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.
Post Reply
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Prem Kumar »

Tanvi Madan, from Brookings, is adding fuel to the fire. Is she shilling for imports from the US? Is she being a loyal sepoy?

Its clear that she is provoking both sides to queer the pitch

https://twitter.com/tanvi_madan/status/ ... 6035297303
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by sanjayc »

These natives are appointed to US institutions for a purpose. They start singing for their supper on signal from the Whites. Otherwise, Whites have no use for them.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Thakur_B »

All think tanks are shills unless proven otherwise.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Prem Kumar »

On the veterans' side, its quite revealing to note the # of people who are anti-Atmanirbhar. Many from the Navy, surprisingly. And several are very senior officers:

1) Adm Arun Prakash: former CNS
2) Sudhir Pillai: Chief of Staff, A&N command
3) Manmohan Bahadur: Air Vice Marshal, IAF (he has been nicknamed "Import Bahadur", which has since then become a generic term for all import-loving veterans)
4) K P Sanjeev Kumar (@realkaypius): Navy Test Pilot
5) Cmdr Yashodhan Marathe: first Naval ALH flight commander

Except for the last one, the rest are on Twitter, having heated exchanges.

Many of these gents are going through the same angst that the mainstream media did, once social media came into play. They are being challenged on their assumptions, bias, baggage etc by knowledgeable tweeples (many from BRF). They were not used to being challenged this way when they were serving and to top it all, the people questioning them are civilians. So, strawmen arguments like "Don't question my professionalism/patriotism etc" fly back & forth
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Manish_P »

^ It is understandable that there would be inherent biases on both sides. As long as the discussion/debate is civil and supported by data/science (to the extent possible), it will be a meaningful learning experience.

We also should appreciate that at times the Veterans are constrained by compulsion of not being allowed to divulge information which could be construed as being of a sensitive nature.

Anyway it is good to see BRF forumites, being well aware of that, are being courteous and not being too pushy.

As more of the younger gen service folk (who have grown up on social media) come online, it will lead to more engaging outcomes in a positive way.

This can already be seen in some of the younger vets.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ramana »

ks_sachin wrote:Ramana all IN ships have that requirement as that number comes from the ship with the tighest tolerances. If a helo can accomodate the smallest space requirements then it aids interoperability.

My point is that looks like quite a narrow space due to low displacement ships.
Is this the standard hangar on ships? Or is it for the early ships?

So Would like some insight into the requirement.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/realkaypius/status/ ... 10466?s=20 ---> "President Droupadi Murmu will fly a sortie on the Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter aircraft on Saturday from the Tezpur Air Force Station." Why not indigenous ALH Dhruv that saw a fleetwide grounding recently? What exactly are we signalling here? Discuss.

https://twitter.com/realkaypius/status/ ... 06816?s=20 ---> Fighters may provide better optics. But at a time when we're carpet-bombing our own with Make In India and an indigenous product faces headwinds, why fly "screw-drivered" Su-30MKI? Sends mixed signals. If Su-30MKI fit for VIP/VVIP carriage, why not ALH? Are helicopter crew worth any less?
https://twitter.com/mjavinod/status/164 ... 07232?s=20 ---> I can’t believe I did staff course with this gentleman. Presidents before her, flew in Su-30 when issues on MiG-21 was burning. God knows why such venom. Especially when further checks on Dhruv is on and he wants President to fly in it, when the issue with Dhruv is yet to be resolved.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Prem Kumar »

That was a distasteful tweet!

Some of the vets have gone unhinged. Maybe its the inability to handle social media critique, inability to shed their baggage/worldview or worse
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

Prem Kumar wrote:That was a distasteful tweet!

Some of the vets have gone unhinged. Maybe its the inability to handle social media critique, inability to shed their baggage/worldview or worse
demented and deranged woke whose identity politics spills out in every tweet.

definitely not a fan of the India first brigade. Pity, because there are many like him, each with a huge chip on the shoulder but luckily, the sober vastly outnumber the wokes

usually happens when one too many landings are made in some kommunist paradise

all things considered, presidents and PMs, the world over, fly in fighters only and solely for optics.

As commanders in chief, it's part of their job description, to support and also rally the troops.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Rakesh »

Prem Kumar wrote:That was a distasteful tweet!

Some of the vets have gone unhinged. Maybe its the inability to handle social media critique, inability to shed their baggage/worldview or worse
In addition to what chetak said (and he is right as usual), this particular gentleman is a critic of the current Govt. And that is perfectly fine. He is a citizen and has every right to criticize his government.

He (and others like him) insist on Court of Inquiry to be conducted on the HAL Dhruv. But then turns right around and makes the above tweet! :roll: Behind the "supposed" shock and angst of the back-to-back HAL Dhruv crashes, lies a glee that rears its head every now and then.

Ground the fleet after the crash, then demand for Court of Inquiry (because lives are at stake!)....but ask for the President of India to go for a ride on the very same chopper. He sarcastically asks if the lives of helicopter crews are any less valuable? Is the life of the President of India any less either? Group Captain MJA Vinod (retd) is absolutely right to call out his nonsense.
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by basant »

I remember reading an article and wondering...
Well before we embarked the carrier, we had to contend with many other issues. The strangest one was that whenever it rained, it poured inside the cockpit. Water would come through the overhead CB panel, and pour on the collective pitch where the engine control was located. Water would drip on the instrument panel. Water would drip on the passenger seats. I remember the AME of the civilian Dhruv telling me that the ONGC Chairman when flying on board the civilian ALH once had to use a newspaper to shield himself from rain. HAL will again claim that this point has been addressed. But the main issue again begs question, why was this not checked out in design and before delivery?
Two things. First, it should be obvious that no one would design a helo that rains inside. A flaw could be addressed and has been addressed. The initial low volume production was the reason for low tolerance parts due to a lot of manual contribution with little automation. It was addressed when the volumes grew. Second, how on earth a newspaper would be useful if it really 'poured'? Just wondering. If it was a design issue, surely they would have kept umbrellas inside! :rotfl:
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

basant wrote:I remember reading an article and wondering...
Well before we embarked the carrier, we had to contend with many other issues. The strangest one was that whenever it rained, it poured inside the cockpit. Water would come through the overhead CB panel, and pour on the collective pitch where the engine control was located. Water would drip on the instrument panel. Water would drip on the passenger seats. I remember the AME of the civilian Dhruv telling me that the ONGC Chairman when flying on board the civilian ALH once had to use a newspaper to shield himself from rain. HAL will again claim that this point has been addressed. But the main issue again begs question, why was this not checked out in design and before delivery?
Two things. First, it should be obvious that no one would design a helo that rains inside. A flaw could be addressed and has been addressed. The initial low volume production was the reason for low tolerance parts due to a lot of manual contribution with little automation. It was addressed when the volumes grew. Second, how on earth a newspaper would be useful if it really 'poured'? Just wondering. If it was a design issue, surely they would have kept umbrellas inside! :rotfl:
and they kept flying the "leaky helos"...

That would be a major flight safety issue, as well as a flight critical issue, endangering crew, passengers and platform..

what would have happened if the ingress of rain water had shorted out flight critical electronics and control systems, with a real possibility of a fire in the cockpit/helo passenger compartment

There was every possibility of such a thing happening.

Sealants are used to protect the joints or mating or bonding surfaces from rain and also during washing done at times as part of the normal maintenance, when called for.

Rain tests are done at HAL helo division. There is no chance that this is not in the production specs and delivery checks

If there was a rain water ingress issue, it could usually be a sealant problem that likely developed post delivery.

However, if the acceptance team, before accepting the new helo, insisted on a (repeat) rain test to be done in their presence, it would cause some consternation but at the end of the day, and with some obvious ill grace, they would have to do the test with the hawk eyed inspectors in attendance.

