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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 31 Oct 2009 07:07

chetak wrote:HAL did the major work on the power train and the gearbox. and herein lies a majority of the problems. There are higher than normal vibrations that continue to plague the Dhruv. The main gearbox is unique in that it flies on no other helo in the world. I have seen and continue to see a lot of cowboys here. I am unable to discuss anything further on an open forum.


In fact I recall that the conversation (at that time) was about the gearbox. Specifically it was about how long it will continue to work after losing all its oil and scraping into my memory I seem to recall two sides of the story as I asked someone else about the same thing (perhaps at some Aero India)

The IAF man said that the gearbox would not work for the stipulated X minutes (can't recall the figure) after the oil was drained out.

The other guy claimed that not only did the gearbox meet those specs, but those specs were higher than what the IAF required for other imported helos.

Of course I don't know who is right or wrong.

I will soon put up edited clips of the Ecuador crash.

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Dmurphy » 31 Oct 2009 08:07

IAF Mi-17 helicopter crashes into Chenab, pilot killed
NEW DELHI: A senior IAF pilot was killed and three others were feared dead after their Mi-17 helicopter crashed into the Chenab river in the
mountainous Doda district of Jammu and Kashmir on Friday afternoon.

While the charred body of pilot, Wing Commander R Garg, had been fished out by late afternoon, search operations were still in progress for the other three victims -- co-pilot Flight Lieutenant S Tomar and technicians junior warrant officer Kundan Singh and sergeant P K Deepak.

The ill-fated Mi-17-1V, in formation with another helicopter on a regular sortie, was flying quite low over the Chenab when it apparently got entangled in a cable of a bridge and crashed into the water reservoir of Baglihar hydro-electric power project at Tringel Assar, 150 km northeast of Jammu.

The helicopters were returning from the mountain-locked Nawapachi area of Kishtawar district, where IAF undertakes regular sorties to supply rations, arms and ammunition for the troops stationed there.

This is the 10th aircraft crash in IAF this year, already making it one of the worst years for the force in recent times. From 1971-72 to 2003-04, IAF's consolidated average rate stood at 1.09 accidents per 10,000 hours of flying, roughly translating into the loss of 23 aircraft and the death of 10-14 pilots every year.

The crash rate did come down dramatically to around 0.27 accidents per 10,000 hours of flying, with an over 50% reduction in crashes after 2003-04. But the number of crashes has now gone up once again.

The two main reasons for crashes are attributed to "human errors" and "technical defects". In other words, "inadequate" training to pilots, ageing machines and shoddy maintenance practices form a deadly mix for IAF.

The sturdy Mi-17s have, however, proved to be one of the workhorses of IAF ever since 50 of them were inducted in the mid-1980s. Another 40 Mi-17-1Vs were later ordered in 2000.

Incidentally, IAF is slated to induct another 80 of Mi-17's latest version from 2010 to 2014 under a $1.2 billion deal with Russia inked in December 2008.

The choppers, which will also be weaponised for combat operations, are slated to replace the 50 old Mi-8s in the IAF fleet, which have already outlived their life span of 35 years, and boost operations in high-altitude areas like Siachen and Ladakh.

Brushing aside criticism that Mi-17s were based on outdated technology and had high life-cycle costs, officers say the new choppers would be able to land at a height of 18,000-feet with their powerful engines, better avionics and night-flying ability.
:( :( :(

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby vina » 31 Oct 2009 09:18

chetak wrote:There are no special specs given by the IAF for the crash worthiness of the Dhruv. Why would any Indian designed helo be more crash worthy than required? Do we crash more often?
There is essentially no airframe difference between the civilian and military versions of the Dhruv except for the wheels fitted on the civilian ( and also Navy & Coast Guard ) version and the skid fitted on the Army and Air Force versions. Other differences are engines and the equipment suite.


No what I meant is that the civilan Dhruv is a military derviative and has the same crash worthiness as the military one. Normal civilian versions wouldnt have that kind of extra crash worthiness (the military ones are expected to be in combat and get shot at and you might have to land one in a real hurry!) as the military ones because that would cut fuel and payload efficiency. Enter composites in a big way in Dhruv .

But that said, I knew during the design stage that extra care was paid to crash worthiness that was built into the designs. Back in those days there were big whines when the skids were selected for army version becuase the whiners said that only wheels alone will make it crash worthy !.

