Yuri Sytnik, Honored Pilot of the Russian Federation, member of the Commission under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of General Aviation, experience of flying Tu-154 - more than 20 years.

On any aircraft, flaps are used in order to reduce the takeoff run and the airplane's roll during takeoff and landing. The plane takes off at a speed of 700-900 km / h, and lands at a speed of 280-220 km / h, depending on the type of vessel. Tu-154 lands at a speed of 260 km / h, and takes off at a speed of 280 km / h. There is a command "Rubezh", "Rise", there is a separation of the aircraft. In order for the plane to take off at such speeds, you need to change the wing. For this purpose, there are slats and flaps. That is, they move out of the wing, increase its area, change the curvature, thereby increasing the lift at a lower speed. And with horizontal flight, such a range is not needed, you need to transfer passengers faster, the plane accelerates to a speed of 800-900 km / h, the flaps are already removed. Everything is compactly pressed into the wing, and it becomes faster. The plane continues its flight at this speed. Then, when the plane descends and approaches the airfield area, the flaps are extended again, then the landing gear. On the Tu-154, the flaps are extended at 45 degrees.

Before takeoff, the flaps are extended on the runway. The aircraft is taxiing, flaps extended for take-off and set to 28 degrees. Then the aircraft increases the engine's work, starts the takeoff run, takes off from the ground, the landing gear is retracted, when the speed reaches 340 km / h and the height is not less than 120 meters, the flaps are retracted. At what stage of the case with this TU-154 are we talking about flaps? Unclear.

And those who write that the flaps were released out of alignment - they write nonsense. If the flaps are mismatched, there is synchronization, when the faulty flap stops, and the good one "works under it". I have other information, for example, information that the speed was 300 km / h, and this is not about the flaps, but about the strut (editor's note - the main power element of the aircraft landing gear). Something happened to the counter. Why did she stay on the ground and not in the sea? So he touched the ground after taking off from the strip? It is not clear. But I know that the rack was found on the shore. How did she end up there? She's heavy! It weighs more than a ton. How could she be thrown away? Is it a storm?

It is also unclear what height it was. If this height was 15-20 meters, then it is clear what it is. And if the height was 200 meters, this is a completely different option. We do not yet know the true height, nothing can be asserted. If the height is 15-20 meters, then the crew made a mistake, and instead of retracting the landing gear, they retracted the flaps at low speed, at a speed of 300 km / h. In this case, the commander lifts his nose so as not to touch the water, brings the plane to the second mode and falls into the water. And if, after a height of 120 meters, the flaps began to retract asynchronously, he was simply turned over, and he was already in the water. But there is a system that controls this, it cannot be. Then everything would be different, the whole dynamics of the flight would be different, it would not have fallen, but gained its height. And here he is already in one and a half kilometers from the coast. I don't think the flaps have anything to do with it. I think the crew did the wrong thing. Who sat in the right seat - the co-pilot or the inspector? This is also a question.

Published on 12/28/16 2:16 PM

According to experts, there have been cases when, instead of the "flaps-15" mode, the switch was accidentally put in the wrong position.

As I wrote earlier, the preliminary results of decoding the flight recorders of the Tu-154 plane crashed near Sochi by the Russian Ministry of Defense showed that the development of an emergency situation on board an airliner. Moskovsky Komsomolets journalists asked experts to comment on what happened on board the airliner.

According to one expert, if an inconsistent flap extension occurs, the jammed flap remains in the position it was stuck in.

"That is intkbbee the system cuts off all electric motors that are used to extend and retract mechanization (flaps). At the same time, a serviceable flap, this tracking system releases, or retracts, exactly to the same angle at which the jammed flap remained. In connection with this, some have a question: is it possible that the crashed "Tu" was so old that it was not equipped with such a system? No. I flew this plane and I can say that only the very first Tu-154 did not have it. Later, planes with the designation Tu-154A went, then "A-1", "A-2", then - Tu-154 B, etc. Latest modification with the designation "M". And they all had this system. So why is one of the crew members scolding the flaps in his last words? I think he just realized at that moment that he had made a mistake, "- said the specialist.

The expert notes that in this aircraft, the retraction and flap extension switch is located above the windshield of the cockpit. If the ship's commander is piloting, then the co-pilot releases the mechanization, and if the co-pilot is piloting, then the commander controls the switch.

