The pilot should not have flown. The investigation into the plane crash in Kazan has been completed. Boeing crash in Kazan: The Investigative Committee announced the causes of the Boeing 737 500 plane crash of Tatarstan Airlines

November 18, 2013

According to information received, on November 17, 2013 at 7 p.m. 23 minutes Moscow time at the Kazan airport during landing, a Boeing 737-500 aircraft of the TATARSTAN airline of the Tatar MTU VT FAVT crashed.
Six crew members and forty-four passengers on board the aircraft were killed. The plane is destroyed.
Based on Russian legislation and in accordance with the “Investigation Rules” aviation accidents and incidents with civil aircraft in Russian Federation", approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 18, 1998 No. 609, as well as taking into account the requirements of Appendix 13 to the Convention on International civil aviation, the investigation is being conducted by a commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee with the participation of specialists from the Federal Air Transport Agency and other interested departments.
The commission began work at the scene of the accident.

November 18, 2013

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee for the investigation of the crash of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that a parametric information flight recorder container was found at the scene of the accident.
The recorder container has significant mechanical damage.

November 18, 2013

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee to investigate the crash of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that a container for a flight voice data recorder was found at the scene of the accident.
The recorder container has significant damage.

November 18, 2013

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) to investigate the crash of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that the containers of on-board means of objective monitoring of parametric and speech information (the so-called black boxes) found at the scene of the accident were delivered to the Interstate aviation committee.
Opening of containers, reading of information recorded on on-board media and its decoding will be carried out at the scientific and technical center of the Committee.

November 19, 2013

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) to investigate an accident involving a Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs about the preliminary results of decoding the information from the flight parametric recorder.
During the landing approach, the crew failed to perform a standard approach in accordance with the procedure established by regulatory documentation. Having assessed the aircraft’s position relative to the runway as “non-landing”, the crew reported to the controller and began a missed approach in TOGA mode (Take Off / Go Around. Takeoff / Missed approach). At the same time, one of the two autopilots involved in the landing process was turned off and the further flight was carried out in manual mode.
The engines reached a mode close to takeoff. The crew retracted the flaps from the 30° position to the 15° position.
Under the influence of the pitching moment from the engine thrust, the plane began to climb and reached a pitch angle of about 25°. The indicated speed began to decrease. The crew cleared the landing gear. From the moment the go-around began until this time, the crew did not take active steps to control the aircraft.
After reducing the speed from 150 to 125 kts, the crew began control actions with the helm column to put the aircraft into a dive, which led to the cessation of the climb, the beginning of the aircraft's descent and an increase in the indicated speed. The maximum angles of attack during flight did not exceed operational limits.
The plane, having reached an altitude of 700 m, began an intense dive with a pitch angle that reached -75° by the end of the flight (end of recording).
The plane collided with the ground high speed(more than 450 km/h) and a large negative pitch angle.
About 45 seconds passed from the start of the missed approach to the end of the recording; the descent took about 20 seconds.
Power plants worked until the plane collided with the ground. Based on the results of the preliminary analysis, no one-time commands characterizing failures of systems and components of the aircraft and engines were identified.
The analysis and decoding of parametric information continues.
The Commission notes that when the voice recorder container was opened, the secure container with the tape drive mechanism was missing. The commission continues to search for the device.
The technical commission continues to work at the scene of the accident. The airline's flight documentation and crew training are being studied, including with the involvement of highly professional line pilots who have extensive experience in operating this type of aircraft in leading Russian airlines. The airline's technical documentation is being studied, including on aircraft maintenance and maintaining their airworthiness in accordance with international regulations. Information from ground-based objective monitoring equipment, weather conditions and air traffic services data are analyzed.
The IAC Technical Commission will regularly inform you about the progress of the investigation.

November 20, 2013

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) to investigate the crash of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that a voice data carrier unit of the flight recorder was found at the scene of the accident.
The found block will be delivered to the IAC for the necessary work to be carried out at the Committee’s scientific and technical center.
The scientific and technical center continues to carry out a large amount of work on further decoding and analysis of parametric recorder information, including the Kazan-Domodedovo flight that preceded the emergency, and other flights.
Work is planned to synchronize and jointly process records of ground-based and airborne objective monitoring equipment.
The technical commission continues its work at the scene of the accident.

November 22, 2013

In connection with questions that have appeared in the media about the causes and versions of the crash of the Boeing 737-500 of Tatarstan Airlines, the Technical Commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) informs:
According to on-board objective monitoring equipment, no failures of aircraft systems, components and controls, including the elevator channel, were recorded. The plane's engines were running until it hit the ground.
The IAC has repeatedly explained that ICAO standards for so-called “old” and “new” aircraft do not exist. The main thing for safety is the airworthiness of the aircraft, not its age. There is no direct relationship between aircraft crashes and their age. Over the past five years, the number of accidents in the world, including Russia, with aircraft with a passenger capacity of more than 50 seats is the same for aircraft under 5 years old and over 30 years old. According to available information, the average age of Boeing 737-500 aircraft operated in the United States is 20.4 years. In Europe – 20.3 years. More than 7,600 Boeing aircraft are in operation around the world. Their total flight time is 257.6 million flight hours. The crash rate of Boeing 737 aircraft per 100 thousand flight hours is less than 0.05.
The Interstate Aviation Committee asks to refrain from “PR” and populism against the backdrop of a serious tragedy. This traumatizes the relatives and friends of the victims and disrupts the work of the aviation transport industry.
The IAC Technical Commission continues its professional work to establish the circumstances and causes of the disaster in accordance with ICAO standards.