Composites notwithstanding, the Navy baulked at accepting the Dhruv because primarily it was very much heavier than promised and having a short range bird at sea is a big time liability. This translates to less loiter and weapon carrying capacity. This also puts the ship at great risk because she will have to stay exposed longer in submarine infested waters.

The Dhruv is not suitaeble as a ship borne helicopter which is esentially multi role . Period.It needs to do ASW, ASwW and SAR and have large endurance and range as well. You need a 10 ton helicopter to be able to do that. With even just a LWT or a Anti ship missile laoded it will have serious range and loiter restrictions. As for SAR roles, again, there will be restrictions on range and no of people it can pick up at a give time.

The more important part is I think the Dhruv wouldnt have certain key requirements that are really really necesary for a true Navl Helicopter like the Sea King . Stuff like auto fold of rotors, auto hover all these are absolutely crucial. I dont think Dhruv had these features. A

As for vibration, I think that was a fallout of the US sanctions. Remember, the original powerplant for the Dhrvu was the LHTEC CTS 800 i think with close to 1800 shp. The Dhruv in fact was nearly fully certified with athat engine and the trubomeca was adopted only after the sanctions. Why Turbomeca did not have an equivalent engine.. Hence the Shakti. That crusial Lorid's Anti Resonance Isolation system too fell a victim of that. I dont know what happened to address that , but I think there must have been something done. If anyone knows , please update

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby rohitvats » 31 Oct 2009 15:15

I'm not exactly the technical types to evaluate a Helicopter but i once had a dicussion with a Navy freind of mine. Now this gentlemen flies in those things with contra-rotating blades and does submarine hunting for living. As per him, the Dhruv does not have capacity to be a true blue ASW chopper. In more chaste hindi, 'Dhruv mein dum nahin hai payload uthane ka..itna sara equipment kaun uthayega.....aur kitni der tak"

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 31 Oct 2009 16:47



I heard a sad and shocking fact about this crash today. People have a habit of slinging up cables across all sorts of areas for various reasons. The Air Force has a standing request that such cables should have huge and prominent markers. What happened to this helo was that it flew into a cable that someone had decided to sling across the water.

Apparently this is the second such cable crash - with one having occurred somewhere in the North East.

I am deeply saddened and angry to hear this.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 31 Oct 2009 16:52


Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16997
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rahul M » 31 Oct 2009 16:53

rohitvats wrote:I'm not exactly the technical types to evaluate a Helicopter but i once had a dicussion with a Navy freind of mine. Now this gentlemen flies in those things with contra-rotating blades and does submarine hunting for living. As per him, the Dhruv does not have capacity to be a true blue ASW chopper. In more chaste hindi, 'Dhruv mein dum nahin hai payload uthane ka..itna sara equipment kaun uthayega.....aur kitni der tak"

rohit, that's the very point, who thought that it had ? dhruv is a light helicopter by definition (advanced light helicopter). true-blue ASW choppers are heavyweight machines. there is absolutely no comparison, it's like saying your RCL armed jeep is no replacement for a MBT !
well, that's stating the obvious !
the very idea seems like a strawman argument to me.
what dhruv should have been ideal replacement for is the chetak that are used for utility, SAR and some ASW in ships that don't carry a heavy helo.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22262
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 31 Oct 2009 17:03

shiv wrote:
In fact I recall that the conversation (at that time) was about the gearbox. Specifically it was about how long it will continue to work after losing all its oil and scraping into my memory I seem to recall two sides of the story as I asked someone else about the same thing (perhaps at some Aero India)

The IAF man said that the gearbox would not work for the stipulated X minutes (can't recall the figure) after the oil was drained out.

The other guy claimed that not only did the gearbox meet those specs, but those specs were higher than what the IAF required for other imported helos.



Shiv,

The required dry running time for this MGB is 30 minutes, The MGB is rated for this.

HAL has actually demonstrated this ( and more ) and run the MGB dry for 32-33 minutes. I guess that when push comes to shove, it might actually do somewhat better than this but that is a matter of karma. :)

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22262
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 31 Oct 2009 17:07

shiv wrote:


I heard a sad and shocking fact about this crash today. People have a habit of slinging up cables across all sorts of areas for various reasons. The Air Force has a standing request that such cables should have huge and prominent markers. What happened to this helo was that it flew into a cable that someone had decided to sling across the water.