“The switch has such slots where the switch is locked in three different positions: flaps-15, flaps-28 and flaps-45. And when the commander is taxiing on takeoff, he gives the command: flaps-28” The co-pilot puts them in take-off position. The plane (this, however, depends on the flight weight) takes off from the ground at a speed of 270-290 km per hour. Then, when he needs to cross an altitude of 120 m and go higher, he accelerates to a speed not less than 330 km per hour and then a command is given to clean up the mechanization. That is, from the "flaps-28" position, their switch is set to the "flaps-15" position. air - when instead of "flaps-15" the switch was accidentally, by mistake, put in position "0." This, of course, is an assumption, but just imagine: from "28" the flaps are immediately retracted to "0." "clean wing", that is, when the mechanization has already been completely removed, is not ensured. Amoleth reaches a critical angle of attack, at which a stall into a tailspin is possible. If something like that happened, then it can definitely be regarded as a mistake by the crew, "he stressed.

Another expert described the possible situation on board the crashed Tu-154 in a slightly different way.

"If the flaps began to retract out of sync, then the point is not that there is not enough lift. It is enough. It's just that the difference in lift forces on the left and right wing leads to the intensive development of the roll angle. If you do not immediately react to this, then nothing can be done further, since the speed increases and accordingly the difference in lifting forces on the half-wings grows and even the rudder travel is no longer enough to compensate.That is why mechanisms are installed on all aircraft that limit the harvesting of mechanization, if there is a mismatch. According to the transcript of the negotiations, which appeared in the media, everything was probably even worse there: the pilots removed the flaps instead of the landing gear ... And they were killed. In this case, there are no options at all ... ", - he said.

The flaps of the aircraft could have caused the crash of the Tu-154 on December 25 near Sochi. This version was put forward by experts after decrypting the data of one of the black boxes.

Airplane flaps: why, photo, why are they needed during takeoff and landing

Flaps could have been the cause of the Tu-154 crash in Sochi. According to a preliminary analysis of the data obtained from one of the black boxes, the development of an abnormal situation on board could begin with the flaps not retracted for some reason.

Trying to compensate for the resulting diving moment, the pilots aggravated the situation to a critical one, excessively lifting the nose of the aircraft.

According to Life, citing a source close to the investigation, the experts were able to decipher the recording from the speech flight recorder without any problems. According to him, the conversation is interrupted by the fact that one of the pilots exclaims: "Flaps, with ... ah!" Then a cry sounds: "Commander, we are falling!".

- Speed ​​300 ... (Inaudible)
- (inaudible)
- Took the racks, commander.
- (inaudible)
- Wow, e-mine!
(A sharp beep sounds)
- Flaps, s ... ah, what the fuck nya!
- Altimeter!
- We ... (inaudible)
(The signal sounds about a dangerous approach to the ground)
- (inaudible)
- Commander, we are falling!

What are the flaps of the plane for, photo

Flaps are called wing high-lift devices. When retracted, they are a continuation of the wing surface. In the released state, they move away from it with the formation of cracks. Flaps are needed to improve the wing bearing capacity during climb or takeoff / landing. They are also needed when flying at low altitudes.

When the flaps are extended, the curvature of the profile increases, which allows aircraft to fly without stalling at low speeds. The Tu-154M uses double-slotted flaps, and the Tu-154B uses three-slotted flaps. Flaps can be extended both automatically and by the command of the pilots from the cockpit.

According to preliminary data, the flaps on board worked mismatchedly, as a result of their failure to exit, the lift was lost, the speed was not sufficient to climb, and the plane crashed.

Official data on the decryption of the recordings has not yet been published.

Flaps photo

Recall that the Russian Defense Ministry's Tu-154 on December 25 at 01:38 Moscow time took off from the Chkalovsky airfield in the Moscow region and was heading to the Khmeimim airbase in Syrian Latakia.

In Sochi, the aircraft stopped for refueling, which was not known in advance. At 05:27 Moscow time, the plane disappeared from radar a few minutes after taking off from Adler airport. Later it became known that the liner fell in the Black Sea near the Sochi coast.

There were 92 people on board, all of whom died.

Among the victims of the disaster are 64 employees of the Alexandrov Song and Dance Ensemble and its leader Valery Khalilov, three film crews, the doctor Elizaveta Glinka, who was bringing medicines to Syria, as well as the director of the culture department of the Ministry of Defense Anton Gubankov and crew members.