That said, there is a quality issue too. trained manpower from various HALs is often poached by gora aviation companies in bangalore and hyderabad. Just for a few dollars more onlee.


Icing and rain test methods can provide you with important data on your product or part's performance in response to typical or extreme environmental conditions. Element performs icing and rain tests that comply with RTCA DO-160 and MIL-STD 810 aerospace and military standards.

Rain Test and Aircraft Icing Testing
Rain tests are used to evaluate any physical deterioration of a material caused by rain, water spray or dripping. Exposure to water can cause damage to a product’s coatings, sealants, cases and overall performance. These test methods are useful for products that experience outdoor and high condensation environments during their lifespan, particularly for commercial and military aircraft.

Some of the rain test methods we offer include:

Blowing rain tests
Blowing rain tests use a specified wind velocity and rainfall rate to determine how a product will endure its outdoor environment.
Drip tests
Drip tests are used to measure any water penetration or pooling caused by a product being exposed to drops of water falling at a uniform rate.
Water ingress protection tests
Water ingress determine the effectiveness of seals on the enclosures of electrical equipment.

Aircraft Icing and Test Methods
Aircraft icing tests determine the ability of the equipment to withstand naturally occurring ice and frost conditions and helps determine the need for de-icing operations. Some icing test methods may use automated chambers to combine altitude, humidity, and freezing temperatures.

For the RTCA DO-160 standard, equipment is categorized into three groups when performing aircraft icing tests: A, B, and C.

Category A is for equipment located externally or in non-climate controlled areas where aircraft icing and frost may occur due to condensation.
Category B is a 25 cycle test which mimics the effects of multiple ascents and descents where the accumulation of water can cause structural or functional damage to moving parts and electronic systems.
Category C is used for external areas where standing water could freeze and where ice could build up over time impeding normal operation of the test unit.
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by basant »

Of course there are going to be issues, that's true with all products including A380. I am very confident that the water ingress was extremely rare, else we would have heard it years ago along with pleas to write off the Desi product.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Prem Kumar »

Rakesh wrote:In addition to what chetak said (and he is right as usual), this particular gentleman is a critic of the current Govt. And that is perfectly fine. He is a citizen and has every right to criticize his government.
We can see a strong correlation between people who like Modi and those who are pro-Atmanirbhar and those who want India to be a superpower

The reverse correlation is also true: People who love imports & don't believe in any grand narrative of India are also Modi critics

We can say all we want that: "Hatred of one man should not morph into hatred for a nation", but nothing is really morphing. At its core, both these hatreds stem from the same source. These folks truly don't think our country deserves to be great.
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by sanjayc »

Rakesh wrote:In addition to what chetak said (and he is right as usual), this particular gentleman is a critic of the current Govt. And that is perfectly fine. He is a citizen and has every right to criticize his government.
Lot of anti-national work is being packaged as anti-Govt. work by crooks. When caught, they say: "We are not anti-national. We are merely criticizing the Govt." This is just a trick. All their arguments and campaigns are designed to damage India, but they pretend they are only anti-Govt. I am seeing lot of instances of this. Anti-governmentism is the last refuge of the anti-national.
BajKhedawal
BRFite
Posts: 1203
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 10:08
Location: Is it ethical? No! Is it Pakistani? Yes!

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by BajKhedawal »

A week ago 10+ USA faujis died in a Black Hawk crash while training somewhere in Texas, yesterday 10 Japani faujis died in another Black Hawk crash. Is this some software issue like Y2K? Didn't we order some kala hawks ourselves?
chiru
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 17 Jun 2009 12:46
Location: mahishooru

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chiru »

Unni sir has this to say
unnipillai@ctp
@unnipillai18
·
1h
Replying to
@Indrani1_Roy
The first one off shore had a failure. But the second in Kochi was pure maintenance error.
MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by MeshaVishwas »

