Sad news indeed.
By: Austin - 7th June 2012 at 16:53
SSJ-100 could crash due to recklessness commander of the aircraft
The Russian Sukhoi SuperJet 100 aircraft could crash in Indonesia because of the commander’s decision to make the liner Alexander Yablontseva dangerous maneuver. From the transcripts of negotiations of the crew that the approximation of Mount Salak (that it eventually crashed the plane) of the first pilot warned the board not only automation, but the ship and the navigator. On June 7, writes, “Moskovsky Komsomolets”.
The maneuver, which was undertaken A.Yablontsevym was, according to the newspaper, inadmissible in a mountainous terrain and bad weather. As an expert told the Central hydrodynamic Institute, together with colleagues from the LII im.Gromova they modeled the last flight of the SSJ-100.
The experts concluded that before the collision SuperJet twice flew like the mountains in an equally dangerous convergence, but the third was unable to get around. “I knew from the beginning that the error will be hard put to rest the crew, but that there may be an element of bullying air, could not assume,” – said the representative of TsAGI
By: DC Page - 4th June 2012 at 22:25
I’m not sure how significant the following pics will be, nevertheless they appear to show the Terrain Avoidance Warning System (TAWS) indicating a fault and switched off. They were taken several hours before the ill fated flight:
That picture also shows left and right generators off because they are connected to ground power. Note the EXT PWR switch shows AVAL and ON. This is what you would expect to see when the jet is sitting on the tarmac. Most systems are powered down at this point. Normal.
By: Arabella-Cox - 31st May 2012 at 11:57
The data recorder has been found, no word on it’s condition yet, but am sure it will reveal vital clues.
By: Arabella-Cox - 29th May 2012 at 13:54
Indeed TAWS (T2CAS actually) was turned ON and functioning as SCAC ant NTSC released via PR after the analysis of the CVR…
http://www.superjetinternational.com/mediacenter/statement-from-sukhoi-civil-aircraft-company/2012/
May 20, 2012
Today in Jakarta the National Committee for Transport Safety (KNKT) of Indonesia and the Russian side signed the protocol on the results of joint activity in investigation of the SSJ100 #97004 accident.
According to the signed document, the preliminary analysis of the CVR data showed the following: indications of the failure of the aircraft’s systems and components were not discovered, the terrain and collision avoidance system T2CAS was functionally operative in flight and provided crew with information on the hazardous ground proximity.
Due to the fact that the flight data recorder (FDR) has not been found, works on detailed analysis of the radar information of the air traffic control (ATC) will continue. This is necessary to plot the aircraft’s flight path and synchronize ATC and CVR data.
The document signed by KNKT Chairman Tanang Kurniadi and Deputy Russian Minister for Industry and Trade Yuri Slyusar also noted the need to continue the search for the FDR by the Indonesian side. The Indonesian side will continue the search for the FDR.
“We highly value the professionalism of our Indonesian colleagues and their Russian counterparts that participated in the work of the commission. From our side, SCAC will ensure maximum collaboration in supply of any data necessary to conduct a thorough and comprehensive investigation of the accident” – said Vladimir Prisyazhyuk, SCAC President.
Still no news on the FDR as of the 29th of May. Although the Indonesian Ministry revealed today the timeline of events of the SuperJet:
http://gerryairways.blogspot.it/2012/05/ssj100-accident-minister-reveals.html?spref=tw
Timeline
0710UTC aircraft requested engine start.
0721UTC aircraft took off from Runway 06 and climbed to 10,000ft.
0724UTC aircraft contacted ATC at Soekarno Hatta airport along radial 200 from Halim VOR (VHF Omnidirectional Range beacon).
0726UTC aircraft requested to descend to 6,000ft.
0728UTC aicraft requested to make a right orbit over Atang Sanjaya (Bogor) Training Area.
0752UTC ATC attempted to call aircraft as it disappeared from radar.
0755UTC ATC reported the missing aircraft to the Air Traffic Service Coordinator.
0835UTC SAR “Uncertainty Phase” declared.
0905UTC ATC contacted Search and Rescue
0955UTC SAR “Alerting Phase” declared.
1122UTC “Distress Phase” declared after aircraft endurance time elapsed.
As per this timeline, Gerry’s analysis on the flightpath looks really a realistic guess.