November 22, 2013

At the IAC Scientific and Technical Center, work continues to decipher the information recorded on the on-board voice recorder of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of TATARSTAN airlines, which crashed on November 17, 2013 at Kazan airport. There remains a significant amount of work to recognize and identify the voices of flight crew members, and subsequent synchronization of recorded information from ground-based and on-board objective monitoring equipment.
The IAC Technical Commission continues its work.

November 28, 2013

At the Scientific and Technical Center of the Interstate Aviation Committee, with the participation of representatives of the flight crew of Tatarstan Airlines, who know the voices of the crew members well, work was carried out to identify voices in the aircraft cockpit recorded on the recording of the flight voice recorder. These specialists signed a preliminary protocol of negotiations between crew members. At this stage, there were no signs of strangers in the pilot's cabin. Work on decoding and identifying voices continues.

November 29, 2013

The Technical Commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee for the investigation of the crash of the Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that, based on a preliminary analysis of data from objective control means and other available information, in accordance with the provisions of the Rules for the Investigation of Aviation Accidents and Incidents with Civil Aircraft in the Russian Federation (PRAPI), the commission considers it appropriate to implement the following operational recommendations to improve flight safety:
1. Consider the feasibility of conducting additional classes and training with flight personnel:
on practicing actions during a go-around in director mode, paying special attention to the procedure for leaving an intermediate altitude when the altitude value that needs to be gained during the go-around is close to the current value, as well as the procedure for conducting radio communications;
on recognizing a difficult spatial position of an aircraft (Upset) and practicing actions to recover an aircraft from a difficult spatial position (Upset recovery);
on the order and features of the operation of aircraft systems (autopilot, flight director) during approach and go-around, depending on specific conditions;
to study the features of the aircraft navigation system (section FCOM: FMC Navigation Check and Navigation Position).
2. Consider the need to refine the work technologies of ATS specialists in terms of providing (in case of significant deviations from the route) more active assistance to aircraft crews if technical capabilities are available, for example, by submitting a request to the crew to perform vectoring to put the aircraft on a landing course.
3. Hold a flight technical conference to exchange experience in operating Boeing 737 family aircraft.
The specified recommendations in the form of a Subsequent Report on an Aviation Accident in accordance with the PRAPI were communicated to the Federal Air Transport Agency.
The flight documentation of Tatarstan Airlines is being checked for initial training, as well as for retraining on the Boeing 737 and undergoing periodic training and inspections by flight crew members.

September 16, 2014

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee for the investigation of an accident with a Boeing 737-500 aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines informs that the work of the engineering and technical subcommittee for research and performance analysis has been completed aviation technology, including elevator control systems, in an emergency flight.
To assess the performance of the elevator control system, a number of studies were carried out:
three-dimensional tomography of the hydraulic drives of the left and right halves of the elevator;
complete disassembly and assessment of the condition of hydraulic drives;
bench testing of main switchgears (spool valves) of hydraulic drives;
preparation (cutting) of a number of hydraulic drive elements to assess the condition of internal surfaces;
mathematical modeling of aircraft movement and operation of the elevator control system using records of objective control means.
An engineering analysis of the operation of the system of two hydraulic elevator drives was also carried out, simulating all possible options for jamming of the main switchgears.
The history of operation of this type of hydraulic drives and materials from the investigation of events related to abnormal operation of the elevator control system that occurred in operation on Boeing 737 type aircraft were studied earlier. The analysis showed that the circumstances of the events that took place related to abnormal operation of the hydraulic elevator actuators differ from the circumstances of the emergency flight.
Based on all the work carried out, the engineering and technical subcommittee concluded that the records of objective monitoring equipment, as well as the surviving parts, components and assemblies of the airframe, engines and systems, including the elevator control system, showed no signs of failure of the aircraft during the emergency flight.
The commission is completing work to establish all the causes and factors of the accident.

April 29, 2015

The technical commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) has completed a set of works to investigate the crash of the Boeing 737 500 VQ-BBN aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines.
During the investigation, the entire necessary amount of work was carried out, including: the field stage of the investigation, including drawing up maps of the accident site, as well as a full-scale layout of the surviving fragments of the aircraft; decoding and analysis of recordings of ground and airborne objective monitoring equipment; special studies of hydraulic elevator drives; mathematical modeling of flight; flight evaluation of crew performance by test pilots and experienced flight pilots; simulator experiment; study of data on crew training, work and rest schedules, organization of flight work and the airline’s flight safety management system; study of medical documents and results of forensic medical research; study of data on aircraft maintenance and technical operation.
Based on the results of the work, the Technical Commission prepared a draft Final Report.
In accordance with the Standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization, after translation into English, the draft report will be sent to authorized representatives: the US National Transport Safety Bureau, the UK Aircraft Accident Investigation Agency, and the French Air Accident Investigation Bureau. These states took part in the investigation.
After receiving and considering comments from states, the Final Report will be published on the official website of the IAC on the Internet.