The on-board equipment of the Tu-154 aircraft of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation worked on an abnormal basis, the Minister of Transport of Russia Maxim Sokolov said. According to the investigation, the last flight of the aircraft lasted about 70 seconds, during which time the airliner rose to an altitude of 250 meters at a speed of 360-370 kilometers per hour.According to the minister, the first data from the examinations may appear in January, and the final conclusions about the causes of the disaster will be made after the black boxes are deciphered.According to a preliminary analysis of the data, the problem with the flaps was the cause of the development of the abnormal situation on board.

The main versions of the crash for The Insider were commented on by an independent aviation expert, ex-designer of the Sukhoi Design Bureau Vadim Lukashevich.

Version 1: Failure of flaps or speed detectors

Technically, the flap version is flawless, unfortunately, such problemsnot very often, but there are. VIn this case, most likely, the flaps were not retracted, this is a very unpleasant situation, but not a disaster. And that is why, probably, the pilots did not perceive what was happening as something extraordinary, and did not sound the alarm.

Before takeoff, the flaps on the right and left wings are extended, they serve to increase the lift of the wing at low speed. After taking off the aircraft, the landing gear is first retracted, and then, after 15-20 seconds, the wing mechanization, including the flaps, is retracted. The speed increases, and as the speed increases, the lift also increases, and the flaps create both drag and dive moment.

That is, as the speed increases, if the flaps are not removed, the aircraft tries to lower the nose. The following happens: on takeoff, the plane picks up speed, the pilots begin to retract the flaps, but for some reason they do not retract. There is a synchronization of cleaning - this is very important, because they must either be removed or released into some position, but always on the right and left wings, otherwise one wing will have more lift than the other, and the plane will simply capsize.

Suppose there is a problem, the flaps are not retracted, and this is a completely solvable situation, because in this position you can lock, not increase your speed, and try to turn around, approach and sit down. The aircraft also lands with the flaps extended, while they are extended even more to transition to the landing position. If the pilots made the decision to land right away, the flaps could not have been retracted.

Obviously, the situation was developing very quickly, the crew did not have a reserve either in speed or in height, and, since the plane began to lower its nose as the speed increased, the pilots could take the control wheel, thereby increasing the angle of attack, and go to its supercritical angle and stall. The plane fell down, sagged backwards and hit the side of the water.

The fact is that the lift of the wing occurs at very small angles of attack - this is the angle between the longitudinal axis of the wing section and the oncoming air flow. The angle is small, a few degrees. Moreover, as this angle increases, the lift force first grows almost linearly, and after some value, called the critical angle of attack, it practically disappears, dropping to zero. That is, the air flow ceases to flow around the wing as intended, the flow stalls and that's it, the plane crashes. They could just jump out to this critical angle of attack. For planes of such a plan, this is approximately 11, 12, 13 degrees - this should be looked at specifically from the documentation.

The cockpit has a signaling device that warns the pilot about approaching a critical angle of attack and an audible alarm, the aircraft in this situation begins to behave very badly. Shaking begins due to the stalling of the flow from the wing, and the plane warns that it will be bad further. Perhaps the situation was developing quickly, and the pilots instinctively automatically pulled the control wheel towards themselves so that the nose would not drop.

There is another option - ground speed is also determined by the pressure of the oncoming air, and if this system was faulty or malfunctioned, then the pilots could, flying on the instruments, inadequately perceive the current speed of the aircraft.

The pilots could rest assured that the aircraft's speed was greater than it was, and simply raised their nose, believing that it was enough.

They could rest assured that the aircraft's speed was greater than it was, and simply raised their nose, believing that it was enough. But in fact, the speed is small, so this flow arises, and they sink and hit the surface of the water. Thus, either the pilots were simply correcting the situation, or they were sure that they had a speed margin.

Flap problems occur on this type of aircraft and in aviation in general. The more correctly the aircraft is maintained, the less likely such cases are. TOUnfortunately, if this version is correct, then all these people died due to unfortunate coincidence of circumstances.

That is, at first a technical problem arose, and the wrong actions of the pilots were superimposed on it. In aircraft accidents, different factors are superimposed on one another, and each of them individually does not lead to a disaster. It should not be forgotten here that this was the second night flight for the pilots: they took off from Chkalovsk, spent two and a half hours in the air, then landed at Adler airport - not the easiest airport, refueled there and flew again.

It is necessary to understand whether the instruments worked correctly or whether it was purely a mistake of the pilots. It is necessary to check the readings from the parametric recorder, which recorded several dozen flight parameters - how the systems worked and so on. MIt so happened that there was not enough engine thrust, this is another factor that could be superimposed. At least the plane took off normally, and there was no information about engine failure. The flap problem, that is, a technical problem, was the trigger for further developments.