Satyam Eva Jayate.
Advanced Light Helicopters Back in Flight Mode- Manu Pubby/ToI
New Delhi: The fleet of indigenous Advanced Light Helicopters (ALH) has started flying operations again, nearly amonth after two successive crashes of coast guard and naval variants of the aircraft. Extensive checks on the entire fleet of helicopters, also in service with the Army and Air Force, were under-


taken and no signs of any deep-rooted issue with the aircraft were found.
It is learnt that both accidents that took place in March were related to a control failure. No aircrew had suffered fatal casualties and the helicopters could be recovered fully to study the reasons behind the technical faults. The initial probe has found that the reasons behind the failure were maintenance related. In one case, the fault appears to have oc- curred due to the improper fitment of washers, while in the other, two similar rods were interchanged during the maintenance process. Following the crashes, the entire fleet was assessed by technical teams and no red flags have been raised after thorough checks. Additional training is being given to crews to ensure such issues do not come up again.
Aworkhorse for the armed forces that operates in diverse environments from warships to high altitude areas like the Siachen glacier, the ALH fleet has undertaken over 3. 9 lakh flying hours till now. The armed forces, as well as some export customers, are flying 338 helicopters of the type, with orders for several dozen more in the pipelines.
Internal records seen by ET show that the accident rate has sharply declined in the past five years. The average rate since 2018 has been 5. 5 accidents per one lakh flying hours. Prior to 2018, this rate was 9. 5 per lakh flying hours.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ramana »

Good they got to root cause and effective corrective action.
Both had different root causes.
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by yensoy »

Two rods should not be interchangeable by design (unless they are interchangeable by design). This is not a human failure, this is a design error. There is room for improvement here, evidently.
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by basant »

yensoy wrote:Two rods should not be interchangeable by design (unless they are interchangeable by design). This is not a human failure, this is a design error. There is room for improvement here, evidently.
At least in some cases it need not be either considering the extremes the machine has to perform. It might be the most optimal solution meeting the restrictions.
MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by MeshaVishwas »

yensoy wrote:Two rods should not be interchangeable by design (unless they are interchangeable by design). This is not a human failure, this is a design error. There is room for improvement here, evidently.
Saar, they were similar and not identical.The technician(s) could not differentiate between the two.With training they will identify without problem.
williams
BRFite
Posts: 875
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by williams »

I am asking a very ignorant question. improper fitment of washers? Isn't that something basic? or is it complicated in a Helicopter and requires training?
Should there be some quality check after maintenance to avoid such incidents? Or is this typical DDM reporting?
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ks_sachin »

Mistakes happen.
SOPs are laid down but technicians can still make mistakes.
An engineering officer who signs off will not dismantle everything to check that it was put together properly. Just not feasible.
His or her job is to ensure that his or her men are as proficient in the SOPs of their particular aircraft Type.
This is what I have gleaned.
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by yensoy »

MeshaVishwas wrote:
yensoy wrote:Two rods should not be interchangeable by design (unless they are interchangeable by design). This is not a human failure, this is a design error. There is room for improvement here, evidently.
Saar, they were similar and not identical.The technician(s) could not differentiate between the two.With training they will identify without problem.
Saar the wrong one should just not fit. There should be some kind of obstruction in one which prevents it from being used. Basic good design, especially when it is so critical. This is precisely so that we don't need to rely on technician's expertise or level of attention.

In exacting situations, there is no such thing as human error because to err is human. Or something can be termed as human error only if multiple human errors have led to the incident (swiss cheese model). Humans fail, which is why the design itself must be defensive in nature; the only human related errors which may occur from that point on will be due to sabotage or malintent.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

yensoy wrote:
MeshaVishwas wrote: Saar, they were similar and not identical. The technician(s) could not differentiate between the two.With training they will identify without problem.
Saar the wrong one should just not fit. There should be some kind of obstruction in one which prevents it from being used. Basic good design, especially when it is so critical. This is precisely so that we don't need to rely on technician's expertise or level of attention.

