TU-154 forced down

Can you explain the soft wing theory please, i haven’t heard that one before

Let me tell you some things about the Tu-154M.

Firstly, the most accidents with this type are caused by bad maintenance. This happens very oft in Russia(Aeroflot are leaders) and the countries from CIS. Reason – not much money. The bulgarian aicrafts from that type are maintained much better.

What is more, the Tu-154M provides much more pleasent flight than the B737-300/400/500 for example. This is caused by the “soft wing”. If you have flown both types, than you will be able to compare.

Furthermore, the bulgarian Tu-154M are prodced between 1988 and 1992. The most european B737 classics are produced before 1988.

just wondering whenin the post anybody said the Aircraft was operated by a Russian company? ow do we know it’s not a western TU-154 on a charter flight from say a Bulgarian operator? Long odds but we may not be dealing with a russian airline – a lot of generalisation? The former Soviet union is usually wholly referred to as Russia by the majority of the population.

The other point i would like to make is that if a twinjet such as a B757, 767, 777, A330 etc etc was flying accross the pond on single engine 180 min ETOPS thats upto 3 hours flying on 1 engine – this thing still had two operating and the commander decideded this was acceptable!

I have flown on Russian (yes it was an RA- registered aircraft) before, abnd in many cases would trust Soviet aircraft as much as “Western” models.

I have seen “airworthy” European airliners in a much worse state than many Russian airliners. Indeed the Russian ailiners that we get into the UK are always supremely maintained and cleaned. As for some of the African operators using Western types, well….

The third engine on the TU154 is not just there for take off and in usual circumstances the aircraft operates using all 3 engines in the flight regime. A failure such as this would not unduly compromise the 154s safety even with full payload. Jeanske, Russian pilots are no more “irresponsible” than any other nationality, you’ll find similarly irresponsible pilots in all countries.
Generalisation is easy I guess, especially when the crew/plane are Russian.

It is my understanding that the third engine in a Tu-154 is for takeoffs only. What is the problem here? The Pilot is in charge of the aircraft and is responsible for it. He made a decision. If you are so knowledgeable about the aircraft, and the whole situation go ahead and criticise, but if I were a passenger and this happened I’d be glad the pilot made the choice he did. If there was no fire and no other problems diverting to another airstrip 3,000km from my destination in an aircraft that is unlikely to take off again till the engine has been either repaired or replaced sounds to me like a very long uneventful wait in a small airport.

It’s just a failure and not being able to restart it! As long as there is no fire, I don’t think there is a need to land immediately.
I can’t stand the Russian “maintenance” (is an aircraft actually EVER taken care of?!)
They always wait untill stomething happens! Why are the Russian pilots always so irresponsible!!!

I think Russian pilots tend to try and bend the rules and regulations quite a lot of the time. Usually, an engine failure would mean a landing at the nearest suitable airport, but this does not seem to be the case. My dad was telling me how he once had to call the rangers and airport police when the captain of a Tu-154 (don’t know airline) threatened to ‘pull the plug’ on the waste tanks, all on to the apron. My dad was explaining how the pilots had to request facilities such as the ones to take the waste out of aircraft, but the pilot wouldn’t listen. He was also saying how all the tyres were so worn out that they were actually ropey! And bits of what looked like string were hanging out of them. It wasn’t a surprise that the airfield authorities decided to ground the aircraft!

If the aircraft landed at its intended desitnation, how can this be classified as a forced landing?

That would imply it was forced to land immediately at the nearest airport. Clearly this did not happen.

Sensationalism by the media once more