Seconds From Disaster: What Brought Down Flight J2-8243?
Preliminary Report (Flight J2-8243 began like any other – a routine hop across the Caspian Sea. Passengers settled in, anticipating a short flight from Baku, Azerbaijan, to Grozny, Russia. But on this cold December day, routine would shatter into chaos, leaving a trail of wreckage and unanswered questions across the desolate landscape of Kazakhstan. What caused a modern airliner, flown by experienced pilots, to fall from the sky? While the official investigation is still underway, the preliminary evidence points to a terrifying possibility: an accidental missile strike in a region simmering with conflict.
The Routine Departure
The aircraft, an Embraer 190-100, was a familiar sight in the skies, a workhorse of regional airlines known for its reliability. Azerbaijan Airlines, the operator of Flight J2-8243, maintained a solid safety record. At the controls were Captain [Captain's Name], a seasoned veteran with over 15,000 flight hours, a significant portion of which – over 7,000 hours – were logged on the Embraer 190 itself. His First Officer, though younger, was also well-trained on the aircraft.
The pre-flight checks were completed without incident. The weather in Baku was good. Passengers boarded, luggage was stowed, and the Embraer pushed back from the gate. At 03:56 UTC, Flight J2-8243 lifted smoothly off the runway, climbing into the clear morning sky, heading north towards Grozny. For the first half-hour, everything was normal.
The First Sign of Trouble: Lost in the Electronic Fog
As the aircraft approached Grozny, disaster struck. Without warning, *both* of the aircraft's GPS navigation systems failed – a highly unusual and extremely dangerous situation. In today's world, airliners rely heavily on GPS for precise positioning and navigation. Losing one system is rare; losing both is almost unheard of.
But this was no ordinary region. The Caucasus, nestled between Russia, Ukraine, and the volatile Middle East, is a hotbed of electronic warfare. Military forces routinely use powerful jammers to disrupt enemy drones and missiles. While these jammers are intended for military targets, their effects can spill over, crippling civilian navigation systems. This "electronic fog" may have been the first domino to fall in the chain of events that doomed Flight J2-8243.
The crew, now flying blind in increasingly difficult weather, requested vectors from air traffic control for an older type of approach – an NDB approach – relying on ground-based radio beacons. This was a throwback to an earlier era of aviation, a far less precise method of finding a runway.
Cascading Failures: A Nightmare Unfolds
The situation quickly deteriorated. As the crew struggled to navigate using the NDB, a series of catastrophic failures ripped through the aircraft. At 05:13 UTC, the nightmare scenario began. First, hydraulic system number 3 failed. Then, within seconds, system number 1. And finally, system number 2.
Hydraulic systems are the lifeblood of a modern aircraft. They power the control surfaces – the ailerons, elevators, and rudder – that allow pilots to steer and control the plane. Losing one hydraulic system is a serious emergency. Losing *all three* is, for all practical purposes, a death sentence. It's like losing all steering, brakes, and power in your car, except you're thousands of feet in the air. This catastrophic failure meant the pilots had absolutely no way to control the pitch (up and down movement), roll (banking), or yaw (left and right movement) of the aircraft using the normal control surfaces.
The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) captured sounds of impacts – two distinct events. Then, the chilling EICAS message: "SERVICE DOOR AFT OPEN." Moments later, a flight attendant reported a terrifying scene in the cabin: "Two seats exploded!" Passengers, deprived of oxygen due to a failing system, were beginning to lose consciousness. The cabin filled with the smell of fuel.
Desperate Measures: A Fight for Survival
With their aircraft crippled, Captain [Captain's Name] and his First Officer were engaged in a desperate battle for survival. They were left with only one, incredibly difficult, way to control the plane: differential thrust. By carefully adjusting the power of each engine, they could, in theory, exert some limited control over the aircraft's direction and altitude. It was a maneuver requiring extraordinary skill and nerves of steel. They were literally flying by the tips of their fingers.
Initially, the crew decided to divert to Baku. But the weather there was marginal, and with their limited control, a safe landing was far from guaranteed. They then requested to divert to Mineralnye Vody, then Makhachkala, asking for weather updates. Finally, they made the fateful decision: They would attempt an emergency landing at Aktau, in Kazakhstan, where the weather was reported to be better.
The Delayed Mayday and Descent into Chaos
It is important to note that the crew committed some mistakes, one of them the late Mayday call. A Mayday call is a universal distress signal, indicating an imminent threat to life and requiring immediate assistance. In this case, given the catastrophic failures, the Mayday should have been declared much sooner. This delay is a human factor, understandable in such a high-stress situation, but nonetheless a deviation from best practices.
As they struggled towards Aktau, the crew faced another agonizing challenge: dwindling oxygen and the terrifying prospect of passengers losing consciousness. They requested a lower altitude, hoping to alleviate the oxygen shortage. But with every passing minute, their control over the aircraft deteriorated further.
The ground proximity warning system (GPWS) blared repeatedly: "TERRAIN! TERRAIN! PULL UP!" – a desperate cry from the machine, warning of impending disaster. The pilots, during at least one, and likely both, of their attempted approaches to Grozny, descended below what is known as the *minimum descent altitude (MDA)*. The MDA is the critical safety parameter on non-precision approaches (like the NDB approach they were attempting). It represents the lowest altitude a pilot can descend to without having visual contact with the runway environment. Descending below the MDA without seeing the runway is a serious violation of regulations, significantly increasing the risk of a collision with terrain. While the preliminary report doesn't state the specific MDA for Grozny, the air traffic controller's report of the plane's altitude at a mere 330 meters (around 1000 feet), combined with multiple GPWS warnings, strongly suggests the pilots descended dangerously low. It's a testament to their skill that, even after the catastrophic damage, they managed to fly the crippled aircraft as far as they did, ultimately saving some lives.
Finally, at 06:27:58 UTC, the struggle ended. Flight J2-8243 slammed into the ground, five kilometers from Aktau airport.
Communications Breakdown
The following table presents the radio transmissions. It illustrates the building emergency and communication difficulties, the initial failure and finally the Mayday call
| Time (UTC) | Speaker | Communication | Approximate Flight Level (ft) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03:47:40 | Crew | Crew requests pushback and start-up clearance from Baku Ground. | N/A |
| 03:51 | Crew | Crew requests taxi clearance. | N/A |
| 03:54 | Crew | Takeoff clearance received from Baku Tower (RWY 34). Wind 320 degrees at 16 knots. | N/A |
| 03:56 | Crew | Takeoff from Baku. Planned flight level FL300. | Climbing |
| 04:12 | Crew | Aircraft leaves Azerbaijan airspace, contacts Rostov-Control. | FL300 |
| 04:13 | Rostov-Cont. | Rostov-Control instructs crew to proceed direct to REMKA and expect REMKA1R arrival. | FL300 |
| 04:25:59 | Crew | Crew reports ready for descent. | FL300 |
| 04:26:13 | Crew | Crew reports: "Ready for descent and for information we lost both GPS, request REPKA one V arrival" | Descending |
| 04:26:50 | Rostov-Cont. | Rostov-Control: Expect REMKA one X-ray. | Descending |
| 04:36:50 | Crew | Crew to Grozny Tower: Reaching FL130, lost both GPS, request vectoring for NDB approach. | ~13,000 |
| 04:37:04 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower clears for NDB Victor approach RWY 26 via REMKA one X-ray, descend to 1100 meters, QFE 1005 hPa. | ~13,000 |
| 04:37:04 | System | TERRAIN TERRAIN, PULL UP, PULL UP, PULL UP (GPWS) | ~3600 |
| 04:37:18 | System | FDR time shift of 4 minutes 32 seconds begins. | ~3600 |
| 04:39:56 | Crew | Crew asks for vectors | |
| 04:40:25 | Grozny Tower | Vectoring for NDB VICTOR approach Runway 26, continue present heading until advise. | |
| 04:49:12 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower changes heading and gives clearence | |
| 04:49:13 | System | TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP PULL UP (GPWS) | ~3600 |
| 04:50:12 | Crew | Crew requests distance from NDB. | |
| 04:50:18 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower responds: Distance 14 kilometers. | |
| 04:50:51 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports distance 12 km, approaching glide path, wind calm, runway 26, cleared to land. | |
| 04:51:46 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower confirms runway lights are on. | |
| 04:53:19 | Crew | Crew announces go-around: "Non-stabilized approach.... lost LNAV heading?" (internal cockpit communication) | ~3600 to ~9000 |
| 04:53:24 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Go around as published. | ~9000 |
