Tu-22 crash

[The Basket]

Some weather.
Looks like pilot hit the ground far too early so either fault with altitude or pilot lost all situation awareness and thought he was much higher.
Flying in conditions like that are quite something.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Saw this on FaceBook. It seems he was really sinking during the approach. The weather was dreadful and I'd be skeptical if the TU-22 was CAT IIIc capable. The bomber hits pretty hard (obviously) but I wouldn't have expected it to break apart the way it did.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ouch. Read about this on ASN the other day, but did not see the video until now. My comdolences to the families.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

This captured my curiosity. I found this clip on YouTube of an SU-22. Check out 1:47 of the video and the way the aircraft is landed.

 

[Wurger]

IMHO too high speed during the final approach and too late flare . My condolences to the families.

 

[Airframes]

Condolences to the families.
It certainly seemed to be a fast approach, high sink rate, and late flare. Too committed for a 'go around', although it was perhaps attempted at the last second ?

 

[GrauGeist]

That was a terrible event and I would have thought the gear would have collapsed under the strain.
I had mentioned a possability of fatigue causing the breakup on Eric's post over at FB, but then I noticed something while watching the vid that Joe just posted.

In this screenshot, there appears to be "windows" of some sort in roughly the area where the fuselage seperated in the crash which leads me to wonder if there's a relation.

 

[Gnomey]

Yikes! Wouldn't of expected it to break up like that despite the very hard landing.

My condolences to those involved

 

[FLYBOYJ]

More...

Russian Tu-22M3 crash: Expert says instrument landing system to blame 'hard' landing

Russian Tu-22M3 bomber crash: preliminary report gives details

 

[Augsburg Eagle]

Absolute horrible. At a landing like this, I would have expected a collapse of the main gear, but no collapse of the whole fuselage.
I pray for the crew and their relatives

 

[Husky]

Some weather.
Looks like pilot hit the ground far too early so either fault with altitude or pilot lost all situation awareness and thought he was much higher.
Flying in conditions like that are quite something.

No doubt, absolutely sh!t weather. Definitely one of those days where; "It's better to be down here wishing I was up there then up there wishing I was down here" rings true.

 

[Zipper730]

Honestly, I'd have thought the plane came in fast because something was wrong with it and "it's this or nothing baby"...

 

[nuuumannn]

Just to be specific, the aircraft that crashed is a Tu-22M3 'Backfire', not a Tu-22, which was an earlier, different type, codenamed 'Blinder'.

Tupolev Tu-22M - Wikipedia

Tupolev Tu-22 - Wikipedia

In this screenshot, there appears to be "windows" of some sort in roughly the area where the fuselage seperated in the crash which leads me to wonder if there's a relation.

They're auxiliary inlet doors, but in the clip do look like windows. Sad for the families of those involved. A Lithuanian friend of mine said that the two Backfires were instructed to land at this airfield, but the tower had explained that it was unsafe because of the weather, but the commander of Backfire flight overruled the tower and instructed the pilot that it would be okay for them to land. If this is true, it's criminally sad.

 

[Husky]

A Lithuanian friend of mine said that the two Backfires were instructed to land at this airfield, but the tower had explained that it was unsafe because of the weather, but the commander of Backfire flight overruled the tower and instructed the pilot that it would be okay for them to land. If this is true, it's criminally sad.

Not sure what the Russian military Flight Regulations say but, my not so old U.S. Army one specifically indicates that the Pilot-in-Command has the final authority in the operation of their aircraft.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Not sure what the Russian military Flight Regulations say but, my not so old U.S. Army one specifically indicates that the Pilot-in-Command has the final authority in the operation of their aircraft.

That's not entirely correct. Yes the PIC has final authority, but that authority is over the aircraft. It does not mean he can just land at any controled airport. He or she is still required to obtain clearances and adhear to them.t

If the tower at a controlled airport tells a pilot that the field is closed because of weather then the PIC has to divert. He does not have control over the airport.

Emergency situations can dictate otherwise. In an emergency a PIC can deviate in order to ensure the safety of the aircraft and crew. You can also deviate to avoid other aircraft, or you notice that a tower clearance is putting you in danger (i.e. towards another aircraft, or a building for instance). All deviations must be explained and reported.

And the US Army is no different in those regards, especially since most of it's flying is done in the civilian national airspace. It was no different when I was crewing/flying in the US Army.

Here are the regulations, at least as far as the FAA is concerned:

§91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

§91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.
(c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.
(d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.
(e) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no person operating an aircraft may operate that aircraft according to any clearance or instruction that has been issued to the pilot of another aircraft for radar air traffic control purposes.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Not sure what the Russian military Flight Regulations say but, my not so old U.S. Army one specifically indicates that the Pilot-in-Command has the final authority in the operation of their aircraft.

The Russians (and going back to the old Soviet Union) give a lot more authority to ground radar operators than pilots during military operations. Read about their GCI tactics as opposed to AEW&C)

 

[nuuumannn]

Last night I asked my friend to clarify. He was explained this by an old ex-Soviet Air Force buddy of his. Apparently the tower had said not to land but was ignored. Looking at the video, the Backfire's approach speed and rate of descent is extraordinarily fast, most likely caused by the pilot experiencing whiteout.

Whiteout (weather) - Wikipedia

Air New Zealand Flight 901 - Wikipedia

The accident took place here:

Olenya (air base) - Wikipedia

 

[tyrodtom]

What amazes me is that one man survived.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Last night I asked my friend to clarify. He was explained this by an old ex-Soviet Air Force buddy of his. Apparently the tower had said not to land but was ignored. Looking at the video, the Backfire's approach speed and rate of descent is extraordinarily fast, most likely caused by the pilot experiencing whiteout.

Whiteout (weather) - Wikipedia

Air New Zealand Flight 901 - Wikipedia

The accident took place here:

Olenya (air base) - Wikipedia

I'm not too open about the whiteout scenario. He should have been shooting an instrument approach until he reached a decision height, totally focused on his instruments and not even looking outside the cockpit. When reaching his DH (the time to start looking for the runway threshold) if he had no visual on the runway he should have gone "missed approach." If he was trying to land in those conditions visually, well I have to say it but he was a madman! If your friend has any info on what type of instrument approach was being used, I'd like to know.

 

[GrauGeist]

Doesn't the Tu-22M3 have the Sopka TFR?