262
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

A Russian airliner carrying 170 people was forced to crash-land in a field after a hydraulics failure.

No one was injured in the emergency, which left the Ural Airlines Airbus A320 stranded next to a forest in the Novosibirsk region of Siberia.

Ural said the pilot "selected" the landing site after the jet's hydraulic systems failed while approaching Omsk.

The incident sparked denials from the airline that it was unable to service its planes due to sanctions on Russia.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Russia is lacking spare parts, which is probably why instead of repairing it, they cut it up for scrap and spare parts.

https://youtu.be/H4b25pp_tqU?t=1421

Apparently a plane can't be repaired after an emergency landing some claim.

Still hilarious that Russia is short of planes, and now cut this one up, because it had to land in a field. 😋

[-] ShadowRam@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean screw russia, but be real.

NO one is repairing and using an airplane frame that has had a crash.

We write off cars for less... you definitely write off an airplane frame that's had a landing like that, and never certify it for re-use.

Cutting it up to transport it out of there is 100% normal for any nation.

[-] andyburke@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

My friend, many, many planes that have been crashed have been serviced and returned to service, including airliners.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

OK I thought it would still be usable since it's standing on the wheels seemingly completely unharmed. After all the emergency landing went extremely well, and all passengers are OK.

[-] bfg9k@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Commercial aircraft like airbuses are purpose-built for landing on proper sealed runways, if it's brought down on soft dirt the engines are filled with dust and debris, the landing gear is damaged as it drags across the field, and the airframe itself could have suffered fractures that won't become apparent until the hull blows out unexpectedly one day.

It is in one piece but there's hidden damage to all sorts of things

[-] stevehobbes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We X-ray these things all the time.

Many many airliners have slid off runways all the time and reenter service.

For decades Boeing sold a 737 Gravel Kit for their planes to minimize FOD ingest on unimproved surfaces.

http://www.b737.org.uk/unpavedstripkit.htm

The gear didn’t collapse. The damage is probably fairly minimal, including the engines which were probably at idle, and they most likely didn’t use or need thrust reversers.

Not saying it’s a certainty if this happened in the US or EU that it would fly again, but it isn’t impossible.

I will say it’s unlikely because getting it out of a field in one piece is no small task - and probably more expensive than the plane is worth relative to the parts value, but not because of any inherent damage. Just because the engines are the most valuable thing on a plane and much easier to take those off the plane than move the airframe without damaging it more.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

OK I see, still a bit hilarious, that while they may be short of planes, they lose them like this.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

This is a great example of "it's expensive to be poor"

[-] nous@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

On rough ground that would put a lot of stress in the landing system and likely the rest of the plane. Small cracks in things can lead to catastrophic failure later on even if everything looks fine now. Would you want to take a chance on that?

Not to mention they have to get it out of the field. That alone is probably not worth the effort to save a possibly compromised frame.

[-] Treczoks@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Would you want to take a chance on that?

I would not. But are you sure about Russia? And even if they just break up the plane for parts, would it really be safe to fly a plane that relies on parts salvaged from this one?

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

OK I see, still a bit hilarious, that while they may be short of planes, they lose them like this.

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Airliners cost around $100 million or more though. If they can, they're going to be repaired and put back in the service.

load more comments (13 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
262 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39026 readers
1209 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS