Russian Pilots are the strongest...

Users Local time
Today 6:44 PM
incredible and crazy....:devil:
[youtube]925MgqyU2NA[/youtube]

EDIT:
Just need the final code part (after the 'v=') of the youtube url between the tags
:)
 
The snow looks quite loose and dry (luckily) :)
Seems quite irresponsible to me anyway.

Is there any reason I fail to see that justifies that kind of behaviour?

Thanks for sharing Frank!
 
This is the one of the most commented thread in pprune forums, now after Utair ATR 72 Crash in Siberia. It seems to be a common practice in Russia - take-offs without de icing, after -50C nights
 
Szymon Kurzacz said:
Topic should be "Russian pilots are most stupid..."

Although the footage is shocking, I would be reluctant to call all Russian pilots stupid. There are stupid, or I should rather say irresponsible, people everywhere including places one would have never suspected to come accros them. We had this kind of an example 2 years ago in our own country but I don’t think you would agree to call all our Polish pilots stupid based on that tragic accident.

Cheers,
Rav
 
Who needs Anti-ice when Vodka is already enough.. :lol:

BTW, I was also wondering why the cockpit in some Russian planes such TU-154, IL-62, AN-124 still uses a very old school electric fans instead of AC?

Tu-154.jpg
 
Szymon Kurzacz said:
Topic should be "Russian pilots are most stupid..."

Of course its easy to generalize and to stamp stereotypes on entire nations, but apart from being downright offensive, especially coming from a moderator, it does not contribute much to understanding of the actual situation and without understanding there can be no remedy.

The fact of the matter is that for decades the Russian pilot training was considered exemplary in the entire Eastern block and also widely recognized beyond it. Things have changed since, but not dramatically and many of those who were trained back then are still active pilots and instructors.

These pilots however are very often forced to use inferior equipment under a very restrictive set of company rules or stay grounded. Russian aircraft types, even the decent ones, are getting VERY old and maintenance has never been stellar. In many airlines it's been downright poor in the last 20 years, regardless of what types are operated. There are right now more than 150 airlines officially registered in Russia (2 years ago there were more than 200), many of them having a single aircraft or 2 and there's no need to explain what such a huge number means in regards of quality, control and accountability. The entire industry was broken apart into multiple pieces in the early 90s, many interested parties snatching whatever a/c and FBOs they could at the time and exploiting all these resources like no tomorrow, cutting corners on maintenance, salaries etc. Total jungle economy.

Nowadays it's common practice, not only in Russia, but in many other less-developed countries around the world to have airline practices and procedures, that do not account for safety, that are not in compliance with international regulations and even with common sense and that do not leave the pilots the liberty to alter them in any way, even when the pilot is competent and experienced enough to see the dangers and the shortcomings.

No pilot in their right mind would prefer to take-off with their aircraft covered with snow. However it's not him, but the company that decides whether they will pay for de-icing or not. Or may be just for de-icing but skip the anti-icing spray. It's the company that decides how tight the ground turnaround should be. And it's the company that penalizes or directly fires personnel that decide to go against these rules even if it is to ensure safety. Sad but true, and that's how it is in most companies. Of course you have the big mainstream ones like Aeroflot, Transavia, etc that are much more "civlized", but generally the corporate pressure on pilots is a mark upon the entire industry and it's not exclusive for Russia at all.

So once again, don't be too quick to judge and try to use your head once in a while. It's useful, even for sim-pilots.

End of rant :)
 
Interesting read, Svilen. :up: But please don't judge too hard either on comments that were probably not meant as an in-depth analysis of the situation ;)

Anyway, I'm with you on the subject. Hardly any pilot would stupidly risk his own life just like that. For the pilot it matters the least if he departs 30 minutes late because of de-icing. For the company it matters. Which takes us back to the story that Ralf probably refers to. Would it really matter to the pilot if he lands at, say Minsk or Moscow - just as an example ;) - instead of Smolensk? Personally I believe that a pilot, especially an experienced one, would always choose the safe option. If he has the choice, that is ...

@Genno: what's wrong with the fans? They don't need bleed air and can operate all the time :p
I'd rather be interested in knowing why most russian flight decks are painted like swimming pools :think: Seriously. Never found an answer to this question.
 
Dear Svilen and All

in real life I am a medic, and work for many years now in the 'drug safety' department of the pharma industry. Over the years, I developed a strong interest in the common challenges and characteristics of well-or-less-then-well designed and operated safety systems, well beyond drug safety. I realized a couple of interesting things, first of all that ALL safety systems are similar, no matter if they are focused on medicinal products, flights, fire or anything else: the principles of safety are always the same.
The second thing I realized is that virtually ALL safety disasters nowadays can be attributed basically to the same culprit: lack of resources (mainly in poor countries) and/or greed (mainly in rich countries). It does not matter if it is about a medicinal product associated to serious adverse events (see the story of Vioxx, Baycol as example) or aviation disasters (see the expected disaster of the Royal Air Force NIMROD XV230): it goes always down to the greed of scruple-less bastards who are willing to save money on safety rather than save lives. And here is my last bit of lesson learned: it is always and only a single competent and brave man who can make a difference avoiding such disasters by - for example - refusing to fly under unsafe conditions or to sign a medical assessment which underestimate the potential dangers of a medicinal product. I know it is tough, when the 'bad guys' have the power to fire you or make your life otherwise miserable, but it is the only way to keep up one's own professional and human dignity. And to save lives.
Fly SAFE ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom