Are Aeroflot REALLY Flying With NO BRAKES?!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 апр 2024
- Use code "mentournow" and the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/mentournow
-----------------------------------------------------
With international sanctions hitting Russia for a year and a half now, what is the state of the country’s airlines today? Are Aeroflot pilots REALLY flying some aircraft with NO brakes, as we’ve heard recently? And what does the future of Russia’s aviation industry look like?
Stay tuned.
-----------------------------------------------------
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward!
👉🏻 / mentourpilot
Our Connections:
👉🏻 Exclusive Mentour Merch: mentour-crew.creator-spring.c...
👉🏻 Our other channel: / mentourpilotaviation
👉🏻 Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/mentourpilot
👉🏻 BOSE Aviation: boseaviation-emea.aero/headsets
Social:
👉🏻 Facebook: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Instagram: / mentour_pilot
👉🏻 Twitter: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Discord server: / discord
Download the FREE Mentour Aviation app for all the lastest aviation content
👉🏻
-----------------------------------------------------
Below you will find the links to videos and sources used in this episode.
• Life in Russia 14 mont...
• Sanctions Slashing 📉🛢...
• Sanctions stop Aeroflo...
• Sanctions on Russia ar...
• Аэрофлот вводит в эксп...
• How do airlines price ...
• Western sanctions star...
• EU sanctions on Russia...
• HAECO Careers - My Lif...
• Конкурс «Лучший по про... v
• Russian airlines strip...
• Техническое обслуживан...
• Airbus A330-800 perfor...
• See the Boeing 777-9 f...
• Что в чемодане у пилота?
• Новый Boeing 777
• Airlines brace for Eas...
• Самая уважаемая профессия
• В преддверии празднова...
• Ural Airlines. Професс...
aviationsourcenews.com/airlin...
aeroxplorer.com/articles/aero...
igorsushko/status...
www.reuters.com/world/europe/...
www.aerotime.aero/articles/ae...
www.moscowtimes.ru/2023/08/02...
www.planespotters.net/airline...
www.reuters.com/world/europe/...
www.aerotime.aero/articles/ae...
www.aerotime.aero/articles/ae...
www.bloomberg.com/news/articl... 
Развлечения
Aeroflot really taking "we pay for whole runway, we use whole runway" to the limit.
...plus some of the taxiway and the perimeter road around the airport......!
Hate to break your 69 likes but... 😄
@@swanvictor887 And gate 8, gate 9, gate 10... gate 23, 24, 25.
@@princekamoro3869 Is that an Airplane! (the movie) reference, or just a happy coincidence?
😆😂@@princekamoro3869
8:55 Mentour: "a missing bolt from a wheel might be ok"
Aeroflot HQ: "oh ok, time to collect those bolts for our spare parts bin!"
How does only "one" nut get left off??
What other parts that are out of sight might be missing?
The brakes are not disabled, it's "special breaking operation".......
😂😂😂
Just like Wagner’s plane crash was a “special flying operation.”
This is humorous with either "breaking" or "braking". Which did you mean?
😂😂😂
@@Allan_son yes.
"We brake for nobody" Spaceballs, 1987.
Hahaha!
"You attention, please. Trans American Flight 209 non-stop from Los Angeles is now arriving at Gate seven...Gate eight...
...209 arriving gate thirteen...gate fourteen....gate fifteen...
...gate twenty-three...twenty four... twenty-five..."
Airplane!, 1980
@@ptrinch”What?! You expected us to stop?! WE TOLD YOU NON-STOP!!!!”
I definitely picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.
@@Wintermute909 “1, 2, 3, 4, 5?! That sounds like something an idiot would have as the combination for his luggage!”
In totally unrelated news, Aeroflot has massively increased their import of black market duct tape
and now Delta is facing a shortage...
@@MrTaxiRobIf they don't mind yellow Spirit has entire warehouses full of the stuff
Hello Mentour,
I'm from Russia (inside). I must say that most of what you've highlighted is spot on. But the problems with Russian aviation was way before the sanctions even happened. The issue is that the government control and supervision over this industry is not that strong as one might think. Aeroflot, S7 and others are private companies and they generally like to shuffle the data and facts quite well. I don't think that I will say something extraordinary, but the management of the companies is oriented on maximising the profits for their owners be it even at the expense of other things. And authorities are somewhat "castrated" in this regard, unless some accident actually really happens. It's not like during the USSR period, when things were very strict. Therefore I was very reluctant to fly with these airlines in the past. And since the sanctions came up - flying with them became a big "no-no". I prefer the railway, which has almost a military discipline when it comes down to safety, maintenance and precision. Technically, it's a miracle that Russian Railways maintained the sort of approach, which was instilled from the times it was under the supervision of Ministry of Interior during WWII.
On the fact that Aeroflot doesn't want to disclose their suppliers - even if we might not like it from the point of view "transparency for the sake of safety" they still have solid reasons for that. Because once they disclose their sources those sources will be hit by Western persecution. So it's in their own commercial interest to keep it silent.
Do other modes of transport aside of train also suffer from shortages of spareparts?
@@josephboen178 In the aviation it's not about lack of spare parts - it's about lack of transparency from the side of companies, lack of their internal discipline, which is the result of lack of tedious control from the side of authorities. Therefore the companies start taking it easy on the safety part. Something like Boeing according to recent news.
When it comes to railways - simply put, the internal discipline is rolling as it was set during WWII. For some reason it didn't properly change when things went down the tubes in 90's. Almost a military discipline inside. In comparison the aviation has seriously dropped down in this regard. Though it is tough inside there, but if comparing the USSR period and nowadays - the former was on a top notch level.
