Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
There was a report that two bodies have been found and one crewman has been rescued but the other is missing.
(two two seater aircraft means four men...)
RIP if true...
(two two seater aircraft means four men...)
RIP if true...
+75
caveat emptor
lancelot
Dr.Snufflebug
Gomig-21
mnrck
Big_Gazza
owais.usmani
Broski
Cheetah
Rasisuki Nebia
marat
Backman
Mir
TMA1
limb
LMFS
Russophile
Isos
Hole
miketheterrible
dino00
mnztr
Pierre Sprey
runaway
gaurav
T-47
AMCXXL
magnumcromagnon
TheArmenian
JohninMK
Benya
Singular_Transform
airstrike
hoom
Singular_trafo
franco
archangelski
KiloGolf
zepia
Backinblack
AK-Rex
ult
Ranxerox71
whir
Giulio
par far
ExBeobachter1987
Werewolf
Mak Sime
Teshub
jhelb
Svyatoslavich
Cucumber Khan
Mike E
PapaDragon
OminousSpudd
flamming_python
Vann7
max steel
Prince Darling
Berkut
Kyo
mack8
medo
Firebird
George1
SOC
Viktor
Cyberspec
ahmedfire
Austin
GarryB
Russian Patriot
sepheronx
Admin
79 posters
Russian-Made Crash Notification
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
George1- Posts : 18315
Points : 18812
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
Two crew members of the Tupolev-22M3 died in crash in Murmansk Region - Defense Ministry
More:
http://tass.com/emergencies/1041152
More:
http://tass.com/emergencies/1041152
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
Bad start to the year. Three planes gone, 6 dead. Two Su-34 and one Tu-22M3. Can't replace a life and the aircrafts gone means Russia will be even further behind in modernization.
Sad all around. RIP to the pilots. Thank goodness that two are alive.
Edit: 4 dead.
Sad all around. RIP to the pilots. Thank goodness that two are alive.
Edit: 4 dead.
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
So in these situations, what happens next? Does the MoD order two new Su-34s to replace the lost ones, and add another older Tu-22M from reserve to service? I'm unsure what usually happens after these events?
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Vann normally pops up and tells us it is all Putins fault and it is quality control in Russia because they don't know how to make anything properly and accidents are all about quality control... apparently.
Isos- Posts : 11301
Points : 11271
Join date : 2015-11-06
Tu-22M are already more than 30 years old. It's an old plane and being supersonic means more stressed than a subsonic one. Modernization won't help. They need a successor quickly.
To risk another 4 lifes ?
In US you would have a colonel at the congress saying they need new b-222221 and 10 billion $ more on the budget. In russia nothing.
older Tu-22M from reserve to service? I'm unsure what usually happens after these events?
To risk another 4 lifes ?
In US you would have a colonel at the congress saying they need new b-222221 and 10 billion $ more on the budget. In russia nothing.
Hole- Posts : 10722
Points : 10700
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 47
Location : Scholzistan
B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
Isos- Posts : 11301
Points : 11271
Join date : 2015-11-06
Hole wrote:B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
Comparing with US analogues won't make them safer. In terms of keeping operational old aircraft, US are better. First the climat is better, they have hangars, their aircrafts didn't spend all the 1990s outdoor without being flown, they don't stay every winter under the snow, they have money to repair/buy spare parts quickly ...
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
For reals, hopefully will not continue like that.Bad start to the year. Three planes gone, 6 dead. Two Su-34 and one Tu-22M3.
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
In US you would have a colonel at the congress saying they need new b-222221 and 10 billion $ more on the budget. In russia nothing.
That is because well before the B-2222221 gets into service that Colonel knows he will have retired from the military and he wants a cushy high paying job at Boeing so he can live the retirement the military was never going to be able to afford to give him.
Russian officers don't give a shit about the profit margins of Tupolev or Sukhoi... and neither they should.
Comparing with US analogues won't make them safer.
The Tu-22M3s are young aircraft... if they have to retire them because they are too old to operate safely then their designs are fundamentally flawed and there is something seriously wrong.
If they can't keep their planes flying now there is no point in giving them new planes.
To risk another 4 lifes ?
What you need to do is calm down and change your underwear... and relax, while the Russian military does what it needs to do... ie work out what went wrong and work out how to fix the problems.
They also need to work out by 6 people are dead despite sitting on perfectly good ejection seats that should have saved them.
There might be a dozen reasons they they were each killed, but scrapping perfectly good aircraft and demanding new ones is the sort of thing a 5 year old would demand... (so it makes sense for US colonels to do this).
