Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Cubana flight in SDQ emergency landing

  1. #41
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Sean01,

    The quote you presented in your previous post about the ICAO document means that the former Russian aviation authorities did not present full information about accident rates in the USSR. It is past tense. It happened before, in the past, not now.

    There is no such thing as the USSR aviation administration anymore. There is the Russian aviation administartion that now have presented full information about the accident rate in the former USSR and Russian Federation. And ICAO based on that information has come to the conclusion, quote:

    3. CONCLUSION
    3.1 The Conference is invited to note the average indications of Soviet-manufactured civil aircraft and turboprops flight safety were and remain not worse than the Western manufactured planes.


    If you read carefully the ICAO document you will see that many Western aircraft have significantly bigger accident rates than Russian planes.

  2. #42
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Indeed your arguments in regard to ICAO document might be correct. Despise reading document I overlooked possibility of such conclusions. Quite interesting while talking about same subject on different Polish forum, someone else arguing about superiority of Aeroflot safety (of presumably Russian descent), used exactly same argumentation in regard to same document (read all text, note tenses), however while confronted to explain what he meant, despise heated discussion all the sudden disappeared – which lead me to believe that he was repeating arguments after someone (being unable himself to explain their meaning) and (correct me if I’m wrong), my post triggered discussion on some Russian forum.

    How would you explain however huge statistical disproportion of Polish airlines experiences with IL-62 and IL-62M compared to official accident sources?

    To remind there was two deadly disasters and at least two emergency landings – all for the same reasons in Polish Airlines. According to Polish Airlines, defective engines have been found on 6 out of 7 Polish planes, after diagnostic method able to detect early problems was invented and implemented (which could be understood as: another 6 deadly crashes were prevented). Its is known that both China and North Korea not admitting their crashes (both operates and/or operated IL-62) – for which reason alone its impossible to make reliable compression of Soviet made planes versus western ones. Still: Czechs, Romanians, Cubans, Egyptians each had just few of IL-62 yet they each lost one. Same applies to East Germans which lost 2 and Polish which lost also 2. Aeroflot had 200+ of IL-62 yet their statistics are spotless, “better than western”.

    There is additional Polish TV movie, which I never translated. There are also Polish press Special Disaster Commission press articles, which explain in much greater details reasons of both disasters.
    When you read documents as well watch movie, you can draw conclusion, that crashes were not result of some singular design fault, but nothing short of overwhelming and outrageous general lacks in manufacturing process and quality control mechanism. Wherever experiences of Polish officials in engine factories are mentioned, impressions of manufacturing process are always described as “very bad”.

    I didn’t wanted to bore everyone to death with technical details, however here are problems pointed by Polish commission:
    - every second roller was pull out of engine bearing, as obviously manufacturer attempted to improvise over insufficient bearing load. In result bearing used only half of originally intended rollers what caused it to change its character from roll bearing to slide bearing (direct cause of 2nd crash). After taking bearing apart, damage to bearing walls (which suppose to be perfectly polished), as well rollers shape disfigurement, could be observed without need of any measuring equipment - by naked eye alone.
    - holes were drilled in bearing walls, against all accepted rules and even Russian norms (direct cause of 2nd crash)
    - surface of engine shafts (which caused disaster in both cases) were not finished at all beyond rough machining
    - used material is shaft was poor due to non metallic inclusions.
    - incorrect shaft element (diameter change) finishing (or actually its lack) resulted in material fatigue and initiation of cracks (direct cause of first crash)
    - shaft heat treatment was performed incorrectly which decreased its ability to carry loads.
    - engine turbine had design fault allowing its hub to disintegrated at same time as turbine blades (as oppose to comparable western plane engines manufactured in the same time period).
    - engines lacked robust vibration sensors capable of detecting early anything but catastrophic events.
    - despise locating engine shaft (its broken half) and turbine pieces over 200 km form disaster site, Russian manufacturer insisted that all damages to bearing and shaft occurred in result of ground impact. Consequently to move 200 km away they obviously had to be “teleported” in Star Trek like manner.




    Those are only faults related to engines. There was also number of faults pointed to plane itself which I skipped.

    Now knowing all this you learn all the sudden that Russian planes are “even safer” from western ones. Don’t you think something doesn’t ads up?

    PS.
    I am expecting to leave tomorrow for about week in which time I will not be able to answer. My lack of response should not be understood as me disappearing. I will address responses when I’m back.

  3. #43
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    A very important thing to note is that Cubana is retiring its IL-62 fleet and using new TU-204 and A320 aircraft on the HAV-SDQ flight.

  4. #44
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    sean01,

    With the list of problems, YOU are saying the polish commisssion had found, the airplane could not even get a permittion to fly.

    I do not know if ever lived in Russia at the time of communists. If you did then you should know about the OTK (stands for a quality control in russian). The quality control was very strict at that time and it is impossible that an airplane with problems like these could ever leave the plant. People were sent to jail if the work they had done, or not done, could jepordize safety or cause people deaths.

    Besides all this contradicts with your previous statement that all Ilyushin 92 planes are still flying with the same problem that had caused the crash. HOW the airplane with problems like these could show the best safety record which Boeing and Douglas could only dream of?

  5. #45
    Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    161
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I am flying to Havana from Santo Dom in December. I find the info above usefull but also slightly worrying.

