way, according to the specification, lightning striking the hull cannot lead to the failure of flight electronics, this is the way
  2. Guillon
    Guillon 2 November 2019 09: 09
    -13
    Here you have a super-duper jet! The reliability of bourgeois technology causes, to put it mildly, distrust !!! negative
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 2 November 2019 09: 12
      +7
      Do you think our engines will continue to work after hitting birds?
      1. Guillon
        Guillon 2 November 2019 12: 14
        -3
        I believe that our engineers, science and economics are fully capable of creating competitive engines and aircraft !!! yes
        But some upstairs stubbornly do not want it! am
    2. loki565
      loki565 2 November 2019 09: 23
      0
      Here you have a super-duper jet! The reliability of bourgeois technology causes, to put it mildly, distrust !!!

      Reliability of the bourgeois ???
      And which jet can catch a bird in the engine and not suffer ??? According to modern regulations, a 2-motor aircraft should continue to take off on one engine
      Well, here's a "domestic" analogue
      1. Berkut154
        Berkut154 2 November 2019 14: 57
        +2
        There, thank God everyone was alive! The navigator suffered the most in his glass cabin. The decision of the FAC is not being discussed ... he had seconds to accept it ... but they crossed V1 ... and in general, 134 “whistles” on one take off without problems.
    3. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 2 November 2019 10: 31
      -3
      Quote: Gillaton
      Here you have a super-duper jet! The reliability of bourgeois technology causes, to put it mildly, distrust !!!

      Something we have a lot of birds bred, no matter how accident, so again "psis".
  3. Siberian 66
    Siberian 66 2 November 2019 09: 09
    +5
    Well, bravo to the Russian pilot! (c) even though they are preparing for this, adrenaline and excitement are such a thing ...
  4. Sky strike fighter
    Sky strike fighter 2 November 2019 09: 09
    -2
    SaM-146 should be changed to PD-8 faster, then there will be no problems.
    1. loki565
      loki565 2 November 2019 09: 25
      +4
      PD-8 swallows birds without any problems ??? no i don't think
    2. Hog
      Hog 2 November 2019 09: 41
      +3
      Will birds not get into PD-8?
      Well, if you close the air intake then, yes (though he will not fly then, but it’s safe).
  5. icant007
    icant007 2 November 2019 09: 11
    +2
    Something strange lately the birds flew apart. This zhzhzhzhzh for a reason ...
  6. nikolai.kolya
    nikolai.kolya 2 November 2019 09: 17
    -9
    Poor passengers .. after the last landing of the superjet, flying on such an airplane is extreme entertainment
    1. Jerk
      Jerk 2 November 2019 09: 36
      +8
      Within three days - October 24-26, the Pratt-Whitney engines (which were reduced) failed three times on the Airbus A320neo aircraft of the Indian low-cost airline Indigo. On Wednesday was the fourth case. By the way, as in the case with the Airbus A220 (Bombardier CSeria) aircraft of the Swiss, when climbing. As a result, the Indian Regulator (DGCA) demanded that the main airlines using clean-powered Pratt-Whitney engines replace all engines with more than 3000 hours of operation within two weeks. Either put the aircraft on the fence. It's about the 29 A320neo. Well the Indians got burnt. Indians have been using aircraft of this type since 2016 and have constant glitches and potentially dangerous situations on them.

      This is after one Airbus poured engine on Rome, and the other on Paris. So what, say, is flying dangerous? Fly on Boeing 737 Max - we recently celebrated the anniversary of how one such Boeing dived with all passengers in the sea, because Boeing’s engineers have their arms growing, wherefrom the legs
      1. Kaw
        Kaw 2 November 2019 09: 45
        -12
        After the disasters, they stopped flying and did not resume them until they made a change to the software. And with a relatively small number of flights, there is disaster after disaster, accident after accident. In all cases, the blame is laid on the pilots (they already refuse to fly on these machines), and we cannot make a design change, because the most breaking part was made in France. We do not have similar engines, they were in Ukraine, but after the well-known events they became inaccessible to us, and our new engines are at the development stage, they should be expected for a few more years (if they appear at all).
        1. Jerk
          Jerk 2 November 2019 09: 50
          +7
          BEFORE the catastrophe, they knew about an irreparable defect dangerous to use - and at the same time made TWO catastrophes with hundreds of corpses! And flights have not been resumed at all! Learn the materiel!
          1. Olezhek
            Olezhek 2 November 2019 17: 58
            0
            And with a relatively small number of flights, there is disaster after disaster, accident after accident. In all cases, the blame is laid on the pilots (they already refuse to fly on these machines)


            and at the same time TWO disasters were made with hundreds of corpses! And flights have not been resumed at all! Learn the materiel!


