Preliminary IAC report not cite Pilot Error as probable cause
Suggested that the aircraft (a Putin Favorite) may have had problems
Simultaneous criminal and safety investigations forces pilot to not provide answers
DEcriminalization of accident investigations has been a global cause for most aviation safety professionals. The below case of simultaneous examinations by the Investigative Committee of Russia (ICR) (criminal jurisdiction) and the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) is an example of why the different missions will likely obfuscate the identification of probable cause. Here are some posts which support this position:
FRENCH COURT REVERSES CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IN CONCORDE DISASTER; MAYBE THE DECISION WILL CAUSE RECONSIDERATION OF CRIMINALIZATION OF ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS
THANK YOU, FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL, FOR RAISING THE ISSUE OF CRIMINALIZING AVIATION ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION
This accident adds the possibility of political interference. The Russian NTSB, the IAC (the bottom badge in the cover page), issued a preliminary report which raised the possibility of design flaws and minimized the likelihood pilot error.
Captain Denis Evdokimov’s aircraft was struck by lightning soon after takeoff – however prosecutors are now blaming him for the catastrophe, claiming he performed a ‘hard emergency landing’
The pilot of a doomed Russian plane that crash landed killing 41 could face seven years in jail.
Footage shows the rough “jumping” emergency landing of the Sukhoi Superjet 100 and the moment fire ignited on the Aeroflot aircraft.
Videos also highlighted giant flames ravaging the plane on May 5 at Sheremetyevo International Airport.
Heroic Aeroflot flight attendants saved dozens of those on board but 41 perished in the inferno.
Prosecutors have now filed charges against the highly experienced 42-year-old captain of the Moscow to Murmansk flight.
After the Russian-made aircraft was hit by lightning Evdokimov “performed a hard landing”, said Svetlana Petrenko, spokeswoman for the Russian Investigative Committee.
“Further actions by Evdokimov violated the existing regulations and led to the destruction and outbreak of fire.
“As a result, 40 passengers and one crew member were killed, and (ten) others were badly injured.”
Prosecutors want a maximum seven years jail for the Evdokimov, whose father was a respected military pilot and Soviet air force major general.
In the aftermath of the horror, there were claims of serious technical problems on the SuperJet – a plane supported by Vladimir Putin – were to blame.
But prosecutors have laid criminal charges against the pilot even before the final report into the crash is completed.
The captain – who previously flew for the border guard wing of the FSB security service – has not been detained pending his trial but was banned from travelling.
Sources say he will dispute the charges.
Another claim after the crash was that the captain had not properly trained in manually flying and landing the SuperJet – because most flights were by autopilot.
Sources on the investigation earlier claimed the captain dangerously sped up the aircraft immediately before landing and, on top of that, put it into a dive”.
This made the situation “critical”.
Aviation expert and former designer at Sukhoi Design Bureau, Vadim Lukashevich, said the lightning strike “caused problems” but “they were not critical”.
He said: “I believe that this catastrophe is a consequence of a set of mistakes of pilots that began from the moment when lightning hit the plane.”
The differing perspectives may be demonstrated by the very hypothetical questions (left) by the RIC and the IAC. Given the criminal charges pending, Captain Evdokimov would assert, under most criminal legal systems, his right against self-incrimination, thus he would be compelled to withhold information critical to addressing significant safety issues.
Aviation safety standards are becoming more global. Leverage comes from getting ICAO, FAA and EASA imprimaturs. Maybe Russia will adopt this best aviation safety practice?