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.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby putnanja » 01 Dec 2009 05:47

I am sick of people clubbing the earlier Su-30MKI crash with the latest one. Please do some basic research. The issue with the earlier crash was due to inadvertently switching off the FCS in-flight. It had nothing to do with service, maintenence, heat or dust.

jeez, is it so hard to do some basic search on the web or even in this very thread? Or is it that people rush to this thread to post their opinions about their favourite theories when a crash occurs and don't bother to come here when news reports of results of inquiries are posted here?? :roll:

Sandipan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Sandipan » 01 Dec 2009 06:09

Ravi - The first sukhoi crash has nothing to do with switching off the FCS and it was related to failure of FBW as admitted by RM A K Anthony. It was not a human error of shutting off a switch as suggested by you.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby putnanja » 01 Dec 2009 06:16

Sandipan wrote:Ravi - The first sukhoi crash has nothing to do with switching off the FCS and it was related to failure of FBW as admitted by RM A K Anthony. It was not a human error of shutting off a switch as suggested by you.


The FBW failed as the FCS system was switched off. Please look at this link too :

IAF taking steps to prevent another SU-30MKI crash

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby putnanja » 01 Dec 2009 06:20

HAL-made Sukhoi crashes

...
IAF PRO Group Captain M G Mehta on Monday said, “The aircraft was on a routine training exercise when the incident occurred and both pilots managed to eject to safety. An inquiry has been ordered into the incident.”
...
...
Rajasthan defence PRO Lt Col. N N Joshi stated that the Sukhoi aircraft took off from Jodhpur at around 4.30 pm at the IAF range in Pokharan but crashed sometime between 5.30 pm and 5.45 pm. While officials reached the site of the crash, the black box has not yet been recovered.
...
...
Sources also said that the aircraft that crashed was a brand new fighter that had recently been rolled out by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) in India and was part of an upcoming squadron in Pune.
...
...
The earlier crash, which was attributed to a failure in the flight control system, was never conclusively investigated as the black box was completely destroyed.
...
...


The headline is the one used by Indian Express. Please don't start a HAL-PSU-incompetent argument till all facts come out.

SanjibGhosh
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 30 Jan 2009 18:49

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby SanjibGhosh » 01 Dec 2009 09:34

RaviBg wrote:
SanjibGhosh wrote:this is very sad thing indeed but moreover it is surprising as well!! After an unmatched record for 12 yr ... what went wrong !!! 2 crashes in a year !!!

Few questions
If both the fighters are from same lot ? Does they belong to same sqd? Who produced it HAL or Russians ? How old are those are fighters? Was the previous crash investigation was done properly (I hope that wasn't a cover up)?

any idea ...


Please search on BR for the previous discussion. It is not that hard. The cause for the previous crash was identified and perhaps has already been fixed. All your questions can be answered if you look on BR or on the web about the previous crash.


Ravi my questions were related to the new crash and I am quite aware about facts of the previous crash ( in fact I was doubting the investigation report ) .... now it seems that my doubts are closer to the truth ....

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4444
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby putnanja » 01 Dec 2009 10:09

So you are saying that IAF investigation was a cover up excercise??

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16996
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rahul M » 01 Dec 2009 10:32

let's not forget that the pilot survived the crash, IAF has other means to ascertain facts even if BB was destroyed.

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby dorai » 01 Dec 2009 13:11

Kartik wrote:
produce some source with some figures to back your claims on "only now in very recent times that the IAF finally has had a decent number of flight hours produced on MKI's" or cut the crap.


I can't help that you do not understand the valuing of basic system experience on a operative product. All countries look at total produced flight hours on the entire fleet as a measuring stick.

It doesn't matter if the crash is on a brand new jet like this one or something older. Everyone understands mistakes and accidents will happen it is only when the type has been flying for a long time in great numbers one can speak of any record. A record that has to include training, service and support.

You really don't have to be that smart to understand that the total accumulated Fh on the MKI's is low.

No one else is posting similar sources btw. Like you.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16996
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rahul M » 01 Dec 2009 21:57

dorai, could I get a reply to the question I asked you last page ?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby krishnan » 01 Dec 2009 22:08

The previous mishap was attributed to pilot error

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Aditya G » 01 Dec 2009 22:21

Kartik wrote:.....the 18 Su-30MK and Ks were flogged to a level that they were left with about 30% of their service life intact by the time the IAF decided to replace them with new-build MKIs..even if these didn't have the 6000 hours of the MKI airframe, the regular Su-30 has 3000 hours total technical life....