| 04:53:28 | Crew | Crew requests vectoring for go-around, lost GPS. | ~9000 |
| 04:53:35 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Continue present heading, climb to 900 meters. | ~9000 |
| 04:54:34 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower requests present heading | |
| 04:55:23 | Crew | Crew requests vectoring for another approach. | |
| 04:55:37 | Crew | Crew requests heading change, Grozny Tower responds with heading 080. | |
| 04:55:49 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks if crew needs RNAV GNSS approach. | |
| 04:55:54 | Crew | Crew confirms: "Confirm we need NO GNSS approach, lost both GPS" | ~9000 |
| 04:56:02 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Roger, expect RNAV GNSS approach Runway 26. | ~9000 |
| 04:56:08 | Crew | Crew: "No, we lost both GPS, we cannot perform RNAV approach, request vectoring for NDB VICTOR approach" | ~9000 |
| 04:56:18 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower confirms NDB Approach | |
| 04:58:07 | Grozny Tower: | Maintain 900 Meters | |
| 05:00:00 | Crew | Crew asks how long to maintain heading. | |
| 05:00:13 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower responds: One minute. | |
| 05:01:30 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports radio contact lost, instructs to continue heading and report distance. | |
| 05:01:45 | Crew | Crew reports heading 080, asks for distance from airport. | |
| 05:01:54 | Crew | Crew reports distance 30 miles, but notes GPS is lost and information may be inaccurate. | |
| 05:02:13 | Crew | Crew reports to Grozny. | |
| 05:02:24 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports not observing the aircraft on radar. | |
| 05:02:30 | Crew | Crew reports heading 080, altitude 900 meters. | |
| 05:02:37 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs left orbit, climb to 1500 meters. | |
| 05:04:53 | Crew | Crew asks for heading. | |
| 05:04:58 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower provides weather information: visibility 3300 meters, overcast at 240 meters, haze. | |
| 05:06:00 | Crew | Crew requests further vectoring, heading 180. | |
| 05:06:03 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs to maintain heading. | |
| 05:06:27 | Crew | Crew asks about preparing landing gear. | |
| 05:06:37 | Crew | Crew asks again. | |
| 05:06:39 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower acknowledges. | |
| 05:07:01 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower provides heading 072, distance 26 km, clears for NDB VICTOR approach, runway 26. | |
| 05:07:22 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs right turn to heading 240. | |
| 05:07:29 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs descent to 600 meters. | |
| 05:08:04 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs to resume own navigation, descend to 500 meters. | |
| 05:09:16 | Crew | Crew reports reaching 500 meters, asks for distance to continue descent. | |
| 05:09:36 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports altitude 330 meters. | |
| 05:09:45 | Crew | Crew reports altitude 500 meters. | ~1640 to ~1082 |
| 05:09:58 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Distance 12 kilometers, approaching glideslope, wind calm, runway 26, cleared to land. Runway lights on. | ~1082 |
| 05:11:42 | Crew | Crew: "Azerbaijan eight two four three, following Baku." | ~3000 to ~9000 |
| 05:11:50 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Climb to 900 meters with current heading. | ~3000 to ~9000 |
| 05:12:21 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Initially climb to FL080, asks if able to proceed direct to PINTA. | ~9000 |
| 05:12:40 | Crew | Crew: "Azerbaijan eight two four three, both GPS are lost, need vectoring." | ~9000 |
| 05:12:49 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Roger, turn right, heading 360. | ~9000 |
| 05:13:31 | System | Sound of impact, autopilot disconnect warning ("AUTO PILOT"), autothrottle disconnect warning ("Throttle"). | ~3500 |
| 05:13:34 | System | Pressure in hydraulic system 3 drops to 0 PSI. Fluid level in system 3 drops to 0%. Elevator, aileron, and rudder positions become fixed. | ~3500 |
| 05:13:36 | System | AP PITCH TRIM NOT ENGAGED, MACH TRIM NOT CAPABLE. | ~3500 |
| 05:13:39 | CVR | KVS ozvuchil EICAS: «DOOR...SERVICE DOOR AFT OPEN» | ~3500 |
| 05:13:39 | System | Cabin depressurization begins. | ~3500 |
| 05:13:47 | System | "HYD 2 LOW PRESS" warning. Pressure in hydraulic system 1 drops to 0 PSI. Fluid level in system 1 drops to 0%. | ~3500 |
| 05:13:54 | System | Pressure in hydraulic system 2 drops to 4 PSI. | ~3500 |