Version 2: Crew members mistakenly removed the flaps, not the landing gear:

Until now, we talked about one of the possible scenarios - this was a technical reason associated with the flaps: they remained in their takeoff position, when the aircraft accelerated, a diving moment began to appear, the pilots pulled the control wheel towards themselves, reached a critical angle of attack, the aircraft sank and fell.

But the fact is that all our reasoning is based on the decoding of the speech recorder published by the Life channel (and the authenticity of which is not obvious), in the recording the pilots allegedly shouted: "flaps!" was: "Commander, we are falling."

This shout "flaps!" (if it ever took place) can be interpreted differently: the pilots made a gross mistake, and together the landing gear removed the flaps.

What usually happens: when the plane rolls out, it starts to take off on the runway - the flaps are extended to the takeoff position. Then the brakes are released, the engines are turned on at maximum thrust, the plane takes off, and upon reaching a certain speed, the commander decides to take off and takes the helm.

First, the front pillar comes off, then the main pillars, and the plane takes off from the runway. It takes off, and literally immediately, after 3-5 seconds, the landing gear is retracted. The landing gear must be retracted somewhere after the aircraft reaches an altitude of 100-120 meters. And then it flies with a climb, and after 30 seconds after taking off from the strip at an altitude of several hundred meters, the flaps begin to interfere and their cleaning begins.

The sequence of the crew's actions during takeoff is as follows: first, immediately after taking off from the runway, the landing gear is retracted, and then, after some time, 20-40 seconds, the wing mechanization begins to retract and the flaps are retracted.

The flaps that hang behind the wing are removed, and at the same time on the Tu-154 the slats are a small surface on the leading edge. At the same time, the stabilizer, a horizontal small winglet in the very tail at the top of the keel, changes from the takeoff and landing position to the normal position. Another important point: the landing gear retracts quickly enough, in 3-5 seconds, the hydraulic drives, cylinders work, and the wing mechanization, including flaps, retracts for a longer time, about 15-20 seconds.

And the problem is that in the cockpit the landing gear retraction and flap retraction knobs are close to each other: landing gear retraction - this knob is on the upper panel above the right pilot, and the retraction or flap extension knob is also on the upper panel, but between the pilots. that is, on the center console between them. Thus, the co-pilot is responsible for the landing gear, and both pilots can reach the flap lever, but with different hands.

Despite the fact that the levers are close, they have different shapes, and in order to retract the landing gear or flaps, you need to move these levers in different ways.

Despite the fact that the levers are close, they have different shapes, and in order to retract the landing gear or flaps, you need to move these levers in different ways. However, they are close to each other and novice pilots sometimes get it wrong. Experienced pilots, of course, do not make such mistakes, but, as they say, there is a hole in the old woman. This is a gross mistake, but we cannot rule out it.

If we assume that the crew, the co-pilot, or one of them, by mistake, removed the flaps instead of the landing gear, then theoretically the picture is similar to what happened next: the plane accelerates, takes off from the runway, takes 5 seconds of flight, and the landing gear needs to be removed. At this moment, the crew retracts the flaps instead of the landing gear.They are not removed immediately, so the crew cannot immediately understand that something is going wrong. It takes 15 seconds, maybe even 20 - something is buzzing, and there is an illusion that the flaps are slowly retracting. Having given the command to retract the flaps, thinking that they are retracting the landing gear, the crew begins to understand after 15 seconds that there is a problem. They cannot gain altitude because they lack lift. Also, the unretracted landing gear hangs down and slows down the aircraft, that is, the lift of the wing has dropped, and the resistance has not disappeared. And then the plane starts to sink.

We proceed from the fact that they had only two minutes from receiving clearance to take off. 3-4 seconds pass, they release the plane from the brakes, run along the strip for 30 seconds, another 5 seconds come off, then they begin to retract the flaps instead of the landing gear, this happens for another 15 seconds.

They begin to understand what is happening with them, literally in a minute from the moment when they were allowed to take off, that is, after half of these two minutes, which they were given to the end.Moreover, this is night, there is no visual contact with the horizon, they fly according to instruments, according to sensations. And when they understand that there is a problem, that the plane is not gaining altitude, they spend some more time understanding the situation. And so they understand thatinstead of the landing gear, the flaps were removed, and the phrase sounds: "Damn, flaps!" Its meaning is not thatthey are not removed, but the fact that they simply do not exist. Vat this point, obviously, they start trying them again.