In exacting situations, there is no such thing as human error because to err is human. Or something can be termed as human error only if multiple human errors have led to the incident (swiss cheese model). Humans fail, which is why the design itself must be defensive in nature; the only human related errors which may occur from that point on will be due to sabotage or malintent.
yensoy ji,

Assuming that all that has been said is true, a few observations are called for...

not to mention that the part numbers of the two "near identical looking" components would be different and the said different part numbers would/should be printed or otherwise identified indelibly on each component.

There would also be separate inspection tags on each component that would have been signed off by qualified inspectors

Moreover, if the rods are part of the flight control system, standard procedures would call for a mandatory "independent" check to be done and signed off.

Last but not least, tech log entries are finally checked and signed off by the tech officer.

The so called error has passed through several levels of tech scrutiny, visual checks, and challenge, and it still emerged unnoticed.

In the interests of sanity, one will not touch upon the effed up aspects of the design and how these components got through that stage, including the manufacturing stage, without raising an kind of alarm

sadly, the damage of many crores would be passed off with a standard one liner in the board of inquiry report: "Loss to be borne by the state"
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Rakesh »

MeshaVishwas wrote:Satyam Eva Jayate.
Advanced Light Helicopters Back in Flight Mode- Manu Pubby/ToI
The initial probe has found that the reasons behind the failure were maintenance related. In one case, the fault appears to have oc- curred due to the improper fitment of washers, while in the other, two similar rods were interchanged during the maintenance process. Following the crashes, the entire fleet was assessed by technical teams and no red flags have been raised after thorough checks. Additional training is being given to crews to ensure such issues do not come up again.

https://twitter.com/sudhirpillai__/stat ... 99904?s=20 ---> As FONA & Class Authority for Naval Aviation till about 2012 did not clear ALH LSP for VIP transport. Negative list does gross harm to current and medium term military readiness. The naval 60 @indiannavy ALH order must be CANCELED & SP route must get revived.


This jerk hides his Twitter responses. He used to DM me on Twitter.
MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by MeshaVishwas »

FLASH: Indian Army chopper crashes in Kishtwar of Jammu & Kashmir
UPDATE: Pilots of the Indian Army's ALH Dhruv Helicopter have suffered injuries in the crash but are safe: Army officials
-TNIE on Twitter
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

ks_sachin wrote:Mistakes happen.
SOPs are laid down but technicians can still make mistakes.
An engineering officer who signs off will not dismantle everything to check that it was put together properly. Just not feasible.
His or her job is to ensure that his or her men are as proficient in the SOPs of their particular aircraft Type.
This is what I have gleaned.
what were the supervisors and officers doing while the fitment was going on

All maintenance is to be done in accordance with the relevant maintenance manual, physically opened to the correct page(s) specifying the required action to be completed and frequently referred to, because the actions have to be legally signed off



every joker who signs off on the completed work is responsible legally for the correctness and completeness of his/her work

If the officers cannot be present, then deeper scrutiny and care is to be exercised by them before affixing their dhobi marks.

when the log entries are made and signed off, it is the relevant paras and subsections of these very maintenance manuals, including the page number(s) which are cited to confirm that the maintenance actions have been carried out in a procedurally correct manner and exactly as specified in the maintenance manual and refers to exactly the maintenance actions that are called for

In aviation, the vital relevance of the written word simply cannot be overlooked, nor can it be dispensed with, or even over emphasised.

Mistakes just do not "happen", It is the holes in the swiss cheese that align
Last edited by chetak on 04 May 2023 12:59, edited 1 time in total.
wig
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2162
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by wig »

ALH Dhruv down in Kishtwar, J&K

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/ar ... 80565&ei=8

extracts
As per sources in the Army, the pilots of the chopper have suffered injuries due to the crash, but are safe.