Apparently this is the second such cable crash - with one having occurred somewhere in the North East.

I am deeply saddened and angry to hear this.



Maybe its time to fit cable cutters on helos operating in such hazardous areas. Many civil helos carry them routinely as a permanent fit.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22262
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 31 Oct 2009 17:16

[quote="shiv"]Ecuador Dhruv crash

IMHO, the Ecuador Dhruv has been flown outside its demonstrated and safe flight envelope.

Pity.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 31 Oct 2009 21:48

chetak wrote:
shiv wrote:Apparently this is the second such cable crash - with one having occurred somewhere in the North East.

I am deeply saddened and angry to hear this.


Maybe its time to fit cable cutters on helos operating in such hazardous areas. Many civil helos carry them routinely as a permanent fit.


I dont know if its a cable or a rope bridge . But these bridges are usually very old and regular fixtures dating back from ages in the kashmir valleys. I would doubt if someone can just decide on thier own to sling a cable across the river waters on their own. Or if something popped up overnight

I did a bit of checking just nagvigating along the chenab from Doda to Ramban ( distance of about 20 miles) came up with 10 different kinds of bridges - big ones, small ones, pedestrian bridges etc.. like this one

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 2&t=h&z=17

i would probably guess that the pilot knew the bridge was there but didnt realise he was low enough to get caught in one. or soemthing else forced him to drop hieght and into the bridge.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 31 Oct 2009 21:50

Incidentally last year, Western Command had a zero accident rate.

This year, they lost two - both fatal - the MiG-21 and this Mi-17

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 31 Oct 2009 22:07

The Indian ambassador in Ecuador in an official statement has blamed the pilot for the crash. The ambassador says that the pilot abruptly carried out an unauthorized maneuver on his own that was not planned for the demonstration. As a result, he lost control.

If this is the case, then I think the accident will actually prove to be a massive PR boost for HAL as the helicopter hit the ground nose-first, yet the pilots walked out of the wreck on their own without any injuries. There was no fire either though the tanks were loaded with aviation fuel. This kind of crash worthiness is unbelievable.

The ambassador of India in Ecuador, Deepak Bhojwani, emphasized yesterday the technological advances that the company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) he has given in aviation.

It said that the Air Force of his country it watches a land border of more than 10 000 kilometers. As well as the sovereign marine zones that surpass the 200 000 square kilometers.

“ to perform these functions, India counts on apparatuses developed in the facilities of Bangalore, of HAL ”.
Bhojwani referred that although also they use airplanes of foreign marks, all are assembled in India. “ the airplanes Mirage (France) Jaguar and Hawk (England) MIG and Sukhoi (Russia)… totally are assembled in India by HAL.

Also, it indicated that this state company/signature collaborates with the companies of aviation Boing and Airbus, for those who makes different components from his airplanes.

On the Dhruv helicopters, it affirmed that they are of last generation and that they have been tried in lands and more adverse situations of the world. Even in mountain ranges of the Himalayas, the north of India.

“ This helicopter was certificate by the Armed Forces of Israel, Island Mauritius and Nepal. More than 120 Dhruv airships they are in the service with the Air Force, Terrestrial and Naval of India ”.

Through an official notice, the Ambassador even affirmed that the own Ecuadorian Air Force (FAE) stated the competition and quality of the Dhruv.
“ the High Commands of Ecuador attended a demonstration in Bangalore and evaluated the technical aspects ”. Then, in October of 2009, it assures that there was in Ecuador a demonstration where a rescue in open sea (against the coasts of Salt mines) became and other tests battle.

In his letter, the Ambassador picks up the version of the commander of the FAE, Rodrigo Bohórquez, that gave the wreck to the pilot: “ the evidence of the certainty and trustworthiness of these airships was mainly evident in the accident in the airport Marshal Sucre… when one of the helicopters crashed after the pilot lost control, result of an abrupt maneuver that was not predicted in the demonstration planned for the commemoration of the 89 years of the FAE, according to the Commander of the FAE. In spite of the fall on the nose, the pilot and the copilot left by their own means…, demonstrates of the solidity of the airship… ”.