Dear Kartik, would appreciate if you share the source for these numbers. Thanks in advance.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5144
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Kartik » 02 Dec 2009 01:20

dorai wrote:
Kartik wrote:
produce some source with some figures to back your claims on "only now in very recent times that the IAF finally has had a decent number of flight hours produced on MKI's" or cut the crap.


I can't help that you do not understand the valuing of basic system experience on a operative product. All countries look at total produced flight hours on the entire fleet as a measuring stick.

It doesn't matter if the crash is on a brand new jet like this one or something older. Everyone understands mistakes and accidents will happen it is only when the type has been flying for a long time in great numbers one can speak of any record. A record that has to include training, service and support.

You really don't have to be that smart to understand that the total accumulated Fh on the MKI's is low.

No one else is posting similar sources btw. Like you.


just to give a glimpse into the tempo of ops that were conducted to get IAF pilots trained on the Su-30 MK so as to move on to (then) newly raised MKI squadrons- read the bolded parts.
Wing Commander Sandeep Singh (17312) Flying (Pilot) was commissioned in the Indian Air Force as a fighter pilot on 22 Dec 1983. A recipient of Sword of Honour for standing first in the overall order of merit in his course, the officer is a Qualified Flying Instructor with A2 category and an Exceptional Test Pilot. Wg Cdr Sandeep Singh has over 4150 hours of flying and he is qualified on Su-30 MkI, Mig-29 and Mig-21 aircraft. He has been an instructor at the Air Force Test Pilots School, a flight commander of a Mig-21 Squadron, the project test pilot with the 1AF Su-30 Project team in Russia and is presently the Commanding Officer of a Su-30 Mk-1 Squadron. He has been commended by the Chief of the Air Staff for his dedication to duty. As a test pilot with the Su-30 Project team in Russia, he has been instrumental in evolving the navigation, display and weapon employment logic of Su-30 Mk I aircraft. The Su 30 Mk 1 is being hailed as a 'first of its kind' project in which the best of Russian and western technologies have been synergized to produce one of the most potent fighter aircraft in the world. Utilising his operational flying experience, professional knowledge and analytical approach, Wg Cdr Sandeep Singh spearheaded the integration team of Indian, Russian and Western specialists to ensure success of the Su-30 Mk 1 project. In view of his unparalleled knowledge of Su-30 Mk-1 operations and systems, he has been frequently called upon for consultations and briefings at Air Headquarters and various Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) labs on all issues related to the Su-30 Mk 1 programme. Wg Cdr Sandeep Singh was appointed as the Commanding Officer of a newly resurrected Su-30 Mk I Squadron on 15 Apr 04 and entrusted with the task of inducting the latest variant of Su-30 Mk 1 aircraft. Starting with a severely limited number of experienced pilots, engineers and technicians, he has led his team with personal examples to operallonalise the new aircraft, Despite the attendant pressures of forming a new Squadron, he has flown over 400 hours in the last one year. He has shown immense courage, exceptional skill and determination to successfully undertake pioneering missions on the Su-30 Mk I aircraft, such as the record breaking long duration flight of over 9 hour 30 minutes, solo low level aerobatics, air to air refueling and first time firing of guided munitions. For exceptional devotion to duty, The Hon'ble President is pleased to award 'Vayu Sena Medal' to Wing Commander Sandeep Singh.


link

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby dorai » 02 Dec 2009 02:18

Well it would be nice to have a truly independent accident investigation board that even post its reports online. I see no reason why we should always accept "human error" on state-produced items.

Viv Sreenivasan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Mar 2009 16:29

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Viv Sreenivasan » 02 Dec 2009 06:02

Day after crash, IAF grounds Sukhoi fleet for checks


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 288979.cms


The Sukoi's are pretty reliable, only 2 have crashed after more than a decade of opeartion. How many Mig's have crashed in the same interval? It would have to be around 20-30 id say. The Sukoi's are an order of magnitude more reliable than the Migs.