“One Army AHL Dhruv helicopter crashed near Kishtwar, Jammu & Kashmir today. Pilots have suffered injuries but are safe,” said sources.

The remains of the chopper were found in the Marusudar River, which flows through Marwah-Dachhan in the Kishtwar district, after being washed away following the crash.
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Manish_P »

wig wrote:ALH Dhruv down in Kishtwar, J&K
As per sources in the Army, the pilots of the chopper have suffered injuries due to the crash, but are safe.

“One Army AHL Dhruv helicopter crashed near Kishtwar, Jammu & Kashmir today. Pilots have suffered injuries but are safe,” said sources.
Good to hear about the personnel.

In fact when news of heli crash comes and i read that it was the Dhruv somehow I feel more hopeful/confident that the personnel will make it.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

Army ALH Dhruv Helicopter crashed near Kishtwar.

Image
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Prem Kumar »

The COI report that there weren't any design problems, is a blow to Import Bahadurs, one of whom penned a piece hinting at fundamental design problems even while the COI was going on.

The gang (Manmohan Bahadur, Realkaypius, Sudhir Pillai, Arun Prakash etc) don't miss an opportunity to run down indigenous programs. That most of these gents were at the top or one level below in the Armed Forces hierarchy, shows how much rot exists in the system

Today's Dhruv crash is unfortunate. These gents must be smacking their lips in glee
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ks_sachin »

chetak wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:Mistakes happen.
SOPs are laid down but technicians can still make mistakes.
An engineering officer who signs off will not dismantle everything to check that it was put together properly. Just not feasible.
His or her job is to ensure that his or her men are as proficient in the SOPs of their particular aircraft Type.
This is what I have gleaned.
what were the supervisors and officers doing while the fitment was going on

All maintenance is to be done in accordance with the relevant maintenance manual, physically opened to the correct page(s) specifying the required action to be completed and frequently referred to, because the actions have to be legally signed off



every joker who signs off on the completed work is responsible legally for the correctness and completeness of his/her work

If the officers cannot be present, then deeper scrutiny and care is to be exercised by them before affixing their dhobi marks.

when the log entries are made and signed off, it is the relevant paras and subsections of these very maintenance manuals, including the page number(s) which are cited to confirm that the maintenance actions have been carried out in a procedurally correct manner and exactly as specified in the maintenance manual and refers to exactly the maintenance actions that are called for

In aviation, the vital relevance of the written word simply cannot be overlooked, nor can it be dispensed with, or even over emphasised.

Mistakes just do not "happen", It is the holes in the swiss cheese that align
Each CoI after the crash helps the IAF understand how the swiss cheese aligned.

Everytime we understand how the swiss cheese aligns we update the SoPs.

You are assuming that there is no accountability when mistakes happen or that mistakes cannot happen!
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

ks_sachin wrote:

Mistakes just do not "happen", It is the holes in the swiss cheese that align
Each CoI after the crash helps the IAF understand how the swiss cheese aligned.

Everytime we understand how the swiss cheese aligns we update the SoPs.

You are assuming that there is no accountability when mistakes happen or that mistakes cannot happen!
predigested and prepackaged pap is not going to cut the mustard...

I still have an open mind, but now the anger is fast building, as indeed it is, with many across the country.

if what you say if true, then why the major embarrassment with these series of fiascos, especially when global attention is so keenly focused on these platforms and why did the updated SOPs not work..

In an event of this magnitude, a holistic and thorough reappraisal of all procedures should have been carried out. There was certainly enough time during the grounding to have done a very thorough and independent audit.

maybe it's also high time to do a deep and non partisan dive into what the PSU has been doing including the audits of it's suppliers, manufacturing, and storage procedures, QC, training, and maintenance, including the platform management philosophy

from what one is hearing, fingers are being pointed everywhere else except inwards, where the antiseptic light of honesty should have, first and foremost, shone with the greatest of intensity

If ever a manufacturer should have stepped in on their own, and gone above and beyond the call, to reassure their customers by finding safe and workable solutions and help to regenerate confidence, it is this PSU and at this time
Last edited by chetak on 05 May 2023 07:08, edited 1 time in total.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by SSridhar »

yensoy wrote:
MeshaVishwas wrote: Saar, they were similar and not identical.The technician(s) could not differentiate between the two.With training they will identify without problem.
Saar the wrong one should just not fit. There should be some kind of obstruction in one which prevents it from being used. Basic good design, especially when it is so critical. This is precisely so that we don't need to rely on technician's expertise or level of attention.