“ The fact that the Dhruv flew in Ecuadorian skies to whole satisfaction of the Ecuadorian High Commands is testimony of the technical and industrial competition of HAL, who is not due to deny by interests that do not prioritize the priorities of Ecuador


http://ww1.elcomercio.com/noticiaEC.asp ... _seccion=4

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 31 Oct 2009 22:25

I read in an Ecuadorian paper that the helicopters may have been flying too close to each other due to which the accident occurred. Shiv Aroor today has this take on the accident:

Ok here's the very latest. According to my sources in Ecuador, the ill-fated helicopter is likely to have come under the air forced downward by the rotors (rotorwash) of one of the other Dhruv's flying in the formation. At this point, complications may have started when the pilots Luis Armas and Ivan Abril made an attempt to recover from the ensuing sharp left bank (this is visible in the video). In technical terms, the pilot encountered a cyclic limit to the right (saturation of cyclic), as a result of which they found they had no further cyclic available at their disposal to stabilise or roll back out of the left turn. In well-documented helicopter flight dynamics, when cyclic saturation is reached, there is an abrupt loss of available lift to counter the turn.

It is understood that the Dhruv flight manual and training programme contains a specific module on recovering from a cyclic limit situation, and the Ecuadorian pilots underwent this process as part of their training in 2008. However, considering that the Dhruvs were flying at just 70-meters above the ground -- and if this theory holds -- then the pilots would not have had a chance to recover either way.


http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/10/dh ... limit.html

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 01 Nov 2009 06:25

Jagan wrote: I would doubt if someone can just decide on thier own to sling a cable across the river waters on their own. Or if something popped up overnight.


As per what i was told (by a recently retired AM) this is what happened. A previously unknown cable slung across with no markers.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 01 Nov 2009 08:58

shiv wrote:
Jagan wrote: I would doubt if someone can just decide on thier own to sling a cable across the river waters on their own. Or if something popped up overnight.


As per what i was told (by a recently retired AM) this is what happened. A previously unknown cable slung across with no markers.


ouch.. now with the pleas to stop people from throwing food around to prevent bird hits, we need to tell them not to sling cables across rivers? such a waste of life.

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 794
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Shameek » 01 Nov 2009 09:22

The sad part is that the media will be quick to start harping the "This is the n'th crash this year....etc" line but will not take up the issues like birds, garbage and now this low hung unmarked cable which cause such tragic losses of lives.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Surya » 01 Nov 2009 09:49

why are people surprised???

In a country lacking any civil sense - where cables are strung helter skelter, garbage thrown around etc etc its a miracle this has not happened more.

Imagine the nightmare the poor Helo pilots have to plan for in night SHBO operations. cables is high on the warning list for all SHBO ops

The only relief is that if the enemy also have to deal with this.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 01 Nov 2009 10:05

pandyan wrote:if cable incident has happened before and it is known that there are "rogue" cables...why are the pilots/crew put into danger with these type of missions? what is the objective?




I understand and empathise with your distress but that is a stupid question.

For example bird hits are a known cause of accidents but still pilots are made to fly knowing that bird hits are always a possibility. What is the objective, I could equally ask.

The point is not that flying does not have risks, but how to mimimize the risks. That is what flight safety is about.

If the Air Force wanted to reduce risks to zero they should not fly at all. We the public have a duty to ensure that we can help reduce risk to our pilots. Looked at in that perspective your question is absurd. Nobody deliberately sends pilots out to face risks unless you can accept that flying itself involves risks. No fly no risk.

We have a country full of people who are both ignorant and stupid. They do not understand that a cable across the water is as much a risk to pilots as a ditch dug overnight in the middle of a city road is to motorcyclists. India is a country of ignorants who need to be either taught or forced to conform.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22262
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby chetak » 01 Nov 2009 12:07

shiv wrote:
pandyan wrote:if cable incident has happened before and it is known that there are "rogue" cables...why are the pilots/crew put into danger with these type of missions? what is the objective?




I understand and empathise with your distress but that is a stupid question.

For example bird hits are a known cause of accidents but still pilots are made to fly knowing that bird hits are always a possibility. What is the objective, I could equally ask.

The point is not that flying does not have risks, but how to mimimize the risks. That is what flight safety is about.

If the Air Force wanted to reduce risks to zero they should not fly at all. We the public have a duty to ensure that we can help reduce risk to our pilots. Looked at in that perspective your question is absurd. Nobody deliberately sends pilots out to face risks unless you can accept that flying itself involves risks. No fly no risk.

