Military Flight Safety

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby JayS » 19 Jun 2019 18:30

ArjunPandit wrote:one question, wouldnt cruise missile style terrain mapping work, with modification of course, in this case as well? Not sure if something from b'mos or nirbhay can be taken here and applied at least on fixed routes that IAF takes most of the times. Stopping flights is the easiest way. Wonder if IAF/DRDO and working on something.


I was thinking about the same, given our solid capability in terrain mapping, we should have good enough high res terrain maps of entire India, or should be in a situation to generate the same, if not already available. With the terrain maps and INS-GPS/IRNSS integration, a crash warning system should be feasible.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2019 21:21

rrao wrote:
chetak wrote:

Saar, any idea as to how far the aircraft was from its actual destination when it went down.


Saar,.. the wreckage of the aircraft was found near Pari hills close to Gatte village, 16 km north of Lipo in Arunachal Pradesh, at 12,000 feet elevation as per wiki. Lipo in Arunachal Pradesh on Tuesday, an air force statement said. ... Its wreckage was spotted around 69km (road distance) from Mechuka.
...


I know that many times commercial traffic call finals for the active runway from 30,000 ft or even higher depending on the height that they are flying at, stabilize and descent undisturbed to finish the touchdown.

I was wondering why this aircraft descended while still 70 odd miles away from his intended destination and apparently ended up in a CFIT.

It was not really the terrain to be doing such a thing as descending so far out.


The blackbox would be able to throw a lot of light on the matter

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2019 21:56

JayS wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:one question, wouldnt cruise missile style terrain mapping work, with modification of course, in this case as well? Not sure if something from b'mos or nirbhay can be taken here and applied at least on fixed routes that IAF takes most of the times. Stopping flights is the easiest way. Wonder if IAF/DRDO and working on something.


I was thinking about the same, given our solid capability in terrain mapping, we should have good enough high res terrain maps of entire India, or should be in a situation to generate the same, if not already available. With the terrain maps and INS-GPS/IRNSS integration, a crash warning system should be feasible.


we have been using ring laser gyro based INS-GPS systems in India for some time now. The ELTA radars used by the IN and CG use it as do the UAVs.

It shouldn't be too hard to come up with a standalone INS-GPS sub system feeding into the aircraft's nav system to plot track and position on a real time basis.

working examples and spare units should be easy to come by for study, analysis and development.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ramana » 19 Jun 2019 23:00

How much innovation is encouraged in military service?

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3029
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ArjunPandit » 19 Jun 2019 23:19

ramana wrote:How much innovation is encouraged in military service?

Obviously you are on to something.
1. DRDO and govt should be the driver in this and armed forces the facilitator not the owner or driver of that.
2. DRDO has access to both colleges, talent pool, military facilities and has budgets too. If it lacks that should be escalated to govt
3. I wont say it is military service's jobs, but we've heard of stories like BRDs and ATAGS
4. If this govt doesnt do it the perhaps we must wait for next regime in 2029 (not sarcastic or anything but sad reality). That's the sad reality.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2019 23:40

ramana wrote:How much innovation is encouraged in military service?


Innovation is encouraged and also fostered (in theory) but one must understand that tinkering with flying machines and things that go bang need very stout hearts and the backing of really gutsy bosses with muscular spines and robust testimonials to allow underlings the liberty to experiment unless those underlings already have a reputation for safe and assured delivery of desired results and many bosses are willing to piggyback on such individuals in their journey up the greasy pole.

as in every organization, such individuals with a proven ability to understand risks, and also high on the element of testicular fortitude to overcome obstacles and bureaucratic hurdles are few and far between.

plain old jealousy kills a lot of the spirit of innovation.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 19 Jun 2019 23:49

ramana wrote:How much innovation is encouraged in military service?


the INS-GPS systems should be handed off to someone like the HAL hyderabad unit and not the DRDO.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ramana » 19 Jun 2019 23:50

I think IAF chief can ask his technical staff to work with DRDO/HAL to come up with solutions for the AN-32 flying in mountain terrain. Especially as its a large fleet and C-295 will take some time to materialize as its not there before CCS yet.
And I don't know if the upgraded AN -32 could have avoided the CFIT?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2805
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby tsarkar » 20 Jun 2019 00:22

JayS wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:one question, wouldnt cruise missile style terrain mapping work, with modification of course, in this case as well? Not sure if something from b'mos or nirbhay can be taken here and applied at least on fixed routes that IAF takes most of the times. Stopping flights is the easiest way. Wonder if IAF/DRDO and working on something.
I was thinking about the same, given our solid capability in terrain mapping, we should have good enough high res terrain maps of entire India, or should be in a situation to generate the same, if not already available. With the terrain maps and INS-GPS/IRNSS integration, a crash warning system should be feasible.