If you are interested if there is a general problem in spare parts? Nope. Doesn't matter - heavy machinery, personal cars, buses, ships... There were no issues at all. In the beginning there was a small gap due to logistics readjustments (only 2-3 months), but before the stock was depleted the deliveries were going in steadily already. I'm dealing professionally with heavy industries and nobody ever mentioned any issues.
You forgot to mention that Aeroflot, for fear of having their aircraft impounded by the lessors, had decided to outright purchase the aircraft they were leasing but only the aircraft necessary for flying international routes, such as Turkey, Thailand, etc... since that's where the impounding may happen. This involves a little more than a handful of Airbus A330-300 and Boeing 777-300ER and some A320 aircraft.
🤔 ... did you mean sanctions?
@@XB10001 Are you thinking about the word Lessor? That means the people leasing them the planes.
Edit: For example a landlord is a lessor who leases property.
@@PippetWhippet I read "LESSONS" ... that's why it did not make any sense.
did they really buy the aircraft from lessors? Last time I checked, the Russians basically stole the airplanes by not returning them or refusing to pay the lease.
@@rzero21 yes they purchased quite a few
As I always say, bad brakes never stopped me.
not like they can
🤣🤣🤣🤣
I had a master brake cylinder go out on me once. Scarey to say the least, when your brake pedal suddenly goes to the floor & no braking action occurs.
@@annrn6148 That that's what will lead to an incident soon, most likely. That flight where the autobrakes are disabled ( as required ) and it needed them.
Haha. Classic mechanic gag that
Just in case, “Moscow times” is an opposition/non-RU-state-affiliated press outlet, so they have no intention to “brag” about Aeroflot “tricks” at all, rather than attract attention to emerging wild procedures which significantly harms flight safety.
A good clarification there.
Moscow Times is run by a Dutchman. The newspaper was run from Moscow, but the owner and reporters were forced to flee Russia when the war started, so they are based in Amsterdam now. They are frequently interviewed on Dutch public radio.
Thanks, I was just wondering about this
To be more clear: Moscow times has nothing to do with Moscow or times))) This is a media nest sponsored by highly "anti Russian" forces, so you can divide all that was spoken by 10. Just like with any "official" media.
Moscow times and all such are CIA arms.
I really enjoy your aviation analysis. I got my private pilot license in October 1968 in Allentown Pennsylvania. In the mid 90's I was a flight dispatcher for aeroflot and air Ukraine at O'Hare in Chicago. I was dispatching illyshun 62-m an later they switched to Boeing aircraft
There were 5 pilots/crew in the cockpit. I was offered free round trips to Moscow
that's a hell of a job to have. i had no idea they ever flew ilyushins down to good old ohare. man how things have changed
On a more serious note. Your knowledge of the aviation industry is invaluable. It covers such a wide scope, from technical to economical, to historical knowledge and on top of that, the way you translate that knowledge to us (the common folk) is an achievement in it's own rights. Thank you for that.
Simp
I don’t think he‘s single, sorry to disappoint
Those kind of generic comments that don't even talk about what happens in the video really sound like they are made by bots or fake users paid to "generate engagement".
Big shame because it really detracts and lowers the quality of the conversation in the comments.
@tank-eleven Sorry to burst your bubble but I'm no bot. Why is it that these days everything has to be drawn into the negative. It was just a nice comment to Petter, who has given us a ton of interesting content over the past years. Nothing more, nothing less. Have a nice day in your negative and suspicious world.
@@tank-elevenuse some critical thinking my guy, his channel's over 10 years old. There's no need to be negative like this
Well, a Ural Air A320 crash-landed in a field in the middle of nowhere a couple of hours ago, with everyone surviving, and the aircraft too pretty much in one piece, following a total hydraulic failure. If ever there was a well-timed piece, yours was it :)
I just watched press brief from CEO of Ural air. According to him, due to hydraulics malfanction captan decided to land plane on the spare airport with wider airfield. But, in the flight he realised that becasue of landing gears and flaps had been released, the fuel tanks were almost empty, so he decided to land on nearest visible field. I'm curios if when making the decission to fly to the spare ariport captan should make fuel calulations, considering released flaps and landing gear? Was there captan mistake or just lack of the procedere?
@@user-gg8jn4yo9g Looks like the PIC will have his butt kicked, because he apparently flew that entire leg from Omsk at FL150 or some such, and quite slowly, which means that he'd have been mushing, for whatever reason. That's enough to upset any fuel burn calculations, what?
According to the video released 3 hrs ago by Russian channel Редакция (Redaktsya), "Аварийная посадка А-320 под Новосибирском" (Emergency Landing of A-320 Near Novosibirsk, ruclips.net/video/Y6L45RQubn0/видео.html), all we know for sure now is "it landed safely and no one was hurt". Also, the commenting author (Aleksiey Pivovarov, Алексей Пивоваров) has a pilot licence himself ("I'm a former pilot" he said - but he isn't a commercial pilot).
So, apparently/ reportedly just prior to landing (reportedly at "few hundred metres" altutude; AFAIK in Russia they use metric system for flying) in Omsk (the destination) pilots reported "some issue with hydraulics" ("but we don't know whether it was Mayday or Pan Pan Pan" said Mr Pivovarov), and the conversation between the pilot and ATC (at 5:08 in the abovementioned video) was as follow:
- 1383, we have an issue with hydraulics... we lost hydraulics. Now we'll go to waiting zone (i.e. "we'll be flying in circles trying to resolve the issue/ go through checklists" - forgot how this is called in English), and then I'll suggest/ advise you [what we'll do next]
and then (still the pilot):
- 1383, we decided [that we'll go] to Novosibirsk
To which the control tower responded:
- 1383, understood. To Novosibirsk.
But no specific info what the failure was, and to what extent was provided (A320 has triple redundancy hydraulic system, however no one of them can substitute the failed one(s) in their entirety - according to info in the video).