In exacting situations, there is no such thing as human error because to err is human. Or something can be termed as human error only if multiple human errors have led to the incident (swiss cheese model). Humans fail, which is why the design itself must be defensive in nature; the only human related errors which may occur from that point on will be due to sabotage or malintent.
Well said. I agree. This is the safest way assuming parts look very similar and can therefore be error-prone for misuse.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by chetak »

SSridhar wrote:
yensoy wrote: Saar the wrong one should just not fit. There should be some kind of obstruction in one which prevents it from being used. Basic good design, especially when it is so critical. This is precisely so that we don't need to rely on technician's expertise or level of attention.

In exacting situations, there is no such thing as human error because to err is human. Or something can be termed as human error only if multiple human errors have led to the incident (swiss cheese model). Humans fail, which is why the design itself must be defensive in nature; the only human related errors which may occur from that point on will be due to sabotage or malintent.
Well said. I agree. This is the safest way assuming parts look very similar and can therefore be error-prone for misuse.

What is Error Proofing?
Error proofing

Error proofing or mistake proofing or fail-safing is also called as ‘Poka-Yoke’ (pronounced as Po-kaa-Yo-kay) in Japanese. Error proofing was previously called fool-proofing or idiot proofing. Error proofing involves the use of any automatic device or method that makes it impossible to make an error or at-least detect it as soon as possible in order to correct it.

It can be as simple process to draw a picture of a TV remote on the table and hence help everybody at home in reminding to keep the remote in the same place every time or a washing machine not turning ON till the water is turned on and machine is shut properly.

Why is error proofing required?

When there are resources involved, money involved, and general wellbeing (of society at-large) involved, it becomes necessary making processes or devices mistake proof to avoid damage, non-uniformity, rework, and wastage due to human intervention. It only requires that the error proofing method has to be inexpensive, it has to surely detect the error or report it at the earliest.

When do you use error proofing?

When human errors cause mistakes or defects and the output depends on somebody’s skill and experience.
To avoid customer making error and making a loss to himself and the business.
When something can be avoided in earlier stages that can cause bigger problem in later stages.
When any error becomes too costly to rectify and it is cheaper and better to prevent its occurrence in the first place.
When a large number of people are involved in a process or producing an output and the same person may not be available throughout the life cycle of the product.
How do you error proof?

Create a flow chart of the process describing each step and clearly mentioning where the human interventions occur.
Identify each potential error and try to do a root cause analysis to find its source or origin.
For each potential error, list down potential ways of making it impossible to make the error.
Think of eliminating the step that causes the error.
Think of changing he step with a better, failsafe step.
Think of helping the user to exercise the correct step in an easier way instead of making an error.
Encourage the usage of sensors, warning lights, buzzers, proximity detectors etc
In any case if it is impossible to avoid the error at-least try to make it obvious and reported immediately so that any necessary corrective action can be taken. Thereby you are minimizing the effects of the error.
To detect errors, encourage usage of color coding or graphics, checking for completeness, templates etc
Choose the best process or device or method to error proof and use it for each potential error.
Error proofing performance window

It is generally suggested to allow one month for observation and recording the errors and their error proofing data.
from the net
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by Manish_P »

Manish_P wrote:
wig wrote:ALH Dhruv down in Kishtwar, J&K
Good to hear about the personnel.

