Sukhui Superjet reported missing

Davidth88

Seems one may have gone missing in the Indonesia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18004097

it was on a demo flight .

vicwatson

And here -

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/crash-fears-as-demo-jet-vanishes-3103505.html

Zonda999

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5460828/

Good place to follow this, its not looking good at this point..

donvito99

Al Jazeera reporting a distress message was received.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2012/05/20125910428596384.html

Terribly sad; death knell for Sukhoi and their Superjet?

Zonda999

It its a bit early to be saying that, no one knows the circumstances at all

BuffyBot

Indeed. Look at the A320 crash in 88 at Mulhouse. Only the 9th built, and out at an airshow doing a fly past. Now one of the most successful planes ever..it may be the craft at fault, it could be many things..it's way too early to tell how it will impact the SuperJet program.

Thoughts go out to all on board.

Delancey

Somebody posted on here a year ago some photos of the first Sukhoi Superjet - it was obvious the workmanship was of a very poor standard and caused me to wonder what were the bits like that couldn't be seen ?

Zonda999

Well, it was certified, here in Europe.. Plenty people, especially on Airliners.net are saying its probably CFIT and that the terrain response systems may have been turned off for that demo flight. Bear in mind that mountain they were going to fly around is over 7000 ft so the plane requesting to drop to 6000 ft before its disappearance, seems odd. I wouldn't be so quick to say the crash was caused by a technical issue with the plane..

ohigg84

This is tragic! Although traditionally Russian built airliners were of poor standard, this Sukhoi Superjet seems quite promising, as evident by securing orders from some Western operators such as Interjet (Mexico)and Malev, but Malev is no longer with us., but no major European or U.S carriers, and Armavia
Also Boeing participated in assisting towards the development of the Sukhoi jet..

I hope it will not hinder sales of the airliner, it looks ok, but is not really that nice looking, especially the vertical tailfin and the way the front landing gear retracts backwards rather than the conventional (Western) forward method.

It seems Aeroflot wasn't happy with the first few aircraft it received, and thus, received more 'Advanced' series aircraft.

I wonder will Aeroflot get rid of them now and just acquire more A319/A320s?

globemaster1986

Also reported on Flightglobal and is being discussed on PPRuNe.

Quite sad as the Superjet does look very promising, but as previously mentioned re the A320 accident, it didn't seem to affect the A320 sales much in the long term!

Zonda999

True but airbus already had two successful planes produced at that stage (A300 & A310). Sukhoi does no. i really hope this doesn't put prospectus buyers off, if its proven to be something other than a technical fault. Tomorrow we'll know all

This is tragic though, all the same

Dacian

ohigg84 wrote: »

........
It seems Aeroflot wasn't happy with the first few aircraft it received, and thus, received more 'Advanced' series aircraft.

It was my understanding that Aeroflot accepted the first batch of SJ-100's without their specific cabin config, the deal was that they would be returned and replaced once their precise config was available.

BrianCohen

ohigg84 wrote: »

This is tragic! Although traditionally Russian built airliners were of poor standard, this Sukhoi Superjet seems quite promising, as evident by securing orders from some Western operators such as Interjet (Mexico)and Malev, but Malev is no longer with us., but no major European or U.S carriers, and Armavia
Also Boeing participated in assisting towards the development of the Sukhoi jet..

I hope it will not hinder sales of the airliner, it looks ok, but is not really that nice looking, especially the vertical tailfin and the way the front landing gear retracts backwards rather than the conventional (Western) forward method.

It seems Aeroflot wasn't happy with the first few aircraft it received, and thus, received more 'Advanced' series aircraft.

I wonder will Aeroflot get rid of them now and just acquire more A319/A320s?

I just did a google image search and it looks like the front gear retracts forwards. I think it looks quite nice actually. I hope whatever has happened this aircraft won't affect future orders but I suppose only time will tell.

ohigg84

Dacian wrote: »

It was my understanding that Aeroflot accepted the first batch of SJ-100's without their specific cabin config, the deal was that they would be returned and replaced once their precise config was available.

Ah ok, that was it..
Isn't there a business jet variant too.

ohigg84

BrianCohen wrote: »

I just did a google image search and it looks like the front gear retracts forwards. I think it looks quite nice actually. I hope whatever has happened this aircraft won't affect future orders but I suppose only time will tell.

Ok, thats unusual for Russian built aircraft, so that idea may have stemmed from Boeing input into the project.

Actually, its not too bad, as I said earlier, i dont like the tailfin (vertical) but it looks a bit like a modern shorter Dassault mercure?

Anybody else think so?

ohigg84

globemaster1986 wrote: »

Also reported on Flightglobal and is being discussed on PPRuNe.

