Overload of the Tu-154 aircraft by 10–12 tons could not have caused the airliner to crash in the Black Sea near Sochi on December 25, 2016. Our expert, an experienced military pilot with more than 10 thousand flight hours, of which about 4 thousand as a Tu-154 crew commander, is convinced of this. He told Novaya that he could give official testimony to the commission investigating the Sochi disaster and substantiate his version of the tragedy. The editors of Novaya, in turn, can provide the commission investigating the disaster with personal data and contact number veteran military aviation, who acted as an expert for the newspaper.

Our expert contacted the editors immediately after the publication of another version of the Sochi disaster: the online publication Gazeta.ru, with reference to specialists participating in the investigation, said that before takeoff from the Chkalovsky airfield near Moscow, the weight of the aircraft was 99.6 tons, including 24 tons of fuel, the plane was refueled in Sochi, and its weight reached 110 tons, which exceeded the permissible 98 tons. “If the crew commander knew that the standard take-off weight was exceeded by more than 10 tons, he would either refuse the flight or take off taking into account that the plane was overloaded,” Gazeta.ru concludes.

However, the Investigative Committee of Russia has already denied information about the overload of the Tu-154. Official representative of the department Svetlana Petrenko said: “The hypotheses published in the media about possible reasons Airplane crashes are not based on facts and are the personal judgments of their authors.” According to Petrenko, conclusions about the causes of the tragedy will be made only after a “complex of flight technical examinations”. At the same time, the representative of the Investigative Committee did not announce the timing of these examinations. Although, according to information from Novaya, received from a source familiar with the investigation, all the necessary examinations have already been carried out, and the conclusions of specialists have been transferred to the official commission to investigate the causes of the disaster.

The Novaya expert also considers the version of the Tu-154 overload to be untenable, but, unlike the TFR representative, he supported his opinion with arguments.

- I can’t imagine that air force Kamikaze pilots appeared, making decisions about takeoff, not knowing whether the plane was overloaded or not. Loading and refueling of aircraft, of course, is carried out by ground services, but always under the supervision of the technical crew and co-pilot. The mouse won't go through. This is an axiom,” my interlocutor said. — Besides, 10 tons is a lot, but this is not a catastrophic overload for modern aircraft.

My interlocutor recalled the events of 1973, the war in the Middle East:

— At that time, military transport aviation, as they say, “lived in the sky,” ensuring the transfer of cargo to Syria, Iraq, and Egypt. The commander of military transport aviation issued a special order, which allowed to increase the take-off weight for An-12 aircraft from 61 to 65 tons. In the order of the USSR Minister of Defense “On air transportation by planes M.O." the procedure for preparing cargo and personnel (passengers) for transportation is clearly regulated.

But this order emphasized that the aircraft commander is obliged to obtain documents for the cargo. And this order of 1973 has not yet been canceled.

Analyzing the actions of the Tu-154 crew that took off from Sochi airport on December 25, 2016, our expert drew attention to another inconsistency:

- Even if you believe that the crew, sensing something was wrong, made an attempt emergency landing, then the pilots had to make a left turn, trying to enter the second lane (there are two lanes in Sochi, visually they represent the letter V). And the wreckage of the crashed plane was found in the Khosta area. It turns out that the crew was trying to perform a right turn? Moreover, if they were really going to make an emergency landing, the pilot-in-command would have notified the crew and the airport about it. And this would have been recorded by both the flight recorders and airport dispatchers.

Our expert continues to adhere to the version with which Novaya has already introduced readers: the take-off of the Tu-154 aircraft was carried out by a non-staff crew. Its essence: the full-time commander of the Tu-154 crew performed the functions of a co-pilot during takeoff, however, being in his place, and a pilot who had extensive flying experience took off, but on other types of aircraft, for example on the An-72.

According to our expert’s version, the Tu-154 crew commander took his place in the cabin, but to his right, in the co-pilot’s seat, there was not a crew member, but an “outsider” who had no right to be there, not only not trained and not allowed to fly on this type of aircraft, but also an officer not included in the flight mission, senior in rank and position

“Here are the photographs published in the press,” my interlocutor shows. — In this photo you can clearly see that the landing gear was in the extended position. Here is one of the racks. The thick short part that “lies” on the bogie, and the suspension unit to the center section is outlined with a thin red oval - this is the shock absorber strut itself. The long thin part, indicated by a thick red arrow, is the landing gear retraction/release cylinder. Its length corresponds to the length of this cylinder when the landing gear is extended, like an airplane standing on the ground. When the landing gear is retracted, the rod of the cleaning cylinder, under the influence of hydraulic mixture pressure, extends, pushing the rack back, and turns the landing gear bogie over so that the last pair of wheels becomes the first in flight, while the cleaning cylinder becomes much longer than in the picture.

