Itar-Tass is now reporting the two missing Russian Tupolev aircraft have crashed and that terrorism may be involved:
The incidents may have been the result of terrorist attacks, Itar-Tass cited unidentified air traffic controllers as saying in Moscow. Yevegeniy Khorishko, a spokesman for the Russian embassy in Washington, said in a telephone interview Russian reports said the aircraft left Moscow’s Demodedovo airport within three minutes of each other.
I flew out of Demodedovo (Moscow’s second airport) a year and a half ago on my way to Khanty-Mansisk, Siberia (yes, you read that correctly). I remember thinking the airport was on the disorganized side at the time.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
19 Comments
1. Jim in Texas:“Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity”
Or insert “human error” for “stupidity.” All air traffic around many airports in that part of the world is chaotic and hazardous.
I smell a mid-air.
The important thing to remember is that all initial reports and theories (including this one!) are usually wrong.
You’re a braver man than I, Gunga Roj, I wouldn’t go near that airport, especially in an Aeroflot flight!
Aug 24, 2004 - 6:33 pm 2. Roger:Actually, Jim, it wasn’t Aeroflot. It was worse. Some local airline whose name I now forget. But apropos of Aeroflot, I once flew (circa 1990) from Tblisi, Georgia to Moscow on that line and there were livestock in the aisle. Definitely Gunga Roj.
Aug 24, 2004 - 6:54 pm 3. richard mcenroe:Test post
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:05 pm 4. hollywood:It would have to be 2 separate mid-airs (not impossible, I suppose). Speculation is terrorism by Chechen (sp?) rebels.
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:24 pm 5. Terrye:My understanding was the were not near each other. So, strange as it may seem, hollywood may be right.
Terrorism. How awful. I remember when those poor children were killed in a crash a couple of years ago but that was an accident. They were Russian also.
What can people hope to gain from doing these things?
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:30 pm 6. hollywood:“What can people hope to gain from doing these things?”
Apparently there’s an election coming up in Chechnya. Shades of Madrid.
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:40 pm 7. Dave Schuler:The airline is Sibir’ (Siberian). Putin has called in the FSB so it appears that they suspect more than two plane crashes.
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:44 pm 8. Roger:For the record, I did not fly Sibir. I believe it was a line that began with an “M.”
(How can Kerry and the Swifites remembr thngs that happened in 1968 and I can’t remember the name of an airline I flew a year ago February. Maybe it was Air Cambodia.)
Aug 24, 2004 - 7:47 pm 9. richard mcenroe:Little Green Footballs is reporting a bomb explosion in Moscow.
Aug 24, 2004 - 8:02 pm 10. mwalls:Consider how few Tupolev’s actually crash (especially with Russian maintenance and airfield conditions). Not too shabby.
Aug 24, 2004 - 8:26 pm 11. Mark Poling:Report: Russian Jet Sent Hijack Signal
MOSCOW (AP) – A Russian airliner crashed and a second disappeared from radar about the same time Tuesday night after both planes took off from the same Moscow airport, raising fears that terrorism was involved.
The Russian news agency Interfax reported that a hijacking signal was activated on the second plane before it went missing. The signal came at 11:04 p.m. from the Tu-154 airliner, Interfax quoted the source in Russia’s “power structures” as saying.
Aug 24, 2004 - 9:06 pm 12. bkw:How can Kerry and the Swifites remembr thngs that happened in 1968 and I can’t remember the name of an airline I flew a year ago February.
That’s because the memory wasn’t seared — seared! — in your mind!
Sorry … sorry … I’ll stop now …
Aug 24, 2004 - 9:16 pm 13. Thom:The second plane was en route to the same city where Putin is currently vacationing.
Aug 24, 2004 - 9:17 pm 14. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):This early it’s always hard to tell what’s happening. Also be aware that every major airplane that ever crashed had at least one witness saying it blew up in flight or was on fire. This happened with flight 93. It’s an odd human phenomenon – few aircraft suffer in-flight fires or explosions.
With Russia, expect the early rumors and inside sources to be especially flaky, and the authorities may be very quiet or make up an alternate explanation.
Since they both took off from the same plane, bombs or hijackers make sense. The first one crashed pretty quickly for a hijack. It isn’t clear how long the second flew.
My best guess: terrorism. However, we don’t know the weather, whether in fact there was no mid-air collision, what the radars saw, whether the aircraft had functioning altitude encoding transponders, etc.
At least these planes didn’t have a lot of people on board. Let’s hope they weren’t shot down by MANPADS!
Aug 24, 2004 - 9:40 pm 15. Cybrludite:Couple a hundred miles between them, so the only thing they would have collided with mid-air would be something fired by the PVO.
Aug 25, 2004 - 1:32 am 16. hollywood:The maintenance records would appear to be critical. Sounds like a coincidence, but could it be poor maintenance on 2 planes with too many cycles?
Aug 25, 2004 - 8:10 am 17. mwalls:I suspect that the Tupolev’s maintenance is not an issue, otherwise the Russians would be losing them in quantity. If we maintained 737’s the way the Russians maintain their Tupolev’s, we’d be having Congressional Hearings & criminal charges. Russian hardware is generally designed to function with poor maintenance (at least from my reading).
Aug 25, 2004 - 9:09 am 18. thibaud:Aeroflot’s service on transatlantic flights is now as good or better than that of its western competitors. I’ve flown both Aeroflot and Delta to Moscow about a dozen times in the last 7 years and I’d happily fly Aeroflot instead of Delta today.
As for the Tupolevs, maintenance is the big problem, not design or piloting. They’re said to be far more stable in foul weather than either Boeing or Airbus planes. Also, the pilots are generally superb. But service on domestic routes still sucks.
Aug 25, 2004 - 11:04 am 19. Roberts:Hmmmm, superb Russian pilots? Perhaps, but I recall a few years ago there was a crash of a Russian airliner where the investigation revealed that the pilot had allowed his son into the cockpit to play with the controls.
Aug 25, 2004 - 1:03 pm