That the head of the Ministry of Transport, Maxim Sokolov, sent a letter to Medvedev and proposed dismissing the head of the Federal Air Transport Agency, Alexander Neradko. The fact that the letter was sent to RBC was confirmed by a source in the transport department. Press secretary of the head of government Natalya Timakova said that she does not have any data on this issue. Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich, who oversees the transport industry in the government, intends to replace the head of the aviation department.
Before this, in October, in relation to Neradko. The document is related to violations in the Federal Air Transport Agency in the process of monitoring VIM-Avia. The supervisory agency advised the Ministry of Transport to exercise more control over the Federal Air Transport Agency and over compliance with the requirements and certification of air carriers, and also proposed to consider the issue of the official suitability of Neradko and his deputy Oleg Klim.
Airline "VIM-Avia"
VIM-Avia airline was founded in October 2002. The carrier operated its first flights mainly in the Asian direction (Vietnam, China, Thailand). The airline's fleet consists of Boeing 777-300, 777-200, 767-300, 757-200 and Airbus 319-111, 330-200. According to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, the founders of VIM-Avia LLC are Rashid (1%) and Svetlana (99%) Mursekaevs. They are also listed as the founders of Invest Holding PJSC, which was declared bankrupt in July 2017.
Financial indicators
In 2016, the company showed a net profit of 89 million rubles. with revenue of 17.174 billion rubles. The value of assets as of December 31, 2016 was 10.481 billion rubles, and net financial debt was 7.007 billion rubles. (source: GMC Rosstat).
Transportation volumes
According to the Federal Air Transport Agency, in 2016 the VIM-Avia company transported 2.076 million passengers, showing an increase in this indicator by 30% and taking ninth place in the industry. The company itself associated this growth with the introduction of new aircraft (four Boeing 737-500, two Boeing 767-300, six Boeing 777-200 and one Airbus A330-200). From January to August 2017, the number of passengers carried continued to grow compared to the same period last year - by 31.4%. Nevertheless, the company dropped to tenth place, behind North Wind.
Airline problems
In 2016, the company had problems with passenger transportation. VIM-Avia allowed massive flight delays of many hours. In July 2016, Rosaviatsia warned VIM-Avia about the possibility of limiting its air operator certificate due to massive delays and gave it a week to resolve all problems. The carrier's spokeswoman noted that the delays were due to the high season and the attempted coup in Turkey. The day after the warning was issued, the company announced that the transportation situation had stabilized and reported that the problems had been resolved thanks to the introduction of new ships.
The company ran into problems again in 2017 when dozens of flights were canceled after delays in early June. A representative of Rostransnadzor then explained the failure of the charter program by delays in aircraft repairs. The number of victims due to problems at VIM-Avia in June 2017 was estimated at approximately 30 thousand people. As a result, the airline's share of delayed flights this month was 13.56%. In July-August, problems remained: in July the share of delayed flights was 13.83%, and in August - 19.45%. In September, the airline delayed more than 40% of its flights.
In January-September 2017, the department of state aviation supervision and supervision of transport safety in the Volga Federal District conducted seven inspections of the airline, mainly at the request of citizens.
Oleg STORCHEVOY: Good evening. Well, probably, first of all, because the report did not provide any arguments or facts that would confirm the version proposed by the Dutch side. Probably because the investigation, and we have talked about this more than once, was carried out in violation, first of all, of the standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO. This expressed our dissatisfaction with the progress of the investigation.
Nika STRIZHAK: But who was on the International Commission? But I think it is necessary to explain to the audience that the safety council in the Netherlands has existed for almost 10 years, it is a permanent body created in case of various types of emergencies, floods, droughts, fires and so on. And the same Tjibbe Joustra who read this report actually worked in the Ministry of Agriculture. Then the question is: how many specialists are there in this commission now who understand aviation, understand weapons.