Our expert shows another photo:

— This is another landing gear with the front pair of wheels torn off. The wheels could come off only when they hit the water. The conclusion is obvious: the landing gear was released. Here's a photo of the left wing. What do we see? Flaps in retracted position.

My interlocutor is indignant:

— After our conversation in March, the “recording of conversations in the cockpit” was made public.

On the recording, in absolute silence, the calm command “Remove the flaps” is heard, and ten seconds later a cry is heard: “We’re falling!” Meanwhile, there is “Technology of work of the Tu-154 crew”. This document is strictly followed by all pilots flying this type of aircraft. According to “Technology”, after the commander’s command “Remove the flaps,” the co-pilot says: “I am retracting the flaps.”

Then the navigator reports: “The flaps are retracted synchronously, the stabilizer is shifted.” When the flaps are retracted, the navigator reports: “Flaps, slats are retracted, the stabilizer is zero, the LV and LV displays are not lit.” There is none of this in the released “recording of conversations in the cockpit.”

My interlocutor assumes that they want to hide something from us. And that is why they “leaked” the recording to the public, in which “outsiders” voices were erased, or it is a recording that has nothing to do with the Sochi disaster.

I repeat, Novaya’s expert is ready to testify and substantiate his version of the tragedy officially to the commission investigating the Sochi disaster.

Why is the version of a terrorist attack on board a plane flying to Syria actively being promoted in the media and social networks?

Upon the crash of a Tu-154 of the Russian Ministry of Defense over the Black Sea, which killed 92 people, the Investigative Committee opened a criminal case under Art. 351 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (violation of flight rules resulting in grave consequences), and the head of the Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, personally flew to Sochi to coordinate the actions of his subordinates.

In addition, there is a government commission in Sochi. As stated by the Minister of Transport of the Russian Federation Maxim Sokolov, who heads it, the priority versions are technical problem aircraft and pilot error. The version of the terrorist attack is also being considered, but is not the main one.

Indeed, a terrorist attack seems almost impossible. As a source in the special services told RIA Novosti, the Tu-154 planned to land for refueling in Mozdok, but due to weather conditions it was moved to Adler. “There was no information in advance that the plane would be refueled at Sochi airport,” the agency’s interlocutor said. He noted that “the Tu-154 took off from the Chkalovsky airfield, where passengers and luggage were carefully searched and checked,” and after arriving in Adler it was taken under guard. “Only two border guards and one customs officer boarded the plane, and only the navigator exited the plane to control the refueling; food was not served on board, and refueling was carried out by regular personnel,” the intelligence officer said.

It turns out that the hypothetical terrorists could only find out about the arrival of the plane at the last moment, and did not have the physical ability to carry an explosive device to the plane.

However, many Russian media it is the version of the terrorist attack that is being promoted. For example, it is adhered to by perhaps the most knowledgeable journalist of the “Kremlin pool,” Andrei Kolesnikov. And he is not alone. Komsomolskaya Pravda quotes the words of test pilot, Hero of Russia Anatoly Knyshov: “the fact that the crew did not have time to ask for help says only one thing: it was an explosion.” And Life quotes the first deputy chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security, Franz Klintsevich, that “it cannot be ruled out terrorist attack", since the air transport was "technically sound."

This is precisely the mystery - nothing foreshadowed a tragedy when taking off from Sochi airport. The weather conditions were almost ideal. The pilot requested a full takeoff roll, recalling that the plane was “heavy,” and took off at approximately 5:24 a.m. After 2 minutes 44 seconds, the dispatcher called the plane and reported an “approach” - an oncoming aircraft landing. The Tu-154 confirmed receipt of the command, but a few seconds later it did not respond to the “approach” call. He requested the airfield and reported this, after which the Tu-154 began to be called on all frequencies, but he was silent. At the same time, the Tu-154 mark on the radar screens also disappeared. The ground services did not receive an alarm signal, for which the pilot-in-command simply pressed the switch on the instrument panel.

It is this suddenness that now raises the most questions. And the landing in Sochi was not 100% unpredictable: military transport planes fly to Syria almost every day, and use only two airfields for refueling - in Mozdok and Adler. What if we assume that there were two groups of terrorists? Or another question: how was the cargo that was being transported to Syria inspected at the Chkalovsky airfield?