You need to understand the earth is a living planet and very dynamic especially where forces operate. There are minor earthquakes and frequent landslides that change topology. Snowfall is not unform, so it may further alter the topology. Rivers frequently change course. Temporary Barsati Nalas appears and disappear. Islands appear and disappear in rivers.

For cruise missiles temporary mapping is done. For sustained flight purposes regular mapping needs to be done that is time effort & money consuming.

Same happens at harbours too where regular dredging is done to keep artificial channels open.

The An-32 did have a flight plan that avoided terrain. Why it descended early needs to be ascertained by the CoI

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3029
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ArjunPandit » 20 Jun 2019 00:37

^^tsarkar sir, thanks for this clarification. This is informative for a novice like me. However, would all these factors would have moved the terrain that the plane would crash. I am not convinced. Of course, CoI will bring the truth.
But my point is again can't we do this with our satellite systems, weather forecasting and some form of radar sensing.
I am sure the temporary terrain mapping would not cost as much as a plane or the lives of our soldiers, with our scale, can't we lower down the costs.
Also, flying in this area is going to increase in coming years. New planes are not coming anytime soon. You know way more than I do about all this. My point is just trying something that we havent already, may be for the sake of it or for the sake of saving lives.
PS: It may not include weather, or other things..even some simple check ups on what fails, a simple sat phone. I am sure this can be done in peace time, may not be in war time.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby vasu raya » 20 Jun 2019 07:28

now that X-band SAR sats are developed in house, they can go for SAR pods for all-weather navigation to be used by all aircraft flying in these areas?

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Haridas » 20 Jun 2019 11:28

AN32 belly landing reminds me of a Superconnie (recce version transferred from #6 sqn IAF) lost by Navy.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 20 Jun 2019 11:32

Haridas wrote:AN32 belly landing reminds me of a Superconnie (recce version transferred from #6 sqn IAF) lost by Navy.


entirely different reason and entirely different circumstances.

It had already landed safely and was taxying back.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 20 Jun 2019 11:38

ramana wrote:I think IAF chief can ask his technical staff to work with DRDO/HAL to come up with solutions for the AN-32 flying in mountain terrain. Especially as its a large fleet and C-295 will take some time to materialize as its not there before CCS yet.
And I don't know if the upgraded AN -32 could have avoided the CFIT?


upgradation has nothing to do with CFIT.

The latest boeing and airbus aircraft have been lost due to CFIT.

CFIT is basically caused by the loss of situational awareness by the crew and this can be precipitated by a variety of reasons.

the utter and total confusion in the cockpit of the very unfortunate Air France Flight 447 was precipitated by the loss of situational awareness.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23757
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby SSridhar » 25 Jun 2019 09:37

Upgraded planes in tough skies - Arjun Subramanian, The Hindu
The recent crash of an AN-32, which was on an air maintenance sortie to the Mechuka Advanced Landing Ground in Arunachal Pradesh, has raised questions on flight safety in the Indian Air Force despite accident rates having declined exponentially over the past few decades.

Air crashes today are subjected to the full glare of the media, exposing vulnerable families of the crash victims to needless trauma and also seriously hampering the remedial measures and outcomes that would flow from professionally conducted accident inquiries. In this milieu, it is important to explore some of the less-dissected issues that continue to plague aviation safety in the IAF.

The IAF flies 38 different types of aircraft and has the most varied fleet among modern air forces. Its fleet comprises aircraft like the MiG-21 and the Avro that hardly fly anywhere else. Seven of these have not had a major accident in the last five years. The long-serving IL-76 has had an accident-free innings in the IAF, a fact that is missed by most.

