It's best to avoid any Russian products in general. They are still on a hangover from the communist regime. The party wasn't exactly concerned with the quality control of their national products, and therefore there was an enormous black market in western products for even the simplest of items.

Even when the planes manage not to fall apart, I wouldn't want to fly in the airspace of any part of the former communist bloc - I'm not taking any chances with their "state of the art" air control equipment or "highly trained" personnel...

Anyone here remember the "Langoliers"?

WMG - as I was reading this article, that's exactly what I was thinking of.

Over on another news site, they are reporting that the pilots requested permission to descend from 10,000ft to 6,000ft. The Indonesian Air Traffic Control lost contact after granting them permission. I don't know why they did that, but I would not be so quick to condemn the equipment before examining the human element, particularly the pilots and air traffic controllers.

This time around it doesn't look like the product quality issue, but rather a human error. Was it the pilot, or air traffic control, or misunderstanding between them? Considering that neither Indonesians nor Russians are native English speakers, and their versions of English (accent, sentence structure, etc.) are as far apart as it gets, that kind of miscommunication is a possibility that should be looked into.

Moreover it's the difference in training. For Western pilots, traffic control orders are advisory and can be deviated from based on visual and/or instrument input. For Russians they are orders subject to following strictly no matter what. Case in point - the collision over Switzerland in 2002, when the pilot followed traffic control order to dive instead of TCAS advice to climb.

Just wondering why you would request permission to descend to 6000 ft with a 7000 ft mountain in front of you!

Jumpmaster,

Oxygen.

tillmanlea - Shouldn't need to do so, with them being under 10k feet.

You don't need to descend below 10,000 feet for oxygen. Oxygen isn't required on flights until you reach 12,500 feet.

On the bright side, the cost of the plane is now being discounted for any remaining buyers.

Hey, I'll take 3 comrade. 1 for each one of my ex-wives

bscol

WMG - as I was reading this article, that's exactly what I was thinking of.

I was thinking amelia earhart.

Just last week i was in a UH-60 Blackhawk at 14,200 ft without oxygen!

They must have discovered warp speed, everyone knows radar can't keep up with warp speed.......

Famous Russian ex-pat comic Yakov Smirnoff has already commented on the tragedy:

"In Amerika, plane flies from ground - into sky. In mother Russia, plane flies from sky - into ground!"...

@ Walk with me.... Bad timing mate, bad timing.....

anonymous, good post. English is the international language of commercial aviation and accents and sentence structure can be confusing for pilot/atc at times. I, myself, have heard of poor sentence delivery from foreign pilots while listening to MIA center who are training with Flight Safety and other pilot training outfits here in the Central Florida area.

I have a suspicion that this crash was a CFIT and anyone who is into aviation knows that CFIT is the most common cause of flight accidents. Even though the plane was a Soviet made aircraft, the 'superjet' has a good amount of western content and engineering which would include avionics which were Thales of France so I imagine the aircraft would have a TAWS as it is required of all commercial A/C. I suspect that the TAWS did funcion properly but the pilots did not have the capability to correct the attitude/atlitude of the superjet which resulted in the crash.

The world in earlier days was dominated by US made pax aircraft. The US is now fighting for it's leadership in commercial aircraft with Airbus and to some degree Bombardier and Embraer. Russia and China now are desiring to enter the commercial aircraft market with the Superjet and China's ARJ-21 with China announcing it will build larger aircraft to compete with Boeing and Airbus. China's COMAC was aided by the fact that China requires western firms who wish to sell durable and high tech goods in China enter into licensed or co-production which gave China the 'boost' it needed to build the commercial aircraft. Specifically it was China's arraingement with Embraer to build the ERJ-145 with China suspending it's agreement with Embraer on the ERJ-145 program and begin building the ARJ-21 in the very same factory the Chinese made ERJs were made.

Going back to the accident, i would have to say that the TAWS did work but either pilot error in avoiding terrain occured or the aircraft had a flight control system failure to pull away from the impending terrain.

I find it odd that there was no ELT transmission that was tx'ed or rx'ed by local air traffic controllers or rescue parties.

I am saddend of the loss of life that occured should this be a fatal accident but, as a former airline employee (3 airlines) that got furloughed and training in aerospace technology, I would 'shy away' from a Soviet or Chinese pax aircraft and stick with my favorite Boeing or in second place Airbus and on regional trips fly on a CRJ (my brother is a captain of a 700 series) or ERJ. I would not risk flying on a Soviet pax aircraft given their record even though the superjet involved a good amount of western technology.