  6. #46
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Hello again.
    Sorry everybody for long absence. Unfortunately circumstances in my life changed in such way, I have limited ability to make replies to this thread, simply because lack of Internet access, also time – for which reasons I cannot devote time and attention which I wish I could to this discussion. I was at sea, am back at the moment and expecting to be leaving again shortly. Anyway to reply to last post:

    With the list of problems, YOU are saying the polish commisssion had found, the airplane could not even get a permittion to fly.
    Actually it is not “ME” which says that, but commission members themselves. Below links to sources - press articles from polish aviation magazine (in Polish). First is commentary of expert (Wojciech Matusik) to official commission report. Second is written by commission member himself (col.Milkiewicz - mentioned before, visible speaking in previously given video links) . Since you seems to question truthfulness and accuracy of statements I trying to make in this thread, translating text by me would make no any sense. I encourage you however to use your own trusted means to accurately translate text and publicly point where I falsified translation:

    Magazine: “Aero Technika Lotnicza” Number 07-1990
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/1...007str1cb7.jpg
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9...007str2hk5.jpg
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7...007str3la8.jpg

    Magazine: “Aero Technika Lotnicza” Number 10-1991
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/3...110str1qp2.jpg
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/6...110str2su6.jpg
    http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8...110str3el4.jpg

    Actually (what I explained in greater details on my page before already), Polish side had no manufacturer licenses, permission or even tools to do any engine repairs, check-ups or diagnostics which would “permit “ or “not permit” engine to fly. Any and all engine repairs, check-ups, diagnostics and similar, were made by Russian manufacturer ONLY. By the way I bet that’s how it looks (or “looked” - since Cubana decided to get rid of IL-62) in Cubana Airlines AS WELL.
    Normally each engine had assigned number of hour in which it can be flown. When hours limit neared end, engine were taken of plane in one piece and shipped to Russia (..from which they usually were returning back after some time with extended hour limit). Between shipments, only check ups which were approved by Russian manufacturer and done by Polish side in regard to engines – were visual OUTSIDE inspections (walk around engine with flash light to see are there and visible from outside cracks, impact points with objects etc), as well service to equipment located on the OUTSIDE of the engine (as electric generators, fire and heat sensors and so forth). Access to last was available through lifted engines covers (installed on hinges). Covers could be simply lifted and someone with leader, flash light and screw driver could install or remove say heat sensor. Access through lifted panels DID NOT however grant access to engine itself. To gain access to shaft (which is central part of engine), whole engine has to be totally removed from plane and taken apart to pieces. Special tools, heavy equipment and permission are necessary - none of which Polish Airlines had. Once engine is removed , placed on special holder, all part loosen, than with help of heavy lifter shaft can be removed (as it weights few tons). Than and only than it can be inspected.

    So in regard to your comment: YES, engine should not be permitted to fly, ...YET IT WAS, ...by RUSSIAN MANUFACTURER.

    I do not know if ever lived in Russia at the time of communists. If you did then you should know about the OTK (stands for a quality control in Russian). The quality control was very strict at that time and it is impossible that an airplane with problems like these could ever leave the plant. People were sent to jail if the work they had done, or not done, could jepordize safety or cause people deaths.
    Yet it appears it not only left the plant, but flew and crashed - doesn’t it? By he way it’s also not the first time your and mine understanding what was possible or not in communist Russia differs. Even I do believe you many people in Russia indeed go to prisons for many various reasons, it appears in this case no one ever did. TThere is another Polish TV program (to which I cannot find link to) in which colonel Stefan Szczecinski (professor from Polish Military Technical Academy - another commission member), shares his impression from visit in Soloviev factory in Rybinsk (and which are drastically opposite to your opinions). Program also mentions another incident caused by same problem, which happened in Polish Airlines already AFTER two crashes and which ended luckily.

    Besides all this contradicts with your previous statement that all Ilyushin 92 planes are still flying with the same problem that had caused the crash.
    “All this” (where it is not clear what “All this” is and what and how it contradicts to which of my statements), doesn’t contradict any of my previous statement. Also I never stated before that ALL iluyshing 92 (or any other type of plane for that matter) are still flying with same problem which caused the crash. Some do and some don’t – obviously question of luck who gets and who don’t “lucky” engine. If incident still doesn't happen anymore, why we have this thread and pictures of damaged engine here?


    HOW the airplane with problems like these could show the best safety record which Boeing and Douglas could only dream of?
    …simply by falsifying (incomplete otherwise: since they don’t cover Korea and China) statistics.
    By the way I recommending very interesting lecture by James E Oberg “Uncovering Soviet Disasters: Exploring the Limits of Glasnost”:
    Amazon.com: Uncovering Soviet Disasters: Exploring the Limits of Glasnost: James E Oberg: Books

    I am flying to Havana from Santo Dom in December. I find the info above usefull but also slightly worrying.
    Drcayca - since you made post in December, its February now, I didn’t hear of plane crash – I’m happy to know in any case all ended up good for you. By the way, someone mentioned before in this thread that Cubana getting rid of IL-62s. What other Russian planes which Cubana still uses have Soloviev D30-KU engines – I simply don’t know. Very fact of Cubana decision seems to suggest someone at Cubana decision level is aware of the problem – so that’s encouraging. I know that after second crash, Polish Airlines operated IL-62 for few years - apparently more of necessity than choice. Replacing fleet is simply not a task which can be done over night. Even so, according to materials I was able to reach, Polish Airlines managed to develop some non intrusive diagnostic engine methods, implement some modifications and enforce on manufacturer presence of Polish representative at manufacturer site – which made planes safer. Ultimately however they decided to get rid off of all Russian made planes.
    Don’t know what Cubana will do (or did), not sure what choices you have as passenger. Hope you have some, and in any case would like to wish you (and all Cubana passengers and employee for that matter) - the very best!

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •