Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:46 pm

Previous thread:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1028153
is locked. Time to start a new one.

Mi-28 crashed in Russia, with casualties:
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/12/ ... ash-a68577

The story is hotly debated on Russian aviation forums, as something is fishy with the situation. Briefly:
1) the crew reported difficulties landing at their home airfield, due to poor visibility, and landed on an unprepared patch (apparently in a field) 12 km from their airfield
2) a more senior crew, along with some other personnel, arrived at the landing site by car
3) more senior crew took over the helicopter, took off and soon disappeared from radars
4) wreckage was found

Hypotheses and versions are flying wide and high.
Last edited by SQ22 on Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Title updated
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1781
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:39 am

Needless hurry + bad weather = bad outcome?
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:44 am

AirlineCritic wrote:
Needless hurry + bad weather = bad outcome?


Quite possible.
But the only bad weather reported that day was fog. By the way, that particular area is reportedly fog-prone.

What I find fascinating -- this is presumably a brand-new helicopter, fresh from the factory. It's an attack helicopter, crammed with expensive vision and targeting stuff, electronics galore, all that.
The original crew (two people) had a major as pilot in command. They were returning to home base, also crammed with electronics, radars, all that.
A major is a lot of officer in those parts. In Soviet Army, plenty of officers retired as major after 25 years of service.

Here, a major in a (presumably) state-of-the art helicopter cannot land at his (presumably) well-equipped base, because... visibility is poor?

If they cannot fly in fog in fog-prone areas, then probably they are not very useful for defense. (Not that it's a requirement, as Russia practices only aggression as a way of defense in last decades. And an aggressor can chose the time and weather for invasion.)
 
sovietjet
Posts: 2689
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:32 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Mon Dec 16, 2019 3:33 pm

Let's not make this political. Whoever the crew is, were following orders during their service in the military. The problem with fog is not that the helicopter doesn't have electronics to get back to base. From what I understand, it's the terrain obstacles. Imagine flying low and not knowing where exactly you will run into a tree or power lines. Yes, the electronics guide you back to the base, but then landing it requires some minimal visibility to not run into stuff.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:39 pm

sovietjet wrote:
Let's not make this political. Whoever the crew is, were following orders during their service in the military. The problem with fog is not that the helicopter doesn't have electronics to get back to base. From what I understand, it's the terrain obstacles. Imagine flying low and not knowing where exactly you will run into a tree or power lines. Yes, the electronics guide you back to the base, but then landing it requires some minimal visibility to not run into stuff.


Somebody killed my answer. Probably Kremlin brigade didn't like it.
anyway, the question remains -- how is it that a Mil Mi-28N Night Hunter is unable to fly and land at home base in the dark? Night vision equipment, radars, ILS -- nothing beats poor visibility anymore?
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 5559
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:00 am

And another today, TU-22M engine failure/fire resulting in an “emergency landing” in a field. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/231504
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:26 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
sovietjet wrote:
Let's not make this political. Whoever the crew is, were following orders during their service in the military. The problem with fog is not that the helicopter doesn't have electronics to get back to base. From what I understand, it's the terrain obstacles. Imagine flying low and not knowing where exactly you will run into a tree or power lines. Yes, the electronics guide you back to the base, but then landing it requires some minimal visibility to not run into stuff.


Somebody killed my answer. Probably Kremlin brigade didn't like it.
anyway, the question remains -- how is it that a Mil Mi-28N Night Hunter is unable to fly and land at home base in the dark? Night vision equipment, radars, ILS -- nothing beats poor visibility anymore?


I had written an answer to you and there was a link to a document about the abilities and limits of imaging infrared in fog. No idea why it was deleted. ??
 
sovietjet
Posts: 2689
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:32 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:11 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
sovietjet wrote:
Let's not make this political. Whoever the crew is, were following orders during their service in the military. The problem with fog is not that the helicopter doesn't have electronics to get back to base. From what I understand, it's the terrain obstacles. Imagine flying low and not knowing where exactly you will run into a tree or power lines. Yes, the electronics guide you back to the base, but then landing it requires some minimal visibility to not run into stuff.


