55 years ago, a passenger plane landed directly on the Neva. Why did the crash landing happen and how did you avoid casualties? "Paper

Exactly 55 years ago, on August 21, 1963, a passenger plane flying from Tallinn to Moscow made an emergency landing on the Neva. Tu-124 landed on the water near the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. This is the only case in Russian aviation when no one was killed when a passenger plane landed on the water.

How did the Tu-124 crew manage to avoid casualties, why is this case compared to the "Miracle on the Hudson" in the United States, and what is the difficulty of landing an aircraft on the water? "Paper" I spoke with the aviation journalist Andrey Menshenin.

- Is the Tu-124 landing on the Neva a unique event in the history of aviation?

In the history of Russian aviation, this is the only case of a successful splashdown (water landing - approx. "Papers") with passengers on board when no one is killed. In world history, such cases are also very few, the most famous was in 2009 in New York, when the plane landed on the water of the Hudson River. The film "Miracle on the Hudson" was made about this. The overwhelming majority of splashdown attempts fail, usually with casualties.

- Many media publications compare the history of the Tu-124 with the Miracle on the Hudson. How similar are these two cases?

Both cases fit the description "a jet plane with passengers on board near the center of a densely populated city is forced to land on a river." But, of course, the details are important. In the New York case, the reason for the engine failure was obvious: the plane had crashed into a flock of birds. The role of the crew is clear: they performed the flight according to the procedure, encountered an emergency situation, performed a set of procedures to solve it, went beyond this complex with a successful result.

In the case of the Tu-124, it is still not clear to the end what happened. They flew according to standard instructions, encountered an abnormal situation (the front landing gear jammed - approx. "Papers"), then something happened, and the crew found themselves in a plane without engines over a densely populated city.

Flooding of TU-124 on the Neva. Photo: Yuri Tuisk

- Is it even possible to land a plane with a jammed landing gear?

Landing gear failure is not an unambiguous prerequisite for disaster, although it increases its likelihood. In modern civil aviation, most forced landings with landing gear retracted end without casualties. The Tu-124 crew had many chances to complete the flight safely.

- Why did they have to land on the water?

Two factors should be noted here. If they did not coincide, the plane would have landed on Shosseinaya (the old name of Pulkovo airport - approx. "Papers"), albeit with a jammed chassis. First, the plane was producing fuel (to reduce the likelihood of a possible fire on landing - approx. "Papers") at low altitude - 500 m. The lower the altitude, the more fuel the aircraft consumes and the less time it takes to run it out.

Secondly, the plane was left without fuel. Why it ended is not completely clear. According to one version, sensors were junk in the Tu-124, showing fuel, which in fact was not there. On the other hand, the pilots simply missed the moment when they ran out of fuel, trying to fix the jammed landing gear. Another version: supposedly, in certain situations, a kind of air funnel appears in the Tu-124 fuel system, which prevents the fuel from entering the engine. This certainly sounds dubious to me. On the other hand, the Tu-124 could have some design flaws, since then was the very dawn of jet aviation. In modern aircraft, all these experiments are taken into account: the wing is divided into compartments inside and you can pump fuel from any of them as you need it.

If we exclude at least one of these factors, then the plane could fly to the airport. With a greater headroom — for example, several kilometers — he could glide without engines to Shosseinaya. Such successful cases in the history of aviation are much more than cases of successful splashdown. But 500 m is too little headroom. They only had enough to fly to the Neva.

Reconstruction of Tu-124 landing

- Why is it so difficult to land a plane on the water?

At high speeds, the elastic properties of water are close to those of concrete. But the fact is that, in contrast to the prepared landing strip of the airfield, the surface of the water is uneven. Because of the waves, the structure of the aircraft is simply destroyed. A land plane is not designed for such loads.

- How did the pilots manage to land the plane without casualties?

Each of the successful splashdowns is seen as the result of tremendous luck. In this case, there were several factors. First, the co-pilot landed (Vasily Chechenev - approx. "Papers"), who had experience in flying seaplanes. He mastered the splashdown technique. This was one of the factors of luck.

The second factor was that, apparently, there were practically no waves on the Neva. Third: when the plane was in the water, a tug passed by, which immediately pulled it ashore. Theoretically, it would be possible to get out of the plane, but in this case there would certainly be panic and people would not know what to do.

- How was the landing? The plane was falling?

No. For each aircraft there is an operation manual, where in the section on emergency situations it is written what speed and pitch (angular movement relative to the main transverse axis of inertia - approx. "Papers") must be maintained for optimum descent.

What is the real merit of the crew: when they were already in this stalemate, they managed to make a decision in a matter of seconds. These seconds are very important. The pilots were able to assess the situation and agree on what to do.

If we recall the adaptation of The Miracle on the Hudson, then the main complaint about Sally (pilot Chesley Sullenberger - approx. "Papers") was that he would have had enough time to fly to the airfield if he had started the maneuver as soon as the engines failed. But while the crew was making a decision, the seconds slipped away. In the end, they had no choice but to board the river.

Several publications about the landing of Tu-124 on the Neva mention that the plane, according to eyewitnesses, flew directly to St. Isaac's Cathedral. If he had not sat down on the Neva, what would have been the consequences?

The plane could fall to the ground, on residential buildings. It can be assumed what kind of disaster would have been, with how many victims. Suffice it to recall, for example, the disaster in Irkutsk in 1997 (the plane fell on residential buildings, 72 people died - approx. "Papers").

Crew of TU-124. On the far right is the co-pilot Vasily Chechenev, next to him is the commander of the airship Viktor Mostovoy

- After this disaster, did you continue to produce the Tu-124?

Yes, they flew many places. Now, of course, it is not being exploited.

- Are flights over Petersburg allowed now?

There are flight restriction zones in St. Petersburg, there are no-flight zones. Moreover, each of them is open for certain categories of aircraft. But if, for example, you need to fly from Pulkovo to the Peter and Paul Fortress, then the plane will fly not over the city, but over the Gulf of Finland.

In the center of the city - in the no-fly zone - only state aviation and medical aviation can fly, that is, the police, rescuers and the president. For the most part, of course, these are helicopters. Passenger airliners do not fly into the center at all. If the plane goes on a go-around, then the trajectory will fly around the entire city - along the ring road and the WHSD.