Novosibirsk is over 600 km (370+ mi/ 320+ nautical miles) from Omsk, which seems like an awfull lot for "alternative airport" but then it's Siberia, so towns and big airports are few and far between - and the reason the pilot decid to go there was the runway length, 2501 m/ 8205 ft in Omsk and 3597 m/ 11801 ft in Novosibirsk (the weather was about the same in both places, so it wasn't probably the deciding factor).
And since the plane landed with flaps and spoilers (partially) deployed, which are operated by hydraulics, it can be assumed that the failure happened after they deployed them on preparation for landing in Omsk, and thus they flown the entire route toward Novosibirsk with flaps extended (and probably with extended landing gear as well - as they landed on it), which may be the reason they run out of fuel way before Novosibirsk.
But then "those are only speculations and conjectures as we have very little of solid information" as Mr. Pivovarov said, and then the MAK/ IAC (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Aviation_Committee) will probably produce, as usuall, the report "in accordance with expectations from powers that be".
There's another video by Redaktsya about "in Russia" airplane crash and the "fog and doubts" surrounding it and the official findings - "Crash of Tu-154: Why did Doctor Liza and Alexandrov Ensemble die?", with English CC (ruclips.net/video/eajw5bDtv74/видео.html).
In this case - as it's ALWAYS the case in case of pilots perishing in the crash - the ICA report blames pilot(s) for the crash, even though there were witness reports about "explosion" - but then the objective truth is not what is valued most in Russia, so we may probably never learn what actually happened with Ural Airlines flight 1383.
@@user-gg8jn4yo9g Yes, they miscalculated the fuel consumption.
The airline is now bragging about their 24h pilot training center, which allowed them to safely land on a field for the second time... They sure can land well, but they can't think well.
There is also a theory that they did this, because there is S7 Technics in OVB.
@@user-gg8jn4yo9g "land plane on the spare airport with wider airfield."
Thank you! I read the small newsitem about this, and couldn't figure out what this was really about (and was too lazy to check avherald).
BTW, I think that in English "spare airport" should be "alternate" or "alternative" airport.
Telegram is not a social media web site, it’s a messenger, and it’s definitely no more “Russian” than e.g. Google
11:25 Thanks for addressing this, there's so many bots everywhere.
I think you're the first channel that i watch that has mentioned this.
To many people they seem like obvious scams, but the fact that they're still here seems to indicate that people still fall for it.
Yeah, I get contacted by people ALL the time who has fallen for it. 😖😢
They pop up everywhere and everywhere I have seen them the video has warned about them. So I guess it depends on the quality of the channels you watch.
@@57thornsOr OP just didn't watch the one video addressing the problem.
Most channels only mention it one time (just like Mentour so far IIRC). So it's not that unlikely that OP just missed that one video for the channels they are talking about.
All the high traffic channels I frequent which are plagued by this disease warn of it.
@@Jehty21 I don't watch a (whole) lot of "talking people" channels, most of them are space/nature documentaries and podcasts, that aren't plagued by these bots.
But channels like Formula 1, or Adam Savage's Tested, or Kim Iversen and a couple of those have not addressed it.
(EDIT: Not even Sabine Hossenfelder, unless i did happen to skip that 1 video where she addressed it.
Also, i've never fallen for it myself, and i usually report the bots as well, so it's probably also dependent on the audience.)
Back in '69 (I was barely two years old) ...we ended up landing at Shannon (on the second attempt, after flying over the beach with our wing pointed at it) ...some brake part had fallen off over the sea... - I have such vivid memories of the plane cavorting down the runway, swaying from side to side as the pilot managed to stop successfully... from a toddlers viewpoint, being chased by fire engines while in a plane was fabulous... - maybe you could look that one up (when you are stopped over at Shannon)...
You know, if we could all live more in the present moment, we could somewhat recapture that innocent joy.
@@grmpEqweer If we could avoid knowing what's going on.... I'm thinking the best bet for that in adults is dementia.
@@grmpEqweer - SURE! ...all the grown ups were sobbing and playing bo-bo time with pillows ...my mum was trying to keep hold of me as I managed to jump up and enjoy the ride and wave at the fire engine... - being a kid that knew nowt was an asset, - the same landing now would end my life...
I was flying to Piza, when we were diverted to Rome, where we saw the runway lined with crash emergency vehicles. Some passenger yelled That's for us! Starting a panic. The crew really should have told us the landing gear warning light had engaged and that was a precaution as the gear had descended. .the screaming put me off flying for life.
@@robertfarrow5853 -Trains, Busses and Boats ROCK!!!
Good video! Though just for context, the Moscow Times is not a Russian newspaper. It is a Dutch newspaper based in Amsterdam and banned in Russia (at least the Russian version).
Yes, all accurate, though to be fair they did print in Moscow until 2017 and had one of their two offices there until 2022. So it's been a recent ban, since it operated since the early 90s - the same issue that forced Novaya Gazeta to cease RU operations.
This of course also means that tracking the issues in the video has gotten a lot harder.
I mean, oddly, before 2017 you would see it lying around (western) hotels and things, even with stories critical of the government.
Anything not State approved is banned in Russia.
@@freeculture That is factually incorrect. Just like many countries in the west banned RT and Sputniknews, Russia has banned some news outlets as well. But banning some news outlets does not equal "everything must be state approved."
@myname - incorrect. Truth be to,d there’s not a single operational news source in ruZZia that doesn’t get its directives 100% from the kremlin. You can do whatever you must to cope with this fact, but it is a fact.
@@myname7021funny point of view regarding you go to prison for criticism in Russia
No longer having to do maintenance…every aviation CEOs dream come true.