Somebody killed my answer. Probably Kremlin brigade didn't like it.
anyway, the question remains -- how is it that a Mil Mi-28N Night Hunter is unable to fly and land at home base in the dark? Night vision equipment, radars, ILS -- nothing beats poor visibility anymore?


I think the problem was fog, not darkness. Also the crashed helicopter was a training version, Mi-28UB and not a Mi-28N.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:39 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
What I find fascinating -- this is presumably a brand-new helicopter, fresh from the factory. It's an attack helicopter, crammed with expensive vision and targeting stuff, electronics galore, all that.
The original crew (two people) had a major as pilot in command. They were returning to home base, also crammed with electronics, radars, all that.
A major is a lot of officer in those parts. In Soviet Army, plenty of officers retired as major after 25 years of service.

Here, a major in a (presumably) state-of-the art helicopter cannot land at his (presumably) well-equipped base, because... visibility is poor?


Much more experienced pilots have put much more capable aircraft into the ground during much better conditions. Flying is a dangerous business... I'm sure the fog didn't help but who says it wasn't a CRM (or lack of it) issue? Experience can be detrimental if you let complacency take over.

But we need more information before saying what happened. Jumping to conclusions, like it is implied is going on in the Russian forums, is how conspiracy theories form.

The crash could be something very simple and not at all nefarious
 
Pentaprism
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:12 pm

SU-57 Crash

Tue Dec 24, 2019 1:13 pm

Unfortunately a SU-57 has gone done near the Manufacturer's Base at Komsolmolsk-na-Amure in Eastern Russia. Thankfully the Pilot ejected safely.

Certainly a setback for the program but far from unprecedented when a new Fighter is being developed.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 952151.cms
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12727
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Tue Dec 24, 2019 4:41 pm

So they lost half their operational fleet ;-)
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4058
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Tue Dec 24, 2019 4:55 pm

Love the article wording that "there was no damage on the ground"... not sure how a pilotless aircraft other than a drone can accomplish this.. but then again it may just be American English vs. British English.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:04 pm

Su-57, manufacturer-owned, down in Russia. No casualties.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3255
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: SU-57 Crash

Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:41 pm

kanban wrote:
Love the article wording that "there was no damage on the ground"... not sure how a pilotless aircraft other than a drone can accomplish this.. but then again it may just be American English vs. British English.

Because it probably came down in an open field or similar area, and didn't hit any structures on the ground. Yes, there was probably some "damage" to the field it crashed in, but that's not usually reported as damage on the ground.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12727
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:46 pm

Image

something like the Cornfield Bomber?
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Dec 25, 2019 7:16 am

Phosphorus wrote:
Su-57, manufacturer-owned, down in Russia. No casualties.


This article has a good top view pic of the SU-57,

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ ... est-flight
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:15 am

I would be interested to know if the aircraft that crashed had the new engine installed.
 
426Shadow
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:13 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Wed Dec 25, 2019 3:30 pm

This certainly is good news. Kind of odd though that China hasn't had one go down. I guess the benefits of stealing data means you wont make the same mistakes.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12727
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:14 pm

426Shadow wrote:
This certainly is good news. Kind of odd though that China hasn't had one go down. I guess the benefits of stealing data means you wont make the same mistakes.


What do you mean? China hasn't had any Su-57 delivered, so in that sense, you are absolutely right, they haven't had any Su-57 crashes to date. And perhaps good to mention that New Zealand also hasn't had any Su-57 crashes.
 
jupiter2
Posts: 1739
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Wed Dec 25, 2019 9:56 pm

426Shadow wrote:
This certainly is good news. Kind of odd though that China hasn't had one go down. I guess the benefits of stealing data means you wont make the same mistakes.