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Jagan » 02 Dec 2009 06:04

One report mentioned it was from 31 Squadron from Barielly

Viv Sreenivasan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Mar 2009 16:29

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Viv Sreenivasan » 02 Dec 2009 06:05

Quote from TOI

"The two pilots, Wing Commander Srivastava and Flight Lieutenant Arora, had ejected from the Russian-origin fighter while taking part in fire-power exercises at Pokhran after fire alarms went off in the cockpit around 5.30 pm.

"Preliminary indications are that it was caused due to a technical defect. The pilots ejected after they saw fire alarm buttons glowing red... Probably the engines were on fire,'' said a source."

Engines on fire doesnt sound very good.

bodhi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 09:25

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby bodhi » 02 Dec 2009 09:42

My First post...trying to get the hang of things...dont shoot if it sounds stupid :)

Could the fire warnings be a false alarm and the pilots ejected prematurely? I know it sounds stupid but it might have happened in panic especially if one is not experienced enough. My line of thought is because the article suggests a technical defect with the Fire alarm going off and the engine was "probably" on fire.

Just to educate myself... a few questions

1. what pre-checks do they have in place when an alarm (Fire) goes off?

2. Are there suppressants in place to extinguish engine fire which is activated preferably automatically or manually?

3. When the ejection handle is pulled, do both the pilot and the WO eject or is there a way for one to delay his ejection?

Username changed to bodhi.
welcome to BR.
Rahul.
Last edited by Rahul M on 02 Dec 2009 19:30, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: username changed.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13108
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby negi » 02 Dec 2009 09:44

^ The AC was piloted by Wing Commander Srivastava and Flight Lieutenant Arora.

Shameek
BRFite
Posts: 788
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 20:44
Location: Ionosphere

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Shameek » 02 Dec 2009 09:51

Viv Sreenivasan wrote:The Sukoi's are pretty reliable, only 2 have crashed after more than a decade of opeartion. How many Mig's have crashed in the same interval? It would have to be around 20-30 id say. The Sukoi's are an order of magnitude more reliable than the Migs.


That is a very generic statement. Which MiG are you comparing to? We operate and have operated a wide variety of MiGs from the MiG 21 through the 29. And they exist in different numbers, have different roles and are of varying vintage. Its hard to make such sweeping generalizations without accurate data.

crisis wrote:3. When the ejection handle is pulled, do both the pilot and the WO eject or is there a way for one to delay his ejection?


AFAIK its the canopy, the WO and then the pilot.

bodhi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 09:25

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby bodhi » 02 Dec 2009 09:54

negi wrote:^ The AC was piloted by Wing Commander Srivastava and Flight Lieutenant Arora.


exactly..which is why i have asked the third question.

The WO/Nav is a flight Lieutenant who is not very experienced as per the link

http://careerairforce.nic.in/life_airforce/lifeair_cargraph_officers.html

vasu_ray
BRFite
Posts: 550
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby vasu_ray » 02 Dec 2009 10:01

crisis wrote:Are there suppressants in place to extinguish engine fire which is activated preferably automatically or manually?


The pilot could briefly turn off the fuel supply to the engines meanwhile check for any draining fluids, if there is fuel leak relighting wouldn't help should the fire propagate the fuel lines

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13108
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby negi » 02 Dec 2009 10:04

Afaik in IN/IAF as far as aviators are concerned the senior pilot (instructor) ensures that the trainee bails out first , at least that is the norm in IN and I assume same is the case with IAF too .In case of a critical malfunction the crew is supposed to update the ATC and try to maneuver the AC away from a populated area , no one bails out of an IAF AC without a genuine reason. The post crash court of inquiry and its proceedings are not exactly amusing to the pilots and the ground crew .

SanjibGhosh
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 30 Jan 2009 18:49

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby SanjibGhosh » 02 Dec 2009 13:38

‘Natasha’ alerted Sukhoi pilots of fire
http://www.hindustantimes.com/newdelhi/ ... 82098.aspx

The female voice warning system is known as the Bitching Betty in the US fighter aircraft. It is believed within military aviation circles that most male pilots would respond more quickly to a female voice.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby krishnan » 02 Dec 2009 13:51

Only 2? What do you mean by only 2? Its not like they have been in service for the past 20 years or so

gauravjkale
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 75
Joined: 29 May 2007 15:32
Location: Mumbai

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby gauravjkale » 02 Dec 2009 18:24

can anybody please tell me how many F-22, rafale, eurogifhters have crashed till date since induction???

