Su-33 lost to the sea during landing, again Kuznetsov

[Worrazen]

Aw naaaaah! If it only had some way to float!

 

https://www.rt.com/news/369209-admiral-kuznetsov-su-33/

 

Well, at least the carrier and the crew are getting beta tested, without cost in lives.

Edited December 5, 2016 by Worrazen

[Shaman]

If the line snaps shouldn't aircraft be on full after burner and on speed to climb away with enough planned fuel to go around? I wonder what has actually happened. There must be more factors than mentioned in news from RT or The Aviationist websites.

[Aginor]

Depending on at which point the wire snaps they won't be able to takeoff again. Happens on american carriers as well now and then.

[Neldrion]

Tonight I did the first carrier landing in DCS with a SU-33. It was successful.

 

Almost at the same time the SU-33 in real life dropped in the ocean :( Oh-oh !

[QuiGon]

Depending on at which point the wire snaps they won't be able to takeoff again. Happens on american carriers as well now and then.

 

How often do these wires snap?

[Aginor]

I don't know the exact number. But I am pretty sure we could find some numbers about that somewhere. A few times every cruise I guess.

Most of the time nothing too bad happens. But there were also some spectacular cases in the past.

[ram0506]

This is, how it could have happened:

The wire snapped after the Su-33 was nearly stopped. So there was no speed left to take off again.

[Aginor]

That's pretty much exactly what I meant.

If the cable snaps late it is pretty bad, and in many cases causes the loss of the aircraft.

[ram0506]

Yes, barely time enough for the pilot to eject. You feel, that you catched the wire, turn off the afterburner and then everything goes straight to hell...

Edited December 5, 2016 by ram0506

[grunf]

:(

Hope no one got injured.

 

Here's a similar accident on US carrier:

 

[Seaeagle]

If the line snaps shouldn't aircraft be on full after burner and on speed to climb away with enough planned fuel to go around?

 

No only if they miss the wire entirely("bolter"), but as others said, its a different story if the aircraft catches the wire and is slowed down before the wire snaps.

[NRG-Vampire]

No only if they miss the wire entirely("bolter"), but as others said, its a different story if the aircraft catches the wire and is slowed down before the wire snaps.

 

 

think about on it a bit guys

angled deck on carriers is for safety

BUT

to avoid similar cable snap situations perhaps they should consider this:

especially by the russain navy - they operate aircrafts on a nearly (or completely) empty deck

landing and take off as well

SO

image this:

on carrier with ski jump if the aircaft approaches and lands on a perfect longitudinal axis of the ship, and one of the wire snaps at close to zero speed of the aircraft then it will be able to take off again - there will be more or less enough distance for a take off emergeny run on the deck towards to that ski jump

with an agled deck landing this re-fly wont be able

of course this theory will needs redesigning the cable systems and the carrier safety/operating patterns and orders as well (and maybe new wider carriers too)

maybe on flat deck us/french carriers as well

...my 2 cents brainstorm ;)

Edited December 5, 2016 by NRG-Vampire

[Pocket Sized]

I don't know the exact number. But I am pretty sure we could find some numbers about that somewhere. A few times every cruise I guess.

Most of the time nothing too bad happens. But there were also some spectacular cases in the past.

 

It's extremely rare in real life from what I've heard. I'd be surprised if it's happened more than a dozen times, because it's devastating while being very easy to prevent.

 

I assume those cables get inspected every chance they get. Not to mention how absurdly strong they are.

[NeilWillis]

Well the loss of an aircraft is a blow, but at least the crew appear to be safe. It could have been far worse if personnel got in the way of that wire when it parted.

 

Carrier operations are always hazardous, so hats off to anyone who works in that environment.

[Kenan]

From what I could understant, the MiG loss could have been prevented by landing it in Syria. This one appears to be just a bad luck. Glad pilot is safe.

[T_A]

This is sad and is the result of low budget for training (both for pilots and for deck crews)

[Esac_mirmidon]

You dont know what you are talking about.

 

Su-33 pilots are the best among tbe Russian Air Force. A bunch of "specialist" by they own flying the Su-33. Its not because lack of training or competence. This is not 1992. Its an accident because an arrestor cable failure.

 

Something that sometimes happens in all navy air branches. Included US NAVY.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Esac_mirmidon

[M460]

Will russia attempt a salvage on those 2 lost aircraft?

 

If not, then 2 new treasures lie on the Mediterranean floor. ARFF!!

[Esac_mirmidon]

An attemp to destroy the Su-33 lost in 2005 was cancelled because not sensible equipment was installed on board.

 

In this case about yesterday i dont know of the Su-33 crashed was one of the modernised ones and if that new equipment worth the effort to destroy de wreck or rescue the airframe.

[Weta43]

To be fair to T_A, MSN.com is running an article saying:

Unlike modern aircraft carriers, the Kuznetsov does not have a catapult system, and the jets it carries must launch off a ramp, which makes the job of takeoff and landing extremely challenging.

 

“We have a very limited number of pilots who can fulfill this task,” Golts said. “I doubt there are many in the world.”

though the connection between the ramp and the arrestor wire snapping escapes me, and it seems generally to be a chance taken to run down the Russians rather than a serious report...

 

(maybe they could get the RAF to train up some pilots on the use of a ramp :-)

[Kenan]

What does the ramp have to do with landing? It has to do with TAKING OFF, not with landing. Landing on Kuznetsov is essentially the same as landing on the Nimitz or any other U.S. carrier. Elevated ramp has nothing to do with the landing per se.

[Kuky]

To be fair to T_A, MSN.com is running an article saying:

 

though the connection between the ramp and the arrestor wire snapping escapes me, and it seems generally to be a chance taken to run down the Russians rather than a serious report...

 

(maybe they could get the RAF to train up some pilots on the use of a ramp :-)

 

Yeah, typical nonsense from mainstream media, just wanting to make the Russians look bad, inexperienced, with old tech etc. :music_whistling:

 

Ramp or no ramp, landing the aircraft on carries is same, also ramp vs catapult is not just old vs modern, its different approach, as catapults have their own problems and challenges... but what would "honest" media know about this and real journalism any more :doh:

[ebabil]

:(

Hope no one got injured.

 

Here's a similar accident on US carrier:

 

 

(00:50) look at the man who jumps to avoid getting hit by the cable. hats off

[QuiGon]

Su-33 pilots are the best among tbe Russian Air Force.

 

Wait, they are air force pilots? I would have thought they are navy aviators? :huh:

[Esac_mirmidon]

Thanks for the Russian Air branches lesson.

 

You know what i mean. Yes they are navy pilots. Sorry for the typo