The facts we have do not allow us to reject the version of a terrorist attack, says the Honored Pilot of the USSR, former Deputy Minister civil aviation USSR Oleg Smirnov. - The possibility of a terrorist attack, I believe, is indicated by the fact that the pilot of the aircraft did not have enough of a split second to press the button of the emergency radio transmitter, which is located on the control wheel.

This signal is used in case of emergency situations during flight. This is either a gross failure of equipment, including one associated with retracting the flaps, or a failure of instruments, or a crew error associated with a loss of speed, which happens when taking off at sea. Or, finally, external intervention - an explosion.

The fact, I repeat, is that the commander did not have enough time for an almost reflexive action. And until it is proven that something else was the cause of the sudden catastrophe, the version of a terrorist attack cannot, indeed, be ruled out.

“SP”: - The Tu-154 is considered “strict” in controlling the aircraft. How likely is it that there was pilot error rather than an explosion on board?

The probability is quite high. I have taken off and landed in Sochi many times - it is a difficult airfield. There is only one landing course and one take-off course - from the sea, and you cannot take off or land from the mountains. Although, I must note, I caught a time when pilots on an Il-18 plane were landing from the mountains. Then it was allowed. But landing in this case turned into a professional balancing act, a kind of aerobatics. The heavy Il-18 had to be piloted between the rocks with pinpoint precision in order to get to runway. And after several planes crashed during landing, this approach was canceled.

So, it was from that time that I made professional impressions of taking off towards the sea. When I took off at night for the first time - and the crashed Tu-154 also took off almost at night - my brain froze. I saw a dark starry sky in front of me, but the stars were shining both above and below me, reflected in the water. This is a fantastic sight, but it confuses the brain - the pilot loses spatial orientation. And if at that moment he was distracted from the instruments, expect a disaster.

Such a case happened in 1972. A few minutes after the night takeoff in Sochi, the Il-18 suddenly took a sharp left turn with sharp decline, and then crashed into the water and was completely destroyed. Small debris and fragments of bodies were found floating on the water 5-6 kilometers from the shore. All 109 people on board the airliner were killed. A major search operation was organized with the participation of the Black Sea Fleet. But, despite all efforts, the main wreckage of the plane and the flight recorders were never found.

I think the Il-18 pilot was distracted from instrument piloting, lost orientation in space, and fell into a tailspin.

A similar situation happened on the night of May 2-3, 2006 with an Armavia Airbus A320−211, which was flying on the Yerevan-Sochi route. During the landing approach, the plane made a second circle. This is equivalent to takeoff - the pilot performs the same actions. The commander of the Armenian ship also lost his orientation, lost speed and fell into a tailspin. The result was the death of 105 passengers and 8 crew members.

Therefore, for an inexperienced crew, taking off towards the sea is a serious test. With all due respect to the crew of the deceased Tu-154, the flight commander Roman Volkov, a first-class pilot, had about 3.5 thousand hours of flight time, which is meager by civil aviation standards. And most importantly, he rarely took off and landed in Sochi, and apparently did not know the insidious features of this airfield.

“SP”: - Did the Il-18 and Airbus A320−211 that crashed into the sea manage to send a distress signal?

That's the thing, no. Falling into a tailspin passenger airliner due to the loss of speed occurs instantly. The plane's engine is spinning, with such rolls and overloads that you can't reach any button.

“SP”: - How do you assess the probability: is it a terrorist attack or a pilot error?

I don’t have enough objective facts for such an assessment. This is the task of the government commission. Ideally, in order to establish the truth, you need to lift the wreckage of the plane from the bottom and lay it out along the contour of the airliner on the shore. And most importantly, you need to find the “black boxes” and decipher them. Only in this case will a unique and objective picture of what happened appear before us.

I don’t think there was a terrorist attack during the Tu-154 crash,” says Sergei Goncharov, president of the Association of Veterans of the Alpha anti-terror unit, member of the Russian Academy of Security, Defense and Law Enforcement. - If it were a civilian aircraft, I would consider the version of a terrorist attack seriously. But the plane was military, and I have been to Chkalovsky more than once, and I know well how security issues are ensured there.

There are only two things that confuse me. The first is why the ship's commander and crew were unable to tell ground controllers what happened on board. This means it was an instantaneous depressurization or explosion. Secondly, it is confusing who and how checked the equipment of the late and respected Elizaveta Glinka (Dr. Lisa). They say she was carrying more than a ton of medicines and medical equipment for Aleppo. It is unclear who downloaded it, from which region and from which hospital the equipment was delivered. So far, few people are paying attention to this circumstance, and no one is giving answers to the questions listed.