By: TR1 - 28th May 2012 at 19:34
I’m not sure how significant the following pics will be, nevertheless they appear to show the Terrain Avoidance Warning System (TAWS) indicating a fault and switched off. They were taken several hours before the ill fated flight:
Groomi disproves that it was turned off in that blog entry.
By: Jō Asakura - 28th May 2012 at 18:59
I’m not sure how significant the following pics will be, nevertheless they appear to show the Terrain Avoidance Warning System (TAWS) indicating a fault and switched off. They were taken several hours before the ill fated flight:
By: JangBoGo - 18th May 2012 at 07:04
^^^ you are welcome. CVR have been recovered and probably by tomorrow we’ll hear something, but FDR is still not recovered.
Superjet Recorder Deciphering Equipment to Arrive in Jakarta
06:23 17/05/2012
MOSCOW, May 17 (RIA Novosti)Deciphering equipment for the voice recorder of a crashed Russian passenger jet will be delivered to Jakarta from Moscow on Thursday morning, the Russian Industry and Trade Ministry reported.
The Russian Sukhoi Superjet 100 (SSJ-100) passenger jet slammed into a steep side of Indonesia’s Mount Salak near Jakarta shortly after takeoff on a demonstration flight on May 9. All 45 people on board were killed.
According to Deputy Industry and Trade Minister Yury Slyusar, the recorder taped the last two hours of conversation in the cockpit.
By: Arabella-Cox - 17th May 2012 at 22:39
Thankyou Jangbogo for keeping us posted, now that at least the CVR was recovered we’ll know something more….
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 19:50
Concluding part of Gerry Soejatman’s analysis of the Sukhoi-Superjet-100 crash
SSJ 100 Descent: Innocent but deadly – Part 2
I was very unsatisfied with the results I got from the first round of trajectory simulation for the SSJ-100 crash in Jakarta a week ago (blog article here: SSJ 100 descent: Innocent but deadly – Part 1). It does not match the crash site. I tried to find the cockpit photos by my friend Andy D (@infohots) who went on the first flight, to no avail. I felt that extrapolating based on the First Officer’s panel alone is really a waste of time. No matter how I try to find alternatives, I keep coming back to the same conclusion.
All that changed today when Andy turned up again on the net and posted at the SSJ-100 crash topic in Indoflyer, and that he contacted me as well. His photos in Photobucket ran out of bandwidth and he loaded it elsewhere. I asked him to send the originals to me, so he did, along with what he can remember from his flight. It changed everything!
The Captain’s Primary Flight Display showed basically the same thing as the first officer’s, and the detail of the new photos corrects a few errors I made:
Aircraft Indicated/Calibrated Airspeed: 238 knots
Aircraft was passing 7300ft (the difference with the other photo is only a matter of timing)
Autopilot was on, with Heading Select mode and Vertical Speed mode (029° and -1300 feet per minute), Altitude Select was 6000ft (not 2500).
What may have happened:
After completing the orbit, to go back to Halim Airport, the crew would have had to notify ATC of their intention and obtain clearance for it. However, we know that the ATC handling that area is at Soekarno-Hatta Airport (CGK), handling approach and departures through the area to/from that airport, and also covering aircraft going in and out of Halim Airport that is not at the Tower Frequency. At that time of day, it is the beginning of the afternoon rush hour at CGK, and the ATC handling the Sukhoi Superjet could also be handling about another 15 aircraft, in an area from Halim to the north.
The ATC frequencies can be quite busy during the rush hour period, and there is a possibility that the Sukhoi could not talk to the ATC (the radios only permit one station to talk at any one time). If they could not get to talk to the ATC due to the amount of other traffic, the crew would do what others are trained to do, maintain the last heading after completing the orbit. Unfortunately, this headed straight to Mount Salak. The Yellow Triangle with the Red Outline shows the possible path of the aircraft doing that, and we can see that if they didn’t hit the peak, they would be very close to it.
4. So why did they descend during the orbit on the second flight but not at the first flight?
The simple explanation would be, the runway change. As I said before in the previous article, it is a general rule of thumb for jet aircraft to need 3 nautical miles to lose 1000ft of altitude. To descend 10,000 feet they would need a distance of 30 nautical miles. Even with this revised speculation, if they would be too high for the approach if they didn’t descend from 10,000ft by the time they completed the orbit. Again, mental calculations would be going on in the pilot’s head as they plan for the descent. If they would make the orbit at 20 nautical miles from the airport, they can make a 180 turn after the orbit, after complete that turn they would also be at 20 nautical miles from the airport. 6,000ft needs 18 nautical miles, and they still got that final approach segment of 5 nautical miles. So, descending to 6,000ft so you can be at that altitude at 20 nautical miles, is perfectly normal. The runway change from runway 24 to runway 06, shortened the flight by a significant amount.