| 05:13:56 | CVR | Second sound of impact. | ~3500 |
| 05:14:07 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower instructs climb to FL150. | ~3500 |
| 05:14:17 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower request speed up climb | |
| 05:14:23 | Crew | Crew: "Accelerating climb" | |
| 05:14:58 | CVR | Captain asks cabin crew, "What happened?" Flight attendant reports: "Two seats exploded, I... I can't get there because the passengers have gotten up, I'm seating them." | ~3500 |
| 05:15:57 | Crew | Crew reports: "Control failure, bird strike in the cabin. Aa, bird strike and 2 seats exploded in the cabin." | ~3500 |
| 05:16:08 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks what assistance is needed. | ~3500 |
| 05:16:14 | Crew | Crew: "We need, we need the nearest airport with normal weather." | ~3500 |
| Internal cockpit communication: "Let's land" | ~3500 | ||
| 05:16:32 | Crew | Crew discusses diverting to Mineralnye Vody, requests weather information. | |
| 05:16:36 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports information in 16 minutes. | |
| 05:16:40 | Crew | Crew: "Didn't understand?" | |
| 05:16:44 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower repeats information in 16 minutes. | |
| 05:16:48 | Crew | Crew asks again about information in 16 minutes. | |
| 05:16:52 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks to repeat the message, poor communication. | |
| 05:16:54 | Crew | Crew: "There was a strong impact, the rear seats exploded, the flight attendant reported. We are proceeding to Mineralnye Vody, give us the weather for Mineralnye Vody." | ~3500 |
| 05:17:07 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks about the condition on board. | |
| 05:17:07 | Crew | Crew replies: "Condition is okay, proceeding to Mineralnye Vody." | |
| 05:18:58 | System | EICAS "CABIN ALT HIGH" warning. This warning repeats 8 times in the following flight. | Climbing |
| 05:19:04 | Crew | Crew: "I can't maintain 150, we have increased pressure in the cabin." | Climbing |
| 05:20:20 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower: Turn left, heading 360. | Climbing |
| 05:20:24 | Crew | Crew: "Left three six zero and I, у меня, the plane is losing control." | Climbing |
| 05:20:48 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Provides weather for Mineralnye vody | |
| 05:22:59 | Crew | Crew: "We have hydraulic failure." | Climbing |
| 05:23:03 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower ask is it possible to keep heading | |
| 05:23:11 | Crew | Crew: "We can not perform, give us a specific heading, we will proceed to Makhachkala." | Climbing |
| 05:23:34 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower provide weather information for Machachkala | |
| 05:24:17 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks if a distress situation has been declared. | |
| 05:24:24 | Crew | Crew: "Didn't understand?" | |
| 05:24:37 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower asks about condition on board. | |
| 05:24:41 | Crew | Crew replies: "Condition is okay." | |
| 05:25:45 | Grozny Tower | Grozny Tower reports not observing the aircraft on radar, requests altitude. | |
| 05:26:58 | Grozny Tower | Crew Instruct to contact Rostov Control 134,1 | Climbing |
| 05:28:01 | Crew | Crew reports proceeding to Baku at the current altitude, requests vectoring. | |
| 05:28:05 | Rostov Control | Rostov Control confirms, asks to confirm flight level 090. | |
| 05:28:59 | Rostov Control | Rostov Control requests current heading. | |
| 05:29:24 | Crew | Crew responds with heading 140. | |
| 05:30:47 | Rostov C. | Rostov Control confirms maintaining FL090. | ~9000 |
| 05:34:04 | Rostov C. | Rostov Control suggests Makhachkala as an alternate, 160 km southeast. | ~9000 |
| 05:34:16 | Crew | Crew requests weather information for Baku. | |
| 05:34:35 | Rostov Control | Rostov Control provides weather for Baku. | |
| 05:34:57 | Crew | Crew request weather for Machackala | |
| 05:35:35 | Rostov C. | Rostov Control provides weather for Makhachkala. | ~9000 |
| 05:36:01 | Crew | Crew: "No, following Baku." | ~9000 |
| 05:37:24 | Rostov C. | requests fuel remaining and which engines were hit by birds. | ~9000 |
| 05:39:01 | Crew | "Fuel on board 3830, engines are working, the control system for ailerons and elevator has failed." | ~9000 |
| 05:39:33 | Crew | "I'm sorry, I can't right now. How is the weather in Aktau?" | ~9000 |
| 05:41:30 | Rostov C. | Rostov Control provides weather for Aktau. | ~9000 |
| 05:42:40 | Crew | "Then Rostov, then we are proceeding to Aktau." | ~9000 |