The flaps are extended in the same way, in the reverse order, but the same 15 seconds, and until they are extended, the wing lift does not increase, and the plane crashes. They sag and, trying to somehow raise the lift of the wing, pull the steering wheel towards themselves, go to supercritical angles of attack, an audible alarm sounds in the cockpit, and they fall.

We are not participating in the investigation, we are not examining the wreckage, we do not know what is happening there in Sochi, but some of the information still comes to us from the media. When the day before yesterday, late in the evening, they took out the chassis from the bottom with a floating crane, it was clear that the chassis was not locked. The fact is that the position of the chassis is always locked with locks.There are retracted position locks, there are released position locks. The latter fix the landing gear in the parking lot and during taxiing so that they do not fold and the plane does not fall on its belly. And in flight, they are also fixed, because the landing gear is a heavy thing with wheels, and the plane rolls in flight, raises its tail, lowers it, dangles it, if the landing gear is not fixed inside the niche, they will sway there and beat against the walls, against the ceiling ...

The video that was shown to us on TV shows that the chassis was not locked in the retracted position - this is, firstly, and, secondly, the doors of the chassis niches were missing. This suggests that at the time of impact on the water, the landing gear was extended.

The chassis did not stand on the lock in the retracted position and there were no flaps, with a strong impact on the surface of the water, the open struts simply tears off.

There were no flaps, with a strong impact on the surface of the water, the open racks simply tears off. The video, of course, is of poor quality, the correspondents are not allowed to enter the place, but what is seen can be interpreted in this way: at the moment of hitting the water, the landing gear was released. There is also a photograph of the rise of a part of the wing with flaps, it shows that the flaps are retracted.

It turns out that the plane, 2 minutes after the start of the takeoff run, has landing gears that are not locked in the retracted position, and from the flap fragment it can be seen that they are already folded, but it should be the other way around - wAssi should be locked in the retracted position, and the flaps should not be completely retracted, but extended in whole or in part.

I emphasize that the photo is not very high quality, the video is even worse, but nevertheless. This, of course, is a gross mistake of the crew, I do not want to believe it, but the phrase: "Flaps", said by the pilots, confirms this mistake.Clarity will come when the parametric recorder is deciphered whether there was a command to retract the flaps, and, if so, in what position they were.

According to the information that appeared today, it is also clear that there is damage to the fan blades on the right engine, it is said that this is not a bird. But I think that this is damage from hitting the water, because otherwise it would be necessary to assume that the plane took off with bent fan blades from Chkalovsk. This is generally something outrageous, the plane, as we were told, was carefully examined before departure from Chkalovsk,he took off and flew for 3 hours to Sochi, and there were no problems.

I think that the damage occurred when hitting the water, which means that the plane was heeled to starboard. This suggests that either the pilots tried to somehow dodge, maneuver at the last moment, or there was a problem with the synchronization of the flaps retraction (see Version 1). If there was a roll to the starboard side, it means that on the left wing the flaps were extended more than on the right - the left wing had more lift and the aircraft was capsized on the starboard side.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

- Who is responsible for technical malfunctions in military aircraft?

- The operating organization is responsible for the maintenance of military aircraft. In this case, routine maintenance is carried out by her forces, and repairs are carried out by specialized enterprises that repair aviation equipment - the rules are the same for military aircraft and for civilians.

- The plane fell apart into more than 1500 fragments - is it possible when hitting the water?

- You have to understand that water in such a situation is no different from concrete, and the area where debris falls - 500 meters - corresponds to the situation. But we do not know what happened next: the plane hits with its tail, the tail breaks off, then the rest after the separation could somersault and fly apart.

check if he is lying or not. In general, the media first reported that the bodies were wearing life jackets, and then that they were not. They said that the landing gear was separated from the wreckage, from which it was possible to conclude that the plane fell into the sea, and the landing gear - on the shore, and today I read that a floating crane lifted the landing gear from the seabed. Therefore, when a person told reporters that he saw something at half past five in the morning, it is necessary to check this information - now it is difficult to comment on it.

- Some experts say the plane was too old.

- The assigned resource for this type of aircraft is 35 years of service and 60 thousand flight hours. He served 33 years, and flew less than 7 thousand hours. That is, from the point of view of resource consumption, wear of parts, he spent it by only 11%, and in terms of service life it was 33 years out of the 35 allowed. This suggests that the car was more on the ground than it was flying. That is, suppose you bought a car and drive once a month, and consider whether it is new or not new - if you service it normally, then rather yes. The main thing here is that the flight resource is not enough in terms of the number of flight hours, this is a completely normal plane, if you maintain it, treat it normally, it could still fly and fly.

