Better officials would forbid

The flight of "Kogalymavia" flying from Sharm el-Sheikh to St. Petersburg, broke on Saturday morning in the north of Sinai. Absolute majority – Russians. 219 people, from them 24 children.

Flied from rest. Have a rest.

Certainly, it will be now very pleasant to tell that flight brought down damned IGIL (the organization forbidden in Russia. – Edition). The plane flied really over battle-grounds, and it is a single question why the plane, saving, flied there, but chances are not present, and Islamists have no "Beeches" too. Already it is clear that the commander complained of engines earlier and requested emergency landing.

What was it? Charter. Simple council: do not fly the Russian charters.

For this reason, by the way, I always when could, flied "Transaero". At all financial trick of this company I knew that I fly the company which standards of safety were, as in the West. The minister of transport Sokolov forbade "Transaero" flights next day after it was bought by Filev from S7. Next day(!) after rescue the minister demolished from the market the company with the formulation, of course, – «safety of flights». Question: why minister Sokolov did not forbid "Kogalymavia"?

It is possible to build any theories, but everything, except one, for the last one and a half ten years of failure of the Russian planes are caused by a brothel below a plinth. The unique exception is a failure of Tu-204 of the Red Wings company to "Vnukovo" on December 29, 2012.

That Tu-204 flied "empty", without passengers, it is the plane rather new, and when landing in the conditions of a strong wind as it appeared, at it technical failure is possible: racks of the chassis "were not pressed out", and the reverse did not join. The plane simply did not feel that it sat down.

Following the results of this accident in Red Wings airline passed searches, and it stopped existence. Why? Because belonged to banker Alexander Lebedev against whom security officers then were up in arms.

All other failures – result of a brothel.

In 2006 of Tu-154 broke near Donetsk because the pilot saved fuel and was afraid to run into a penalty, flying about a thunder-storm. It rose too highly to fly by over a cloud, and broke in a corkscrew.

In 2008 "Boeing" broke in Perm because one of pilots was drunk, and another was not able to operate "Boeing". When the dispatcher asked to leave pilots on the second circle, it appeared for them fatal. In a cabin there was a mat remat, and the exchange of remarks occurred at level «pull here it», «is not present, here that».

In Petrozavodsk in 2011 the pilot, sitting down at night, took the highway for VPP because, first, at the airport there was a primitive equipment, and secondly, to the airport criminally lifted an overcast limit: it was impossible under such weather conditions at the so badly equipped airport to put the plane.

What occurred then? Prime minister Dmitry Medvedev after accident in Petrozavodsk forbade Tu-134 flights. Question: technical characteristics of Tu-134 have what relation to lack of the landing equipment at the airport? What difference, "Tu" it was or "Boeing"?

The difference was only for "VTB leasing" and for "WEB LEASING". Just they needed that the companies bought from them "Boeings". Later a few, the prime minister suggested to forbid also "An-24".

It as? What there were shortcomings of domestic planes (namely they guzzle a lot of fuel), technical safety is not included into their number. On safety of Tu-134 will not concede to "Boeing". That money, which airlines after Medvedev’s successful order gave "VTB leasing", they did not spend for safety.

Who took planes from "VTB leasing" and at "WEB LEASING" to which was so lucky with Medvedev’s decision? "Transaero". At what price? In the market say that leasing payments at "Transaero" were higher, than at any other company. Forgive, but if, suppose, in them and kickback – that, probably, not at will "Transaero" was sewn up?

Now the company killed, planes came back to lessors, all are happy, except those who already never will depart by "Transaero" planes to Sharm el-Sheikh (they there flied regularly), and will be compelled to fly any new "Kogalymavia". Prime minister Medvedev at last explained that "Transaero" is guilty that bought too many planes.

You will tell: in the West too fight. Answer: in the West absolutely other pattern of accidents. They do not appear natural result of a brothel. They appear result of improbable combination of circumstances.

In 2011 we set up a sad ginnessovsky record, having become the country of the world most dangerous to an aircraft service: more dangerously than Nigeria and Chad.

As a result, our market of transportations схлопывается. Against it our officials are engaged in everything, except safety of flights.

Them that? They do not fly on charter coffins.

Julia Latynina