New Planes crash too so you just spent a billion dollars and you have the same problems you had before... your fired.
PapaDragon- Posts : 13272
Points : 13314
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Hole wrote:B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
B-52s in service today were built in the 80s same as Tu-95s and they are subsonic hence much less load. They are both in far better condition.
B-1Bs have barely been used over the years, they spent most of their service life in glorified storage in the desert.
They definitely need something to replace Tu-22s, hopefully PAK-DA should be online within reasonable timeframe, it's subsonic aircraft after all so there should be no major hickups.
mnztr- Posts : 2773
Points : 2811
Join date : 2018-01-21
PapaDragon wrote:Hole wrote:B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
B-52s in service today were built in the 80s same as Tu-95s and they are subsonic hence much less load. They are both in far better condition.
B-1Bs have barely been used over the years, they spent most of their service life in glorified storage in the desert.
They definitely need something to replace Tu-22s, hopefully PAK-DA should be online within reasonable timeframe, it's subsonic aircraft after all so there should be no major hickups.
There were NO B-52 built in the 80s, the last one was made in 1962 geezzz...the B1 was made in the 80s
PapaDragon- Posts : 13272
Points : 13314
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
mnztr wrote:PapaDragon wrote:Hole wrote:B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
B-52s in service today were built in the 80s same as Tu-95s and they are subsonic hence much less load. They are both in far better condition.
B-1Bs have barely been used over the years, they spent most of their service life in glorified storage in the desert.
They definitely need something to replace Tu-22s, hopefully PAK-DA should be online within reasonable timeframe, it's subsonic aircraft after all so there should be no major hickups.
There were NO B-52 built in the 80s, the last one was made in 1962 geezzz...the B1 was made in the 80s
My bad, sorry. Been selling USAF bit short there.
So it's just subsonic part for B-52s.
And with 2 decades more than Tupolevs it looks like exceptional maintenance quality as well, good job
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
What a 
.
We don't even know why it crashed but you have already decided...
What a .
.We don't even know why it crashed but you have already decided...
What a
.
Russophile- Posts : 11
Points : 15
Join date : 2014-03-13
Location : US
A Tu-22M3 supersonic strategic bomber has crashed in Russia’s north-west while trying to make a landing during a sudden snowstorm. Two crew members died in the incident while two others were injured.
The bomber got into trouble after conducting a training exercise, the Russian defense ministry reported. It attempted to make a landing at an air base near the city of Olenegorsk in Russia’s Murmansk region.
The aircraft was destroyed by the impact. Two crew members died on the spot while two others survived and were taken to a hospital for treatment, the ministry said.
The storm, which affected the aircraft, is of a rare kind that only happens in Arctic areas. It is almost impossible to predict and develops very rapidly, turning a calm day into a fierce and dangerous blizzard.
The bomber got into trouble after conducting a training exercise, the Russian defense ministry reported. It attempted to make a landing at an air base near the city of Olenegorsk in Russia’s Murmansk region.
The aircraft was destroyed by the impact. Two crew members died on the spot while two others survived and were taken to a hospital for treatment, the ministry said.
The storm, which affected the aircraft, is of a rare kind that only happens in Arctic areas. It is almost impossible to predict and develops very rapidly, turning a calm day into a fierce and dangerous blizzard.
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The storm, which affected the aircraft, is of a rare kind that only happens in Arctic areas. It is almost impossible to predict and develops very rapidly, turning a calm day into a fierce and dangerous blizzard.
Are they trying to suggest even an immaculately maintained B-52 might have crashed in the same situation?
Surely not... the obvious solution is a 1.5 trillion dollar programme to develop a strategic long range hypersonic STOVL bomber... might need to rope in a few dozen allies to buy some to help pay for it and it needs to be 20 years late and 10 times over budget...
mnztr- Posts : 2773
Points : 2811
Join date : 2018-01-21
PapaDragon wrote:mnztr wrote:PapaDragon wrote:Hole wrote:B-52 is from the 60´s
B-1B from the 80´s.
Most Tu-22M3´s in service are much younger.
B-52s in service today were built in the 80s same as Tu-95s and they are subsonic hence much less load. They are both in far better condition.
B-1Bs have barely been used over the years, they spent most of their service life in glorified storage in the desert.
They definitely need something to replace Tu-22s, hopefully PAK-DA should be online within reasonable timeframe, it's subsonic aircraft after all so there should be no major hickups.