“There were cases when, instead of flaps-15, the switch was accidentally set to the“ 0 ”position ...

After decoding the flight recorders

The preliminary results of the decoding of the flight recorders of the military Tu-154B-2 that crashed near Sochi drew an end to the debate about the possible. Already the initial data confirmed the version of the piloting error. What exactly is meant by these conclusions was explained by our experts - pilots who are closely following the progress of the investigation. This is reported by Moskovsky Komsomolets, citing sources close to the investigation.

There is no official confirmation of the data on the decryption of the "black boxes" yet - too little time has passed, so all information comes exclusively with reference to unnamed "sources" and specialists "close to the investigation."

Specifically, one source states: “The plane, according to preliminary data, crashed due to a“ stall ”with insufficient wing lift for takeoff. The flaps of the Tu-154 worked mismatched, as a result of their failure to exit, the lift was lost, and the speed was not sufficient to climb. The reason why the flaps could work abnormally has not yet been established. "

"MK" on the second day after the tragedy also wrote that the version of the abnormal operation of the flaps was voiced by a representative of the Ministry of Transport. However, one of the pilots, who had flown on the Tu-154 for more than 10 years, said that a tracking system was installed on this aircraft, which controls the release and retraction of the flaps. Our other expert, who was also a Tu-154 pilot in the past, confirmed his information, however, taking into account the new data - preliminary decoding of the "black boxes", he developed this topic more broadly.

He explained:

- If an inconsistent flap extension occurs - one comes out faster, the other slower, or is jammed for some reason - then the jammed flap remains in the position (measured in degrees) in which it was stuck. That is, the system cuts off all electric motors that are used for the release and retraction of mechanization (flaps). At the same time, a serviceable flap, this tracking system releases, or retracts, exactly to the same angle at which the jammed flap remained. In connection with this, some have a question: is it possible that the crashed "Tu" was so old that it was not equipped with such a system? No. I flew this plane and I can say that only the very first Tu-154 did not have it. Later, planes with the designations Tu-154A went, then "A-1", "A-2", then - Tu-154 B, etc. The last modification with the designation "M". And they all had this system. So why is one of the crew members scolding the flaps in their last words? I think at that moment he realized that he had made a mistake.

The retract / flap switch is located higher in this aircraft. cockpit windshield so that both the commander and the co-pilot can reach it. If the ship commander is piloting, then the co-pilot releases the mechanization, if the co-pilot is piloting, then the commander controls the switch. The switch has slots where the switch locks in three different positions: flaps-15, flaps-28, and flaps-45. And when the commander steers on takeoff, he gives the command: "flaps-28". The co-pilot puts them in take-off position. The plane (this, however, depends on the flight weight) takes off from the ground at a speed of 270-290 km per hour. Then, when he needs to cross a height of 120 m and go higher, he accelerates to a speed of at least 330 km per hour and then a command is given to clean up the mechanization. That is, from the "flaps-28" position, their switch is placed in the "flaps-15" position. Meanwhile, the plane continues to accelerate. But there were such cases - especially if there was a bump in the air - when, instead of "flaps-15", the switch was accidentally, by mistake, put in the "0" position. This, of course, is an assumption, but just imagine: from "28" the flaps are immediately retracted to "0". And at the same time, the flight speed on a "clean wing", that is, when the mechanization has already been completely removed, is not ensured. As a result, the aircraft reaches a critical angle of attack, at which a stall into a tailspin is possible. If something like this happened, then it can definitely be regarded as a crew error.

Another our expert pilot describes a possible situation in the Tu-154 cockpit as follows:

- If the flaps began to retract out of sync, then the point is not that there is not enough lift. It's enough. It's just that the difference in lift forces on the left and right wing leads to the intensive development of the roll angle. If you do not immediately react to this, then you will not be able to do anything further, since the speed increases and, accordingly, the difference in lifting forces on the half-wings grows and even the rudders are no longer enough to compensate. That is why, on all aircraft, mechanisms are installed that limit the harvesting of mechanization, if there is a mismatch. However, judging by the transcript of the negotiations, which appeared in the media, everything was probably even worse there: the pilots removed the flaps instead of the landing gear ... and were killed. In this case, there are no options at all ...