December 23, 2015

The Commission of the Interstate Aviation Committee completed the investigation of the accident involving the Boeing 737-500 VQ-BBN aircraft of Tatarstan Airlines OJSC, which occurred on November 17, 2013 at Kazan airport.

The cause of the crash of the Boeing 737-500 VQ-BBN aircraft was systemic deficiencies in identifying hazards and controlling the level of risk, as well as the inoperability of the airline’s flight safety management system and the lack of control over the level of training of crew members by aviation authorities at all levels (Tatar MTU VT, Rosaviatsia), which led to the admission of untrained crew to flights.

During the go-around, the crew did not recognize the fact that the autopilot had been turned off and allowed the aircraft to get into a difficult situation. spatial position to pitch up (Nose up Upset). The PIC's (pilot's) lack of skills to recover the aircraft from a difficult spatial position (Upset Recovery) led to the creation of a significant negative overload, loss of spatial orientation and the transfer of the aircraft into a steep dive (dive pitch angle up to 75°) until it collided with the ground.

The need for a missed approach was caused by the non-landing position of the aircraft when approaching the runway, which was a consequence of the “Map shift” effect (an error in determining the location of the aircraft by on-board systems) by about 4 km, the inability of the crew in these conditions to integrated aircraft navigation and navigation with the required accuracy, as well as the lack of active assistance from the ATS service during prolonged observation of significant deviations from the approach pattern.

The accident was the result of a combination of the following factors:

Lack of initial flight training by the PIC;

Admission to retraining on Boeing 737 flight crew members who do not fully meet the qualification requirements for being sent for retraining, including in English;

Methodological imperfection of the retraining process, formal control over the results and quality of retraining;

The low level of organization of flight work at the airline, which led to the failure to eliminate shortcomings in work with that had been identified for a long time navigation equipment, piloting technique and interaction between crew members, including during go-around;

Systematic violation of the work and rest schedule of crew members and large debts for vacations, which could lead to the accumulation of fatigue and negatively affect the performance of crew members;

The absence of an element of missed approach from an intermediate altitude with two operating engines in the simulator training programs;

Increased psycho-emotional stress of crew members before go-around due to prolonged inability to determine the location of the aircraft with the accuracy necessary for landing;

Violation of the principle “Aviate - Navigate - Communicate” by both the crew and the ATS service, which led to the crew’s failure to comply with standard operating procedures during the missed approach stage due to the long-term distraction of the second the pilot from performing his duties and monitoring flight parameters;

Failure by the crew to recognize the fact that the autopilot was turned off and later intervention in the control of the aircraft, which led to the aircraft getting into a difficult spatial position for pitching up (Nose up Upset);

The imperfection of the applied simulator training programs for recovering an aircraft from a difficult spatial position (Upset Recovery) and the criteria for assessing its quality, which led to the inability of the crew to restore the spatial position of the aircraft;

Possible influence of somatogravitational illusions.

Lack of a proper control system over the issuance of pilot licenses, compliance of the training of crew members with the established requirements and the assignment of qualification marks;

The inoperability of flight safety management systems in airlines, the lack of methodological recommendations for their development and approval, a formal approach to the approval/coordination of flight safety management systems and flight crew training programs by the authorized body;

The imperfection of the work of the training center and the actual lack of control over the results of retraining;

Lack of knowledge requirements for flight personnel in English for retraining for foreign types of aircraft and a formal approach to testing the level of language knowledge;

A formal approach to conducting periodic and qualification inspections of flight personnel;

Systematic violation of the work and rest regime of flight personnel;

Insufficient training of flight personnel for go-around from an intermediate altitude, piloting the aircraft in the control (manual) mode and when recovering from a difficult spatial position;

The occurrence of a “map shift” effect on aircraft not equipped with GPS and insufficient preparation of crew members for flights in these conditions;

The need for active assistance to the crew from the ATS service when significant long-term deviations from established patterns are detected;

Violation of the principle “Fly the aircraft - Navigate - Communicate”,

did not prevent this accident.

Based on the results of the investigation, recommendations were developed to improve flight safety.

The Boeing 737-500 plane of Tatarstan Airlines crashed the day before while landing at 19:25 Moscow time at Kazan airport. The plane was flying from Moscow. 44 passengers and six crew members were killed. Among the dead are the son of the President of Tatarstan Irek Minnikhanov, the head of the FSB department for Tatarstan Alexander Antonov, and the wife of sports commentator on the Rossiya-2 TV channel Roman Skvortsov, Elina. Also among the victims is British citizen Donna Caroline Bull.

How Boeing died The Boeing 737-500 plane crashed at Kazan airport. Official representative of the Federal Air Transport Agency Sergei Izvolsky told Interfax about this. Later, news agencies reported that the crew of the plane during landing may have... Evidence has emerged that the crew reported to dispatchers, when the plane was still 500 meters before the end of the runway, about a non-landing position. Most likely, this may indicate that one or another equipment was faulty. The crew did not specify which one.

Versions The investigation is currently considering several. Among them - climatic conditions, pilot error, technical problems, fuel problems, as well. An order has already been given to refuel the plane in Moscow.

However, passengers on the previous flight that this plane made, from Kazan to Moscow, say that the plane was allegedly faulty even during the flight to Moscow. According to them, the board shook violently throughout the flight, and during landing in Moscow a disaster almost occurred. However, there is no official confirmation of this information.