There were NO B-52 built in the 80s, the last one was made in 1962 geezzz...the B1 was made in the 80s
My bad, sorry. Been selling USAF bit short there.
So it's just subsonic part for B-52s.
And with 2 decades more than Tupolevs it looks like exceptional maintenance quality as well, good job
Whats the excuse for the B1s then? Crappy design? Lousy maint? Looks like the US forgot how to design reliable planes since B-52. Its quite sad that 2 generations of bombers could not replace it. Russia has an excuse (collapse of the country) what the excuse for the US?
miketheterrible- Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06
Yes, after reading what happened, it was essentially really shit weather. And in this regard, two possibilities: they mistaken signal lights from a facility as landing strip lights or heavy impact due to high winds. Both cases could be resolved though by providing a FLIR system to the aircrafts bottom area to be able to verify it's position to ground and what the ground looks like in all weather.
This should be something pushed, as it would save lives and probably cost very little overall.
They will definitely have to bring a Tu-22M from reserve (if there are any in reserve still) and modernize it.
The Su-34's was huge pilot error which no matter how good a jet, can't solve mistakes like that.
This should be something pushed, as it would save lives and probably cost very little overall.
They will definitely have to bring a Tu-22M from reserve (if there are any in reserve still) and modernize it.
The Su-34's was huge pilot error which no matter how good a jet, can't solve mistakes like that.
JohninMK- Posts : 14692
Points : 14827
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
From what we know neither of these incidents seems to be the fault of the aircraft themselves. Also in both cases it is possible that ejection was not an option (although do we know if anyone did actually eject?) in that the incidents happened too quickly. Probably human error by the pilots in the Su-34 case being too close and colliding and possibly ground control (not having a good enough view of conditions?) for the Tu-22M as although these snow blizzards may appear very quickly that is surely many minutes not seconds.
Difficult to blame the aircraft.
Difficult to blame the aircraft.
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
For all we know in a crash landing there probably was no time between when they realised there was a problem and when they could not longer eject in time, and for the collision... the two that died might have been incapacitated by the impact and never given the chance to eject...
But all this speculation is pointless right now... adults wait for investigations why the kids squeal and demand action so it never happens again...
But all this speculation is pointless right now... adults wait for investigations why the kids squeal and demand action so it never happens again...
JohninMK- Posts : 14692
Points : 14827
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
Russian military preliminary report on their investigation into T-22M3 strike bomber crash was apparently leaked online today.
Russian Tupolev Tu-22M3 strike bomber (35 Red / RF-94159), carrying four crew members, has crashed at 13:40 p.m. (Moscow time) in Russia’s northwestern region of Murmansk, according to an initial report.
The accident occurred as the long-range bomber was attempting to land at Olenegorsk airfield, aircraft caught fire and was destroyed.
Of the four crew members, two were injured and were transported to a medical facility to receive assistance whereas two were killed.
Preliminary results of the military investigation said the cause of the accident is a piloting error. Tu-22M3 bombe’s crew allowed landing with increased load.
https://defence-blog.com/news/russian-tu-22m3-bomber-crash-preliminary-report-gives-details.html
hoom- Posts : 2352
Points : 2340
Join date : 2016-05-06
Storm came in shortly after takeoff -> quick landing with too much fuel (no time to burn off/dump) and payload?Tu-22M3 bombe’s crew allowed landing with increased load.
Apparently this was a plane upgraded in 2012 so should have been in pretty good condition.
GarryB- Posts : 38981
Points : 39477
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
So over weight and likely a rushed landing to get down before conditions got worse...
So only two dead in the the Backfire... has there been any update with the Fullbacks?
So only two dead in the the Backfire... has there been any update with the Fullbacks?
JohninMK- Posts : 14692
Points : 14827
Join date : 2015-06-16
Location : England
There is a video of the Tu-22M crash, came in heavy tail down, fuselage snapped at the engines, crew in front part went down the runway, rear section left runway and exploded. Lucky anyone got out. Horrific.
This link should work, some interesting stuff on the thread apart from this very sad video.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1089264545078628353
or its in this Twitter link a bit down the page.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1089264545078628353
This link should work, some interesting stuff on the thread apart from this very sad video.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1089264545078628353
or its in this Twitter link a bit down the page.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1089264545078628353
Isos- Posts : 11301
Points : 11271
Join date : 2015-11-06
They came too fast 
altimetre was dead for sure and they had no visibility.
altimetre was dead for sure and they had no visibility. |
|
|