Of course, sooner or later we will find out everything. So far, only 12 bodies of the dead have been discovered, the rest are in the huge fuselage of the liner, which sank 6 kilometers from the coast. When they find him and raise him, everything will become clear.

P.S. On Monday afternoon, the Central Operations Center of the FSB of Russia told Interfax that the main working versions of the Tu-154 crash in the Black Sea are “foreign objects entering the engine, low-quality fuel, which resulted in loss of power and engine failure, piloting error, technical malfunction of the aircraft.”

It was noted that to date there have been no signs indicating the possibility of a terrorist attack on board the aircraft.

On this moment There are four well-known facts in connection with the plane crash of the military Tu-154.

1. A bomb explosion on board has not been detected,
2. The aircraft was not hit by an anti-aircraft missile,
3. There was no message from the crew to the dispatcher about the emergency situation,
4. The scattering of heavy aircraft structural elements at a large distance from each other.

Most of the information on this accident leads us to the version that there was a technical malfunction, aggravated by poor alignment, and the crew could not cope with all this. But according to this main version, the entire plane should fall into the water and, following the example of other similar accidents, all the heavy parts of the airplane should lie piled up in approximately one place. Naturally, no current can move them from their place. The influence of the flow applies only to the light parts of the structure.

Therefore, based on the experience of world aviation, a large spread of heavy fractions of an aircraft is possible only if it is destroyed in the air. Since the Tu-154 has been in operation for more than 50 years in an amount of more than 1000 copies and not one of them has yet fallen apart in the air on its own, it is obvious that someone helped this disaster happen. The number one candidate for this is the unmanned aerial vehicle. Most likely, the drone landed directly into the gondola with the landing gear already retracted from below, as shown in the figure.

Since there were no explosives on board the drone, no traces of explosives will be found on the wreckage of the plane. Mechanical destruction of the Tu-154 will begin due to the high kinetic energy of the oncoming collision between the aircraft and the drone. Because of this impact, the nacelle along with the landing gear was torn out of the plane of the wing; after this destruction, some of the parts fell into the side engine, as a result of which it was also torn out of its mounting location. Some of the kerosene from the broken pipelines burned for several seconds. Small debris from the damaged wing struck the upper engine and it lost power. Numerous sensors installed in these places were instantly cut off and the aircraft’s information system found itself in an unusual situation. As a result, she began to give incorrect information to the crew.

Destroyed from below left wing lost all its kerosene, as a result of which it became much lighter than the right one. The center of the plane shifted to the right and the plane began to turn in the same direction with a decrease, since only one engine was actually working. The crew tried to contact the dispatcher, but he did not hear them. Nowadays, radio messages can be jammed using electronic warfare equipment.

From all that has been said, many readers will say: “This is definitely a terrorist attack.” And they will not be entirely right. The French ship, located near Sochi, could easily jam the radio transmission from the aircraft with its equipment, but even if you establish this, they will always say that they had no malicious intent, they just turned on the jammer to practice in neutral waters. And the drone most likely does not have all its parts English letters, only Arabic numerals and it will be almost impossible to establish the country of origin, even if its wreckage is found. And the Americans from the control center for their drones, even if you push them against the wall, can always say that their drone, flying past Sochi, simply lost control due to a computer failure and strayed from its route, again in neutral waters. In a word, as our investigators correctly say out loud, this is not a terrorist attack, but they add to themselves that this is a “disgusting” case.

The results of an investigation into the Tu-154 crash over the Black Sea have appeared on the Internet. According to published information, the cause of the tragedy was crew fatigue.

“The cause of the Tu-154-B-2 crash was a violation of the spatial orientation (situational awareness) of the aircraft commander, which led to his erroneous actions with the aircraft controls, as a result of which the aircraft, during the climb, went into descent and collided with the water surface.” , says the report published in the Telegram channel “Captain Vrungel”. The document notes the “lack of adequate response of the aircraft captain” to the reports of the crew members, as well as sound and light signals.

Several factors contributed to the disturbance of spatial orientation: excessive mental stress, emotional and physiological fatigue, and the captain’s lack of attention distribution skills. The tragedy was also caused by the lack of mandatory control over flight operations by the military command.

“Military transport aviation was not ready for the large-scale challenges that the task of organizing a continuous air bridge to Syria posed to it. The problem is complex, the lack of trained crews, the outdated training and control system, the command’s disregard for the crews’ work and rest schedule,” – noted the author of the Telegram channel.

The report provides a list of violations committed at the military base during the preparation for the Tu-154 flight. For example, the crew was composed of different squadrons and did not include a radio operator or on-board translator. There were no classes or training for the pilots, and they underwent a medical examination less than two hours before departure.