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 02 Dec 2009 18:34

gauravjkale wrote:can anybody please tell me how many F-22, rafale, eurogifhters have crashed till date since induction???


F-22
http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F ... orce/USAF/

Rafale
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale#Accidents

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Craig Alpert » 02 Dec 2009 19:13

Sukhois grounded after 2 crashes in 6 months
On the hind sight,
Less than 10 days ago India's Supreme Commander flew in Sukhoi fighter jet. Now, the entire fleet of Sukhoi 30s has been grounded as a standard operating procedure.
since when did DDM get smart and started reporting wisely??? Hope I don't speak too soon...
Speaking of the engines catching on fire.. there could be many reasons for it.. but too soon to imply anything.. Hope it is something related to FOD (foreign object damage) and nothing else..A bird hit, or anything else for that matter, but hope it's not the "DESIGN" that resulted in the engine catching on fire...I guess time will tell

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 02 Dec 2009 20:06

Design problem is unlikely. Fires have been caused by simple things like a maintenance error when a 5 Rupee spring clip used to close a fuel hose has not been replaced causing fuel leakage on a hot area, or a fuel pipe that gets worn out by friction against a vibrating surface or a short circuit.

Incidentally my car had short circuits from a squirrel chewing wire.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby KrishG » 02 Dec 2009 22:43

140 killed in 265 MiG fighter jet crashes

http://sify.com/news/140-killed-in-265-MiG-fighter-jet-crashes-news-jmcskddighc.html

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has lost 265 MiG fighter jets in crashes during the last two decades leaving 140 people dead, Defence Minister A.K. Antony said Wednesday.

'In the last two decades (since April 1989 and up to Nov 26, 2009), 265 MiG fighter aircraft of the IAF have crashed. A total of 96 service personnel and 44 civilians were killed in these cases,' Antony told the parliament in a written reply.

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Juggi G » 03 Dec 2009 03:59

HAL Probe On, Sukhois Grounded
The Indian Express
HAL Probe On, Sukhois Grounded
Manu Pubby

Posted online: Thursday , Dec 03, 2009 at 0131 hrs

New Delhi : With the needle of suspicion pointing to possible engine defect, investigators from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) have reached the site where a Su-30 MKI fighter crashed near Jodhpur on Monday while on a routine training sortie.

Sources said HAL investigators, including an expert on engines, will conduct a preliminary inquiry by Friday. The fighter that went down was A Brand New Aircraft Manufactured by HAL and was part of a new squadron being raised in Pune for possible deployment in Jodhpur. Initial investigations suggested a fire in the engine.

The entire fleet, India’s most advanced, remained on the ground for the third straight day with no flying operations being carried out in Tezpur, Pune and Bareilly where the fighters are based.

“No flying operations have been carried out since the crash. In the technical sense, the fleet has not been grounded and the fighters will be available for operations In Case of Any Emergency,” an IAF officer said.

The IAF has close to 90 Su-30 MKI Fighters in its Inventory and has placed a total order for 230 aircraft. Of this, 140 fighters will be manufactured or assembled by HAL. The earlier batch of aircraft that have been in operation for the past few years were directly imported from Russia.

Sources said the aircraft are being inspected by ground crew for possible defects but the all-clear to resume regular flying will come only after the preliminary inquiry. This is the second time this year that the Su-30 MKI fleet has been grounded.

The fleet was earlier grounded after the first-ever crash involving a Sukhoi on April 30. The fleet was grounded for close to a month after a pilot was killed in the crash. That crash could not be conclusively investigated as the black box of the aircraft was completely gutted. Though the black box was even sent to the UK for forensic examination, little data could be extracted. A preliminary inquiry had pointed to “likely failure of the fly-by-wire system” which led to the crash.
Last edited by Juggi G on 03 Dec 2009 10:05, edited 2 times in total.

bodhi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 09:25

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby bodhi » 03 Dec 2009 09:24

Juggi G wrote:
New Delhi : With the needle of suspicion pointing to possible engine defect, investigators from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) have reached the site where a Su-30 MKI fighter crashed near Jodhpur on Monday while on a routine training sortie.

Sources said HAL investigators, including an expert on engines, will conduct a preliminary inquiry by Friday. The fighter that went down was A Brand New Aircraft Manufactured by HAL and was part of a new squadron being raised in Pune for possible deployment in Jodhpur. Initial investigations suggested a fire in the engine.
[/quote]

Same engine for Russian manufactured MKIs...shoddy assembling by HAL?