Great analysis, that’s exactly the case. I work for one of the russian airlines and we had about one week flying some aircraft with one brake deactivated, but spare brakes soon arrived. Nevertheless, the situation becomes worse, especially with PW1100 engines, we expect about a half of our fleet to be grounded in a month or two.
And now two months have passed, how many planes have been laid up?
@@Sonnerick2k there is around 30 A320neo with PW engines grounded now.
@@VergilAckerman P&W 1100 engines are found on the A320neo only, conclusion: you work for Aeroflot, as that's the only Russian carrier which operates the type in the aforementioned numbers (S7, Ural and Smartavia also operates the type, however - unless I'm very much mistaken - they don't have 30 aircraft to ground to begin with).
What do you reckon, will you be able to continue operations until the MC-21 arrives in sufficent numbers (we're talking about 1-3 years), even if that means cannibalizing the grounded aircraft for spares, or will you have to part ways with the type earlier than that?
@@IGLArocknroll I think that MC-21 is a no go, there is no way in foreseeable future this aircraft will start commercial operations, it depends too much on western technology. In my personal opinion it will take decades for Russia to replace western tech with domestic one. So, conclusion: the future is very grim for russian pilots and russian aviation.
@@VergilAckerman The original MC-21-300 variant depends on Western tech (50% of it comes from abroad, if my sources are right) but as far as I'm informed: Aeroflot will receive the MC-21-310 variant (which would enter service in 2024 or 2025, but I expect some delays), and that variant would replace every sanctioned component to a Russian and/or Chinese one.
Either that, or you'll have to reactivate the old Tu-154M, while you ramp up the production of the Tu-204-300, or the Sukhoi Superjet 130NG as you don't have any other viable options left, when it comes to similar sized (i.e.: able to seat 160-190 pax, and have a 5-6000km range) airliners. Ceasing flight operations, using either larger (IL-96) or smaller (IL-114, An-148) aircraft on the existing routes, or kowtowing in front of the West is definetly not an option.
The Comac C919 contains Western-made parts (engines, avionics, etc.), the Embraer E-Jet too (not to mention that this one is smaller than an A320neo), and every other similarly sized aircraft is manufactured in a country which sanctions Russia. So, conclusion: your best bet would be to stick with the MC-21.
Recently, an Airbus captain who flies for, I believe, American Airlines, discussed his latest recurrent training session which essentially modeled these MEL scenarios with the brakes, and it was the first time he dealt with these parameters and he found it fascinating. Another consideration you had to address was the fact that you couldn’t raise the gear immediately so you have to find ways to prevent automatic responses while taking off like putting a piece of paper on the handle to remind you about timing 1 minute before raising the gear. Given the timing, it appears the training department was probably also paying attention to this news in Russia, giving them new ideas for training scenarios.
_Given the timing, it appears the training department was probably also paying attention to this news in Russia, giving them new ideas for training scenarios._
Good training department there because they are learning from real world even if in this case the real world examples come from the absolutely stupidity of russia.
If you MEL a brake, the reason to wait for one minute before raising the gear is to allow the wheel to spin-down before it is retracted into the wheel well. Normally, after the aircraft achieves takeoff, but before the gear is fully retracted, the brakes are actuated to snub the wheels and stop them from rotating. With no brake for that wheel, no snubbing occurs, so you must wait.
Russian roulette.
@@aeroman5239 Thanks for the explanation. OP explained the WHAT, but not the WHY.
@@aeroman5239why can't we have spinning wheels in the wheel well?
In Soviet Russia, brakes use you.
In Russia, plane fly you!
Hahaha
You've d again, Peter. Another fascinating and informative video. I'm very pleased you reviewed the situation in Russia, I have recently wondered what it's status has been. Gee in Sonoma, CA
Love your videos, I've learned so much from them.❤
Glad you like them! 💕✈️
@@MentourNow You are a born teacher, Captain!
Thank you for this insight. Keep safe, Petter. Cheers!
The way you pronounced Leipzig was so on spot for the local dialect... "Leipzish" - it wasn't proper German, but in this case, it was even more correct and funny! Saxon dialect is one of the strong ones - since "no dialect" standard high German derived from the Hannover dialect since it was the Grimm brothers from the Northern part of German with their first German dictionary. And another funny fact: Duden, the current standard for German comes from Leipzig. One of the big differences was that all nouns (not just proper nouns as in English) are capitalized in German, but weren't originally in the Grimm dictionary.
Haha, and in Bayerisch, the dialect I learned while living in southern Germany, it would be pronounced much like "Leapzishk"....
Ich dachte auf sächsisch wird "Leipzig" "Läpsisch" ausgesprochen.
So wie "gänsefleisch mal den Kofferruhm uffmache" (Können Sie vielleicht mal den kofferraum aufmachen)
8:52 It blew my mind that a wheel is allowed to has one missing bolt as it already has enough safety margin in its design.
Okay, I had to jump on this one. Aeorflot is a case study in so many ways these days.
I hope you found it interesting!
@@MentourNow Sure did! And it paints a bit of a scary picture for Aeroflot's planes' future safety.
We pay whole runway, we use whole runway.
Swiss Cheese model --- We use many layers of safety, so unless everything lines up against us, we will remain safe
Russian Cheese model -- As long as there's still a slice of cheese left.... go for it.
@@GlenHunt I imagine many(most?) Aeroflot aircraft will be banned from operating outside Russia even after embargos are lifted.
Excellent content as usual 👌 thank you Petter 👍
Yes, absolutely 💯 transparency is very important in aviation safety
Very interesting to hear more details about this.
Do you currently do livestreams?
He doesn't, but he is active on twitter. I have been the lucky recipient of several answers from him.
One of the main operational consequences apart the landing distance and take off calculations is that on the A320 you cannot raise the gear before one minute after take off, as the affected wheel is not braked before entering the wheel well and you have to wait till the wheels stops spinning by itself.
