Ural A320 lands in field

[knot4u]

I don’t fly Gulfstreams any more. To indulge your question though, we didn’t trust the Mx in Russia, so we would’ve never MELed the fuel indications. If we had Mx in Western European countries, we would’ve trusted them more. However, we never had issues with the fuel system. Yes, we had an MEL.

Now, I fly bigger airplanes, as a lot of people do on here, and Mx has absolutely screwed pilots over by either incorrectly sticking the tanks, or not doing it at all. So the original point stands, both in this side topic, and as far as Russia, Mx, and fuel issues.

Also, on Russian flying, if fuel indication problems did happen, most of our flights we wouldn’t have been able to “top it off and send it” due to leg lengths and max landing weight issues.

So because you didn't trust MX you'd ignore the EICAS until you got back to Western Europe? While I consider that a bit disconcerting I don't blame you, I'd of done the same thing. Gulfstreams are remarkable airplanes, solid and honest, if you flew it in and can get the engines started it'll fly out even with full tanks. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I've never worked on a "121" airplane so their MX is foreign to me. I don't care about them. I'm glad to hear you don't get your hands dirty anymore, it must be a ridge you've peaked and now you see the mountain ahead. I hope everything you want comes to fruition.

 

[SteveC]

So because you didn't trust MX you'd ignore the EICAS until you got back to Western Europe? ...

That's not what he said.

 

[knot4u]

That's not what he said.

I know Steve, I might've been doing this for a little while. I once had a DOM tell me that if someone sent him an email or text about a "situation" the response was always "Call Me!", that way there was no written record. I hate the game, but pretending you never played is disingenuous.

 

[Stone Cold]

So because you didn't trust MX you'd ignore the EICAS until you got back to Western Europe? While I consider that a bit disconcerting I don't blame you, I'd of done the same thing. Gulfstreams are remarkable airplanes, solid and honest, if you flew it in and can get the engines started it'll fly out even with full tanks. I've said this before and I'll say it again, I've never worked on a "121" airplane so their MX is foreign to me. I don't care about them. I'm glad to hear you don't get your hands dirty anymore, it must be a ridge you've peaked and now you see the mountain ahead. I hope everything you want comes to fruition.

As SteveC said, that’s not what I said. I never have and never would “ignore an EICAS”.

I don’t understand the last part though…never get my hands dirty? I’m a pilot. We get paid to not get dirty. I know you despise pilots for it, but it’s a fact. I used to be a computer technician in the Navy and worked for a living. I have progressed in my career to where I now am paid to think, fly planes, and make decisions with the input from the crew, including the ride along Mx. I take pride in making sure everybody is heard and have a very open cockpit.

I have the utmost respect for our Mx people as they continually ride the plane when we get to go to the hotel. I take their input, just as I do every other crewmember. I do not look down on them, like you try to do to us pilots.

However, if you think me not getting my hands dirty is an insult, it is not. I take great pride in my career and how I operate an airplane. It was the same in Ukraine, and in Russia, when I was flying VVIP clientele. I didn’t get my hands dirty there either. Ymmv.

 

[knot4u]

As SteveC said, that’s not what I said. I never have and never would “ignore an EICAS”.

I don’t understand the last part though…never get my hands dirty? I’m a pilot. We get paid to not get dirty. I know you despise pilots for it, but it’s a fact. I used to be a computer technician in the Navy and worked for a living. I have progressed in my career to where I now am paid to think, fly planes, and make decisions with the input from the crew, including the ride along Mx. I take pride in making sure everybody is heard and have a very open cockpit.

I have the utmost respect for our Mx people as they continually ride the plane when we get to go to the hotel. I take their input, just as I do every other crewmember. I do not look down on them, like you try to do to us pilots.

However, if you think me not getting my hands dirty is an insult, it is not. I take great pride in my career and how I operate an airplane. It was the same in Ukraine, and in Russia, when I was flying VVIP clientele. I didn’t get my hands dirty there either. Ymmv.

You've completely misunderstood my point. I doubt you've never gotten your hands dirty, I don't understand why you think that's something to be proud of.

 

[Stone Cold]

You've completely misunderstood my point. I doubt you've never gotten your hands dirty, I don't understand why you think that's something to be proud of.

You’re right, I didn’t understand your point. It’s not something I’m proud of, nor is it something I’m ashamed of either. It is the job.

I took it at face value from you what you said. Maybe you could clarify.