            You know, let's stop "exposing the bourgeoisie" and put things in order in our own aviation.
        2. Avis-bis
          Avis-bis 2 November 2019 16: 39
          +2
          Quote: Kaw
          catastrophe after catastrophe, accident after accident.

          Come on, bring these "catastrophe after catastrophe".
      2. donavi49
        donavi49 2 November 2019 09: 48
        +1
        In fact, it’s not so critical there. I mean, this is a tough and potentially deadly jamb - for which the certificate was correctly revoked.

        However, the first crew encountered this and overcame it; moreover, they didn’t even write down what was buggy about them. As a result, the ground technicians simply rebooted everything and conducted ground tests of the computer system. The second crew panicked and did not overcome on the same plane.

        Ethiopians - ignored the protocol for circumventing the problem (they even had a flight book, it was not updated to the new protocol), here we have to beat AK well.
        1. Jerk
          Jerk 2 November 2019 09: 54
          +3
          In fact, the alignment system was switched on unnoticed by the pilot, and the pilots among the Indians, like the Ethiopians, EVEN DIDN'T SUSPECT! What could they record there? This is pure murder. From Krivorukov engineers from Boeing. And they knew about it, that's why the corporation’s report on the malfunction of this corporation’s own test pilot was driven under the fingernail and declassified only a year later, already after 2 disasters! They knew how it threatened! Here intentional killing in general!
          1. Cook
            Cook 2 November 2019 12: 08
            +3
            They could record, and recorded by the way, about which warning boards popped up immediately before the unauthorized activation of the MCAS system. Three days before the crash, on the crashed plane, remarks were constantly recorded: the “speed” and “spatial position” signal flags were dropped on the PBC command pilot device (PFD), the SPEED TRIM FAIL, MAX TRIM FAIL, and STAB DIFF PRESSURE displays illuminated about problems in the automatic trim system. There was also a tanning board warning of a difference in readings, speed and spatial position of the aircraft between the devices of the 2nd pilot and the FAC. And the engineering and technical personnel wrote it all off by successfully passing tests of the built-in control and flushing the plug of the stabilizer control computer. So, at least for the Indonesian case, not only Boeing has questions. The point is not that the MCAS system itself is flawed, but that it is capable of unauthorized interference in the control of the aircraft, in the event of a failure of the sensors providing flight information for it. If the engineering service had timely identified a faulty sensor and fixed it, then perhaps such problems would not have occurred. And the main question for the Boeing is why full-fledged tests of this system were not carried out, taking into account the failure of the channels of information coming into it.
            1. Jerk
              Jerk 2 November 2019 12: 23
              -1
              So, at least for the Indonesian case, not only Boeing has questions.

              ONLY TO BOEING:
              Until now, information about MCAS was not only not in the flight operation manual (FCOM; RLE), nothing was said about it and in the course of retraining Boeing 737NG pilots for a new type of aircraft :: Boeing

              What the fuck, mechanics, even the pilots did not know that such a system is generally on board !!! ONLY TO BOEING QUESTION !!!
              In the design of the latest Boeing 737MAX, an automatic control system element was discovered, the existence of which the pilots had no information about. The American aircraft manufacturer Boeing has released a newsletter for airlines informing about the principles of operation of the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS). In the current version of the flight manual for Boeing 737-8 and -9 aircraft, only the MCAS abbreviation is given, there was no other information, and the previous generation did not have the system itself. According to Aviation Week, the release of the Boeing newsletter is most likely related to the investigation into the recent crash of the 737MAX aircraft owned by the Indonesian low-cost airline Lion Air.
            2. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 2 November 2019 12: 38
              +3
              Quote: Cook
              If the engineering service had timely identified a faulty sensor and fixed it, then perhaps such problems would not have occurred.

              hi Last week, flightglobal wrote that the sensor was after repair. He glided somewhere on ng, it was repaired in Florida, and then he got replaced by an Indonesian max.
              There are kilogram questions, it's not for nothing that the FBI works. Definitely BOEING & FAA "distinguished themselves" on a couple.
            3. Town Hall
              Town Hall 2 November 2019 12: 46
              +1
              Quote: Cook
              And the main question for the Boeing is why full-fledged tests of this system were not carried out, taking into account the failure of the channels of information coming into it.