Quite sad as the Superjet does look very promising, but as previously mentioned re the A320 accident, it didn't seem to affect the A320 sales much in the long term!

Yep a320 and b737 sales are steady and increasing input.

Wonder how the C-Series is fairing out?

L1011

ohigg84 wrote: »

Yep a320 and b737 sales are steady and increasing input.

Wonder how the C-Series is fairing out?

less than 100 firm last time I checked.

Seems to be mostly sales for people to replace quite aging 146/Avros and not smaller normal sized narrow bodies (319/73G) so far at that.

ohigg84

MYOB wrote: »

less than 100 firm last time I checked.

Seems to be mostly sales for people to replace quite aging 146/Avros and not smaller normal sized narrow bodies (319/73G) so far at that.

Ah I was thinking.. Does SWISS still have orders for it?
I know Republic Airways has orders for up to 75 of them.

L1011

ohigg84 wrote: »

Ah I was thinking.. Does SWISS still have orders for it?
I know Republic Airways has orders for up to 75 of them.

According to the world's least accurate encyclopaedia, yes.

Nforce

A Sukhoi Sukhoi Superjet 100-95, registration RA-97004 performing a demonstration flight from Jakarta Halim Perdanakusuma Airport to Jakarta Halim Perdanakusuma Airport (Indonesia) with 37 passengers, 6 crew and 2 Sukhoi officials, was enroute near Mount Salak and Bogor about 36nm south of Jakarta about 30 minutes into the flight when the radio contact with the aircraft was lost. The aircraft did not turn up at Jakarta or any other airport in the area. The aircraft wreckage was found by a helicopter the following morning (May 10th) at about 09:15L (02:15Z) on the slopes of Mount Salak at an elevation of about 5300 feet MSL.

Rescue and Recovery teams are currently on their way to the crash site. First attempts to reach the crash site, including attempts to set rescuers down by helicopters, have failed so far (May 10th 16:45L) due to the extremely steep terrain rising at up to 85 degrees. About 450 rescue personnel are currently moving towards the crash site on the ground but will not reach the site before darkness.

The coordinator of the rescue operation said, that the aircraft appeared relatively intact from the air however has received substantial damage after leaving a trail away from the crater down the slope, there was no sign of survivors from the air. Rescue teams are currently on the ground about 1km from the crash site, the terrain being difficult to reach the wreckage.

The Air Force said the aircraft impacted the edge of a cliff (top of the cliff at 6250 feet MSL) about 1.7 nm from Cijeruk. Approximate final position of the aircraft is S6.7045 E106.7373

Indonesian Authorities reported the aircraft was enroute at 10,000 feet near Mount Salak when at about 15:30L (08:30Z) the crew requested and was cleared to descend to 6,000 feet. This proved to be the last radio transmission. Radar contact was lost when the aircraft was in a right hand turn descending through 6,200 feet between Mount Salak and Mount Gede at approximate position S6.72 E106.72. The aircraft was flying clockwise around Mount Salak at that time. A search operation has been initiated and is mounting, first search flights on May 9th did not yet found any trace of the aircraft. Search on the ground is under way, a first team has departed for Mount Salak in the evening, a second ground team is expected to depart on May 10th early morning, more than 600 ground personnel have been deployed by sunrise May 10th.

Sukhoi reported the aircraft registration RA-97004 (MSN 95004) was piloted by a very experienced crew that also flew the first prototype of the aircraft, the commander had more than 10,000 hours total. The crew did not report any anomaly and did not issue a distress call prior to the aircraft disappearing. The aircraft had already concluded another demonstration flight earlier the day. The accident aircraft had accumulated 800 flight hours in more than 500 cycles, there had been no serious technical problems since its first flight in 2009.

Mount Salak is 2,211 meters/7254 feet high, nearby Mount Gede is 2,958 meters/9,705 feet high.

At 15:30L the local weatherstation in Bogor reported visibility at 9000 meters (increasing to 10000 meters in the next reading), temperature at 31 degrees C, dew point at 25 degrees C, humidity 70% and winds arund 5 knots from northeast, no precipitation. In the morning the weatherstation had reported low visibility around about 2000 meters.

http://avherald.com/h?article=44f464f7&opt=0

squonk

Looks like it flew right into the side of the mountain. Strange. It looks like a very old-school type of design. The paint scheme is doing nothing for it however. They need to get some of Boeing or Airbus's scheme designers to redo it.

*Kol*

squonk wrote: »

The paint scheme is doing nothing for it however. They need to get some of Boeing or Airbus's scheme designers to redo it.