Oleg STORCHEVOY: Well, in fact, the International Commission of Inquiry included representatives from different countries. These were the UK, Malaysia, and there was a representative from Australia. Of course, the largest representation was from the Dutch side, but excuse me, I forgot, representatives from Ukraine. But the largest representation was from the Russian Federation. Our team consisted of experts in various fields of civil aviation, including military aviation . These are experts in airspace, in the investigation of aircraft accidents and incidents, in metal research, in the study of aircraft wreckage, as well as military personnel - representatives of the Almaz-Antey NPO and the Ministry of Defense Research Institute. Those. our commission was one of the largest, and we offered the participation of our experts in conducting all studies. At the very first meeting, which took place in February, we drew the attention of the Dutch side to the fact that we are ready to take part in research, so that our experts, together with international experts, conduct these studies, so that the investigation becomes objective. We also introduced an additional expert from NPO Almaz-Antey to the commission, because the first version was that the aircraft was shot down by a Buk missile, but to our question: “Do you have any idea about the characteristics of this missile?”, we received a negative answer. And then we proposed that our experts, having the necessary data as the developers of this product, take part in the investigation. We, as a state, took an unprecedented step by declassifying missile data. And we presented this data to the commission and invited the commission to come to us in the Russian Federation and get acquainted directly with the initial data, which would certainly help the experts from the Dutch side draw correct and objective conclusions.
Nika STRIZHAK: Have you arrived?
Oleg STORCHEVOY: Unfortunately, not a single invitation of ours - neither to come to study materials, source materials on Buk missiles, nor to take part in experiments and conduct research after these experiments - was accepted. Unfortunately, not a single foreign expert came to us, although we invited them to all our meetings.
Nika STRIZHAK: But almost in the first days, the Russian Ministry of Defense already provided satellite images that showed that there were Ukrainian Buks stationed on the territory of Ukraine in a military zone. Has anyone else done this? Did the Ukrainians do this? Did the Americans do this? Who else followed this example and provided their own, perhaps secret, but still data?
Oleg STORCHEVOY: Unfortunately, all the materials that were provided to us by the commission for study indicated that no other party, no other country had provided such data and such materials. After all, look, immediately after the disaster, our Ministry of Defense provided quite extensive material, which included a large amount of information. And this information, among other things, talked about the activity of the Ukrainian radar station on that day. And we turned to the commission: “Ask Ukraine. Has Ukraine provided such data from their radar stations?” Perhaps they would help to draw correct conclusions and conclusions. But such data were not presented to the commission and the entire international commission. We addressed the same thing regarding the Americans’ statements about the availability of data from satellites, because as representatives of the Ministry of Defense said at a press conference, that on that very day for some reason an American reconnaissance satellite was over the territory where the tragedy occurred. And we asked the Dutch side, through the chairman of the commission, that such data be submitted to the commission. This data was not presented to the commission. We provided our materials to other members of the investigation commission, including Great Britain, which was interested in our data. And our, let's say, comments.
Nika STRIZHAK:Why couldn’t she influence the Dutch side, for example? Or did she try?
Oleg STORCHEVOY: It’s difficult to make any unambiguous conclusion. We provided them with the information they asked from us. So Great Britain asked us to provide them with information on the downed Tu-154 over the Black Sea. We immediately responded and provided UK experts with such information with photographs, with the procedures we carried out the investigation. In particular, after the draft final report was released and all countries submitted their comments, we asked the question: “Does the UK have our comments on the report?” And they were surprised that neither side saw or read our comments.
Nika STRIZHAK: But the question still arises about Ukraine. At least this report clearly states that Ukraine is guilty of not closing the skies while it is engaged in military operations using aviation. What conclusions will follow now? Will there be any punishment?
Oleg STORCHEVOY: I deeply doubt that there will be any official punishment for Ukraine for the fact that the cause of the disaster was the fact that they did not close their airspace. Today, there are international documents that define the requirements for states to take such measures and close airspace in the event of emerging threats. But international organizations do not have the leverage that would definitely force them to do this. We hope, we expect that after the conclusions made and the analysis carried out, such normative documents will be developed, such rights will be given to international organizations to influence the decisions of those states where military conflicts occur, in order to protect and prevent such disasters.
Nika STRIZHAK: Last question. Do you think the West is ready for a new investigation? Because there are a lot of questions left.
Oleg STORCHEVOY: I can only say for sure that we will take all measures and do everything in our power to ensure that this investigation is resumed again. What will be the conclusions? We will try to do everything to ensure that these conclusions are correct and objective, again, having the opportunity, taking the opportunity to provide new facts, documents and the results of our new research. And the very fact that the Dutch side invited the Russian Federation to take an active part in the investigative commission of investigation is already a good fact.