We have a country full of people who are both ignorant and stupid. They do not understand that a cable across the water is as much a risk to pilots as a ditch dug overnight in the middle of a city road is to motorcyclists. India is a country of ignorants who need to be either taught or forced to conform.



The possibility that the cable has been strung up overnight, not so innocently, has also to be considered.

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 794
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Shameek » 01 Nov 2009 20:58

chetak wrote:The possibility that the cable has been strung up overnight, not so innocently, has also to be considered.


While that may be a remote possibility, it still does not take away from the fact that there are people who will do things without consideration of the long time impact of their actions. And as citizens we are all to blame in part for it. How many discussions and media debates do we see about unauthorized constructions, garbage disposal, bird hits, encroachment on military land etc? Compare that to the plethora of self proclaimed experts who appear on the news everytime there is a crash to start debates on training, quality, crash rate, spurious parts etc. While that is a concern too there is not much the common man can do to affect it. However what the common man can impact is the issues above about garbage, etc. But they are never told about that.
Small wonder then that the public thinks MiGs are 'flying coffins' but knows squat about the actual dangers faced by our pilots every day they take to the air.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 01 Nov 2009 21:38

Image

Looking at the size of the river, slinging a steel cable across would require a governmental sized effort?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 01 Nov 2009 21:52

Jagan wrote:Looking at the size of the river, slinging a steel cable across would require a governmental sized effort?


Jagan - I think the cable was from a hilltop/hillside nearby. It could easily have been dropped to the nearside bank and the end taken by boat to the other bank with no governmental effort.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36409
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby SaiK » 01 Nov 2009 23:15

is it my eyes or that i see before the crash, the spin of rotating chopper blades slowing down gradually... !?

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby enqyoob » 02 Nov 2009 00:07

If so, that is an autorotation (of the rotor, not the helicopter) landing, hey? So didn't the crash hit on the bottom first?

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 02 Nov 2009 00:12

shiv wrote:
Jagan wrote:Looking at the size of the river, slinging a steel cable across would require a governmental sized effort?


Jagan - I think the cable was from a hilltop/hillside nearby. It could easily have been dropped to the nearside bank and the end taken by boat to the other bank with no governmental effort.


Shiv, I was trying to figure out an explanation as to what use the cable would be in the first place, as well as rule out the possiblity of deliberate sabotage as suggested by chetak.

The picture above is not clear - it still doesnt give me how wide the river is - though the report mentions the chopper was probably at a dept of 30-40 feet which meant it was a deep at that point.

The Kashmir Times gives various explanations:

http://epaper.kashmirtimes.com/KT/KT/20 ... Mode=image

ropeway suspended to connect two villages across Chenab


Theres also a reference to "Cable Car Wire"

Either way that has to be a pretty thick wire if it needed to support some kind of weight, and to make sure it holds it must have been anchored well and required some resources - the responsibility for putting it might go beyond a few individuals to that of atleast the people in the two villages.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16997
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rahul M » 02 Nov 2009 00:13

from my limited knowledge auto-rotation is used only in case of engine failures. there have been NO reports saying engine failure so far.

the slow rotation in this case is probably an observational error due to the so called strobe effect, same reason why car wheels appear to rotate backwards.


Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Craig Alpert » 02 Nov 2009 05:50

Someone wanted to keep all DHRUV information in one place.. So please pardon me posting this here.. But these are images released by HAL posted on SENGUPTA's Website.. As many I don't trust his writing, but the images are by HAL...
Image

Image Image
Last edited by Jagan on 02 Nov 2009 07:00, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Link removed. we have some legal issues with them

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 02 Nov 2009 07:21

Jagan wrote:Theres also a reference to "Cable Car Wire"

Either way that has to be a pretty thick wire if it needed to support some kind of weight, and to make sure it holds it must have been anchored well and required some resources - the responsibility for putting it might go beyond a few individuals to that of atleast the people in the two villages.

Yes - I heard the cable car wire ref. But I think people who live up there use a fairly simple thing to get a cable across the river and up hillsides. Even if the cable has to be thick - all you need is a much thinner and lighter cable to be strung across first and that cable is used to pull across a much heavier cable that is made tight with winches and anchored. It is not clear if this was a "people cable car" or a "get goods across the river" cable car.