I think that is the least of their worries at the moment.

guerito

Of the 40-ish non Sukhoi people on board, it seems almost all were representatives of Indonesian airlines out for the demo flight. After this, Sukhoi will be lucky to get a single order in S-E Asia. Rumours coming out of the region are that a number of very senior people from several Indonesian airlines have gone silent, and may well have been among those on board.

Thoughts go out to those on board and their families.

CaptainSkidmark

any more on survivors?

ohigg84

A very sad day indeed.

I think this may have cost the entire program.

ohigg84

MYOB wrote: »

According to the world's least accurate encyclopaedia, yes.

I actually remembered reading about that in flight international.
Yep, SWISS has 30 C-series on order, just got the latest copy of Airliner world.. An article about SWISS!:D

Zonda999

ohigg84 wrote: »

A very sad day indeed.

I think this may have cost the entire program.

Quite a few people on airliners.net and other aviation forums are saying/hoping that it was a technical fault. In that case, the program doesn't to be punished. It is worthy of note though, the crew requested permission from ATC to drop down to 6000 ft despite the fact that mountain range has peaks of 7000ft. People are also saying theu wanted to fly between two peaks, and that localised cloud is known to be a trait of those mountains. Even at this early stage in investigations, I think that paints a fairly compelling case for itself. Whats more, terrain response doesnt have to be on for demo flights. When they were flying at below the peak height of the mountain range nearby, possibly without terrain response on, questions have to be asked.. As tragic as this was, pointing to the fact that the aircraft was new, and is from Russia (like all the American news sites are eluding to, btw) isn't fair IMHO..

Everyone knows here that if this had been an Embraer, not a mind if it was a Boeing or Airbus, no news sites would be eluding to the fact it was a Brazilian jet, I;m convinced of that.. Plus its not as if it was conceived by the same people who built the Tu-154, it was/is very much a joint Russian/European program

L1011

ohigg84 wrote: »

A very sad day indeed.

I think this may have cost the entire program.

Pilot error - if it is proven to be that - shouldn't end the program.

ohigg84

MYOB wrote: »

Pilot error - if it is proven to be that - shouldn't end the program.

So weather too was a mitigating factor too? Does the Sukhoi jet have a Ground proximity warning system?

Surely, the pilots were aware of the terrain?

ohigg84

Zonda999 wrote: »

Quite a few people on airliners.net and other aviation forums are saying/hoping that it was a technical fault. In that case, the program doesn't to be punished. It is worthy of note though, the crew requested permission from ATC to drop down to 6000 ft despite the fact that mountain range has peaks of 7000ft. People are also saying theu wanted to fly between two peaks, and that localised cloud is known to be a trait of those mountains. Even at this early stage in investigations, I think that paints a fairly compelling case for itself. Whats more, terrain response doesnt have to be on for demo flights. When they were flying at below the peak height of the mountain range nearby, possibly without terrain response on, questions have to be asked.. As tragic as this was, pointing to the fact that the aircraft was new, and is from Russia (like all the American news sites are eluding to, btw) isn't fair IMHO..



Everyone knows here that if this had been an Embraer, not a mind if it was a Boeing or Airbus, no news sites would be eluding to the fact it was a Brazilian jet, I;m convinced of that..

I didn't know the circumstances surrounding the crash, but thats a fair point you made.
I think the Sukhoi jet is an ok looking aircraft, but it has caused a dent in Sukhoi's business. This is the first civilian aircraft it has produced, whereas Embraer was producing civilian airliners for a long time.

L1011

ohigg84 wrote: »

So weather too was a mitigating factor too? Does the Sukhoi jet have a Ground proximity warning system?

Surely, the pilots were aware of the terrain?

It would appear that the GPWS was turned off going on photos of the control panel taken that morning.

Pilots were not local, probably didn't do a lot of flight planning either by the looks of things.

Zonda999

ohigg84 wrote: »

So weather too was a mitigating factor too? Does the Sukhoi jet have a Ground proximity warning system?

Surely, the pilots were aware of the terrain?

Yeah, it has it alright.

There was a blogger who was with the delegation, but wasn't on the flight. He put up picture of the jet before the flight.Theres one of the cockpit where someone on another forum pointed out the Terrain Response was off. Can't find it now. I'll have another look. I saw somewhere as well that mountain, Mount Selak or whatever, has been the scene of 10 aviation accidents in the last 10 years

EDIT: See this forum, you'll read what you need to see in the first 20 or so posts

globemaster1986

MYOB wrote: »

Pilot error - if it is proven to be that - shouldn't end the program.

Yes similarities could be drawn with the Airbus accident in 1988 and the A320 has gone on to be one of the most successful airliners ever built!

cuterob

how would this compete with airbus and boeing? solely down to price?

globemaster1986

cuterob wrote: »

how would this compete with airbus and boeing? solely down to price?