The U.K.’s Royal Air Force flew the Jaguar for 34 years (1973 to 2007) during which it had 67 accidents. In comparison, the IAF has lost 52 Jaguars over four decades. The U.S. Air Force flew slightly over two million flying hours in 2017 and suffered 83 ‘Category A’ mishaps. During the same period, the IAF flew 2,51,405 hours and had an accident rate of 0.24 for every 10,000 hours of flying. This translates to 8-9 ‘Category A’ mishaps — a comparable ratio. It would be unfair to make literal comparisons as the U.S. Air Force was and continues to be a dispersed force engaged in multiple locations like Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

Comparing the mishap rates

While there was a rise of 17% when we consider the ‘Category A’ mishaps in the U.S. Air Force between 2013 and 2017, there was a decline in the IAF’s accident rate from 0.29 (2013-14) to 0.24 (2017-18). Similarly, when one compares the mishap rates between the F-16 fleet in the U.S. Air Force and the Mirage-2000 fleet in the IAF over the last five years, there is a positive story that emerges.

There is constant criticism as regards the slow phasing-out of the older variants of the MiG-21 and the MiG-27 fleets, which merits reflection. That these aircraft have no business continuing to fly is a proposition upheld even by senior IAF leadership. However, further investigation reveals a complex web of operational necessities that have forced the IAF to stretch their life and manage the ensuing risks.

For the IAF to remain combat ready for full-spectrum operations, it needs a continuously trained cockpit-to-crew ratio of between 1:1.75 to 1:2 that can undertake operations and seamlessly manage the switch to more advanced platforms as they get inducted into service. Currently, the ratios can barely sustain a limited conflict, leave alone extended ones.

The MiG-21s and MiG-27s were supposed to have been replaced by Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA), a process that is unfolding at a snail’s pace.

Hypothetically, had all the MiG-21s and MiG-27s been phased out without replacement, there was no scope to increase the flying of other fleets to feed the residual pilots, due to maintenance and budgetary constraints. The IAF would then have been down to 25 squadrons and saddled with large numbers of fighter pilots without operational continuity. It would then have been tough to induct advanced platforms like the LCA and Rafale, which need pilots who are current and proficient.

The IAF had very little choice in the matter and the bottom line is that the risks are rising and must be addressed with greater urgency. The way out is simple — an accelerated LCA production, no hiccups in the ongoing Rafale induction and a fast-tracking of the new deal for 114 fighter jets.


Shortage of training aircraft

As far as other flying accidents are concerned, human error is responsible for around 50% of them while issues revolving around technical, environmental and miscellaneous factors are responsible for the rest. One of the major reasons for human error is training deficiencies due to a shortage of training aircraft.

The non-availability of the HTT-40 to complement the reliable Pilatus, a delayed induction of the Intermediate Jet Trainer and a lack of clarity within the Ministry of Defence about the IAF’s proposal to buy additional Pilatus aircraft means that the IAF has keep the 40-year-old Kiran fly-worthy and compromise on training quality and future operational proficiency.
The IAF flies air maintenance sorties to support the Indian Army and conducts humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions in the most inclement of weather conditions and highly varied and inhospitable terrain.

Several weather- and terrain-related accidents on helicopter and transport aircraft like the MiG-17 and AN-32 are caused due to the non-availability of on-board equipment like Ground Proximity Warning Systems and Terrain Following Radar that allow such missions to be conducted in near-blind conditions. The recent accident may never have happened had there been a fleet of medium-lift aircraft with such systems.

Navigating crest tops

An AN-32 can fly well above the crest tops but in case of a single-engine failure, it has to descend below 8,000 ft, which is below the crest tops in the region; hence the ground below has to be in contact at all times. Therefore, in sorties such as this, the route has to planned through known valleys — informed sources point out that the crashed aircraft may have been impacted by a visually obscured mountain located at some distance below the crest top.

Replacing the Avro aircraft with a modern platform that can share the workload of the AN-32, particularly in high-altitude areas, is another key suggestion that can be considered. The Tata-Airbus C-295 with all modern systems has been clearly the IAF’s first choice and can maintain 19,000 ft on a single engine that would keep it above mountain tops in all areas serviced by the AN-32.