              Because after the 3rd / 4th operation of the ICAC, any Boeing pilot had to turn off the electric motors of the stabilizers and switch to manual control of them. This protocol has existed since the 60s in the Boeing RLE.
              The main question for Boeing is why the ICAC was tied to only 1 sensor
          2. Olezhek
            Olezhek 2 November 2019 18: 03
            0
            corporation test pilot drove under the nail and declassified only a year later, a lot after the 2 disasters! They knew how it threatened! Here intentional killing in general!


            I recommend not to yell, but to compare accident rates in the USA and the Russian Federation
            You will be very surprised.
      3. nikolai.kolya
        nikolai.kolya 2 November 2019 10: 54
        -5
        An article about superjays if you haven’t noticed
        1. Jerk
          Jerk 2 November 2019 12: 26
          0
          I say, do not fly on them. There are more reliable ones - 737 Max Boeing and Airbus 320, which were forbidden to fly ... Otherwise, what a horror - a bird can get into the dviglo Dry! They don’t fall into other dvigla, birds, especially roosters - they are all Eurointegrated!
          1. nikolai.kolya
            nikolai.kolya 2 November 2019 12: 32
            -6
            Come on calm down!
            I don’t care what the Boeing and Airbus have ..
            But when choosing a flight, I don’t take a ticket for super ... personally for me their reputation is a drain
            1. Ros 56
              Ros 56 2 November 2019 13: 57
              +4
              Fly on 737 they beat more often.
        2. Ros 56
          Ros 56 2 November 2019 13: 59
          +4
          An article about normal pilots, if you have not noticed, that they have a superjet, that a Boeing with Airbus.
  7. Ros 56
    Ros 56 2 November 2019 09: 22
    +7
    The usual landing, only contingent, is practiced without fail on the simulator, I have a friend, the pilot, however, has now retired and has flown until the age of 60. says: it’s the duty of the pilots to land the plane.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 2 November 2019 10: 43
      +1
      Quote: Ros 56
      I have a friend, a pilot, though now he has retired and so he flew until 60 years. says: it’s the duty of the pilots to land the plane.

      So earlier, about 20 years ago, both planes took off and landed "hand-to-hand", I especially remember when I flew with the guys from "Polar Aviation" and the Military Transport Aviation in the North, the specialists were healthy.
      1. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 2 November 2019 12: 45
        +3
        So now they are dragging it. The aircraft is certified taking into account all the requirements, the working situation, well done.
        Of course, positive news and it requires widespread media coverage, the plane must be rehabilitated. He would also be relieved of his dependence on "friends" and he will fly happily ever after
  8. KCA
    KCA 2 November 2019 09: 33
    +3
    A bike, or maybe not, as Soviet aircraft certified carcasses of hens from airguns in the forehead, everyone holds ours, in the trash, one, two, three, they asked Lufganza for help, those eyes on the forehead - Don’t you defrost the hens?
    1. loki565
      loki565 2 November 2019 09: 39
      +3
      Then it depends on which bird and where it will go.


    2. Pete mitchell
      Pete mitchell 2 November 2019 13: 31
      +2
      They talked about engine manufacturers, I also heard. It happens, and this is quite fresh: landing 737, when passing through a flock of birds above the end, up to 40 were counted
  9. Kaw
    Kaw 2 November 2019 09: 39
    -2
    These aircraft have big engine problems. Most buyers abandoned it precisely because of engines (French) that constantly fail, and it is almost impossible to order new ones.
    1. D16
      D16 2 November 2019 10: 02
      +4
      A-220 has big problems with engines. And for SSJ, it’s completely solvable garbage. Just the greed of the French knows no bounds, and they do not want to make GG for replacement engines, although they recognize and eliminate their jambs. They just do it for a very long time.
      1. Genry
        Genry 2 November 2019 11: 18
        +1
        Quote: D16
        A-220 has big problems with engines.