 

[flyinggreasemnky]

I'd like to hear about those. Pretending a pilot took off without knowing how much fuel was onboard and blaming MX when they ran out is pathetic. I agree, if the fuel quantity indication system is inop let's just park the airplane. I remember one of the first things drilled into my head as a student pilot was never trust the fuel gage, so I'd physically check the quantity before every flight and plan accordingly. I don't know what else to say other than blaming MX feels like a cheap shot. Are you so precious that you can't actually verify the quantity of the fuel on the airplane you're going to fly? The option I've often seen used in these situations in the MEL is "top it off", certainly not cost effective but it's always worked.

These incidents happened on Heavy aircraft (744 and MD11/10). These are not Cessnas and you must be able to trust the qty indications that you have. You also can't just fill to the max and go, as you will run into performance issues like being over max weight for takeoff or landing. The MELs require Mx to take the measurement from the farthest magnetic float sticks that come out of the fuel panels and use that measurement in the chart to determine the correct amount of fuel in that tank. The pilots then input into the FMC the amount of fuel onboard given to them by MX. You have to trust that Mx did their job correctly. In one incident, the captain had a bad feeling and delayed the flight over an hour while he confirmed with Mx, the fueler and Dx that it was done correctly. After enough reassurance and pressure to go, he acquiesced and ended up diverting about two hours shy of his destination. In another incident, the mechanic told me first hand how he messed it up and resulted in a 744 having an engine rollback over the border between India and Pakistan.

As an A&P, I can assure you I'm not too precious to do anything on an airplane. As a captain, I am not even permitted to perform that procedure as I am not trained on the specific type on our certificate as a mechanic. Your reply reminds me of the CNN analyst that is a private pilot using his expertise to tell everyone how an airliner is flown.

 

[derg]

I don’t fly Gulfstreams any more. To indulge your question though, we didn’t trust the Mx in Russia, so we would’ve never MELed the fuel indications. If we had Mx in Western European countries, we would’ve trusted them more. However, we never had issues with the fuel system. Yes, we had an MEL.

Now, I fly bigger airplanes, as a lot of people do on here, and Mx has absolutely screwed pilots over by either incorrectly sticking the tanks, or not doing it at all. So the original point stands, both in this side topic, and as far as Russia, Mx, and fuel issues.

Also, on Russian flying, if fuel indication problems did happen, most of our flights we wouldn’t have been able to “top it off and send it” due to leg lengths and max landing weight issues.

Smart man!

Our MEL's are hyper specific about measuring fuel quantity when the indicator is out. Then it also requires a paper fuel slip which is pretty challenging to 'pencil whip' as well.

I've been to SVO probably ten times over the years, each time was… "special".

 

[Richman]

Smart man!

Our MEL's are hyper specific about measuring fuel quantity when the indicator is out. Then it also requires a paper fuel slip which is pretty challenging to 'pencil whip' as well.

I've been to SVO probably ten times over the years, each time was… "special".

There are places in the world where if the "form is filled out correctly", there can be no problem.

 

[schloopy]

Didn't know this part:

…one of the main contributing factors was the Russian attitude of avoiding non-standard decisions…

Turning a fully functional jet into a raging inferno on a runway in Moscow a few years ago and murdering one of my best friends is just another example of this. And it was the same story then, hero pilots manage to “save” half the passengers after a perilous lightning strike. Being the “pilot guy” at the funeral, it was really fun having to try and explain why exactly he was dead and not having a real answer to give. Maybe those pilots and these guys can get together and trade notes.

 

[bimmerphile]

These incidents happened on Heavy aircraft (744 and MD11/10). These are not Cessnas and you must be able to trust the qty indications that you have. You also can't just fill to the max and go, as you will run into performance issues like being over max weight for takeoff or landing. The MELs require Mx to take the measurement from the farthest magnetic float sticks that come out of the fuel panels and use that measurement in the chart to determine the correct amount of fuel in that tank. The pilots then input into the FMC the amount of fuel onboard given to them by MX. You have to trust that Mx did their job correctly. In one incident, the captain had a bad feeling and delayed the flight over an hour while he confirmed with Mx, the fueler and Dx that it was done correctly. After enough reassurance and pressure to go, he acquiesced and ended up diverting about two hours shy of his destination. In another incident, the mechanic told me first hand how he messed it up and resulted in a 744 having an engine rollback over the border between India and Pakistan.