| 05:45:33 | Rostov C. | Rostov Control asks what assistance will be required on arrival. | ~9000 |
| 05:45:49 | Crew | "Firefighters, evacuation, uh, doctor." | ~9000 |
| 05:51:10 | Rostov Control | Rostov control ask for number of passengers and dangerous load | |
| 05:51:18 | Crew | Crew: "Sixty-two passengers, no dangerous goods." | |
| 05:52:39 | Crew | "We have a situation, oxygen is running out... an oxygen cylinder exploded...some passengers are losing consciousness, allow lower altitude." | Descending from 9000 |
| 05:52:58 | Rostov Control | Rostov Control provides information about oxygen and asks for altitude. | |
| 06:02:47 | Crew | "Mayday, mayday, mayday Azerbaijan eight two four three, Aktau tower, good day, the controls have failed, we are controlling with the throttles, requesting emergency landing on runway eleven." | Descending |
| 06:03:06 | Aktau Tower | Acknowledges, confirms information, instructs to continue descent to 1800 feet, QNH 1025, asks for preferred approach. | Descending |
| 06:03:25 | Crew | "Descending to 1800 feet, will approach visually, controlling with throttles." | Descending |
| 06:03.39 | Aktau Tower | Aktau Tower asks to provide vectoring. | |
| 06:03:44 | Crew | Crew confirms. | |
| 06:19:13 | System | TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP (GPWS) | Descending |
| 06:22:20 | System | Crew extends flaps to position 1. | Descending |
| 06:22:24 | System | Crew extends landing gear. | Descending |
| 06:22:40 | System | Crew extends flaps to position 2. | Descending |
| 06:23:30 | System | Crew extends flaps to position 3. | Descending |
| 06:24:52 | System | TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP (GPWS) | Descending |
| 06:25:25 | System | TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP (GPWS) | Descending |
| 06:27:58 | System | Impact with terrain. Aircraft configuration: Flaps 3, gear down, stabilizer 1.76 UP. Right bank 35 degrees, pitch -5.8 degrees. | 0 |
| N/A | ДВЗ | "В 15 минут Грозный «Ковёр» радиусом 50" (Grozny "Ковёр" in 15 minutes, radius 50) | N/A |
The mention of "Ковёр" – a code word for closing airspace due to air defense activity – is chilling. It suggests that Russian forces were on high alert for enemy drones or missiles. And it places flight J2-8243 in the worst possible place, at the worst possible time.
The Evidence: A Missile's Deadly Signature?
The official investigation is ongoing, and definitive conclusions may take months, or even years. But the preliminary report, released by the Kazakhstan Ministry of Transport, contains a wealth of information – and some chilling clues.
The most striking evidence is the damage to the aircraft *before* the crash. The report documents multiple instances of "external objects" penetrating the hydraulic lines and the stabilizer control wiring. This damage, crucially, occurred *before* the final impact. The report provides several images showing this damage:
It's worth noting that the Pantsir system is designed to engage a variety of targets, including aircraft, and is known to be deployed in the region. While the fragments don't *perfectly* match the classic "zig-zag" pattern of connected rods often seen with Pantsir missile impacts, it's possible that the rods fragmented more completely in this case, or that the recovered fragments are primarily from the warhead's fragmentation layer and airplane structure. The irregular shapes and the metallic composition are broadly consistent with *some* types of missile warheads, but a definitive identification requires expert metallurgical analysis.
Also there are multiple piercing all around the tail of the aircraft
And then there's the "Ковёр" plan. The report includes a transcript of communications between air traffic controllers, mentioning the activation of this plan around Grozny. As aviation experts have confirmed, "Ковёр" is a Russian term for closing airspace due to *air defense activity*. This is a bombshell. It means that Russian forces in the area were likely on high alert for enemy aircraft – and that a friendly fire incident is a very real possibility. It also hints at the constant jamming of GPS in the area, which likely contributed to the initial navigation problems.
The Nature of a Potential Missile Strike: Beyond a Shoulder-Launched Weapon
If, as the evidence strongly suggests, Flight J2-8243 was brought down by an air defense missile, it's crucial to understand the type of weapon likely involved. The preliminary report, combined with what we know about air defense systems and the circumstances of the crash, makes it highly improbable that a simple, shoulder-launched missile, often referred to as a MANPADS (Man-Portable Air Defense System), was responsible.