Experts added that during the refueling of the Tu-154, no passengers were boarded or disembarked, and no additional cargo was placed on board. Problems arose seven seconds into the flight, as the captain "had difficulty determining his position on the airfield due to his understanding of the take-off course."

Let us recall that the crash of the Tu-154 of the Ministry of Defense occurred on December 25, 2016 near Sochi. The plane crashed into the Black Sea. All 92 people on board were killed, including journalists from federal channels, the head of the Fair Aid Foundation, Elizaveta Glinka, as well as the director and artists of the Alexandrov Ensemble.

Independent technical expert Yuri Antipov again reviewed the main version of the plane crash and presented arguments that refute it.

Let us remind you that the Tu-154 crash occurred off the coast of Sochi on December 25, 2016. There were 92 people on board the flight to Syria. These are artists of the Alexandrov ensemble, journalists, military personnel, famous public figure Dr. Lisa and others. Early in the morning after taking off from Sochi airport, the plane crashed into the Black Sea not far from the coast.

According to Antipov, the version of the explosion that he insists on was officially refuted literally right there. However, the expert claims that the airliner could only be torn into tiny fragments by an explosion. This version also proves that only macroscopic fragmentary remains remain of the people who were in the cabin. In addition, the outcome of the investigation, announced by the Ministry of Defense and reducing the cause of the fall to the pilot’s loss of orientation, has a huge number of holes.

Antipov again gives the chronology of events. The plane took off from Moscow and landed in the resort city to refuel. The expert recalled that the Tu-154 needs no more than half an hour for this. Instead, the plane remained on the ground for three hours. Passengers were not allowed out.

After this, the crew commander, Roman Volkov, asked the dispatcher to take off from the very beginning of the long runway, citing the fact that the plane was “heavy.” However, Antipov recalls that the plane was unloaded as much as possible. According to official version, there was nothing else on board except the passengers’ belongings and medicines and food.

The expert suggested that it was no coincidence that the commander demanded a takeoff run from the beginning of the runway. Apparently, in Sochi the plane was loaded with valuable cargo, since the work took about three hours. You can simply “throw in” things in an hour.

After takeoff, the plane, and the Tu-154 has a powerful lifting force compared to other airliners, was unable to gain altitude (due to pilot error) and after 70 seconds crashed into the sea from 250 meters. Antipov recalls that the people in the cabin turned into genetic material.

As everyone knows, a forensic medical examination (FME) was carried out to identify the remains on board. According to the EMS data, not all the bodies of passengers after the disaster turned into genetic remains. Some of them, 17 bodies, have been preserved. And these people were sitting in business class, which is located behind the cockpit. How was it determined that the bodies of the business class passengers survived? Very simple. The bodies of the ensemble's leadership and the so-called "VIPs" survived. Contrary to the speculations of the “experts,” the body of the Tu-154 pilot was also preserved in an intact state, the expert explained.

Antipov recalled that according to the main version, the airliner, which fell from such a height at a speed of 500 kilometers, and it was at this speed that the Tu-154 collided with water, was torn into tiny pieces.

The question arises from the fact that one of the wings remained virtually intact. However, Antipov says that there is nothing surprising here. In his opinion, there was an explosion on board, and the wing was damaged from a collision with water. He was not affected by the force of the explosion, the epicenter of which was in the cargo compartment. And after falling from such a height and at such a speed, the plane shatters into pieces.

Antipov sees another proof of the explosion version in the fact that the lower part of the fuselage was ripped open. The break line was exactly on the floor line separating the cargo and passenger compartments.

It was very clearly shown that the internal structure of the walls in the cargo compartment had turned brown and burned from the action high temperature. Obvious facts have demonstrated that the aircraft's engines, located at the rear, before plunging into the water of the Black Sea, sucked in fine debris from the explosion on board like vacuum cleaners. And this hot, finely dispersed material from the explosion products penetrated into the design of the engine air intake channels, and even sea ​​water, Antipov said.

Yuri Antipov also noted one very important detail. After the expert spoke with people familiar with the investigation into the causes of the disaster, it turned out that the remains of those killed in large quantities wooden splinters were found.

We remember that at the site in Adler, where all the collected debris of the crashed airliner was taken, there was not a single passenger seat. But there should have been more than a hundred of them. Apparently, on this liner heading to Syria, all passengers, including the pilots, sat on wooden stools. But maybe the cargo of the Ministry of Defense, which was loaded for so long, carefully and quietly in Adler, was in wooden boxes? But this version is fantastic. The version with stools is much more realistic,” concluded Yuri Antipov.

News on Notepad-Krasnodar