This was an excellent video. You took your time, researched into the matter and presented the whole picture in a way everyone can understand, with a lot of additional background info.
LET'S DISCUSS
Excellent analysis as always.
Love how you explane everything
As a truck driver, we always avoid using brakes, instead using the engine brake as much as possible. Saves fuel, saves on brake pads, saves over heating on wheel bearings & grease. But the brakes are always there & working if they're needed.
How does it save fuel?
@@edc1569it doesn’t really unless he’s counting the engine not introducing fuel when the jake is on.
@@Len_M.well it does but only to the extend that the less you brake the less power the engine needs to put out to accelerate again.
The engine not introducing fuel when the Jake is on is good enough. The fuel savings are not significant over small distances, but over the 50,000-100,000 a truck driver can easily drive in a year, the small savings do add up. Some truckers even go 4,000+ miles a week for months on end. The savings really add up then.
@@edc1569 The idea is that on a fuel injected engine, the injectors turn off completely when engine braking.
Though in that sense, the time spent engine braking is time saved not idling the engine. A semi truck can run on idle for days. So it's not that much saved in the actual engine braking phase.
However, since the trucker is engine braking he's also more likely to plan ahead and drive strategically / tactically. Not braking when just reaching a traffic light for instance but rather start slowing down long before it because the light is still red. Reaching the light too soon means having to come to a full stop where slowing down ahead of time still leaves you rolling when the light turns green again. THAT saves insane amounts of fuel for a truck. It's the acceleration phase that gulps up most fuel.
Cruising on the highways uses very little fuel, unless you are in a hill climb.
And going downhill on the engine brake saves a lot of brake pads and reduces risks with brake fatigue almost completely. It of course also saves the fuel that would otherwise have been used to idle the engine and there are mountains that take up to an hour to descend completely so it's one hour less of idling. Which ranges from 0.6 gallons to 1.5 gallons saved. It's a small saving that may happen once a day, but that can add upp eventually.
Still, the most savings are to be had from never slowing down needlessly so that you never accelerate needlessly afterwards.
Love your content.
Thank you, friend.
Greetings from Manistee, MI, usa.
The behind-the-news news investigation was fantastic. Brilliant journalism!
The Moscow Times is not "bragging" about Russia. They are an independent newspaper that was forced to move their editorial board out of Russia and now operates out of Amsterdam.
should've renamed themselves Amsterdam Times
@@rsvtwhy? They write about Russia.
Few days after you publish this, we get the ural airlines landing in the field.
Thank you for the great and informative video!
Great report, thank you .
I mean using reversers for every landing as a SOP could reduce brake wear, at the cost of fuel burn (probably not an issue in RU) and possibly some increased engine wear.
And this is how you end up with the ryanair procedures. They try to extend the livespan of brakes using more reverse thrust. But the difference is, ryanair replaces worn brakes.
The biggest issue would be the engine wear and an increased chance to ingest foreign objects from the ground, I'd believe. And you are cutting down safety margins.....
@@phoenix211245 I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that brakes are cheaper and less complicated than engines, and are more easily replicated locally
An extra 15 seconds running the thrust reversers isn't going to do anything in terms of engine wear.
@@luelou8464 It will mate. And the largest problem is still the extra chance of ingesting something off the ground. There is a reason why it is not standard practice done by all airlines.
Aeroflot is flying B777 into Malé Airport in the Maldives on a regular basis. When they land, they use the entire runway length, and it appears they are fond of aerodynamic braking... (Edit: Spelling mistake corrected.)
Is it me, or is that a strange destination for a Russian flag carrier...?
Not really, beautiful place. And the Russians there are just trying to have a holiday too.@@swanvictor887
@@swanvictor887 maybe they're handing off passengers to another airline once they get there
@@swanvictor887how so? Indian and pacific ocean nations are almost all that's left for russuan tourists wanting some tropical holidays, maldives are extremely popular tourist destination in that regard for asia, europe and america alike.
Ragular = regular
It should be noted that nearly all of the countries enforcing the sanctions against Russia are Europe, Australia, Japan, United States, and Canada. The rest are either neutral or siding with Russia. These countries are definitely not being sanctioned (yet) so it would be very easy for spare parts to be sent through these countries, perhaps with secret manufacturer approval and/or strict security measures to prevent counterfeit parts. These countries aren't necessarily known for their transparency either, so they could easily hide the documentation, then whenever the war ends, show that the parts in these planes were officially-sourced and therefore safe.
Excellent video. Troubling information.
I would be curious to know if the recent emergency landing by a Ural Airlines A320 in a grassy field was related to the topic here!
LET'S DISCUSS!
A couple of decades ago the Big Airline that I worked for ran short of A320 brake units (I think it was a problem with the external overhaul company). For a number of weeks we were operating most of the fleet on three brake units per aircraft. In fact I am fairly sure serviceable aircraft had a unit removed to fit on those that had a second failure. There were, as you mention, a large number of restrictions on the operation.
This was interesting but I am not surprised there are questionable suppliers involved. Thanks for sharing this.
Great show
Again I remember quite a number of storys verbally told of planes (md80 I guess) flown within MEL but with this or that part missing or inoperative. And seemed almost a rule in the late operative times of certain models
The MEL is an FAA-approved document which is in effect (subject to updating) from day one of a type's entry into service. The only thing which might change with age is the extent to which it is used. If for example an MD-80 or whatever hops from Houston to DFW on a dry-runway day, one thing it most definitely does not need in order to complete a safe flight is thrust reversers.
This aged well... with Ural dumping a plane in a hay field today.
You, Sir, rock. Many, many thanks for what you bring to us. I fly much better now after watching your work.