It doesn't really. Boeing doesn't currently make anything that would compete directly with it. The Superjet 100-95 would seat approx 98 passengers in a 1 class configuration. Airbus make the A318 (117 seats one class) but its not popular with airlines and is slightly bigger, it is more popular as a corporate jet. It is also not very efficient compared to real competitors like the Embraer 190/195 and the Bombardier CRJ 1000 which would both seat approx 100 in a one class config. These are the aircraft the Superjet is in direct competition with for new orders.

Xpro

Bad news for Sukhoi. Decending to 6,000ft wasnt a smart move in High terrain area with peaks of 7,000ft. Looks purely like a pilot error

the_syco

Zonda999 wrote: »

Bear in mind that mountain they were going to fly around is over 7000 ft so the plane requesting to drop to 6000 ft before its disappearance, seems odd.

If the pilots weren't local, would a request by a high up official to fly between the peaks have been granted?

cuterob

globemaster1986 wrote: »

It doesn't really. Boeing doesn't currently make anything that would compete directly with it. The Superjet 100-95 would seat approx 98 passengers in a 1 class configuration. Airbus make the A318 (117 seats one class) but its not popular with airlines and is slightly bigger, it is more popular as a corporate jet. It is also not very efficient compared to real competitors like the Embraer 190/195 and the Bombardier CRJ 1000 which would both seat approx 100 in a one class config. These are the aircraft the Superjet is in direct competition with for new orders.

ah I see..didn't think it was that small..How would it compete with bombardier and embraer so?

L1011

cuterob wrote: »

ah I see..didn't think it was that small..How would it compete with bombardier and embraer so?

I would imagine it'd be cheaper than the E-Jets and the CSeries, and have a more modern appearance inside than the existing CRJ units.

A lot of orders for this, the Tu204 and so on have been from Soviet-sphere (what's left of it!) countries as well as countries that have trade embargoes preventing them from getting new western craft such as Cuba and Iran. There hasn't been huge interest from outside of these areas.

Nissan doctor

Sad to see, like any air crash site.

The end of the video shows a good view of the full crash site, its very long and spread up the side of the mountain.....if I were to guess I'd say it looks like they were trying to climb up over the terrain as a descending impact would be a smaller area I would think?

If they were climbing then that would point towards pilot error/visibility/terrain warning switched off as mentioned.

Run_to_da_hills

Was Industrial Sabotage at Play with Super Jet crash in Indonesia?

Based on past aggressive competitive commercial tactics employed by the alliance of American corporations, the U.S. Intelligence Community, and the Pentagon, aviation experts in Asia are wondering aloud whether the recent crash of the new Sukhoi Super Jet 100 in Indonesia was the result of high-stakes industrial sabotage engineered to protect Boeing’s lucrative commercial and military aviation market in Asia at the expense of a resurgent Russian aviation industry

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2012/05/12/was-industrial-sabotage-at-play-with-super-jet-crash-in-indonesia.html

lord lucan

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Was Industrial Sabotage at Play with Super Jet crash in Indonesia?

Based on past aggressive competitive commercial tactics employed by the alliance of American corporations, the U.S. Intelligence Community, and the Pentagon, aviation experts in Asia are wondering aloud whether the recent crash of the new Sukhoi Super Jet 100 in Indonesia was the result of high-stakes industrial sabotage engineered to protect Boeing’s lucrative commercial and military aviation market in Asia at the expense of a resurgent Russian aviation industry

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2012/05/12/was-industrial-sabotage-at-play-with-super-jet-crash-in-indonesia.html

I think that post belongs in the CT Forum tbh. Tragic accident was what it was,for reasons as yet unexplained.

Zonda999

Some in Russia are saying that to, it was done by Boeing..This kinda stuff is almost to be expected given the competitive element between the two countires, not one scrap of evidence as usual.

This was a tragic accident and this kinda stuff being brought up won't be making it any better for those who have lost loved ones in this accident.

xflyer

Wouldn't you know Run_to_da_hills would introduce us to the conspiracy theory. :rolleyes:

It's a laughable idea though. The worst thing about the internet is the instantaneous conspiracy theory on literally everything that happens.

No doubt the investigation will reveal the truth in the end, heavily disputed by the Russians

kona

The yanks get blamed for everything, I feel sorry for them.

Mr Benevolent

lord lucan wrote: »

I think that post belongs in the CT Forum tbh. Tragic accident was what it was,for reasons as yet unexplained.

Agreed, that CT crap isn't appropriate here. On topic, the accident was almost certainly a CFIT, they were probably pulling up when they hit. Either that or the aircraft broke up due to the pullup and hit the mountain.