Conclusion:
Runway changes screws up pilots’ descent planning on a daily basis. These guys were good, very good! Top notch test pilots, they stayed ahead of their game in the descent planning in an unfamiliar situation, but at the cost of additional risks they did not foresee (and not out of carelessness), to which blame-pointers will feast on the dead. In my opinion, it remains that lack of familiarity with local operating conditions, resulted the tragedy. Possible busy ATC and its radio frequency, and its effects in conjunction with the surrounding terrain, was likely not foreseen by anyone involved in the planning.
Again, I will say that unless the investigators find something else, the information currently available to the public, does not indicate any “pilot bravado” or “ATC cover-ups” (in fact, they’re quite open about it but will not disclose anything more than what they need to disclose at this point in time).
This article, is just an objective speculation aimed at answering some of the questions running around everyone. The truth at the end of the day can be close to this, or very far from this. However, it is my hope that this article can provide answers against reckless speculators, and the blame-pointers.
I end this article by saying that the simple question on why they descended and why ATC gave them permission to do so, in my books, is answered; and that one of my flight simulator guinea pigs, tested the above theory. His aircraft didn’t end up in the mountain, but it very nearly did, and at 6000ft he missed the crash site by a mere 500 meters…
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 19:45
Highlights from SSJ 100 crash site: The worst place in the whole mountain!
Following on from SSJ Descent: Innocent but deadly, I theorized on how the plane could innocently made the descent, and how the ATC could also be blameless for authorizing the descent. That article does not explain how it ended up hitting the mountain. In this article I am showing where it crashed, but not how it ended up there. This accident is already very tragic, but criticism on the pace of the salvage efforts, like many other things in this accident, irks me. Let me add to the tragedy a little bit: the aircraft ended up at possible the worst place in the whole mountain!
Why do I say it is the worst place in the mountain?
It is located near the peak of the mountain.
The terrain wall it hit, is amongst the largest in terms of height from top to bottom, in the whole mountain, and it is one of the steepest.
It is in a narrow confined location.
From the previous article SSJ Descent: Innocent but deadly , I wrote about how the crew might not realize that Mt. Salak was there. However, the explanation in that article, makes it extremely difficult to reconcile with the crash site. The trajectory from that analysis, would yield an impact from the north east or from the east. On the photo of the crash site on the cliff wall, it should show a predominantly left-to-right trajectory, but the photo shows impact characteristics that relatively right-to-left, which means, the aircraft had to come from the north and at relatively high speed (300 knots ground speed is just within “high speed impact” category in my books). BUT… details of the crash site, description of the bodies found, description of “engines relatively intact”, etc, all point to a low to medium speed impact.
Therefore, there HAS to be a different theoretical trajectory for the aircraft that is different from my previous article. It looks like I found it just now… but it’ll take time for me to write it as I need to take time to make sure it looks plausible, and doesn’t break my own ethical boundary for “objective speculation.”
Maps (first two) from the concluding part is also arranged in order to give an overall view on how the flight might have entered the area and where they ended up…
Gerry’s revised assumption of the flight path of the first demo flight
I have decided to not clutter the map with my writing, but marked key items in the map.
For the Cyan coloured items:
1 A line depicting a course of 200° outbound from Halim VOR.
2 A 20 nautical mile radius ring.
3 AL Non-Directional Beacon.The Magenta coloured items:
1 Aircraft took off from runway 24, and made a left turn to the southwest towards Bogor Training Area while climbing to 10,000ft.
2 Entering Bogor Training Area, aircraft turned left to the east.
3 A right-hand orbit (360° turn) was made at position HLM200/20 (20 nautical miles from Halim VOR on radial 200°).
4 After completing the orbit, aircraft leaves Bogor Training Area towards AL01, and begins to descend to 6,000ft sometime after completing the turn.
5 Approximate position of aircraft when the flight deck photos were taken (Near radial 150° at 10 nautical miles from Halim VOR), as aircraft descended towards 6,000ft. Aircraft then descended further along the magenta line until on the ILS for runway 24, and landed.