Experts interviewed by RT believe that the reason for the crew’s go-around could have been either a pilot error or a equipment failure.

Airport Kazan Airport due to a plane crash, November 18. The day before, the rescue work was almost completed. However, late at night, the Il-76 of the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations landed in Kazan with an additional group of rescuers on board.

Airplane, made its first flight in 1990. After that, it was operated by various airlines, including Air France, Uganda Airlines, Brazil's Rio Sul, Romanian low-cost airline Blue Air, and Bulgarian Bulgaria Air.

At the same time, in December 2001, a serious incident occurred with him: during landing, the plane broke the left landing gear. This happened at the airport in the Brazilian city of Belo Horizonte in unfavorable weather conditions and heavy rain. The plane, carrying 102 passengers and six crew members, touched down before the start of the runway. After this, the Boeing jumped and hit the runway with force, as a result of which its left landing gear broke. The plane stopped after 1.7 km, moving along the runway relying on the left engine.

As a result of the rescue operation, it was possible to evacuate all passengers and crew members. The serious accident did not result in any casualties, but the aircraft suffered significant damage and required major repairs to return it to service.

Incidents with this aircraft also occurred during its operation by the Tatarstan company.

However, the airline itself states that they are no longer operated by Tatarstan. The airline had no complaints.

Mourning In Tatarstan on November 18. Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic Yuri Kamaltynov said that the families of the victims will receive one-time assistance in the amount of 1 million rubles from the reserve fund. He also recalled that all passengers were insured, so their relatives will receive payments.

Chairman of the Russian Government Dmitry Medvedev, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Government Dmitry Rogozin, and Mayor of Moscow Sergei Sobyanin have already expressed condolences to the relatives and friends of the victims.

The President of Russia, whose son died in a plane crash in Kazan. “Vladimir Putin, in a telephone conversation with the President of Tatarstan, once again expressed deep condolences to the families and friends of all those killed in the tragic plane crash. The President personally expressed condolences to Rustam Minnikhanov, whose son was among the passengers of the crashed plane,” said press secretary of the head of state Dmitry Peskov.

Relatives dead passengers the plane is asked to arrive at the forensic medical examination bureau of the Ministry of Health of Tatarstan. The bureau is located at the address: Kazan, Sibirsky Trakt, building 31 a. You must have documents, photographs, and, if possible, dental formulas with you - everything that can help identify deceased relatives.

At Kazan airport, completed. The criminal case has been transferred to the prosecutor's office for approval of the indictment. Of the five alleged defendants, only three can be put in the dock; the pilot and co-pilot were killed. Their criminal prosecution has been completed in connection with their death. According to the law, consent to the termination of a criminal case in the event of the death of suspects can be given by relatives recognized as victims. It seems that the relatives of the pilot Rustem Salikhov and co-pilot Viktor Gutsul agreed with the preliminary conclusions of the investigation.

Let us remind you that the plane crash occurred on November 17, 2013 at 19.23. The Boeing 737-500 was landing with 44 passengers and 6 crew members on board. The plane took off from Domodedovo airport at 18.25, and at 19.30 it was supposed to land in Kazan. But the first attempt to land the aircraft was unsuccessful. The airliner went around, and then, according to IAC, due to pilot errors, the plane went into a vertical dive and crashed into the ground at the airport. Everyone on board died.

During the investigation of a criminal case under the article "Violation of traffic and operation safety rules air transport"which through negligence resulted in the death of two or more persons" some details became clear. First of all, it was established that the very death of people and the plane was caused by the erroneous actions of the aircraft commander Rustem Salikhov and co-pilot Viktor Gutsul. It is believed that Salikhov did not have sufficient piloting skills, and the documents on the basis of which he was admitted to passenger transportation, were falsified.

Valery Portnov, who held the position of Deputy General Director of Tatarstan Airlines OJSC, sent documents regarding Salikhov containing false information to the Tatar Interregional Directorate of the Federal Air Transport Agency in 2009, say the Investigative Directorate of Russia. - In turn, Shavkat Umarov, being the head of the Tatar Interregional Territorial Directorate of Air Transport of the Federal Air Transport Agency, due to negligence, did not organize in September 2009 a verification of the authenticity and reliability of the commercial aviation pilot Salikhov’s certificate presented by the airline. This would have made it possible to identify the fact that this certificate had not been issued to him, but such a check was not carried out, and, as a result, Salikhov, lacking the basic knowledge, skills and experience of a pilot, began working in passenger air transportation as an aircraft pilot.

Violations on the part of Valery Portnov and the airline's chief pilot Viktor Fomin were discovered during their work. They, as the investigation believes, did not provide Salikhov with proper training, but instead sent the untrained pilot for promotion - to obtain the status of aircraft commander. Since March 2012, Salikhov has carried out passenger air transportation as an aircraft commander.

On November 17, 2013, Salikhov, while flying on the Moscow-Kazan route, put the aircraft into a difficult spatial position when landing, while Hutsul did not take over control, the investigators concluded. - As a result, Salikhov, when an emergency situation occurred, violating piloting rules, through his actions caused the aircraft to crash.

During the investigation and consolidation of the evidence base, lengthy and numerous expert studies were required. During the preliminary investigation, large-scale and complex forensic, molecular-genetic, chemical and technical-forensic, as well as other forensic examinations were carried out, over 200 witnesses and victims, specialists were questioned, a significant amount of other investigative actions were carried out, which together confirmed the version of the investigation .