Today 12.09.23 an Airbus A320 operated by Ural Airlines made an e.ergency landing in Siberia due to some "technical emergency".
Luckily no casualties.
But for the west it might be considered "unlulckily" that there are no casualties. Sanctioning airplane spare parts is effectivly targeting for human casualties. Usual western faggot logic.
Telegram is not a Russian social media platform - it's an encrypted messenger with the option of some public broadcast chanels. Yes, it was developed by 2 Russian brothers - both not really on good terms with the Kremlin to put it mildly. For some reason that messenger is very popular with certain people who love to spread nonsense there on some of their public chanels - but that's not really any different to Twitter, Instagram and so on except that it's on a messenger platform and not a dedicated social media platform like the aforementioned. It's still a messenger first
Well, ain't that funny now that a scam bot replied :D
14:31 I wonder why those A320's had the extra wheels
A lot of runways in India at small airports at that time were not capable of dealing with multiple landings without regular repairs. Now that their quality has improved, the extra wheels are no longer needed.
Question for anyone knowledgeable: do airliner brakes usually get replaced as they wear out, 1 wheel at a time? Or in symmetrical/mirrored pairs or sets - e.g., if the leftmost outermost wheel has worn-out brakes, does the _rightmost_ outermost wheel necessarily get new brakes too? Is it more common to simultaneously replace all brakes on the same "axle" line★ along with the wheel with below-spec brakes? Do they just replace all fronts together and all rears together? Is it common to see carriers or maintenance houses spend more on parts & labor with the goal of minimizing downtime - instead of up to 14 separate trips to maintenance facilities, simply replacing _all_ ground wheel brakes, together, whenever any one wheel's brakes are found to be worn out? Coming from a career an an auto mechanic, I'm guessing the wear is vaguely symmetrical, but can definitely vary between axles or wheels depending on maintenance and environmental factors (and of course, the actions of the "nut loose behind the wheel," or... behind the control column, in this case 😁).
★ for example, with 2 front/steering & 12 total rear wheels, starting from the rear, the wheel "axle" sets would be the 4 rearmost, the 4 rear center, the 4 rear frontmost, and the 2 front wheels
P.S.: Sorry for the spammy double-post, but I'm posting this question both here, as a standalone comment, as well as in reply form, below the pinned Mentour Now! comment. Just to maximize the eyeballs.
Individually, as needed. Almost nothing in commercial Aviation is replaced beyond whatever is fastest and cheapest. They might chose to replace sets of components if they're all low and would save overall by one maint. stop but that's it. The strict regulations on inspections (and associated costs) plus the electronic monitoring and visual indicators constantly being checked removed the impetus for wasteful replacements. They just monitor wear items and replace them before they're worn to the manufacturer's minimum spec.
Again, the extremely generous safety margins in aviation and inspection intervals allow the flexibility for operators. That said, Helicopters and Military aviation often replace components before approaching worn out spec as the risk of critical failure is much higher for both, real or perceived.
Great video thanks
Pretty sure they could manufacture their own replacement brakes. Even if they are not the same quality they could just replace them more often.
As always a detailed and in-depth report. Thank you.
I’m interested in what the weight penalty is for a rejected takeoff with an inoperable brake? Never flown this way, but I’m thinking it’s gotta be huge.
Fascinating vid.
Actually, just today there was an accident with another Russian airline "Ural Airlines". Their Airbus A320 crash-landed in a field near the russian town of Novosibirsk. Interestingly some years ago the plane of the same airline (!) crash-landed in a corn field minutes after takeoff from Moscow ZIA airport. Since in both cases no one died (!) the pilots in the latter accident were quickly proclaimed as heroes, but the report that was leaked some time later (it has never been officially published) actually put a lot of criticism on pilots. I think this will make for an interesting video some time later ;)
LET'S DISCUSS
I think a fake Mentour just responded to you. They have no @ in their name (that I can see, at least).
Hydraulic failure, given bloody history of that type of failure, I must applaud their successful landing in a corn field.
Really appreciate your nuanced, expert commentary.
On a more pessimistic note, I hope that no nation states decide to increase the asymmetric warfare profile to infiltrate the grey market with deliberately sabotaged parts.
Oh there are enough private companies who sell bad products for too high prices
Maan you got one of the best analysis of aviation stuff. You BRAKE (sorry/not sorry lol) it down into easy to understand information that a non av-geek can understand without needing to google words and such.
Keep up the awesome job youve been doing 😊 =]
Just attached an InOp card to the plane, on the back write "It's Broke!". For transparency attach it to the plane where no one can miss it.
Thanks for clarifying. It’s really to bad the other aviation channels chose to just go for the clicks. Keep up the good work.
I just watched this two days ago, and then a Russian plane had to land in a field, so your video had excellent timing. I would love to hear your thoughts about the Ural Airlines plane 😄
It’s not a “hole in the perimeter fence” it’s a “new terminal entrance”
ahahahahah I had to scroll way too far down for this
Special Arresting Operation
Is there a public MEL (list) available for a big plane? I'd love to read through it.
Even the little Mooneys I fly have a MEL. Short, and mostly instruments, but it needs to be followed carefully.
If they actually cared about their self-sufficiency, they could develop their own brake replacement parts. They have competent engineers who can do it. They’d have to go with steel brake discs and pay more for fuel, but fuel is what they got plenty.
Oh, I imagine they are doing that already, working perhaps with the Chinese, maybe buying their 3D printers at inflated prices etc. But at the end of the day, they will not have the skills, time or correct materials to make something with the same integrity as the original part. It will keep the flying....until it doesn't.
@@swanvictor887 pretty sure the only thing they lack is the ability to procure fine circuitry, not machined parts.