All in all it is a difficult situation for both Vayusena and people. Cooperation and education is the best way forward and perhaps a change in SOP regarding altitudes at which they fly.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 02 Nov 2009 08:23

IAF Mi-17 helicopter crashes into Chenab, pilot killed



TIMES NEWS NETWORK



New Delhi: A senior IAF pilot was killed and three others were feared dead after their Mi-17 helicopter crashed into the Chenab river in Doda district of Jammu & Kashmir on Friday. While the charred body of pilot, Wing Commander R Garg, had been fished out by late afternoon, search operations were still in progress for the other three victims — copilot Flight Lieutenant S Tomar and technicians junior warrant officer Kundan Singh and sergeant P K Deepak.
The ill-fated Mi-17-1V, in formation with another helicopter on a regular sortie, was flying quite low over the Chenab when it apparently got entangled in a cable of a bridge and crashed into the water reservoir of Baglihar hydro-electric power project at Tringel Assar, 150 km northeast of Jammu. The helicopters were returning from the mountain-locked Nawapachi area of Kishtawar district, where IAF undertakes regular sorties to supply rations, arms and ammunition for the troops stationed there.
This is the 10th aircraft crash in IAF this year, already making it one of the worst years for the force in recent times. From 1971-72 to 2003-04, IAF’s consolidated average rate stood at 1.09 accidents per 10,000 hours of flying, roughly translating into the loss of 23 aircraft and the death of 10-14 pilots every year.


Baglihar dam resorvoir. No surprise the waters so deep.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 6&t=h&z=15

Bob V
BRFite
Posts: 388
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 04:29
Location: Out at the sea
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Bob V » 02 Nov 2009 14:13

chetak wrote:





Maybe its time to fit cable cutters on helos operating in such hazardous areas. Many civil helos carry them routinely as a permanent fit.


a helicopter Laser Radar system like Hellas would be more suitable. It has been successfully implemented on the EC135. I'll try to upload an OEM video shortly.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2309
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Vivek K » 02 Nov 2009 20:14

Is there a body in India that does Airspace Management and review of impacts to the airspace from projects that are above some elevation?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 02 Nov 2009 20:21

Bob V wrote:a helicopter Laser Radar system like Hellas would be more suitable. It has been successfully implemented on the EC135. I'll try to upload an OEM video shortly.


I would be grateful to have more info on this.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Craig Alpert » 03 Nov 2009 02:36

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/11/dhruv-crash-update-6-new-investigation.html
According to Shiv, the cyclic saturation theory was the reason behding the ill fated Dhruv that crashed in Equador

K_Rohit
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 16 Feb 2009 19:11

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby K_Rohit » 03 Nov 2009 12:24

Vivek K wrote:Is there a body in India that does Airspace Management and review of impacts to the airspace from projects that are above some elevation?

All construction projects within X km of an airport have to get AAI clearance. Also, I understand that above any construction above a certain height requires AAI clearance as well. Not sure of numbers. But this would anyway not cover the cable kind of incident being discussed.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby rohitvats » 03 Nov 2009 16:40

Vivek K wrote:Is there a body in India that does Airspace Management and review of impacts to the airspace from projects that are above some elevation?


The Master Plan of every city clealry demarcates zones which fall under areas sensitive to Air Space Management and Flight Safety. For example, the funnel zone which extends from either edge of the runway for couple of kilometers. Within these demarcated zones, there is either absolute restriction or restriction on how high you can go. And of course, you have to take clearance (NOC) from the AAI.

Hope this helps.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Craig Alpert » 05 Nov 2009 00:24


Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 794
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Shameek » 08 Nov 2009 23:03

Body of missing airman recovered

May his soul rest in peace.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Craig Alpert » 11 Nov 2009 05:49

PR FAILURES OF HAL
As a result of HAL's inexplicable refusal to engage the press and at least demonstrate an intention to be open with information, problems that are indubitably Ecuador's own, are now manifested conveniently in an otherwise world-class helicopter.

To think that the great IIM's cannot spare a DECENT Management Alumni to go and MANAGE HAL is a sheer shame :cry:
Maybe HAL needs to hire alumnus's from IIM's(A/B/M) and user their great knowledge to get the company back on track in line with international defense suppliers


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aldonkar, arunsrinivasan, brar_w, gauravsharma, Neela, suryag, Varuna, VikramA and 78 guests