In fact when news of heli crash comes and i read that it was the Dhruv somehow I feel more hopeful/confident that the personnel will make it.
Sad to read today that there is one casualty in this crash.
CFN Anil Pabbala.

May god give strength to his family.

Om Shanti
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ks_sachin »

chetak wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:




Each CoI after the crash helps the IAF understand how the swiss cheese aligned.

Everytime we understand how the swiss cheese aligns we update the SoPs.

You are assuming that there is no accountability when mistakes happen or that mistakes cannot happen!
predigested and prepackaged pap is not going to cut the mustard...

I still have an open mind, but now the anger is fast building, as indeed it is, with many across the country.

if what you say if true, then why the major embarrassment with these series of fiascos, especially when global attention is so keenly focused on these platforms and why did the updated SOPs not work..

In an event of this magnitude, a holistic and thorough reappraisal of all procedures should have been carried out. There was certainly enough time during the grounding to have done a very thorough and independent audit.

maybe it's also high time to do a deep and non partisan dive into what the PSU has been doing including the audits of it's suppliers, manufacturing, and storage procedures, QC, training, and maintenance, including the platform management philosophy

from what one is hearing, fingers are being pointed everywhere else except inwards, where the antiseptic light of honesty should have, first and foremost, shone with the greatest of intensity

If ever a manufacturer should have stepped in on their own, and gone above and beyond the call, to reassure their customers by finding safe and workable solutions and help to regenerate confidence, it is this PSU and at this time
We reap what we sow......
Last edited by ks_sachin on 05 May 2023 08:08, edited 2 times in total.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ks_sachin »

chetak wrote:
SSridhar wrote: Well said. I agree. This is the safest way assuming parts look very similar and can therefore be error-prone for misuse.

What is Error Proofing?
Error proofing

Error proofing or mistake proofing or fail-safing is also called as ‘Poka-Yoke’ (pronounced as Po-kaa-Yo-kay) in Japanese. Error proofing was previously called fool-proofing or idiot proofing. Error proofing involves the use of any automatic device or method that makes it impossible to make an error or at-least detect it as soon as possible in order to correct it.

It can be as simple process to draw a picture of a TV remote on the table and hence help everybody at home in reminding to keep the remote in the same place every time or a washing machine not turning ON till the water is turned on and machine is shut properly.

Why is error proofing required?

When there are resources involved, money involved, and general wellbeing (of society at-large) involved, it becomes necessary making processes or devices mistake proof to avoid damage, non-uniformity, rework, and wastage due to human intervention. It only requires that the error proofing method has to be inexpensive, it has to surely detect the error or report it at the earliest.

When do you use error proofing?

When human errors cause mistakes or defects and the output depends on somebody’s skill and experience.
To avoid customer making error and making a loss to himself and the business.
When something can be avoided in earlier stages that can cause bigger problem in later stages.
When any error becomes too costly to rectify and it is cheaper and better to prevent its occurrence in the first place.
When a large number of people are involved in a process or producing an output and the same person may not be available throughout the life cycle of the product.
How do you error proof?

Create a flow chart of the process describing each step and clearly mentioning where the human interventions occur.
Identify each potential error and try to do a root cause analysis to find its source or origin.
For each potential error, list down potential ways of making it impossible to make the error.
Think of eliminating the step that causes the error.
Think of changing he step with a better, failsafe step.
Think of helping the user to exercise the correct step in an easier way instead of making an error.
Encourage the usage of sensors, warning lights, buzzers, proximity detectors etc
In any case if it is impossible to avoid the error at-least try to make it obvious and reported immediately so that any necessary corrective action can be taken. Thereby you are minimizing the effects of the error.
To detect errors, encourage usage of color coding or graphics, checking for completeness, templates etc
Choose the best process or device or method to error proof and use it for each potential error.
Error proofing performance window

It is generally suggested to allow one month for observation and recording the errors and their error proofing data.
from the net
<deleted>
Last edited by ks_sachin on 05 May 2023 08:07, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply