In society

Disaster

February 7, 2013 Julia Latynina

On February 1, 2013, the Federal Air Transport Agency reported that it is suspended certification from the Red Wings Loader, whose Tu-204 crashed in Vnukovo on December 29 last year. At the same time, the Federal Air Transport Agency specially emphasized that this is not connected with the crash.

What is connected with?

Let me remind you that Red Wings belongs to Alexander Lebedev, who is randed for a long time and persistently for financing Novaya Gazeta and generally for opposition. Lebedev is one of the few Russian businessmen who dare to be an oppositionist.

I must admit when I heard about the disaster on December 29, I thought, well, everything, the end of Lebedev. Because we are not 90, but 99% of disasters occurs due to the fault of the pilots, and this occasion is too good so as not to gobble the company.

However, as the investigation, an amazing thing became clear: the Tu-204 disaster was not only connected with the pilot error, but was not related to technical malfunction. It was a disaster, which in world practice is the worst nightmare of aircraft manufacturers - it was caused by constructive disadvantages of the aircraft. The essence of the matter was that with a certain (and not so rare) coincidence, namely: the aircraft “does not understand” that he sat down with a strong side wind and low loading of the aircraft. He does not squeeze the ends and the reverse does not turn on. The sixty -three -tone colossus rushes in the strip at a speed of two hundred and fifty km/h, and she has nothing to slow down.

These kinds of stories in the West occupy the first lanes of newspapers, lead to multi -billion dollar lawsuits and bankruptcy of aircraft manufacturers, which in this case, ultimately, is the United Aircraft Corporation and Rostechnology.

As soon as it became clear that it would have to be called on the carpet not Lebedev, but Chemezov, everything instantly calmed down. Gosdura, preoccupied with the propaganda of homosexuality and other germaning things, did not even think about the reason for the plane crash, which in any normal country would be the news of the number one. The news disappeared from the media, as Damage Control in aviation forums appeared amazing idiocy of “experts”, which came down to the fact that, yes, this is a constructive flaw of the aircraft, but why did the pilots see that the reverse did not fly up?

Yeah. Have you seen a lot of liners who, without slowing down, fly in a strip and take off? This, apparently, is the usual maneuver in civil aviation.

So, my hypothesis boils down to the fact that when Bastrykin and K. saw the frames of disaster, they rubbed their hands and thought the same as Latynina: for sure this is a human factor, now the Federal Air Transport Agency will slam the Red Wings, we just have to wait. When it turned out that there was nothing to catch here, the SK announced that he intended to understand the disaster. And the next day, the Federal Air Transport Agency announced that she would suspend a license.

I have only one question: the license will be withdrawn. And the Tu-204? We will fly on an airplane that does not always know what has sat down?

Simultaneously with the news of the suspension of the Red Wings license, the news came about another technical disaster: it ended the launch of the Zenit-3SL launch vehicle, which started with the IntelSAT communication satellite under the SEA Launch program.

Let me remind you the story of Sea Launch.

When a powerful market for commercial space starts began to form in the early 90s, the Americans in general and the Boeing in particular were very worried that the lion's part of this market captured Aerospacial with their “Arian”.

Therefore, they simply seized on a brilliant, at first glance, commercial opportunity: to launch a former Soviet military missile from a Norwegian platform converted to the starts directly from the equator (which promised the accuracy of launch, fuel saving, etc.). He led everyone Boeing. He had 40%, Russia had 25%, the rest had the rest with their platform and Ukraine.

Boeing had to overcome an uncountable number of difficulties. To begin with, the native US accused him of transferring military secrets to the Russians; Then the US Customs rolled a hysteria for the import of a military ballistic missile into the US territory (where the final assembly was held).

Boeing overcame everything. And then there was a story that occurs from time to time with the most beautiful and daring projects: Sea Launch was financially unsuccessful. The project entered non-pay debts, in 2007 they exploded at the start of the rocket, customers fled, and in 2009, Sea Launch filed for bankruptcy.

Happens. The grimaces of capitalism. The project was beautiful and daring, in the soul of the best novels Arthur Clark, but even the Boeing did not pull it out, the corporation’s debts weighed either $ 1 or $ 1 to $ 100 to 500 million.

And then an amazing story happened: RSC Energia established the offshore daughter Energia Overseas Limited and bought 95% Sea Launch in 2010. The amount of the transaction is unknown. It is only known that in 2008, Sberbank issued “Energia” a loan of 2.9 billion rubles, then-by 5.8 billion, and then guarantees for 12.4 billion rubles. And in total, the debts of “Energy” have grown from 8 to 30 billion rubles from 2007, and it is obvious that a large share of these 22 billion is just Sea Launch. With this money, we reduced the losses of Boeing.

Now I have a question: “Boeing”, of course, can be satisfied - the Russian treasury covered his losses. And Russia? Why did we buy a bankrupt enterprise for our money?

This is a commercial project. A project where you need to spin in a competitive market. Boeing lost this project. What are the chances to cope with this project from Russian officials and defensemen who are accustomed to spending and stealing, and not to earn and compete?

Who gave the go -ahead for this purchase? Obviously, Putin personally. Question: What was wiped to him? Why was the deal not discussed in parliament? Why is its price unknown to us? After all, these are not defense secrets of state importance. These are just grandmas that the company registered abroad receives for commercial starts.

The SEA Launch necessary for the payback of the number of starts under the wise leadership of “energy” did not gain, and the 2013 disaster will clearly become even more final for him than the disaster in 2007. After all, the market of commercial starts is not Russian launches for you when rockets fly away from time to time, and the money continues to be allocated.

And I have a simple question: when the parliament is gathering to discuss non -burning the question of promoting homosexuality, but at least these two technical issues: how did it happen that in Russia there is a structurally unfinished plane in Russia? At whose approval, for what kind of money and why the clumsy state, all in debt, Energia corporation, tearing other projects (instead of five Russian MCS modules, for example, only two), I bought a bankrupt commercial project that could not stretch the Boeing?