So to be clear. What countries DO have their own (not an alliance or any other bull***t) big aircraft manufacturing capabilities? US (Boeing) and Russia. So don't underestimate that. They still produce homebrew airplanes and reached some success (fully domestic/Chinese Superjet, mc-21, etc) So what we should really investigate is how long will Airbus exist. Germany, France and England are now in their worst shape EVER. It's clear that the US is getting the most "cream" out of what is happening right now in Europe. So the question is more likely to be: will the Air-France and Lufthansa fly Boeings or SUs when all of this madness is over?
They have made steps towards self-sufficiency - by replacing their Western aircraft with domestic designs.
They are making their own parts too. I don't know which parts they are smuggling and which they are making themselves, but both methods of obtaining parts are being used.
If you still remember the days of the soviet union you might know, that they had a very long tradition in building their own aircrafts. And not all of them were bad. Yes, in the last years Boeing and Airbus took over the market of passenger aircrafts almost completely. But as you can see in China and even in Russia western sanctions lead to massive investments in national developments of creating and building aircrafts of their own. In the end these sanction will not lead to any business malfunction in these countries, in the long run it will lead to losses of market shares for Boeing and Airbus, when companies like COMAC from China or Ilyushin take over.
They also had 5 crew in the cockpit...
i love your videos - but is that pointing thing at the end really necessary ?!
"A missing bolt from a wheel might be ok"? Can't believe this...
Is probably 3-4 times safety margin on bolts
I was wondering when you'd look at russia again. That's some extremely important info. Thanks for sharing it.
Glad it was helpful!
@@MentourNow I do hope you'll be swatting those Russophobic comments in your videos such as this then. Not encouraging them. To remain an educative, un-biased channel I learnt to like so much dear Mentour.
@@RussianSevereWeatherVideosIf I were @MentourNow I would ban you from the channel the moment you've used the "Russophobic" adjective.
@@TinLeadHammer Such a delightful act of censorship! I rest my case.
@@SomeRandomPerson163 It is a marker.
Brave pilot to provide a realistic assessment of Aeroflot’s current status. Stay away from open windows and don’t accept hot beverages.
Yeah, funny. If everyone in the West who was making critical comments of Russia had to fear polonium poisoning, Russians would have to make a couple of kilograms of the material.
Some aggregates are undergoing maintenance in countries like UAE right now. They are dismounted from planes in Russia, disassembled, sent apart, undergo maintenance by one-day UAE subsidiary , which issues a fake certificate. Then, Aggregates are sent back to Russia intact. It works with all nonessential parts (gauges, locks, pcs, lubricants….) on older generation planes, including b777. All good, planes can be used for domestic flights. Luckily, there are lots of written-off planes produced 2010 and earlier, so spare parts are not an issue.
Excellent explanation...... non-political, just factual. Very interesting and informative.
Thanks a lot for this video Petter! We in Russia do not know exactly what is the true situation with our civil aviation. Especially the situation with safety. Now I have understanding what is the situation like. At least for the time being.
In post-Soviet Russia, aircraft brakes pilot
You mean breakes?
Nice video, but the Lufthansa Technik facility shown in the video is in hamburg
the timing couldn’t be better!
Are there any legitimate third-party replacement parts for airliners, or do Boeing and Airbus refuse to let that happen? If the latter, it's possible to argue that that restriction could be _creating_ the dangerous illicit parts trade.
Russia should choose to leave Ukraine and get the sanctions dropped if they want safe parts, then
It's a interesting argument, seeing that medicine and medical equipment are exempt from the embargo. You can make the case that exempting aircraft maintenance and parts is in the public good. On the other hand... a national aviation industry is not necessary and aircraft parts include military aviation equipment.
@@ptrinchmy man, it is absolutely necessary if you just look at how big the country is. It takes weeks to cross the country by train. WEEKS.
@@ptrinchnot to mention the search and rescue missions, forest fire fighting, agriculture, etc.
Added:
So they really have to keep flying and just accept the fact of reduced safety and possible casualties. That’s the real effect of the embargo. And the military aviation is significantly localised and doesn’t depend so much on these parts anyway.
@@alexv3357 Or NATO could stop propping up a nation in the name of a politically convenient proxy war and we could actually perhaps stop edging toward a open war between the superpowers.
CFM is suing AOG Technics over the counterfeit parts work. That and the reputational damage will put them out of business. If the sanctions won’t stop you, the lawsuits will.
Sofar there is no news of any of these counterfeit parts ending up in Russia. They are just cheap parts for airlines that need to save a buck.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg True. However, if you can fake paper work to cover the source of parts, you can do it to cover the destination. Petter mentioned the UK supply (AT) in today’s video. That company also falsified employee histories and installation documents. No one knows for sure where all of those parts are today.
If it has four or six wheels & two brakes are deactivated at a time, one on each side, to keep the brakes balanced, you can do this for a good while...
Until it skids off the runway....
Very good información
If I were Russian, I might just avoid air travel for the foreseeable future...
If I were Russian, I might just avoid living in Russia for the foreseeable future...
they will make parts from old tanks
They have plenty of those but unfortunately most are now parked in Ukraine. ;-)
This is why it's so important to have your own manufacturing capabilities in your own country. If Russia would've put some tariffs on imported passenger airplanes, they would've still had their own aviation industry, and none of these sanctions would mean much.
8:50 MEL was lost during special inspection mission
Hi Petter, here I am again.
After watching this video, some big questions pops into my mind: Once the war is over, how will Aeroflot manage to go back to normal safety standards? In my mind (and please correct me if I´m wrong) the main crew members of the russian flag aero company might be as high as in the west, however would that be the same for CEO´s and politicians who run the company? Woulden´t be a safety concirn once Aeroflot start to do international flights? We´ll see.... It would be very sad if serious incidents and/or accidents occur when they eventually go back to normal operations.