What makes you think it would actually be disclosed if they did have one of their new aircraft go down ? Unless it happened at an air show, what hasn't been seen by the international media hasn't happened.

Actually surprised that the Russians made this accident public.
 
426Shadow
Posts: 249
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:13 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Thu Dec 26, 2019 4:47 am

Dutchy wrote:
426Shadow wrote:
This certainly is good news. Kind of odd though that China hasn't had one go down. I guess the benefits of stealing data means you wont make the same mistakes.


What do you mean? China hasn't had any Su-57 delivered, so in that sense, you are absolutely right, they haven't had any Su-57 crashes to date. And perhaps good to mention that New Zealand also hasn't had any Su-57 crashes.


Referring to the J-21 and J-31
 
SuperiorPilotMe
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2018 4:55 pm

Re: SU-57 Crash

Fri Dec 27, 2019 5:19 am

This thread got filled with the usual pathetic useless super stupids pretty predictably quick.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12727
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Fri Dec 27, 2019 7:48 am

yes, I suggest it to be locked, because it went off-topic.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2508
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Sat Dec 28, 2019 12:31 am

I know that it is only one data point but this points a very bad picture of Russian build quality.

I personally think the SU-57 is no threat at all and is much lower quality. It would be no better than the YF-22 demonstrator that flew 29 years ago. Avionics would be on par with what the west had 15 years ago e.g first gen Rafale, Eurofighter, Superhornet. I wouldn't call placing radar contacts on a GPS moving map sensor fusion. The huge diameter of the radar fitted to Russian fighters is a typical way they get acceptable performance from a lower tech solution.

The pilot ejecting rules out high G blackout or oxygen issues.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: SU-57 Crash

Sat Dec 28, 2019 12:55 am

Not to defend the SU-57 or modern day Russian aerospace engineering in general, but top of the line Western planes crash too. I don't think, this alone, is much of a useful data point

Glad the pilot made it out
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2508
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:36 am

DeltaMD90 wrote:
Not to defend the SU-57 or modern day Russian aerospace engineering in general, but top of the line Western planes crash too. I don't think, this alone, is much of a useful data point

Glad the pilot made it out

Such as?

The Eurofighter and Rafale had clocked up over 200,000 flight hours before the first crash and we had two mid air collisions and an airshow routine. Nothing maintenance or design flaw related.

The YF-22 crash landing during testing was software related and 29 years ago making a mistake with software would be an acceptable excuse.

The F-35 engine blowing up on the ground hardly counts. The SU-57 has had similar incidents.

I doubt the SU-57 has clocked up over 2000 flight hours. It could fly another 100,000 hours without a crash and end up matching the rate of a western aircraft but it is highly doubtful.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: SU-57 Crash

Sat Dec 28, 2019 7:18 am

There have been 2 F-35 crashes, Japanese one was due to pilot spatial disorientation. 450 produced. Quite acceptable.

As there are only a dozen SU-57, this brings up reliability questions.

The S-400 seems state of the art, so the SU-57 might have a lot of capability. The production numbers will limit its impact.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8928
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: SU-57 Crash

Sat Dec 28, 2019 5:51 pm

RJMAZ wrote:

JayinKitsap wrote:


And why did the SU-57 crash? Was it due to the aircraft itself or another factor similar to the other crashes you mention?

For the record, I will NOT at all be surprised if it was due to inferior design or engineering, not in the least. But I don't think we can say much with certainty
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14785
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:07 am

Interesting way of combining those events in a single thread. Maybe we can start a similar one to combine those for other air forces too.

"US Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 1"

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/21/poli ... index.html

https://www.af.mil/News/Tag/67/crash/

https://www.airforcemag.com/f-16-damage ... san-crash/

Seems very efficient.
 
cpd
Posts: 6829
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Mon Dec 30, 2019 8:39 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
Su-57, manufacturer-owned, down in Russia. No casualties.


This article has a good top view pic of the SU-57,

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ ... est-flight


Any further word on what caused it to go down?

I guess with it being a very new plane type these things can happen.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Thu Mar 26, 2020 12:53 pm

Crash of L-39 in Russia, with casualties
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/26585 ... in_Crashes
Separately, a Russian Su-27, based in Ukraine (occupied territory, in Crimea), was lost off the coast. Pilot not recovered so far.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sat May 09, 2020 7:19 am

Hard landing of Russian Mil Mi-35 helicopter in Dzhankoy, Crimea, Ukraine (territory temporarily occupied by Russia).
One of the crew killed, two more taken to hospital.
https://ru.krymr.com/a/news-rossiikii-p ... 99582.html
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun May 31, 2020 10:14 am

Two military Mi-8 crashes in Russia, both with casualties:
May 19th, near Klin:
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/05/ ... rew-a70319
May 26th, in Chukotka:
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... d-70876707
 
User avatar
SAS A340
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 5:59 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun May 31, 2020 6:52 pm

Seems like a high rate of losses within the daily operations in Russia...
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:54 pm

Su-30 down in Russia, no casualties.
It's postulated that a friendly-fire air-to-air shootdown by a Su-35 was the cause:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... y-accident
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:31 am

Hard landing of a military An-12 on Iturup island, Kuril Islands:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aGKlSw ... b_err_woyt
Left MLG torn out, NLG collapsed. Landing was performed in a very poor weather, current hypothesis is MLG struck a runway barrier before touchdown.
No casualties.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:43 am

Image
https://vk.com/video-5751308_456245893
https://dambiev.livejournal.com/2220098.html

haven't heard anything about barrier strike.
initial reports landing in blizzard condition, moving (or landing) left off runway.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:25 am

Armadillo1 wrote:
...
haven't heard anything about barrier strike.
initial reports landing in blizzard condition, moving (or landing) left off runway.


If you listen to the video I linked, 0.29-0.30 seconds in, they mentioned "clipped the barrier"/"зацепился за бруствер".
And yes, both drifting to the left of the runway centre, and clipping of the barrier are mentioned (together, or separately, depends on the writer) on Russian aviation forums.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Tue Mar 23, 2021 11:11 am

23 march 2021
Shaikovka airbase near Kaluga
reported Tu-22m3 while starting engines catapults accidentially launched, killing 3. telegram channels say one of killed was regiment commander
https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/10972759

no more details now

there are old KT-1M catapults with 130km/h needed
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Tue Mar 23, 2021 12:37 pm

it looks like 1 survivor was belted and other 3 not yet
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:40 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
it looks like 1 survivor was belted and other 3 not yet


Conflicting information on specialized forums.
Yes, the survivor was belted. However, the casualties were belted too.
The difference is that survivor's catapult did not activate (it was the CO/Captain's seat, and it apparently has separate launch circuitry).

The victims' ejection seats all fired, as they are part of a single escape sequence.

Basically, this appears a misfire of one of the two independent escape sequences, where three crew members' catapults fired without crew's command. At the moment, the blame for actually killing them goes to insufficient speed, as parachutes did not sufficiently deploy to work.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:54 pm

Phosphorus wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
it looks like 1 survivor was belted and other 3 not yet


Conflicting information on specialized forums.
Yes, the survivor was belted. However, the casualties were belted too.
The difference is that survivor's catapult did not activate (it was the CO/Captain's seat, and it apparently has separate launch circuitry).

The victims' ejection seats all fired, as they are part of a single escape sequence.