Several observations on several posts:

1) The Russian aircraft industry is pretty much first-rate. Most professional pilots would put Su and Tu passenger jets as second only to Boeing in the world and significantly better than Airbus products. They have had two weaknesses: a) High-hour low-noise engines were never a strong point because noise laws are more leniet in Russia. b) they are really crappy at marketing. They partnered with a French engine manufacturer (PowerJet) to manufacture the engines and they partnered with an Italian firm to do the marketing. Boeing provided a huge amount of consulting services on the fly-by-wire and coffin-corner issues that make Boeing substantially better aircraft than Airbuses.

2) The S-100 is an attempt to put a low cost (around $25 million) low operating costs (about 23% lower) short to medium passenger jet out there in an arena that has been largely abandoned to Embraer and Bombardier. This is a huge market, starting with the domestic Russian market, and the combination of low initial costs and much lower operating costs from a company renowned for the ruggedness of its aircraft is what a lot of small countries, like Vietnam, and African countries are looking for for their national airlines.

3) On demonstration flights, several things are different from a regular passenger flight. First of all there are generally a number of big wigs --- everyone from buyers to politicians to journalists and photographers aboard. More champagne than coke-cola. And the flights go sight-seeing om VFR profiles. It would make sense that such a flight might want to do a fly-by of a picturesque volcane with a really pretty cone similar to Fuji. Another difference is that the aircraft is usually flown by the company's best test pilots.

4) Here is a link to the demonstration that sold the 707 to a very skeptical public just getting over the BOAC Comet problems. This is a very typical "shake 'em up" approach to be sure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KNbKFMBsQE

5) The Russians seem to have bad luck at this sort of thing. They lost a Tu-144 and a chunk of the international market in 1973 at the Paris Air Show.

6) Russian airlines have had a tough time since the breakup of the Soviet Union. Money that should be going to modernization and upgrades of airports is one area that Putin is using to put money into the pockets of his "friends." For a long time a lot of maintenenace was deferred and even though that is not nearly the same problem now, it is something from which there is never a 100% recovery except the retirement of all effected aircraft.

Center gave them permission to descend from 10 to 6 thousand in elevated terrain? I'm curious about their visibility?

Chris, a good comment

Recipe for disaster:

1 Russian airline

1 flight course over Indonesian mountains

1 handful of Indonesians who won a free trip

I say Haarp was used due to the possible threat to Boeing. Boeing being a massive military supplier can and demand that such actions be taken. There has also been theory that many of the missing flights in Alaska may be due to Haarp. Here you have several diplomats from the Russian Embassy, potential buyers from several Indonesian airlines and journalists were among the 38 passengers on board. What better plane to take take down. Do a search of Dr. Nick Begich-haarp and watch his video and see what the capibilities HAARP are. Dr. Begich is brilliant man and about as smart as they come. Do yourself a favor and watch his video 'Angel's Don't Play This HAARP'

In related news: Mountain now serves in flight snacks and beverages

What happens when you try to dip into Boeing and Airbus sugar.

I wonder why you did not make a similar post when a Boeing plane crashed last week and all were killed?

WalkWithMeInHell:

You know very little, if anything about the Russian Federation (Russia) or the CIS.

edward-2830446

I wonder why you did not make a similar post when a Boeing plane crashed last week and all were killed?

U think msnbc doesn't cover events fairly. I wonder why you don't simply man up and say what u really want to say.

edward-2830446

I wonder why you did not make a similar post when a Boeing plane crashed last week and all were killed?

There's a distinct difference between a new Russian made airliner that is being used to promote and sell product and a nearly 30 year old airliner that is subject to the maintenance procedures of the Pakistani airline Bhoja Air. Apples and oranges.

edward, that Boeing aircraft was a 737 -300 which was over 25 years old. consider also that the airline is notable for it's lax maintenance proceedures and allowances for airworthy aircraft

edward-2830446

I wonder why you did not make a similar post when a Boeing plane crashed last week and all were killed?

U think msnbc doesn't cover events fairly. I wonder why you don't simply man up and say what u really want to say.

RKB, MSNBC does not cover events fairly and if you think they do you have a screw loose. Where were there Headlines about the Hutress Group when a federal judge acquitted seven members of a Lenawee County militia group of plotting to overthrow the U.S. government with weapons of mass destruction.