Accidents will continue to happen and the IAF will have to balance risks with operational necessity. Speedy replacements for MiG-21s and MiG-27s, Jaguars, Avros, Kiran trainers and Cheetah/Chetak helicopters; fast-track modifications and upgrades that are required for operations in remote and hostile terrain; and upgrading of simulators as force enablers and not merely as training aids are among the necessary measures to improve flight safety. Finally, the IAF leadership must lay down clear red lines for continued operational effectiveness — a ‘we will fight and train with what we have’ attitude has ominous signals.

Air Vice-Marshal Arjun Subramaniam is a retired fighter pilot from the IAF and a visiting professor at Ashoka University

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby vasu raya » 27 Jun 2019 23:44

Thanks for the article, shows the limitations of An-32, wonder why it was chosen for biofuel certification?

anyways, SIVA SAR pod can be repurposed for navigation? long time back there was a picture of the MKI in a NE base carrying it

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7226
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby nachiket » 28 Jun 2019 01:48

SSridhar wrote:
An AN-32 can fly well above the crest tops but in case of a single-engine failure, it has to descend below 8,000 ft, which is below the crest tops in the region; hence the ground below has to be in contact at all times. Therefore, in sorties such as this, the route has to planned through known valleys — informed sources point out that the crashed aircraft may have been impacted by a visually obscured mountain located at some distance below the crest top.

Replacing the Avro aircraft with a modern platform that can share the workload of the AN-32, particularly in high-altitude areas, is another key suggestion that can be considered. The Tata-Airbus C-295 with all modern systems has been clearly the IAF’s first choice and can maintain 19,000 ft on a single engine that would keep it above mountain tops in all areas serviced by the AN-32.


The An-32 is known for excellent hot-and high performance with engines nearly twice as powerful as the ones on the C-295 (5112 hp vs 2645 hp each). The MTOW difference between the two is only 4000kg. So what magic allows the C-295 to fly at 19k ft on one engine while the An-32 has to drop below 8000? I am suspicious of these figures along with the payload considered while arriving at them.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 28 Jun 2019 08:23

nachiket wrote:
SSridhar wrote:

The An-32 is known for excellent hot-and high performance with engines nearly twice as powerful as the ones on the C-295 (5112 hp vs 2645 hp each). The MTOW difference between the two is only 4000kg. So what magic allows the C-295 to fly at 19k ft on one engine while the An-32 has to drop below 8000? I am suspicious of these figures along with the payload considered while arriving at them.




one may also have to consider the age of the engines. Over time the performance degrades and the rated or even spec figures are merely indicative.


I remember when twin engined aircraft regularly ferried over water for long distances and these invariably established a negative rate of climb on the loss of one engine and yet this ferry was regularly done, knowing the risks and potential end game scenarios. I know for a fact that this was ONLY because of degraded engine performance.

these AI-20 series of engines are overhauled in India and in fact that was the prime consideration for the very birth of the AN-32 itself, the deep servicing facilities available incountry and the huge pool of engines available ex stock from the AN-12 fleet. Even the IL-38 has these engines.

one simply cannot expect a 20-30 year old engine to be as sprightly as it was in its youth, no.

where once these engines could hold height at say 20,000 ft, all they are able to do now is to barely hold height at a much lower altitudes.


If one were to compare the performance of two identical helicopters, one built by our very own PSU and the other built by the original french manufacturer let me tell you that the difference in performance is very appreciable and this is for a brand new aircraft.

and ditto is the case for the PSU built dorniers and the original german dornier built dorniers

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby MeshaVishwas » 28 Jun 2019 20:22

#SavingLives: On the morning of 27 June19, an IAF Jaguar aircraft loaded with two additional fuel drop tanks & Carrier Bomb Light Stores
(CBLS) pods took off from AFS Ambala for a training
mission. Immediately after take off, the aircraft encountered a flock of
birds
.
https://twitter.com/IAF_MCC/status/1144 ... 56993?s=19
Scary as f***.Please watch.
Kudos to the Pilot!

gaurav.p
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 04 May 2018 23:02

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby gaurav.p » 28 Jun 2019 20:47

Really scary stuff. wasnt the fourth pod which was ejected very dangerous one? It didn't seem to have a clean ejection (flew up again!)

