A few months after this photo was added, I received the following Email from Domodedovo Airlines. I have to say that I am most impressed with the amount of support they put behind such a small issue - just a photo!!!...
JSC "Domodedovo airlines" express you the sincere respect.
We keep up the information on you web-site with interest and we are very glad, that the aircrafts of "Domodedovo Airlines" are present in Category "Passenger Aircrafts". Every year more then 600 thousands passengers make flights on the boards of our aircrafts at average extent of a route more 5 000 kilometers.
Aircrafts of our company flights in very difficult climate conditions. The geography of our flights is widest and include all climate zones from tropic on the south to permafrost on the north.
Difficult meteorological conditions of the airports dictate high requirements to the crews of aircrafts. We can ascertain with pride, that our pilots and cabin attendants are one of best in Russia.
Recently at your site was published the photo of a taking off airplane IL-96-300 at the airport Phuket at the 19th January 2003 with the frightening comments. We attentively considered this situation and conducted investigation of circumstances of take-off of an airplane of our Company.
In view of meteorological conditions and available take-off distance at the airport Phuket we checked up calculations of the ascent data for an airplane.
>From calculations follows:
-Allowed weight for take-off = 237 tons;
-Actual take-off weight = 232 tons;
-Decision speed = 250 kms/h V1 = 150 knots (IAS);
-Take-off safety speed at the H=35 feet V2= 298kms/h=161 knots (IAS);
-Actual take-off speed at the H=35 feet V2=321 kms/h=173 knots (IAS);
-Actual gradient of climb - 7%.
Thus, the calculations show, that at fulfillments of the specified take-off, even in default of one of engines in the most responsible moment - at the moment of separation of the airplane from ground - the threat to safety of flight did not exist.
The same time, meaning, that the airplane had the large takeoff weight and flew by duration more than 10 hours, looks quite proved, that the crew had to use for take-off the most part of an ascent band, in full conformity with computational parameters and holding all norms of safety.
For an airline to simply see a photo and delve into all this in response is something I find very reassuring.
Ben From Switzerland, joined Aug 1999, 1391 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2179 times:
Yes, some people would be surprised at what they find if they dig deeper into the Russian aviation world.
Not many people do, though. Im very impressed that you did....
These airlines are 100% professional organisations and they have my highest respect. I have had the chance to see intimately some of the 'babyflots' day-to-day operations, from ATC to crew training and aircraft maintenance, and I have so much respect for them.
Russian pilots are not cowboys. They have wives and children too, remember.
SegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2131 times:
you can always drop the flaps a notch and pray it provides enough lift (and doesn't kill your speed)....
I've been on a Brasilia, fully loaded RT model, on a 4300' runway.. the pilots opted to drop the flaps after V1 speed.. was kinda wierd at first, seeing no flaps on takeoff roll, then all the sudden, watch them drop and we nose-uped off the ground :P Btw, the pilots said it's an abnormal procedure and they *didn't* forget to use the flaps..
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4495 posts, RR: 21
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
Well, there's really no "point of no return" on the runway clearly visible to the pilot where he must have X amount of runway left etc....so I'm sure the pilot didn't take an unnecessary risk. All V1 is is a takeoff decision speed. Runway length discretion is left to the pilot. Sometimes airplanes don't perform by the numbers, and sometimes atmospheric conditions aren't by the numbers either.
Still, geeze louise! It makes you wonder if that doesn't happen more often.