Gerry’s assumption of the second flight
For the Cyan coloured items:
1 A line depicting a course of 200° outbound from Halim VOR.
2 A 20 nautical mile radius ring.The Magenta coloured items:
1 Aircraft took off from runway 06, and made a right turn to intercept the Halim VOR radial 200° whilst climbing to 10,000ft.
2 Aircraft continued on a course of 200° and reached 10,000ft, to enter the Bogor Training Area. The request to descend to 6,000ft and the right hand orbit would be made shortly after this.
3 After entering the training area, a right-hand orbit (360° turn) was made at position HLM200/20 (20 nautical miles from Halim VOR on radial 200°), and the aircraft also descended to 6,000ft. Note: This should keep the aircraft within the training area throughout the orbit turn.What should have happened then:
4 After completing the orbit, aircraft leaves Bogor Training Area on the same heading before performing the orbit, and it is to obtain Air Traffic Control (ATC) Clearance to head back to Halim for the approach to runway 06.
5 Aircraft would continue to descend to 1600 until performing a visual approach to runway 06, or reach the position of HLM250/5 (5 nautical miles from Halim at radial 250°), and land.We know points 4 & 5 never happened because the aircraft never made it back to the airport. But why?
An incoming path from between north and north east, is a lot more likely. There is a lot of space for them to end up hitting the cliff, without too many probable incoming paths.
looking at what could have been near to the actual flight that happened, it is so damn to see that of all the available area, they went right into the ridge. And as I mentioned in earlier in the thread, the aircraft probably descended right onto the mountains.. 🙁
From Gerry’s excellent analysis and illustration we see that the SSJ-100 probably descended from 10,000ft into the ridge (?) or at the mouth of that ridge… and then at an air-speed of around 238kts, the aircraft probably did not last long before it crashed onto the mountain…
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 18:45
Highlights from Gerry’s analysis SSJ 100 descent: Innocent but deadly – Part 1
To give a short cut, the second flight that was undertaken by the Sukhoi-100 was from a different runway. Very interesting points, particularly none of them noticed the smaller Mt.Salak
Looking out for Mt. Salak – Flight Simulator fans as guinea pigs
I tested several flight simulator friends, inviting them to “reconstruct the SSJ100 crash.” The ones selected had to have the real terrain mesh, conduct the flight and debriefing was made on each flight. The flights were:
SimFlight 1: Depart runway 24 Halim, proceed to 45 nautical miles on a radial of 195° from Halim, and turn back to land runway 24. Cruise altitude would be 15,000 feet.
SimFlight 2: The same as SimFlight1, but use runway 06.
SimFlight 3: Depart runway 24 Halim, proceed to 30 nautical miles on a radial of 195° from Halim, and turn back to land runway 24. Cruise altitude would be 10,000 feet.
SimFlight 4: Same as SimFlight 3, but use runway 06.On all flights, weather was set to clear skies, to exaggerate the mental picture on what they see and suppress mental clutter.
Each debriefing started with them asking me back, “What’s the point of this?” They thought we were going to simulate the crash, not the factors surrounding it. What was found:
Everyone commented that during climb, the mountain they can see would be Mt. Pangrango and not Mt. Salak.
Everyone commented that during cruise, attention would be given to Mt. Pangrango because the peak elevation isn’t far from the planned cruise altitude.
Everyone raised attention to Mt. Pangrango when and after making the left turn to turn back to Halim (before the descent and approach runway 24).
None mentioned their awareness of Mt. Salak. When questioned, no one can describe the position of Mt. Salak in comparison to their position.I asked several pilots who fly in and out of Jakarta’s CGK, where the SID to the east would take them over HLM VOR. All knew that the were 2 mountains south of Jakarta, but as expected, none could recall the rough distances from HLM to the terrain. Even those who had trained in the Bogor Training Area, cannot recall the distance from area to Mt. Salak. They just took the assumptive prevention of “let’s not go south of the training area.” The pilots, generally agree with my findings on pilot perception from the flight sim tests.