Has IAF invested in any devices that prevent bird hits? If not, wondering if it is good time to support some desi startup/university to develop a prototype rather than running after videshi stuff...

atreya
BRFite
Posts: 540
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 16:33

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby atreya » 28 Jun 2019 23:37

MeshaVishwas wrote:
#SavingLives: On the morning of 27 June19, an IAF Jaguar aircraft loaded with two additional fuel drop tanks & Carrier Bomb Light Stores
(CBLS) pods took off from AFS Ambala for a training
mission. Immediately after take off, the aircraft encountered a flock of
birds
.
https://twitter.com/IAF_MCC/status/1144 ... 56993?s=19
Scary as f***.Please watch.
Kudos to the Pilot!


Excellent reaction time and nerves of steel. So easy to panic in these situations for a normal person, but kudos to the pilot.

On a side note, I wonder why the take-off was being filmed though? Is it standard procedure?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Singha » 29 Jun 2019 00:01

there is video of a fatal looking MiG-27 twin takeoff crash being filmed, looks like its SOP now from tower


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Singha » 29 Jun 2019 00:04

gaurav.p wrote:Really scary stuff. wasnt the fourth pod which was ejected very dangerous one? It didn't seem to have a clean ejection (flew up again!)

Has IAF invested in any devices that prevent bird hits? If not, wondering if it is good time to support some desi startup/university to develop a prototype rather than running after videshi stuff...


nobody has any solution other than firecrackers and keeping nearby areas free of slaughter houses. water bodies and trees will attract birds. garbage will attract crows.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1020
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 29 Jun 2019 00:20

Hate seeing this thread pop up anytime on BRF.

Thankfully no casualties or aircraft losses this time

gaurav.p
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 04 May 2018 23:02

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby gaurav.p » 29 Jun 2019 00:38

Singha wrote:nobody has any solution other than firecrackers and keeping nearby areas free of slaughter houses. water bodies and trees will attract birds. garbage will attract crows.


was lurking around as usual, stumbled across this (~40mb video) ornithopter by IITK prof. It seems the red colour of the drone has made the rest of birds go crazy around it.

Yes the methods used up till now use sirens, firecrackers, blinking lights. Housing around such areas are indeed a hazard to operate with.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 29 Jun 2019 01:09

gaurav.p wrote:Really scary stuff. wasnt the fourth pod which was ejected very dangerous one? It didn't seem to have a clean ejection (flew up again!)

Has IAF invested in any devices that prevent bird hits? If not, wondering if it is good time to support some desi startup/university to develop a prototype rather than running after videshi stuff...



the separation of the stores was clean. No problems there.


It is possible that one of the stores got into the turbulent wake of the aircraft or even possibly the jet blast from the still after burning engine

mmasand
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 19 May 2009 23:46

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby mmasand » 29 Jun 2019 02:00

Hindustan Times just put up the video released by IAF MCC on YouTube and called the drop tanks a 'practice bomb'. Matlab kuch bhi..

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jun 2019 02:32

Singha wrote:there is video of a fatal looking mig27 twin takeoff crash being filmed, looks like its SOP now from tower

The pilot in that video was Wing Commander Oswald De Abreu.

https://www.honourpoint.in/profile/wing ... 045872-1-1

Image

Hari Nair
BRFite
Posts: 204
Joined: 20 Aug 2010 17:37
Location: Bangalore

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Hari Nair » 29 Jun 2019 19:13

Singha wrote:...
nobody has any solution other than firecrackers and keeping nearby areas free of slaughter houses. water bodies and trees will attract birds. garbage will attract crows.


Not really. During my time, we had seriosuly explored the option of using trained falcons. Although eyebrows were raised when I proposed the option, this option of using falons to scare away other birds is actively used by some air forces and even some civilian agencies abroad. There is even a detailed procedure for the same, including duty cycles, maximum areas of cvoerage and mandatory rest periods for the trained raptors! Turned out that there is a law in our country against falconery, which would need to be amended....

As an aside, the South African Air Force even use(d) Caracals (also called African Lynx wild cats) to control the population of birds at their air base!
Last edited by Hari Nair on 29 Jun 2019 19:32, edited 1 time in total.

Hari Nair
BRFite
Posts: 204
Joined: 20 Aug 2010 17:37
Location: Bangalore

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Hari Nair » 29 Jun 2019 19:22

chetak wrote:I know that many times commercial traffic call finals for the active runway from 30,000 ft or even higher depending on the height that they are flying at, stabilize and descent undisturbed to finish the touchdown.