As an A&P, I can assure you I'm not too precious to do anything on an airplane. As a captain, I am not even permitted to perform that procedure as I am not trained on the specific type on our certificate as a mechanic. Your reply reminds me of the CNN analyst that is a private pilot using his expertise to tell everyone how an airliner is flown.

accurate except for the part chirping the guy who likely knows more about aviation in a broader scope than any of us ever will

(only les abend can tell us how an airliner flies- airline pilot are just superior communicators)

 

[ChasenSFO]

Turning a fully functional jet into a raging inferno on a runway in Moscow a few years ago and murdering one of my best friends is just another example of this. And it was the same story then, hero pilots manage to “save” half the passengers after a perilous lightning strike. Being the “pilot guy” at the funeral, it was really fun having to try and explain why exactly he was dead and not having a real answer to give. Maybe those pilots and these guys can get together and trade notes.

I'm sorry. That accident is second only to the Saudia L-1011 ground fire incident to me in "wait, HOW?!". Best I can gather from everything I read is they were so worked up over a comm/electrical failure to some extent that they piled it into the runway so hard it flipping blew up. Not what you'd expect from a legacy\national carrier in a global alliance...

 

[schloopy]

I'm sorry. That accident is second only to the Saudia L-1011 ground fire incident to me in "wait, HOW?!". Best I can gather from everything I read is they were so worked up over a comm/electrical failure to some extent that they piled it into the runway so hard it flipping blew up. Not what you'd expect from a legacy\national carrier in a global alliance...

I try to stay unbiased but I truly think its one of the more grim accidents we’ve seen in the modern era. Just a complete catastrophe of poor decision making with a not-even-close overweight and overspeed landing to top it off. Not that it would have saved my friend behind the exit row but the passengers grabbing carry ons was another factor. Plenty of video of a pretty nonchalant flight crew (the pilots at least, I know there were FAs in the cabin working hard and at least one didn’t survive), the fact that a final report is a complete pipe dream, and as you said a global carrier washing their hands of it….there’s a lot of people and things to hate about the situation.

 

[Wardogg]

CONFIRMED: Ural Airlines to attempt A320 take-off from field

Ural Airlines has confirmed that it will attempt to fly its Airbus A320 out of the field it became stranded in following an emergency off-airport landing on September 12.

www.key.aero

 

[ChasenSFO]

CONFIRMED: Ural Airlines to attempt A320 take-off from field

Ural Airlines has confirmed that it will attempt to fly its Airbus A320 out of the field it became stranded in following an emergency off-airport landing on September 12.

www.key.aero

Damn, I know TACA did it with a 733, but those things are built like tanks compared to an A320 so offroading in the bus impresses me more. I guess Russia doesn't want to regulate an A320 to spare parts with no new ones coming in. Regardless of why they ran out of gas, it is very impressive that the airplane is still airworthy in its immediate post-landing state.

 

[Richman]

Damn, I know TACA did it with a 733, but those things are built like tanks compared to an A320 so offroading in the bus impresses me more. I guess Russia doesn't want to regulate an A320 to spare parts with no new ones coming in. Regardless of why they ran out of gas, it is very impressive that the airplane is still airworthy in its immediate post-landing state.

I believe the TACA jet also landed on the levee out by Michoud (pronounced “Mee-shoe”). The levee in question, and in fact most if not all around NOLA are very firmly packed and most have a gravel access road on top. No different really than landing on a gravel strip.

Still an awesome job by that crew. They towed the airplane off the levee, replaced the engines and departed from a wide street that used to be a runway (Michoud used to be an old air base). Airplane was repaired and went back into service.

It was just learning to fly out at KNEW when that happened. It was quite the topic of conversation.

 

[ChasenSFO]

On a side note, I just noticed this in the latest article:

Skuratov says that as a result of the failure, the required landing distance increased beyond the 2,500m offered by Omsk. The crew subsequently decided to divert to Novosibirsk located approximately 375 miles (600km) to the east of its planned destination.

Hmm, so...what is worse? An over-run with all the trucks standing by, or peacing out to a larger airport without checking you have enough fuel first and putting it in a remote field with no equipment on standby? Interesting event. Lol.

 

[CFI A&P]

Has anyone heard if they’ll use Marston mats for this, or just go for TOGA, “yeet” the side stick and hope it gets out of there?

 

[MikeD]

Has anyone heard if they’ll use Marston mats for this, or just go for TOGA, “yeet” the side stick and hope it gets out of there?

They should lay down the PSP planking, Vietnam airbase style.

 

[invadertim]

Its already getting cold, They might just wait for it to freeze solid and bulldoze it smoothish.