Video of Sukhoi Superjet-100 during its earlier demo flight in Indonesia. Some of whom we see in this video, mainly the crew and representatives, might have perished during the second flight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg4B0lXgxXY&feature=player_embedded
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 18:23
Russian Jet Replaced Before Doomed Indonesia Flight
12:09 15/05/2012
MOSCOW, May 15 (RIA Novosti)The Sukhoi Superjet 100 that crashed into a mountain outside Jakarta, Indonesia, killing 45 people on May 9 was a replacement aircraft for one which had been withdrawn due to engine problems shortly before the flight, according to reports in the Russian media.
A Superjet 100 aircraft with the tail number 95005, which earlier performed demonstration flights in Kazakhstan and Pakistan as part of a six-country tour aimed at wooing potential buyers, was the one originally planned to be shown in Indonesia on May 9, the LifeNews television channel said on its website, quoting Alexander Tulyakov, deputy president of Russia’s United Aviation Corporation (UAC).
But an engine oil leak revealed during maintenance on May 6 forced the show organizers to replace the plane with another similar jet, with the tail number 95004, Tulyakov said, resulting in organizers having just a few hours to prepare the plane for the flight.
A spokesperson for the Sukhoi Corporation which designed the plane and is part of UAC confirmed that the plane was replaced, but would not name the reason.
All 45 people on board the Superjet 100 were killed when the plane slammed into a steep side of Mount Salak near Jakarta shortly after take-off on a a demonstration flight on May 9.
Russia’s acting Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said last week that experts believe “human factor” was the most probable cause of the fatal crash, but UAC head Mikhail Pogosyan later said it was still premature to say if pilot error was to blame.
A search operation for the victims’ bodies continues despite difficult weather and terrain at the site of the crash, with the flight recorders of the Superjet 100 yet to be discovered. Indonesian aviation officials have said the investigation of the crash may take up to a year.
The jet is the first commercial plane to be designed and built in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union two decades ago.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20120515/173463377.html
Video from Tv1 on the day of crash, around 3.36min Sukhoi’s Chief Test Pilot Alexander Yablontsev can be seen talking to the reporter from the cockpit. This was probably from the 1st leg of the road-show?
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 18:10
Crashed Superjet 100 ‘Black Box’ Recovered – Media
10:34 16/05/2012
MOSCOW, May 16 (RIA Novosti)“A joint team from the army’s Kopassus special force and the Indonesia Rock Climbing Federation discovered the black box at the site of the crash on Tuesday,” ANTARA News quoted a military official as saying.
The Indonesian military said the black box was severely damaged by the crash and only contained the cockpit voice recorder. It did not contain the vital flight data recorder, which is still missing.
“[The two black box parts] are supposed to be side by side, but because the impact of the crash was so powerful, the two got separated,” National Transportation Safety Committee (KNKT) chief Tatang Kurniadi told The Jakarta Post.
“The black box part retrieved was scorched. It wasn’t its original orange color anymore. It was black,” said National Transportation Safety Committee (KNKT) air transport safety head Masruri said.
Yury Slyusar, head of a special commission set up by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to investigate the crash, said the memory bank of the cockpit voice recorder was safe. Experts have already started listening to the recording, he added.
Investigators are now looking for the flight data recorder, which will give them vital clues about the workings of the aircraft’s engines, controls and systems and its speed, height and attitude when it crashed, KNKT chief Tatang Kurniadi said.
read full – http://en.rian.ru/russia/20120516/173478635.html
Indonesia Takes Charge of Russian Jet Crash Probe
22:30 15/05/2012
MOSCOW, May 15 (RIA Novosti)The Indonesian government will take control of the investigation into a Sukhoi Superjet 100 crash, with Russian teams to have their movements limited, vice presidential spokesman Yopie Hidayat said on Tuesday, The Jakarta Post reported.
There are three Russian teams – one to help search for and evacuate victims and wreckage, one to help identify the victims and one to help investigate the accident. The teams comprise 68 personnel including rescue and missions specialists and psychologists for the victims’ relatives.
“All of these teams are under the coordination of relevant institutions of Indonesia,” he said, adding that the Russian teams had not met with any difficulties in carrying out their tasks in Indonesia.
A search team on Tuesday found the plane’s flight recorder, the AFP said. “We found the black box at around 10 this morning (0300 GMT),” AFP quoted Ketut Parwa, the head of the search operation, as saying.
“It was found around 100 meters from where we located the tail.”
A Russian rescue team on Tuesday also retrieved the jet’s crumpled engine and part of the chassis, Sukhoi said.
