The pilot should not have flown. The investigation into the plane crash in Kazan has been completed

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 of 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 is known, 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 this case, the relevant department - the Ministry of Transport, the government - will certainly 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, Rosaviation 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.”

IAC, however, from the first days, all assumptions about malfunctions were decisively rejected: 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 conclusions 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 accident flight.

At the same time, the message listed a variety of studies with the help of which experts came to the following 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 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 in perfect order, which means the inexperienced crew is to blame for everything.

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 have been exposed to significant risks for a long time,” 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 was it only the crash of the Airbus A321 airliner, which occurred on October 31 in the Sinai desert and has already been called the largest in the history of domestic aviation, that made many people think about the safety of passenger air travel?

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.” The Russian representative office of the corporation (Boeing Russia CIS) has 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. 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 Investigators aviation accidents:

- Of course, this is a scandal! Confrontation between two departments - Rosaviation 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, interesting... Potential Russian Federation there is talk about 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 Construction and Design aircraft, doctor 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 can't 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?

At 19:25, Boeing 737 500 (Tatarstan Airlines), operating flight No. 363 from Moscow to Kazan, exploded upon landing. According to preliminary data, during the landing approach the airliner touched the ground with its wing. As it turned out later, the crew was not ready for landing and requested permission to go around, a source in the republic’s law enforcement agencies told RIA Novosti.

Air traffic controller Kirill Kornishin (on air on the Rossiya 24 TV channel): “He (the pilot) reported to me that he was doing a go-around, and I gave him the kit - everything was according to the documents - and that’s it. And he said that he had a non-landing configuration. I gave him the kit, as it should be standard . He confirmed. And he didn’t leave. It happened just a few seconds later.”

There were 44 passengers and six crew members on board.

Information about the dead

All 50 people on board were killed.

Among the dead are the son of the President of Tatarstan Irek Minnikhanov, the head of the FSB Directorate for Tatarstan Alexander Antonov, the wife of the famous sports commentator Roman Skvortsov.

The list of those killed includes Bull Donna Caroline, a British citizen (born February 14, 1960).

Hotlines open: 8 843 227 46 50, 8 800 775 17 17, 8 843 273 91 45.

Taxi drivers unanimously refuse to take money from relatives of the victims.

— Krasnov Sergei (@krasnov_sergei1) November 17, 2013

What is known about the plane

The crashed plane was in operation for 23 years, making its first flight in 1990. His tail number— VQ-BBN. A plane with this number already made an emergency landing in Kazan last year. Then the cabin depressurization sensors went off.

According to information on the website aviation-safety.net, the previous operators of the aircraft were such airlines as Bulgaria Air (since May 2008) and Romanian Blue Air (since September 1, 2005). On December 17, 2001, an air incident occurred with this aircraft, which was then in service with Rio Sul airlines, in Brazil. In total, this aircraft was operated by seven airlines, including Tatarstan.

Grigory Busarev(on air "Russia 24"): “I was flying on a daytime flight from Kazan (to Moscow)… The plane was landing at Domodedovo airport… It was shaking from side to side… It looked like turbulence, like getting into an air pocket. The wings were shaking from side to side, and the nose He kept throwing it down."

Ruslan Kalimullin (on his page in " In contact with " ): " Today I flew this plane from Kazan to Moscow at 15.20, we landed at Domodedovo as if the plane’s horizon stabilization system was faulty, the pilot had difficulty leveling the ship before landing, upon contact with the ground, we skidded a little, but the pilot managed and I crossed myself. What one of the passengers said on TV was that when landing in Moscow there was a strong vibration in the body of the plane, this is observed in all old cars during takeoff, the vibration does not go through the body, but through the inner lining, this is often found on planes that have not been restored for a long time. I swore not to fly on cheap flights, which is why this time the toad strangled me to buy a ticket not for 5 for a normal Aeroflot flight, but for this one for 3. Before buying a ticket, I was not too lazy to call and find out what kind of car is operating this flight. Well, I think, since the Boeing 500, everything should be fine. And when we got in, I immediately noticed that the car was really “tired” and it became a little scary...”

Insurance

The liability of Tatarstan Airlines is insured by Ak Bars Insurance, a source in the insurance market told Prime. In accordance with the Air Code, in the event of the death of a passenger, the insurance payment is 2 million rubles plus 25 thousand for burial. SOGAZ will pay 2 million rubles to the relatives of the deceased passengers.

Investigation

According to preliminary data, the cause of the disaster could have been a crew error, a law enforcement source told RIA Novosti. The versions also include weather factors and technical malfunctions. Roshydromet reported that weather were normal for this type of aircraft.

A criminal case has been initiated into the crash under 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). The search for "black boxes" is underway. Samples of the fuel used to fuel the plane were taken for testing.

Later, a source at Domodedovo reported that all planes at Domodedovo airport are refueled in one container.

At 22:45 Moscow time, search and rescue operations at the crash site were completed.

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 for a second round, So, as stated by IAC, due to pilot errors, the plane entered a vertical dive and crashed into the ground at the airport. Everyone on board died.

During the investigation of the criminal case under the article “Violation of traffic safety rules and operation of air transport, resulting in the death of two or more persons through negligence,” 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 the 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 served as deputy general director OJSC "Airline "Tatarstan", 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 reveal 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, brought 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 the piloting rules, through his actions allowed aircraft 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.