Nika STRIZHAK: It’s already a small victory, but a victory, a step forward. I thank you, thank you so much for participating in our program today. Thank you.
Oleg STORCHEVOY: All the best. Goodbye.
On October 11-12, 2016 in Tyumen, under the chairmanship of the Deputy Head of the Federal Air Transport Agency - Chairman of the FMC of the Federal Air Transport Agency Oleg Storchevoy, the Flight Safety Inspection Directorate and the Flight Operations Directorate organized and held an extended meeting of the Flight Methodological Council (FMC) of the Federal Air Transport Agency on issues of ensuring flight safety in civil aviation and consideration of the most pressing issues of ensuring flight safety in the autumn-winter period of 2016 and 2017.
More than 140 specialists from 78 Russian civil aviation and aviation industry organizations took part in the meeting.
Opening the meeting, Oleg Storchevoy emphasized that the purpose of the work of the LMS of the Federal Air Transport Agency is to promote an increase in the level of flight safety in air transport, while the work of the LMS is not limited solely to the problems of flight operation of aircraft. As part of the work of the LMS of the Federal Air Transport Agency, flight safety problems related to the ground infrastructure of civil aviation are already being studied.
At the plenary session, issues of the state of flight safety in civil aviation of the Russian Federation based on the results of 9 months of 2016 were considered; experience and practice in solving flight safety problems in the Tyumen Interregional Territorial Directorate of Air Transport of the Federal Air Transport Agency, participation of the Russian Federation in the work of the ICAO expert group on flight crew training.
An important place at the plenary session was given to flight safety culture. Representatives of UTair Airlines PJSC, the Ural International Technical University of the Federal Air Transport Agency and the Flight Safety Inspection Directorate of the Federal Air Transport Agency made presentations on this topic. The reports paid special attention to the system for providing data on hazardous factors, training in the field of flight safety management and the popularization of flight safety.
In order to discuss problems in more detail and develop solutions, during the extended meeting of the Federal Air Transport Council, special thematic sections “Investigation”, “Airplanes”, “Helicopters” and “Airfields” were organized, at which leading specialists from various Russian organizations discussed issues such as:
- preventing cases of transport category aircraft getting into difficult spatial conditions and stalling, including ensuring safety during go-around (JSC Flight Research Institute named after M.M. Gromov, LLC Pobeda Airlines, JSC Rossiya Airlines);
- development and implementation of measures related to ensuring safety on the runway, including the prevention of overruns and rough landings, as well as unauthorized trips to the runway (Department of the Flight Safety Inspectorate of the Federal Air Transport Agency, PJSC UTair Airlines, PJSC Aeroflot );
- introduction of modern methods of training and improving the professional skills of flight personnel (AirBridgeCargo Airlines LLC);
- improvement of regulatory documents establishing flight rules and flight crew training in order to prevent accidents with commercial aviation helicopters (UTair - Helicopter Services JSC, Federal State Budgetary Institution "SLO Russia");
- preventing aircraft collisions with birds and implementing measures for ornithological support of flights at Russian airports (Industry group of aviation ornithology, LLC "Two Wings");
- training of personnel of airfield operators in the field of flight safety management, as well as ensuring interaction of flight safety management systems of aircraft operators and airfield operators (Northern Capital Gate LLC (Pulkovo Airport), AirBridgeCargo Airlines LLC, UTair Airlines PJSC ").
As a result of the meeting, solutions were developed on the problems on which the efforts of the Federal Air Transport Service should be focused.
"...however, for us, civil aviation specialists, perhaps even more urgent is the task of receiving, in a timely manner, clear and precise warnings or prohibitions indicating the need to avoid such areas when planning and executing flights."As if hints Oleg Storchevoy to us during a briefing of the Federal Air Transport Agency on July 16, 2015.