Let us remind you that criminal prosecution against Salikhov and Gutsul was terminated due to their death.

Based on the collected evidence, Portnov and Fomin were charged with committing a crime under the article “Violation of traffic safety rules and operation of air transport, resulting in the death of two or more persons through negligence”, Umarov - “Negligence, resulting in the death of two or more persons through negligence” - reported to the Russian Investigative Committee.

Among the dead were: the son of the President of Tatarstan Irek Minnikhanov, the head of the FSB of Tatarstan Alexander Antonov, orientalist scientist Diana Gadzhieva, the wife and stepdaughter of sports commentator Roman Skvortsov, chess player Gulnara Rashitova.

The Federal Air Transport Agency remained silent for two years about what it considers the cause of the tragedy in November 2013 to be a design defect in the American aircraft.

The IAC's statement on the suspension of Boeing-737 aircraft certificates in Russia caused a stir in the industry the day before. But an even more sensational reason: it turns out that the Federal Air Transport Agency first signed a report on the investigation into the causes of the plane crash in Kazan, and then suddenly withdrew the signature, insisting on the version of a malfunction of the elevator. Moreover, other Boeing 737s may have the same defect. BUSINESS Online experts see the publication of these facts as revenge for Transaero, but this does not change the essence of the issue.

HOW MAC CLASHED WITH ROSAVIATION

The federal scandal began after on November 4, the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) announced on its website that it was suspending the certificates of all Boeing-737 family aircraft in the Russian Federation, about which letters were sent to two addresses at once - the Federal Air Transport Agency and the US Federal Aviation Administration. This is done before receiving a joint notification from the Federal Air Transport Agency and the US FAA that these aircraft are in a condition that ensures their safe operation.

Official letter from the IAC, signed by the Chairman of the Aviation Register Vladimir Bespalov, produced a sensational effect. It’s no joke, according to official statistics, in total Russian airlines operate about 300 Boeings, of which almost 200 are from the 737 family (for comparison: only 100 Tu and 21 Il aircraft). At the same time, the Boeing-737 is included in the fleets of such companies as UTair (50 copies), Orenair (16 copies), S7 (Globus, 13 copies) and Aeroflot (12 copies). Until recently, the Transaero company was considered the largest operator of this model, but, as you know, it went bankrupt. It’s not hard to imagine what awaits other companies after the official ban on the Boeing 737 is introduced. Overnight, the skies over Russia could become empty, and civil air travel could be reduced by almost half.

The reaction of the Federal Air Transport Agency was immediate. The department's press service issued a statement from which it followed that the IAC, with its decision to revoke the certificate for the Boeing-737, cannot stop the operation of this aircraft by Russian airlines. A ban on flights of a particular type of aircraft can only be imposed by a specially authorized federal executive body, which has not made such a decision. The day before, a meeting was supposed to be held with the participation of airlines operating the Boeing-737, the leadership of the International Aviation Committee and the Federal Air Transport Agency.

The Kremlin, in whose direction the eyes of all domestic air carriers involuntarily turned, also hastened to comment on the situation through the mouth of the presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov. “Of course, a very prompt and in-depth analysis of the situation in domestic aviation will be required,” Peskov said. - And in in this case Surely the relevant department - the Ministry of Transport, the government - will do the necessary analysis, there can be no doubt about it.” Press Secretary Vladimir Putin assured that the Kremlin is closely monitoring the course of events according to media reports, but is not yet interfering.

Yesterday evening, Rosaviatsia announced a meeting with the participation of representatives of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation, Rostransnadzor, as well as Boeing itself and the heads of airlines operating its aircraft. It is especially noted that the IAC leadership ignored the invitation to the meeting. As a result, those gathered came to the unanimous conclusion that there was no reason to stop the operation of the Boeing 737.

“A VERY STRANGE CASE” AT KAZAN AIRPORT

However, no less scandalous than the IAC’s decision was its official reason: the need for urgent improvements to the elevator control system for Boeing-737 aircraft. The day before, after the uproar, the IAC published a second statement, which directly links the decision to revoke the Boeing-737 certificates with the 2013 plane crash in Kazan.

Let us recall that a passenger Boeing-737 of Tatarstan Airlines crashed at Kazan airport on November 17, 2013, while making a routine flight from Moscow to the capital of the Republic of Tatarstan. There were 50 people on board the plane: 44 passengers and 6 crew members. Among them is the son of the President of Tatarstan Irek Minnikhanov, head of the FSB RT department Alexander Antonov, as well as the wife and daughter of a famous sports commentator Romana Skvortsova.

Within two days, the IAC reported preliminary conclusions based on the decryption of the black boxes. An emergency situation, judging by the crew's reports, arose during the landing approach. Commander Rustem Salikhov reported this to the ground and decided to go for a second circle, disabling the autopilot. The crew even retracted the landing gear, indicating that it was not about to descend sharply. But then the inexplicable happened: after the airliner began to climb with a high angle of attack, the plane at an altitude of 700 m suddenly went into an almost vertical dive and crashed into the ground at high speed. It is unknown what the pilots talked about among themselves: the IAC classified the recordings of the voice recorders.