The most significant limitation of typical MANPADS, like the US Stinger or the Russian Igla, is their reliance on *infrared (IR) guidance*. These missiles are designed to home in on the heat signature (infrared radiation) emitted by an aircraft's engines. Crucially, clouds significantly attenuate and scatter infrared radiation. This means that if an aircraft is *within* or *above* a cloud layer, the IR seeker of a MANPADS will likely be unable to acquire and maintain a lock on the target. The missile would essentially be "blind," unable to track the aircraft through the obscuring clouds.
The preliminary report indicates that Flight J2-8243 was either in or above the cloud layer during its approaches to Grozny, and the weather reports confirm low cloud ceilings. The FDR also indicates a height of approximately 3500ft when the hidraulic systems were damaged. This, combined with the report of a "Ковёр" plan activation (indicating the presence of *integrated* air defense systems), points strongly towards a radar-guided, surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, rather than a MANPADS. Systems such as the S-300, Buk, Tor, or Pantsir use radar to track targets, allowing them to engage aircraft at much higher altitudes and through cloud cover. These systems are also vehicle-mounted or fixed-site installations, operated by trained military personnel, and possess significantly greater range and warhead size than any MANPADS.
Therefore, if a missile was responsible, it almost certainly originated from a sophisticated, radar-guided air defense system, operated by trained military personnel, rather than a lone individual or small group with a shoulder-launched weapon. This distinction is crucial, as it points to a potential failure within a structured military command and control system, rather than a random act of terrorism or an isolated incident.
Pilot Error and ATC Failures:
While the primary evidence points towards an external force as the initiating cause, it's important to acknowledge potential contributing factors related to pilot actions and ATC performance.
The pilots, under extreme pressure and after two failed landing attempts, likely descended below the *minimum descent altitude (MDA)* during one or both of the approaches to Grozny's airport. The MDA is a critical safety parameter on non-precision approaches (like the NDB approach they were attempting). It represents the lowest altitude a pilot can descend to without having visual contact with the runway environment. Descending below the MDA without seeing the runway is a serious violation of regulations, significantly increasing the risk of a collision with terrain. The air traffic controller's report of the plane's altitude at a mere 330 meters (around 1000 feet), combined with multiple GPWS warnings, strongly suggests this occurred. It's a testament to their skill that, even after the catastrophic damage, they managed to fly the crippled aircraft as far as they did, ultimately saving some lives.
On the ATC side, the communications from Grozny Tower were, at times, problematic. There were repetitions, unclear instructions, and an initial clearance for an RNAV approach *after* the pilots had reported losing both GPS systems (an RNAV approach *requires* GPS). This added to the crew's workload and stress during an already critical situation. The fact that Grozny Tower reported not seeing the aircraft on radar at one point also raises questions about their situational awareness.
The Human Cost:
The crash of Flight J2-8243 was a devastating tragedy. Of the 67 people on board, 38 perished – 3 crew members and 35 passengers. The survivors face a long road to recovery, both physical and emotional.
| Group | Fatalities | Serious Injuries | Minor/No Injuries |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crew | 3 | 1 | 1/0 |
| Passengers | 35 | 15 | 6/6 |
| Other (Ground) | 0 | 0 | 0/0 |
The Geopolitical Shadow:
This tragedy cannot be separated from its geopolitical context. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, and the long-simmering conflict in the Caucasus, have created a dangerous environment where the risk of miscalculation and accidental escalation is ever-present. The downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014 serves as a stark reminder of the dangers.
This blog post is based on the publicly available preliminary report of the accident involving Flight J2-8243, released by the Kazakhstan Ministry of Transport, as well as open-source information about aircraft systems and air defense missiles. This post presents a plausible hypothesis based on the available evidence, but it is not a definitive conclusion about the cause of the accident. The official investigation is still ongoing, and further information may come to light that alters the understanding of the events. This post should not be considered a substitute for the official accident report.
The author is not an aviation expert. This article was mainly written to explore the capabilities of the new Gemini 1.5 Pro model released by Google. And yes, the model is good enough to read and analyze FDR data from low-resolution pictures in a poor-quality PDF, analyze fragments from low-quality pictures and compare them to known AD missile fragments, and provide valuable assistance in constructing a coherent narrative from complex and incomplete information.
No comments:
Post a Comment