BTW: I´m still waiting for your analysis on what happend to the LAPA accident Aug 30 1999 in Aeroparque, Buenos Aires.
Cheers from NE Patagonia, Argentina.
Guess they'll try to do what they did before - cheap flights with layovers in Moscow. I say "try" because the safety standards are higher now.
The largest long term issue for me would be the swapping over of parts which may or may not be correct spec for the aircraft.
It could work for years then suffer fatigue and bring the plane down.
With the lack of record keeping being so widespread now its going to be almost impossible to know if any such parts are fitted until they are replaced as usual or they fail.
An additional issue Aeroflot and other Russian airlines will run into when they eventually try to return to normal international operations is that, as Petter mentioned, a significant portion of the planes in Aeroflot's fleet are essentially stolen because they were leased from European companies and not returned when they were supposed to be after the war started.
@@stuarttomlinson1819 It's not exactly "stolen", yes, they refused to give it back, but the lease money is still transferred to accounts and kept there, it's just that it can't be withdrawn because of the sanctions. I think it will be a kind of loophole when after the war it will be possible to give back all this accumulated money.
@@stuarttomlinson1819 The planes are gone as they are going to be cannibalised for parts. Even if a few do get returned, they will be in such poor shape that they will be basically the same - good for parts only.
By now you can imagine the factories in China pumping out substandard counterfeit spares. Just a matter of time before they start dropping out the sky.
RF air force has an account on Alibaba
Weirdly, summer is also the busiest time of year for airlines based on the southern hemisphere 🤔
Why not use the thrust reversers down to stopping?
Sanctions means increased demand for black market parts, which means increased supply for black market parts even after the sanctions end.
This will inevitably lead to reduced safety for all aircraft everywhere as those black market parts trickle into supply chains.
Only for countries and companies who don’t mind sketchy sources. Mentour and others have shown before most Western companies require a supply chain trace so it’s always clear where the zero/point of origin is. Most Arabic, Asian and South American companies require that too. You’d probably be most at risk in Russia and some African carriers.
I thought this video was click bait that Aeroflot is really flying without brakes. To my knowledge, if an airline were to actually fly without brakes, there will be a lot more runway overruns and more destroyed aircraft which is the opposite of what Russia needs.
Then I watched this video and I went, why isn't more people talking about this...
Mentour doesn't do click-bait. Which is why his videos are sometimes so troubling...
@@plektosgaming I guess Mentour has ethically click-baited me. I learnt something new and concerning
Best update I've had on Russian Civil Aviation in a long while. Thanks man!!!
Probably a stupid question but how do you go about seizing an aircraft on the ground what's the procedure like??
Thank you Petter.
This has to be one of your best posts in the last 6 months.
Brilliantly executed, informative and engaging.
Thank you for being factual and honest, and being true to the facts 10/10.
I can’t buy incogni as you sold me NORD a few months ago. Should I cancel that one and move ?? I am worried now as if Incogni are better than NORD that I am wasting money on them and should change ?
Ok, so one wheel brake is in-op. Now what happens if 2,3, 4 or more also become in-op? Not including logs of problems is just as bad as falsifying them. What can loosely be described as "pattern parts" or non original, they may look the same, they might fit the same, but is their reliability the same? I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but isn't it only a matter of time before there is a tragic incident? Along with some of your case study accidents Captain Petter, I found this quite disturbing, let's hope and pray one of these Russian airliners don't become a subject of yours in a future accident investigation. Happy landings Captain.
I was reminded of a shocking incident involving a British Airways BAC 1-11 I think it was, back in the 80s, where the window blew out and the captain was sucked out of the cockpit. The cabin crew held onto his feet while the co-pilot made an emergency landing at Southampton Airport, UK. Luckily, the Captain, despite being OUTSIDE the aircraft (!) survived. The Windscreen had been replaced the previous day but the retaining screws were fractionally too small, imperceptible to the engineer's eyes.
"pattern parts" as typically made in China for "export" (where legal concerns are moot) are typically made of recycled metals and materials and are often copied without taking into account losses from molds and shinkage due to cooling or curing. You have to basically custom-fit each one and adjust it to make it work. This is somewhat OK in a car fender. Less so with something like a moving part under stress. Often they fail at dramatically lower stress than quoted/are way out of spec. I had a relative who worked for a defense contractor in the 80s and 90s and he said they tried such components but had to replace every rivet, nut, bolt, bearing, and connector as they were out of spec most of the time. Eventually they just paid more for custom-made parts as the time wasted was putting them behind schedule. The overseas companies simply lied or did no quality control. Again, fine for minor things, but for anything that's flying or going into space... not so much.
@@swanvictor887 Thats very true and if the technician had crossed checked his work instead of just relying on his eyesight he would have seen which screws to use but we're not talking about a genuine mistake here, we are talking along the lines of putting a single bullet into a 6 chamber revolver, giving it a good spin, then putting the revolver to your head, squeezing the trigger and hoping you don't blow your head off.
Just a reminder: they still have domestic aircraft designing and manufacturing capabilities. Just like the US do. And nobody else has them. Airbus is not a national manufacturer so there is a place for some concussion...
@@CerberZer0S1gnaL Quite right Russia build there own aircraft namely the Tupolev family. Captain Petter was referring to the Boeing and Airbus aircraft they have. Russia has no approved technical ability to either maintain these aircraft or supply parts to them. Why do you think they are taking parts off grounded aircraft and using them on their airborne craft and they shouldn't be doing that either. I hope I'm wrong, but sooner or later this is going to have a tragic consequence. And for your information Airbus is largely built in Toulouse France.
Wonder If the usage of brakes on a 12000ft runway Is the same as 8000ft?
Just a briliant channel along with Mentour Pilot.