From the first days, many aviation experts cited the jammed tail elevator as the main version of the causes of the tragedy. As Kommersant reported, in the 90s in the United States there were already several similar disasters involving Boeing-737s. The reason remained unknown for a long time, but it later became clear that when hot hydraulic fluid came into contact with the steering system, which had been cooled in flight, the servo valve that controlled the steering wheel became stuck. In the late 90s, this deficiency was eliminated on most aircraft. However, the question of whether this was done on the 1990 plane that crashed in Kazan remains shrouded in darkness.

Many people noticed that in December 2013, the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev during a television interview, he said that the plane crash in Kazan was “a very strange case” and demanded that the results of the investigation “be presented.”

The IAC, however, from the first days, resolutely rejected all assumptions about malfunctions: already on November 22, 2013, a statement was issued that, “according to on-board objective monitoring equipment, no failures of systems, units and controls of the aircraft, including the elevator channel, were recorded.”

At the end of August 2014, developers - specialists from the American corporation Boeing, as well as experts from France, where the on-board engines were manufactured, joined in determining the causes of the accident. In September 2014, the engineering commission published brief findings that were almost entirely devoted to the elevator problem. It was reported that the entire history of the operation of this type of hydraulic drives and materials from the investigation of events related to abnormal operation of the elevator control system that took place in operation on Boeing-737 aircraft previously were studied. The analysis showed that the circumstances of the events that took place related to abnormal operation of the hydraulic elevator actuators differ from the circumstances of the emergency flight.

At the same time, the message listed a variety of studies with the help of which experts came to such conclusions: here there are three-dimensional tomography, and complete disassembly of hydraulic drives, and dissection of a number of their elements, and mathematical modeling of the system’s operation, and engineering analysis of all possible options for jamming. As a result, the commission made an unequivocal conclusion: there were no signs of aircraft failure during the emergency flight.

“It is alarming that more than 20 MILLION PASSENGERS WERE EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT RISKS.”

However, yesterday's statement by the IAC turns the whole picture upside down. The agency officially stated that, in fact, from the first day of the work of the commission to investigate the causes of the plane crash in Kazan, representatives of the Federal Air Transport Agency themselves constantly insisted on the version that the cause of the incident was precisely the failure of the elevator control system.

In this regard, the studies described above were carried out, which allegedly did not confirm the version of malfunctions. After this, in April 2015, a draft final report on the results of the investigation was prepared, which was signed by all members of the commission without comments. Including representatives of the Federal Air Transport Agency. The report was also fully agreed with all states that took part in the investigation (USA, UK, Bermuda, France), the IAC emphasizes. Although the report was never published (which made the investigation almost unprecedented in duration), the conclusion was clear: since the plane was in perfect order, it means that the inexperienced crew was to blame.

However, from yesterday’s statement by the IAC it suddenly became clear that the story does not end there: it turns out that in June 2015, a representative of the Federal Air Transport Agency unexpectedly withdrew his signature on the document! The reasons are unknown - either new circumstances appeared, or my conscience tormented me... One way or another, the leadership of the Federal Air Transport Agency returned to its previous position: the cause of the incident was “failure of the steering drive of the elevator control system due to design flaws in Boeing-737 type aircraft.”

In this regard, the IAC sent a request to the US Federal Aviation Administration (the initial certification body for the Boeing-737 aircraft) to confirm the aircraft’s compliance with the requirements for safe operation. However, the IAC statement says, “the response received does not contain the conclusion that Boeing-737 type aircraft are in a condition that ensures their safe operation.” This was the reason to revoke the certificate.

Now IAC directly accuses Rosaviation of inconsistency and indecision: “For a long time, while declaring serious shortcomings of Boeing-737 aircraft that directly affect flight safety, Rosaviation did not inform airlines and Russian supervisory authorities about this. If this opinion of the Federal Air Transport Agency is competent, then it is alarming that more than 20 million passengers of Boeing-737 family aircraft long time were exposed to significant risks,” the committee said in a statement.

Tatyana Anodina

DID ANODINA AND PLESHAKOV REVENGE FOR TRANSAERO?

The question arises: why were they silent for two years? Why was correspondence on this topic slowly carried out between interested departments, without coming to the surface? Why did they insist so much on the crew’s fault, avoiding talking about “design flaws”? Or just the crash of the Airbus A321 airliner that happened on October 31 in Sinai desert and already called the largest in the history of domestic aviation, made many think about safety passenger air transportation?

However, in response to the IAC decision to revoke the certificates of Boeing-737 aircraft, a version was immediately thrown in that this was revenge on the part of the shareholders of the bankrupt Transaero airline. The Vedomosti newspaper, in particular, writes about this, citing its sources. The fact is that the chairman of the IAC is Tatyana Anodina- mother of the largest shareholder of Transaero Alexandra Pleshakova. “A week ago, the certificate of Transaero, the largest Boeing 737 operator in Russia, was revoked. And so, in fact, the company’s shareholder decides to stop these planes - draw your own conclusion,” the newspaper quotes the opinion of its source in federal structures.

The Kommersant publication adheres to the same version, noting that the IAC decision was unexpected for market participants and relevant officials and provoked “a big commotion in the industry.” Concern about the IAC statement was also expressed abroad. The American corporation Boeing expressed its intention to “meet with Russian officials to understand what their concerns are.” IN Russian representative office corporations (Boeing Russia CIS) have already commented that the information about the revocation of flight certificates for Boeing-737 aircraft “sounds absurd.”

IAC itself insists on its objectivity and is surprised by the media that see in its statement some kind of “revenge for Transaero.” However, even if we assume that certain selfish motives motivated the department’s officials, this does not negate the facts described above. Just an ugly story with Transaero could help them get out...

ONLY 6 BOEING-737 HAVE “RUSSIAN REGISTRATION”

Against the backdrop of the scandal and commotion caused by the IAC letter, another important news spread - about a possible ban on Russian air carriers registering aircraft abroad. It is expected that this issue, also directly related to the safety of air transportation, will be resolved in the State Duma of the Russian Federation before 2016. The authors of the initiative are Duma deputies Oksana Dmitrieva, Ivan Grachev And Natalia Petukhova. Currently, as stated in the explanatory note, 1,337 aircraft are operated in Russia. Of these, 837 units are foreign-made (578 units are registered in the register Bermuda, 142 units - in the register of the Russian Federation, 116 units - in the register of Ireland, 1 unit - in the register of Switzerland); also 500 units are of domestic production (of which 499 units are registered in the register of the Russian Federation, 1 unit is in the register of Belarus). Dmitrieva and Grachev, in turn, propose obliging airlines to register aircraft in the state register of civil aircraft of the Russian Federation.

By the way, it is the lack of Russian registration for most Boeing-737 aircraft that makes them invulnerable to IAC. As stated by the head of the Air Transport Operators Association (AEVT) Vladimir Tasun, the suspension of certificates will affect only six aircraft of two Russian airlines: “subsidiaries” of Aeroflot called “Aurora” and the company “Gazpromavia”.

“About 200 Boeing-737 aircraft are in foreign registers; the IAC’s decision to revoke the certificate will not affect them in any way,” Tasun explained. “But there are six more aircraft of this type that are on the Russian register. We are talking about four aircraft of the Far Eastern airline Aurora and two aircraft of Gazpromavia airline. It is on these aircraft that a decision will be made at a meeting in the Federal Air Transport Agency with the participation of airline operators, representatives of IAC and Boeing. And here it is already difficult to say what decision the Federal Air Transport Agency will make. Because it is on the basis of the certificate issued by the IAC that the Federal Air Transport Agency issues a certificate of airworthiness,” concluded the head of AEVT.

“THIS IS AN ORDINARY FROLL, A CONFRONTATION BETWEEN TWO DEPARTMENTS”

Valery Postnikov - Executive Director of the Society of Independent Air Accident Investigators:

- Of course, this is a scandal! Confrontation between two departments - Rosaviatsiya and MAK. What can you offer instead of 195 Boeing 737 aircraft? It seems to any sane person that there is no other alternative yet. Thousands of aircraft of this modification fly all over the world. And just now a “late reaction”? Not true. These are ordinary feuds to figure out who is who.

Boeing-737s occupy a significant share of the Russian aircraft fleet. Some of our airlines fly entirely on these boards. Even recently organized ones. Take the same “Victory”, 9 sides. I recently flew from Tyumen - wonderful cars.

Alexey Sinitsky — Editor-in-Chief of the magazine "Aviation Transport Review":

— At the beginning of the year, about 190 Boeing-737s were in operation in Russia, now the number is at the level of 150. Two issues have been confused in the public consciousness—certificate and operation. The decision of the IAC does not affect the operation of the aircraft in any way; it must be made by the Federal Air Transport Agency. That's all. And since most aircraft have Bermudian or Irish registration, from the point of view of the aviation registers of these countries there are no claims against these aircraft. These countries do not revoke any certificates. Therefore, aircraft registered in Bermuda or the Netherlands can fly normally. This is a discussion about hidden games, that's all. No need to panic. They will also be used.

So far, we cannot engage in import substitution in the aviation industry. All that remains is to wait for the appearance of the MS-21 aircraft; it is located approximately in this market niche. But time is needed for operational testing and production deployment, so this is not a matter of the next few years. In three years, production of this aircraft should begin. Naturally, at first the capacity will be small, dozens of aircraft per year, but hundreds are needed, there is no point in discussing this.

Regarding the “late reaction” of the IAC to the Kazan tragedy, let me say this unofficially. According to the MAC results, there is no technical factor there. But in the Federal Air Transport Agency there is a special opinion, which is that there is a technical factor for the “classics”, and they believe that this issue needs to be dealt with. The manufacturer must also participate in this. But at the same time, they do not raise questions about the suspension of the entire type.

Petr Trubaev — General Director of UVT Aero JSC:

— Our company was not affected by the IAC decision, since we operate other aircraft. I don’t think that this is a belated reaction of the IAC to the Kazan tragedy, although the question is, of course, an interesting one... The Russian Federation has potential for the construction of a civilian fleet, but it takes time for this to happen. And it won't be very fast. According to first impressions, from five years or more.

Vladimir Gainutdinov — Head of the Department of Aircraft Construction and Design, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor of KNRTU-KAI:

— Technology and human control can sometimes conflict with each other. And they conflict when the staff is not prepared. This is what happened in the tragedy in Kazan. There were two people at the helm who were not prepared for the extraordinary situation. It cannot even be called critical. Just look at the statistics to see how long the Boeing 737 flies! They had problems with management - they solved them. We're on this moment We don’t know all the details of what’s happening now.