Basically, this appears a misfire of one of the two independent escape sequences, where three crew members' catapults fired without crew's command. At the moment, the blame for actually killing them goes to insufficient speed, as parachutes did not sufficiently deploy to work.

not conflicting now.
yes, all were belted. yes, blame to old non-zero-zero catapults.

captain have "all out" button for ejection all other crew.
he himself must launch his catapult manually after confirming that all other out.

this button worked somehow, bailed all except captain (commander in this flight acted as instructor and sitting at right)
why - accidentially pushed or some electric issue (it happens at moment while engines starting)
and why the protection didn't work will be investigated


ps. i really hate how input text here jumped again and again because of commercial


upd: conflicting with my post? yes, it was rumors at that time
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Fri Mar 26, 2021 7:39 pm

Russia's Emergency Ministries Ka-32 helo down in the Baltic Sea. One crewmember perished apparently. Two pulled out of the water in time to rescue them from hypothermia.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun May 30, 2021 10:06 am

Russian AF accident in Saki, Crimea, Ukraine (territory temporarily occupied by Russia), May 22:
Su-30SM, both pilots ejected on the ground, both survived. A ground technician suffered burns, reportedly he was on the cockpit ladder at that moment. A second ground technician apparently was stunned, possibly shell-shocked.
 
angad84
Posts: 2136
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun May 30, 2021 11:16 am

Phosphorus wrote:
Russian AF accident in Saki, Crimea, Ukraine (territory temporarily occupied by Russia), May 22:
Su-30SM, both pilots ejected on the ground, both survived. A ground technician suffered burns, reportedly he was on the cockpit ladder at that moment. A second ground technician apparently was stunned, possibly shell-shocked.

technician on ladder with seats armed and canopy down? that's odd.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Sun May 30, 2021 6:23 pm

angad84 wrote:
Phosphorus wrote:
Russian AF accident in Saki, Crimea, Ukraine (territory temporarily occupied by Russia), May 22:
Su-30SM, both pilots ejected on the ground, both survived. A ground technician suffered burns, reportedly he was on the cockpit ladder at that moment. A second ground technician apparently was stunned, possibly shell-shocked.

technician on ladder with seats armed and canopy down? that's odd.

It is. Pages and pages of debates, arguments and counter-arguments on russian aviation forums. Whether canopy was down or not, whether ejection system was fully armed as per rules, or something went wrong, and arming (and consequent ejection) overrode the protocol, and what exactly was the guy on the ladder doing at that phase. Googlable; online translation is your friend. Some terms are bound to be translated incorrectly -- along with more colorful neologisms of insults, occasionally traded by more emotional users.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Topic Author
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Russian Military Crashes Discussion Thread - Part 2

Thu Jun 24, 2021 7:38 pm

Mi-8 of Rosgvardia (a separate quazi-military force outside of Russian Ministry of Defence) crashed in Leningrad region, Russia, with casualties.
 
SRQLOT
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:05 pm

Be-200 crashes in Turkey

Sat Aug 14, 2021 5:05 pm

Surprised didn’t see this posted yet here or in military. A Russian firefighting amphibious airplane crashed in Turkey on approach to Adana. 8 lost 5 Russian and 3 Turkish. Surprised that Russia sent it there considering the masssive wild fires in Siberia. RIP to all.

I always loved the look of this airplane and wished it could have done downtown to downtown flights around the world if things were different.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/14/europe/r ... index.html
 
tu204
Posts: 2277
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:36 am

Re: Be-200 crashes in Turkey

Sat Aug 14, 2021 5:31 pm

Reg. RF-88450 / 20 Yellow, "Alexander Mamkin", belonging to the Russian Navy. Delivered new in 2020.

Flying low, fast, at pretty high speeds and in bad visibility is unfortunately dangerous. Seen plenty of cockpit videos of the guys at work, can't see a damn thing but they manage to deliver the loads with precision. Hats off to the guys.

Sad.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14861
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Be-200 crashes in Turkey

Sat Aug 14, 2021 6:14 pm

Nooo, my favorite plane !

RIP to the crew.

It doesn't seem like this happened during operations ?

Wildfires in Siberia are left alone as there is nobody living there, basically.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rlwynn, TUSPHX and 8 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos