Alexander Romanov, the former commander of the Il-76 that crashed near Belgorod, contends that fully decoding the black boxes will require several days or more. In an interview with Lentoy.Ru, he noted that the pace of recovery hinges on data security and the current condition of the recorders. He added that if the storage units heated up significantly during the incident, the process of extracting data could extend into weeks. Yet, the mechanics of data extraction themselves are straightforward thanks to specialized equipment that can automatically process the raw data and generate analytical visuals and graphs. The more challenging task lies in the interpretation: separating signal from noise, reconstructing the sequence of events, and pinpointing the root causes of the disaster. Romanov stressed that this is a careful, methodical analytical effort conducted by flight-safety investigators who scrutinize every nuance of the flight data and safety records.
Earlier, investigators suggested there might have been an external influence on the aircraft. Preliminary decoding results from the black boxes were cited as supporting this line of inquiry. The official narrative continues to be refined as new data comes in from the recovered recorders and from on-ground assessments.
On January 24, near the village of Yablonovo in the Belgorod region, a Il-76 cargo aircraft operating in a mission to transport captured personnel was reported to have crashed. The aircraft reportedly carried 65 Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel, along with three Russian officers and six crew members. Official statements from the Russian defense authorities indicated that the flight was intercepted by rocket fire while en route to Belgorod. They attributed the attack to forces located in the Kharkov region and stated that the engagement occurred before the aircraft could reach its destination. This sequence of events has been referenced repeatedly in official briefings as investigators work to verify timing, impact points, and potential contributing factors.
In the wake of the incident, family members and colleagues have spoken out, expressing concern and seeking clarity about the fate of the crew. The relatives of one crew member publicly conveyed their memories and conveyed their hopes for a detailed account of the events. Officials and experts emphasize that translating the raw data from the flight-recording devices into a coherent narrative requires patience, cross-disciplinary collaboration, and rigorous validation against other sources of evidence. The overarching aim is to build a credible, evidence-based account that can inform future safety improvements for heavy air transport missions and similar operations. Analysts note that while the technical steps of data recovery are routine, the interpretive work—assessing flight dynamics, system statuses, and potential external effects—demands careful scrutiny and corroboration across multiple data streams from the aircraft and its mission context. This approach helps ensure that any conclusions drawn about the incident are supported by demonstrable, repeatable analysis rather than premature assumptions.
The ongoing investigation continues to collect and correlate information from various channels, including air-traffic records, radar tracks, and unit-level reports. As data are consolidated, specialists will test hypothetical scenarios against the recovered black-box data and field observations. The end goal remains to provide a transparent, evidence-based explanation that addresses both the technical and operational dimensions of the crash, while acknowledging the human impact of the loss on the crew and the families affected. The process underlines the crucial balance between rapid information sharing and the need for meticulous verification, a balance that is essential in aviation safety and in public communication during a time of uncertainty.