I was wondering why this aircraft descended while still 70 odd miles away from his intended destination and apparently ended up in a CFIT.

It was not really the terrain to be doing such a thing as descending so far out.


The blackbox would be able to throw a lot of light on the matter



The aircraft was less than 50 km away from the ALG. As I had covered earlier, the procedure is to report visual contact with the valley at a designated point and then descend from altitude. This was done in accordance with procedure. The next action is to turn into the valley leading to Mechuka, and continuing descent, so as to position at the correct point in space (height and distance), to land at Mechuka. Something, obviosuly went wrong in this phase.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 29 Jun 2019 19:45

Hari Nair wrote:
chetak wrote:I know that many times commercial traffic call finals for the active runway from 30,000 ft or even higher depending on the height that they are flying at, stabilize and descent undisturbed to finish the touchdown.

I was wondering why this aircraft descended while still 70 odd miles away from his intended destination and apparently ended up in a CFIT.

It was not really the terrain to be doing such a thing as descending so far out.


The blackbox would be able to throw a lot of light on the matter



The aircraft was less than 50 km away from the ALG. As I had covered earlier, the procedure is to report visual contact with the valley at a designated point and then descend from altitude. This was done in accordance with procedure. The next action is to turn into the valley leading to Mechuka, and continuing descent, so as to position at the correct point in space (height and distance), to land at Mechuka. Something, obviosuly went wrong in this phase.


Got it.

the confusion was in miles and kms.

looks like the visibility was good enough when they started to descend.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 955
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby K Mehta » 30 Jun 2019 00:02

mmasand wrote:Hindustan Times just put up the video released by IAF MCC on YouTube and called the drop tanks a 'practice bomb'. Matlab kuch bhi..

The Jaguar aircraft had drop tanks and practice bombs.
It dropped both drop tanks and practice bombs.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ramana » 30 Jun 2019 11:43

I heard there are also noise maker guns that are fired randomly to scare if birds in some places.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20539
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2019 12:57

ramana wrote:I heard there are also noise maker guns that are fired randomly to scare if birds in some places.


yes and the guys doing it look pretty silly because all that the birds do is move a short distance away each time the gun is fired.


a raptor could do the job really well.


like the Hanuman langurs are trained in dilli to scare off aggressive rhesus monkeys and the govt hires these langur owners to parade their wards near govt offices to scare the other monkeys away.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1978
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Manish_P » 30 Jun 2019 18:06

Sirs, here is an interesting article (albeit a bit dated) on various bird scaring devices/techniques

Bird scaring techniques and potential alternatives

PS: As an aside (and no comparison to the problem of birds near airstrips) about a decade and half ago i had faced a problem with pigeons nesting in our apartment. After seeing my failure with a dummy cat and a mini scarecrow, our old maid suggested i simply hang a couple of my old CDs on string, on the safety grill of my balcony. I did so very skeptically.. No pigeon/crow invaders since that day! All i had to do was to replace the CDs every 6 months or so when the reflective surface wore out.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ramana » 02 Jul 2019 00:56

I thought you were playing Sufi musik.

MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby MeshaVishwas » 02 Jul 2019 08:36

No more whining about "high" accident rates, (some)self flagellating Desh vaasis.
Image
From AM Chopra on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/Chopsyturvey/status ... 89409?s=19

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby ramana » 19 Jul 2019 02:08

Any update on the M2K accident.
The FCS box was suspect and was being investigated by Dassault.

Please post any updates if you see them.

mmasand
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 19 May 2009 23:46

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby mmasand » 08 Aug 2019 22:12

Reports trickling in an MKI crashed near Tejpur. Both pilots ejected, they were based at Salonibari AFS.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Nikhil T » 08 Aug 2019 22:16

Hindustan Times:

A Sukhoi-30 fighter jet of the Indian Air Force that had taken off on a training sortie on Thursday evening has crashed, an IAF spokesperson said.

The two pilots have ejected safety and have been rescued, the spokesperson said.

The court of inquiry will ascertain the cause of the accident, the spokesperson said.

A senior IAF official said fighter jet was on a routine training mission and crashed in Tezpur’s local flying area.


The official said the pilots had reported engine trouble shortly before the crash.

The crash was reported around 8.15 pm.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 59 guests