By: JangBoGo - 17th May 2012 at 17:58
^^^
You beat me to post Gerry’s blog. I was waiting for his conclusion to come online. He has done a brilliant job with his analysis, but I’d like to put some blame on the ATC because they are a stationary entity of the region where as the Sukhoi pilots were not.
Voice Recorder from Superjet 100 Contains 2 Hrs of Audio
22:19 16/05/2012
MOSCOW, May 16 (RIA Novosti)A voice recorder from the Russian Sukhoi Superjet 100 passenger jet that crashed a week ago in Indonesia recorded the last two hours of conversation in the cockpit, the Russian Industry and Trade Ministry said.
The plane slammed into a steep side of Mount Salak near Jakarta shortly after take-off on a demonstration flight on May 9. All 45 people on board were killed.
Yury Slyusar, the ministry’s deputy head and the chief of a special commission set up by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to investigate the crash, said special equipment needed to decode the cockpit voice recorder will be delivered from Moscow to Jakarta on Thursday.
“If no technical problems arise, the whole procedure [of decoding] will not take long,” Slyusar said, but did not specify when the decoding could be completed.
Earlier on Wednesday, ANTARA News reported that a joint team from the Indonesian army’s Kopassus special force and the Indonesia Rock Climbing Federation discovered the black box at the site of the crash.
The Indonesian military said the black box was severely damaged by the crash and only contained the cockpit voice recorder. It did not contain the vital flight data recorder, which is still missing.
Investigators are now looking for the flight data recorder, which will give them vital clues about the workings of the aircraft’s engines, controls and systems and its speed, height and attitude when it crashed.
The Sukhoi Superjet is the first commercial plane to be designed and built in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union two decades ago.
The aircraft is considered by many in the industry to be Russia’s last hope for maintaining a commercial aircraft manufacturing capability. Built in partnership with Italy’s Alenia Aeronautica, the aircraft has a high percentage of foreign-built components and subsystems.
By: Arabella-Cox - 17th May 2012 at 12:56
Very interesting and accurate analysis, made by Indonesian blogger and Mt. Salak area expert Gerry Soejatman, can be found here:
http://gerryairways.blogspot.it/2012/05/ssj-100-descent-innocent-but-deadly.html
http://gerryairways.blogspot.it/2012/05/ssj-100-crash-site-worst-place-in-whole.html
http://gerryairways.blogspot.it/2012/05/ssj-100-descent-innocent-but-deadly_17.html
I recommend you this reading!
By: JSR - 17th May 2012 at 02:52
Safety is only just a ‘part’ that can create market perceptions. I give up to talk business sense to you. If safety is bad, then the Market will not give good perceptions for that Airplane, thus NO BANK will going to finance the procurement of the Airplane.
Market Perception can derived from Safety, from cost, from maintanance, from support, etc altogether will determine the acceptance of ANY PRODUCT in the Market. So don’t talk about Market Perceptions does not mean anything if you don’t have ANY IDEA what market perception is.
Market perception dont matter when your business is loss making. can any bank give low interest loans to business that is more likely than not make permanent losses for years on depreciating asset? banks finance it because they are forced to do it.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/15/us-usa-eximbank-idUSBRE82E01P20120315
Delta-Boeing clash threatens Obama bid to renew Eximbank
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-09/singapore-air-posts-loss-cathay-slows-growth-on-fuel.html
Even the best run airlines are making quaterly losses at this oil price. No amount of market perception will help once oil goes up above certain level. most countries dont have savings. and airline make small down payment when they order. manufacturers need strong banking system.
with unlimited bank credit so many aircrafts can be produced that there will be airlines waiting in line for delivery.
By: ananda - 16th May 2012 at 11:35
They have to find cause of crash not because of market perception but for safety
Safety is only just a ‘part’ that can create market perceptions. I give up to talk business sense to you. If safety is bad, then the Market will not give good perceptions for that Airplane, thus NO BANK will going to finance the procurement of the Airplane.
Market Perception can derived from Safety, from cost, from maintanance, from support, etc altogether will determine the acceptance of ANY PRODUCT in the Market. So don’t talk about Market Perceptions does not mean anything if you don’t have ANY IDEA what market perception is.