The wait for the enquiry report is absolutely unbearable :x

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2009 09:53

bodhi wrote:Same engine for Russian manufactured MKIs...shoddy assembling by HAL?

The wait for the enquiry report is absolutely unbearable :x



With respect Bodhiji - the attitude you show, if copied by the IAF and HAL would be exactly in line with what many of us patriotic BRFites expect of fellow Indians - i.e shoddy, incompetent and in a hurry to reach conclusions.

Maybe that is why many of us make much better citizens of a developed country, where we feel our personal competence matches the average competence of the population.

bodhi
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 09:25

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby bodhi » 03 Dec 2009 10:17

Shivji...btw are you shiv aroor by any chance? Haven't gone through all the older threads to know if you have been asked this question before.

Personal accusations can definitely be done without. I haven't had the chance to go through all the threads completely but i do see that any statements against HAL is generally not tolerated.

This is a forum where everyone i though had the rights to express their views...if not..then why dont we write down in the forum guidelines that statements against anything which is not appreciated by the BRF Oldies should not be made. How about making sure that you screen all the posts made by newbies till he has been moulded into the mature posters that you would like them to become. Shiv...you have over 5000 posts....dont tell me that not once have you expressed your frustrations on the forums.

MKIs dropping down regularly is unbearable...2 in a year is painful enough...If a new AC crashes which has new engines (?) it is concerning. i know i am not qualified or knowledgable enough to be a part of your "patriotic" BRFites who understand the intricacies perfectly but the main reason for joining this forum was because am interested and wanted to learn.

Personal attackes can be done without....a mature poster like you should know that.

ohh..and i forgot to add...i am in no hurry for the IAF to complete the investigation in a hurry..by all means they should do the investigations thoroughly...it's the wait that goes with any investigation which is unbearable.

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Dmurphy » 03 Dec 2009 12:23

bodhi wrote:Same engine for Russian manufactured MKIs...shoddy assembling by HAL?
shiv wrote:With respect Bodhiji - the attitude you show, if copied by the IAF and HAL would be exactly in line with what many of us patriotic BRFites expect of fellow Indians - i.e shoddy, incompetent and in a hurry to reach conclusions.
Shivji, I totally agree with you about not jumping to conclusions. But Bodhi has a valid point here - Engines assembled in India allegedly catching fire. So it is but natural for that doubt to rise in one's mind. And please mind the Question Mark he's added after the "conclusion", which means he is not really concluding it but merely raising a doubt.

I suppose we made a hasty judgement about him instead.

JMT.

anand_sankar
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 09 Jan 2009 19:24

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby anand_sankar » 03 Dec 2009 14:17

Here is my two cents on the latest Su-30 MKI crash.

In the first crash as soon as information about the loss of control surfaced, it was clear it was an avionics issue. But this one is a lot more baffling.

It took a bit of time to think hard and assimilate lots of different scraps of data on the MKI, that I have researched over the years.

Random fires in modern turbofan engines are extremely rare. And the standards for combat fighters are higher than commercial aircraft because they have to survive battle damage. So, unless someone messed up real bad at the factory (considering this is a new aircraft), you can absolve the fuel feed system and hot innards of the engines. Also, MKI can be reliably be expected to have state-of-the-art fire suppression in these areas. Further, both engines will be completely independent of each other, further enhanced by barriers including thermal isolation, to ensure redundancy. Its hard to see a failure here bringing down a twin-engined aircraft. Even in the worst case scenario, the pilot would have had time to assess the damage, make a report and bail out.

For me something that disturbs is the way the overhaul and manufacture of the AL-31F engines were supposed to be taken up by the Indian manufacturer. MKI literature says the radar will be manufactured in Russia, and the last item to be transferred to HAL will be the engines. First overhaul facilities were built and then the manufacture. Overhaul has begun and in manufacture we all know they have had problems with making the fan blades, but are said to have overcome that. But the trickiest part with the engines is the nozzles. I remember reading an interview about AL-31F's nozzle development and its makers struggled to get the nozzles right. The challenge was to ensure structural integrity in the moving parts of the nozzle at high temperatures, especially when on afterburner. It is common knowledge that nozzle overhaul interval is radically reduced if the burner is used too much while vectoring thrust. So, if the entire engine, including nozzles were made in India, I would run my eye through this, because quality control here is critical. A nozzle failure can be catastrophic.