When there arrests were announced and when the trial was starting MSNC practically crucified David Stone Sr and family along with making the accusations of the government sound like fact. MSNBC even went as far as calling them radical Christian homegrown terrorists. I was actually surprised Homeland Security didn't pick them up and tuck them away never to be heard from again. I hope they can sue the government as they have been ruined and lost everything. Just remember this can happen to any of you just for make some political statements that some don't like. You would be surprised at the list of groups on the terrorist watch list. Wake up, watch some of the videos on youtube from our current and ex military personel...American Soldiers Are WAKING UP

Sorry for getting off topic here. I would also forward my condolences to the families of the deceased from this flight

Alan-1380274:

Too bad Putin wasn't on board, bragging about how "great" his Corrupt country is.

What proof do you have to make that statement?

Alan - you say that like America isnt corrupt?

*face palm

humans are corrupt, and they come in all colors, shapes, and nationalities.

i know, it's shocking news...i hope you were sitting down.

@old-pilots,

Demonstration flights are almost always flown by the best test pilots available. I am sure you are familiar with the old saying, "There are Old Pilots and there are Bold Pilots, but there are no Old Bold Pilots." I would bet you dollars to donuts that the SJ-100 was being flown by a hot shot test pilot. And Russian test pilots have been notorious for flying 'em into the ground at air shows for years. I'm not so sure that it is fair to blame the demo flight itself so much as the type of "pilot" who was most likely flying the aircraft.

It's called controlled flight into terian.

It's that "flight into terrain" part I don't like.......kinda like fly into the ground!

I did that when i landed after a parachute jump. Damn you hit the ground hard. Wow! It was a cow pasture and the cow was right there as i hit the ground. And i know he said to himself. "wow that guy bounced," oh you bet i bounced. And i limped also. I hope the jet ride has a much better outcome. But a Russian jet built by Italians and Boeing. Something just doesn't seem right with that consortium.

how could you tell it was built by Italians, did it have hair under it's wings?!?

Two key words for you to consider; Jet and Mountains. Ok? With all that open water around, they chose to fly over mountains.

I guess none of you have heard of the idea of turning to go around a mountain, what you afraid you might get lost.

I lived for years next to a 14,000 ft mountain, planes all went lower because the airport was at 7,000 feet.

Controlled flight into terrain? Sounds like a buddy I had when I was a teenager. He got an old car when he got his license. The first week he cleaned out about 100' of ditch line just past my house. The first thing the idiot clown said was, 'I had it under control the hole time'. B.S.

Sarcasm aside, I hope they are ok though.

7254 feet, according to a website I pulled up.

Perhaps they should focus their search efforts 1,254 feet down from the top of the mountain....

Perhaps if you all looked at a picture instead of words, you would see it is a volcano, not a 1,000 mile long range. Maybe like many volcanoes, there is a town or village they were doing a flyover for near the base, the plane could be 100's of miles from there.

Paul in Dallas, what do you mean? Those posting comments didn't publish the cryptic article. What ignorance is being projected here?

We're not ignorant, we're Americans!

We know that the anonymity of the internet allows us to be exactly the type of person we want to be without any repercussions.

my thoughts to!!!!

Paul, I bet you are LYFAO at them though.

...and when they do, mountain wins.

Yes Vor, it's never even a question. My heart goes out to the passengers and their friends and family waiting for news. It must be hell for them.

Two things- 1) They said the search helicopter was forced to turn back due to weather. Could that be a factor for the plane? They don't say. 2) Wouldn't the plane have a transponder and/or black box? It's not clear from the article whether or not they have pinpointed the proximity of the plane or whether they are doing a more general sweep.

According to Russian calculations, we are ok to fly at 6000 feet comrades. No worry.

Dumbass.

MB-3604436:

"jet disappears" ... "near mountain" Oh gee, wonder where it went? Duh. But yes, too bad Putin wasn't on the plane.

What do you have against the President of the Russian Federation? Perhaps you should have been on that superjet???

Nobody say anything against Voldemor Voldemorovitch Putin!

Greg,

I seen a documentary on the Kursk. (I think that's how you spell it) and they had a torpedo that leaked some type of acid from it the caused it to explode within the tube "inside" the sub which made it go down. The Kursk was actually a very state of the art sub.

Greg you have to look at their mind set when it comes to aircraft, subs and what not..the west tends to view quality over quanity and it is the complete oposite for the russians...They figure if you put more out there it will counter act the better designed western hardware...and you have to look at the size of territory they defend.

another thing to look at is where their harware operates...there is no way our western harware could operate in some of their airfields in siberia..had a chance to get up and close to a few of their jets and believe it or not they are quite rugged, granted they dont have a lot of the creature comforts we do but it once again that goes back to thier idea on how to design and manufacture things.

Well, at least they have proven they know how to get us down.

unidentified falling objects............

Sergei, why no one buy new plane?

Yuri, I told you we must add rudder for more altitude.

For sale, new Russian low flying planes. cheap.