We continue to respectfully listen to the chatter of Oleg Storchevy, still the deputy head of the Federal Air Transport Agency:
Read to the very end, there are many amazing gems there (and keep the picture in mind):
“The Boeing 777 crash in Ukraine is not the first time a civilian aircraft has been shot down by a missile. In addition to the aforementioned Tu-154 crash in 2001, on July 3, 1988, a US Navy missile cruiser shot down an Iranian civilian Airbus 300 over the Persian Gulf. which killed 290 people. After this disaster in 1990, the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO issued document number 9554, which provides recommendations on safety measures that should be taken in connection with military activities that are potentially dangerous for the flights of civil aircraft. The document is what it is. and is called - "Guide to security measures taken in connection with military activities, potentially dangerous for the flights of civil aircraft". I have quoted the exact title of this document. This document is clear and precise... - ahem - excuse me - and clearly describes the procedures that should be adopted both in connection with various types of military exercises and in connection with local armed conflicts.
We, the aviation authorities of the Russian Federation, are concerned about the question of why ICAO and the European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation in April 2014, under the pretext of ensuring safety, immediately responded with a ban on flights in the Simferopol region after the Republic of Crimea joined the Russian Federation, but at the same time ignored the situation in the east Ukraine. By July 17, 2014, a paradoxical situation had arisen when in the prohibited, not recommended for flights, and at the same time absolutely safe area of Simferopol, flights were not carried out by foreign companies, and the war in Donbass did not raise any concerns among the relevant organizations... international... .
Judge for yourself. Since April 14, 2014, when the so-called anti-terrorist operation began, various heavy weapons began to be used and Ukrainian Air Force aircraft were intensively used. Taking this into account, today it is fair to ask the question: why did Western states not put pressure on Ukraine and ICAO to completely ban flights over Donbass without waiting for the Boeing 777 plane crash? Why did Ukraine itself only limit flights to an altitude of 320 flight level - that’s 9,750 meters, and did not completely close the airspace. After all, if a country admits that in a zone up to such a height -9750 meters - the plane may be... uh... something threatens the plane, there is a threat to flight safety, there are risks in which... uh... there is... again a threat to the lives of people and the crew, if ... to give a simple example, as you know, in the event of any emergency situation on board associated with failures associated... associated with depressurization of the aircraft, the primary measures are to change the flight level and descend. In the event of depressurization, this reduction must be carried out to an altitude of almost 3000 meters. So I would like... and... ask a question - in the event of such a non-standard, such an emergency situation on board one of the aircraft, would the pilots have to perform a descent into the conflict zone? In the area where the shooting takes place? You understand, this is absurd.
Obviously, the Ukrainian side simply did not want to lose significant funds from closing the airspace. 298 people became victims of this greed and disregard for safety standards. "
You can watch the full speech here: http://pressmia.ru/pressclub/20150716/950250611.html
The part of the speech that is given in the post starts at approximately 21.50
Source of visual information - journalistic community CORRECT!V
(A very meditative activity, it is recommended to set the minimum display speed, simultaneously launch a video with the same piece of teaching from Oleg Storchev in the next browser tab and gratefully, with due reverence and reverence, listen to the intonations and words of a high official from the Federal Air Transport Agency. When you hover the cursor over a flying airplane flight data pops up, if available; data on all flights is available by clicking on Übersicht aller Flüge bottom right)
UPD. Text of Ukrainian NOTAMa A1517/14, completely closing the airspace over Donbass, published by the European Aviation Safety Agency (Eurocontrol)
UPD 2. Rostov NOTAM dated July 16, 2014, duplicating Ukrainian restrictions dated July 14.
It is noteworthy that the Russian aviation authorities directly indicate that fighting is taking place below... but nevertheless, for their part, they do not close the air corridors and continue to drive civilian aircraft from their side into the danger zone. If the Russian aviation authorities had reacted to the danger they obviously recognized exactly as Oleg Storchevoy demanded, then the airspace above the danger zone would have been completely clogged by the Russian side and no one would have flown there.
UPD 3. The same document number 9554 that Oleg Storchevoy mentioned at the briefing - Guidance on security measures taken in connection with military activities potentially hazardous to civil aircraft operations. PDF, 32 pages
What do you think about this speech by Oleg Storchevy, who still holds the position of deputy head of the Federal Air Transport Agency?
(I ask for maximum reposting and links to this material - it seems to me that in this case the official’s cynicism is simply off the charts!)