        Engines slowly had to be changed annually (SuperJet resting). Then the problem gained fame and caused a reaction:
        https://news.aviation-safety.net/2019/09/27/airbus-a220-pw1500g-engine-failures-prompt-inspection-ad/
        The FAA has issued an airworthiness directive (AD) requiring initial and retesting of certain Pratt & Whitney turbofan engines following two recent incidents.

        The first shutdown of infiltration occurred on July 25, 2019, and the second on September 16, 2019. In both cases, it was an aircraft of the Swiss International Air Lines Airbus A220-300 powered by Pratt & Whitney PW1524G-3 engines.
        These shutdowns were caused by a malfunction of the rotor of the 1st stage of the low pressure compressor (LPC), as a result of which the rotor disc came out of the LPC casing and the engine was damaged.

        In order to avoid relapses, the FAP requires initial and repeated checks of the borescope of the input guide vane KND (VNA) and the rotor of the 1st stage KND and, depending on the results of the checks, the replacement of the KND.

        Although these incidents occurred on the PW1524G-3 turbofan engine models, the FAA includes the PW1900 engines because the similarity in type design makes these engines susceptible to the same unsafe condition. The necessary checks must be carried out during 50 flight cycles from September 26, and then with an interval of not more than 50 flight cycles until the engine accumulates 300 flight cycles.

        An investigation into both incidents has been delegated to the NTSB.

        Aircraft with these engines were banned to go, in cruising mode, at a power of more than 94%, which affects their efficiency. And, in addition, it knocks out flights of these aircraft from the schedule of airports, which is close to the extremely saturated and shifts cause an avalanche of changes at other airports.
  10. 4ekist
    4ekist 2 November 2019 12: 09
    +3
    Thanks to the pilots for competent actions.
  11. monah
    monah 2 November 2019 12: 42
    0
    The information is clearly intended for the victims of innovative education "the city of Tyumen, located in Siberia" cool infa!
  12. Berkut154
    Berkut154 2 November 2019 14: 03
    0
    If someone is not in the know, then turning off one engine in flight is not an emergency. Not a single aircraft will receive a certificate until it takes off on a single engine with full commercial load. There was a case when the engine was accidentally turned off from St. Petersburg to Moscow at 319 and did not even notice immediately ..,.
  13. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 2 November 2019 14: 37
    +1
    SSJ is becoming more and more in pieces and they fly more often. Generally strange painful press attention. Aeroflot itself was guilty of the disaster, which trained the crews poorly ... about the aeroflot SILENCE .... nor, by the way, paid all the compensation before the end of the investigation. Since then, one Airbus sat on its belly, a couple, a trio of Boeings also sat down with one engine. And silence.
    I don’t know how to work, but for a passenger it’s better than its competitors, Embras and Bombardier. In it you fly as in Airbus 319. And in those you feel that it is a small class.
    1. Aleksandr21
      Aleksandr21 2 November 2019 17: 22
      0
      Quote: Zaurbek
      SSJ is becoming more and more in pieces and they fly more often.


      Well, how can I say, if only under current contracts, there is production and then not to say that we directly produce a lot. And sales are all sad:

      Kommersant: SSJ-100 manufacturer has sold only one aircraft since the beginning of 2019
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 2 November 2019 17: 58
        0
        Nevertheless, there are already over 100 of them ...
        1. Uncle Vanya Susanin
          Uncle Vanya Susanin 2 November 2019 19: 43
          0
          193 pieces released
  14. Avis-bis
    Avis-bis 2 November 2019 16: 46
    -1
    The aircraft commander decided to use up fuel, bartering over the airport

    Eh?
    BARRAGE (from the French. Barrage - boom).
    Duty of fighter aircraft in the air over a certain area in order to intercept enemy air attack equipment.

    From whom did the su-jet "barricade" someone there?
    and then land.

    And what - was there an option to stay in the air?