By and large, the Russian aircraft fleet consists of imported aircraft. What to replace it with? Superjet, perhaps? 100 of them were produced, about 50 of them fly, two crashed, but the cause of the tragedies is the human factor. Have you ever wondered why out of 100 only 50 are in operation?

Below is some background information.

On November 17, 2013, at 19:23 Moscow time, a Boeing-737-500 plane of Tatarstan Airlines crashed during landing at the Kazan airport. All 50 people (six crew members and 44 passengers) on board the aircraft were killed. Among the dead were the son of the President of Tatarstan, Irek Minnikhanov, and the head of the FSB department for Tatarstan, Alexander Antonov.

The crashed airliner was flying on the route Moscow - Kazan. This flight was supposed to be operated by a smaller Bombardier aircraft, but due to the passenger load it was replaced by a Boeing 737.

According to data about the crashed plane, it was operated by seven airlines, including Uganda Airlines (since the summer of 1995). Boeing made its first flight on June 18, 1990. The aircraft was leased from Tatarstan Airlines since December 18, 2008.

Boeing-737-500 took off for Kazan from Moscow Domodedovo Airport. When approaching international airport Kazan, the crew of the airliner reported to ground services that they were not ready to land and asked for permission to go around. When approaching the second circle, the plane lost altitude, 150 meters before the start runway fell to the ground and exploded. The wreckage of the plane after the explosion was scattered over a radius of about 500 meters. The area of ​​their spread was 23 thousand square meters.

Immediately dispatched to the scene of the incident emergency services, rescue operations began. Significant forces of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia were involved in eliminating the consequences of the disaster, including the Centrospas detachment, specialists from the Leader center and the 179th Rescue Center, as well as branches of the Volga regional search and rescue team of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia. The total strength of the force group exceeded 1.6 thousand people and 260 pieces of equipment.

On the first anniversary of the tragedy, a memorial stele was unveiled at the Kazan airport on which the names of all 50 dead plane passengers and crew members were engraved.

Based on the fact of the plane crash, the investigative bodies of the Volga Region Investigation Department for Transport of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation opened a criminal case on the grounds of a crime under Part 3 of Art. 263 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (violation of traffic safety rules and operation of air transport, resulting in the death of two or more persons through negligence).

Later, the criminal case was transferred to the main investigative department of the central apparatus of the Investigative Committee.

According to the results of the examination carried out by the investigation, no signs of drug or alcohol intoxication were found in the blood of the pilots.

After deciphering the “black box,” the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) stated that when approaching the runway, the pilots made a number of mistakes, which they tried to correct by diverting the plane to the second circle. One of the two autopilots of the Boeing 737 aircraft was disabled, and the crew of the airliner landed manually. During the second approach, the aircraft crew, gaining altitude, raised the nose of the airliner too much. As a result, the aircraft lost speed. Having reached an altitude of 700 meters, the plane began an intense dive and collided with the ground at high speed (more than 450 kilometers per hour) and almost vertically (at an angle of 75 degrees to the surface of the earth). About 43 seconds passed from the moment the aircraft began its go-around until the end of the recording on the recorder.

The power plants operated until the plane collided with the ground.

Tatarstan Airlines reported that the commander of the crashed airliner had never performed a go-around maneuver in a real flight before the tragedy.

After the disaster in Kazan, the investigation began studying the training of pilots. It subsequently turned out that the commander of the crashed plane received a diploma in a dubious training center. According to Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika, the commander of the crashed plane had a false pilot's certificate. The co-pilot's license was also obtained illegally without the required flight experience.

After the plane crash, the Federal Air Transport Agency (Rosaviation) conducted unscheduled inspections of a number of flight training centers and suspended pilots from a number of airlines, including the largest ones, from flying until the end of the investigation.

Rosaviatsia also checked the activities of Tatarstan Airlines, as a result of which it identified a number of violations and, as of December 31, 2013, canceled its operator certificate. The aircraft fleet was transferred to another Tatarstan carrier - Ak Bars Aero airline.

General Director of Tatarstan Airlines OJSC Aksan Giniyatullin was dismissed from his post by decision of the company’s board of directors.

In May 2014, Tatarstan Airlines filed a claim with the court to declare its own bankruptcy, and in June the court declared the airline bankrupt.

The head of the Tatar Interregional Territorial Directorate of Air Transport of the Federal Air Transport Agency, Shavkat Umarov, resigned after the plane crash, which was accepted. The territorial administration itself lost its independence and became a structural subdivision of the Volga interregional territorial administration of the Federal Air Transport Agency.

In September 2014, the IAC reported that the engineering and technical subcommittee concluded that the recordings of objective monitoring equipment of the Boeing-737 that crashed in Kazan, as well as the surviving parts, components and assemblies of the airframe, engines and systems, including the elevator control system, showed signs of There were no aircraft failures during the emergency flight.

At the end of December 2015, the IAC published the final results of the investigation into the plane crash. The cause of the plane crash was systemic deficiencies in identifying hazards and controlling the level of risk, as well as the inoperability of the airline’s flight safety management system and the lack of control over the level of training of crew members by aviation authorities at all levels (Tatar MTU VT, Rosaviatsia), which led to admission for flights by untrained crew.