I can imagine a scenario where they were pulling up hard after a bombing run. But again both engine nozzles giving way at the same time? And at that exact juncture? What are the odds on that?

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2009 14:59

Dmurphy wrote:I suppose we made a hasty judgement about him instead.

JMT.


Correct. This is a national habit. If we do it, we cannot blame another BRF member for doing it. And if we and other BRFites and other Indians do it why should we blame the IAF or HAL for being as hasty and shoddy. They are acting like us and we are acting like them.

We need to judge ourselves by the same standards. When it is OK for us to reach hasty and possibly erroneous judgements it is absolutely fine for the IAF and HAL to do exactly the same thing no?

As for me - I have been told that it takes time to investigate such an accident and that we have to wait. But I am an Indian and I insist that the IAF and HAL are full of liars and incompetents. Do you believe that there is anything wrong with my judgement?

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Dmurphy » 03 Dec 2009 16:24

Sir, I don't see the point in arguing here. I felt bodhi was misunderstood, hence tried to clarify. Thats all. Seeing that he's just joined BRF, being a little soft on him won't be a bad idea, at least till he settles down here.

In case I've rubbed you off in a wrong way, I'm sorry. That was never my intention.

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

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2009 16:58

bodhi wrote:Shivji...btw are you shiv aroor by any chance? Haven't gone through all the older threads to know if you have been asked this question before.

Personal accusations can definitely be done without. I haven't had the chance to go through all the threads completely but i do see that any statements against HAL is generally not tolerated.

This is a forum where everyone i though had the rights to express their views...if not..then why dont we write down in the forum guidelines that statements against anything which is not appreciated by the BRF Oldies should not be made. How about making sure that you screen all the posts made by newbies till he has been moulded into the mature posters that you would like them to become. Shiv...you have over 5000 posts....dont tell me that not once have you expressed your frustrations on the forums.

MKIs dropping down regularly is unbearable...2 in a year is painful enough...If a new AC crashes which has new engines (?) it is concerning. i know i am not qualified or knowledgable enough to be a part of your "patriotic" BRFites who understand the intricacies perfectly but the main reason for joining this forum was because am interested and wanted to learn.

Personal attackes can be done without....a mature poster like you should know that.

ohh..and i forgot to add...i am in no hurry for the IAF to complete the investigation in a hurry..by all means they should do the investigations thoroughly...it's the wait that goes with any investigation which is unbearable.


Boss - please spare me the lecture. My post was aimed at pointing out what appears to me to be hypocrisy using the same rights to express opinions that you ask for.

You said, in response to a news item about the crash
shoddy assembling by HAL


You also said:
The wait for the enquiry report is absolutely unbearable


So an entire organization can be dissed by you in four words because you cannot bear to wait for the enquiry report. Pointing that out is a personal attack. So you want immunity to say what you please and when you please and play victim because you have been caught out. Sorry Sir.

Maybe I work in HAL and do my best. I think your words are a personal attack on my integrity. Have you considered the possibility that HAL workers and their relatives may read the forum. Must one reach 5000 posts before showing maturity?

yossarian
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 35
Joined: 07 Jun 2009 06:52

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby yossarian » 03 Dec 2009 17:08

Shiv,

This is becoming a mountain of a mole hill. No one challenges your knowledge or your support to any organization. But a view that is slightly divergent from yours cannot be squashed in the way you do. Its the tone I don't appreciate (the tone which says I have been here longer, its my way or the highway, it not others fault you were born a wee bit earlier than them :)).

If you cannot handle someone's viewpoint, counter it. Sarcasm, personal attacks and other embellishments can be reserved for personal blogs... not forums.

Yes, I am a trainee.. just because a post count is low does not mean a person does not deserve a right to post his views. Maybe there should be a post read count instead of a post written count. A lot of trainees might get a bit more respect that way possibly....

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16996
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Military Flight Safety

Postby Rahul M » 03 Dec 2009 17:11

yossarian, who exactly is talking of post count here ? did shiv ji raise that point or are other people responding to him on that account with a chip on their shoulder ?

please re-read the posts.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BALAR025, chetonzz, Sagrawal, SriramNarayanan and 60 guests