By: Arabella-Cox - 15th May 2012 at 18:23
Another Indonesian airline delays its orders with Sukhoi
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/05/15/sky-aviation-delays-its-sukhoi-orders.html
And another Indonesian airline may cancel orders for Chinese and Russian airliners. Primarily influenced by load factor, but the May 9th crash also a factor
By: JSR - 15th May 2012 at 03:39
Sorry have to disagree. Market Perceptions is a very big thing. Why do you think the Sukhoi with the back-up of Russian Administrations goes all out to solve the caused of the crash. They’re trying to save the reputations of Russian commercial aircraft industry.
They have to find cause of crash not because of market perception but for safety
You’re talking too much from engineers perspective. But sorry, this days the engineers are not the ones who determines which aircraft going to get sold or bought by the Airliners. The ‘bean-counters’ a.k.a the Financiers and the Marketers are the ones that determined. For them market perceptions is very important if not close to everything.
Again market perception is not important. think harder. It is the banking system. you can have very good aeroplane but without banking system willing to take risk of financing it to loss making airlines. It is not going to sell.
You can’t compared today situations of Airbus with the current situations of Sukhoi. For the Airline industry Airbus Brand already close to a ‘bond’ just like Boeing. The perceptions of the Industry, their products sells and more importantly ‘trusted by the market. Again like I stated before, Market Perceptions is not just related to actual situations. It’s perceptions anyway, and perceptions can be build, but have to be earned.
Airbus sells because it was backed up by banking system of EU and that banking system is proped by cash surpluse countries of Middleast. who want to sell billions of dollars of aeroplanes to permanent loss making Airlines?. This thing is beyond logic.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-11/british-airways-owner-iag-has-eu249-million-loss-on-fuel-iberia.html
British Airways Owner Posts Wider Loss on Fuel, Iberia Unit
If the Airbus A-300 prototype meet a ‘fatal’ crashed during a demo tour, then Airbus on that time perhaps would meet ‘market perceptions’ and ‘reputations’ problem with the International customers just like Sukhoi faced today. Anyway, no Airbus A-380 meet such fatal crashed as today. Still today, they have enough reputations and more importantly Global Market ‘trust’, while Sukhoi still not achieved that on commercial Airliners (far from it).
Airbus cannot sell shiit without bank financing to airlines. Sukhoi has much better quality control as everything integrated and manufactured in fewer locations. and that strong financing led FBW designer liebherr aerospace to build a plant in Russia.
Again I’m not saying that Sukhoi 100 dommed to meet the ‘failure’ with International Market caused of this incidents. However if the Sukhoi can’t solved the crash with proven data showing their Aircraft is alright, and ‘convince’ the market on that. Then yes, Sukhoi 100 project can faced failure in the International market.
As i mentioned before as long as Oil prices keep rising with time and backed by sound banking sector. Sukhoi dont have to worry about market perception. They just need to build airlines and Aeroflot need to control the most profitable routes. why they need to sell aeroplanes abroad?. Airbus need to sell abroad because the home country airlines are loss making.
Again you may not agree with that, but I do believe the Sukhoi people agree on the power of ‘market perceptions’ which made them goes all out campaign to handle ‘damage control’ situations. They’re put campaign in media that the two Indonesian Airliners still comiited to the order of Sukhoi 100 despite the crash. If this not one of their way to convince the market, then you still do not have an idea how important the market perception is for the Sukhoi.
For AN-26, I’m not talking about certifications. I’m talking about proven design, and AN-26 is a proven design. Thus MA-60 (which’s a modified design of AN-26) based on a proven design.
we dont know at this point what cause the crash. and there is not a definite answer from Indo airlines about future procurement. how exactly is An-26 a proven design?. can it operate 24/7 with 98% up time.
By: Breguet - 14th May 2012 at 19:21
Was Industrial Sabotage at Play with Super Jet crash in Indonesia?
Welcome to bullshyt land.
Halim is where U.S. Special Forces troops have been training their Indonesian counterparts in various air force tactics, possibly including meaconing, intrusion, jamming, and interference (MIJI) electronic warfare tactics designed to interfere with aircraft navigation systems. Some of the training occurs every year as part of the EXERCISE COPE WEST, sponsored the Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii. Last year’s exercise, COPE WEST 10, concentrated on simulated military operations against the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force, which uses fighter jets designed and licensed by Sukhoi, including the Sukhoi 27 and Sukhoi 30.
An so what?? What’s the freakking link with the crash???
Sign In
May 9, 2012 at 1:18 pm