Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

An-2 crashed at airshow "70 years of An-2" at Chernoe (MARZ)

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

An-2 crashed at airshow "70 years of An-2" at Chernoe (MARZ)

Old 3rd Sep 2017, 09:01
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From my understanding the AN-2 is not cleared for aerobatics !!!

From the video that was either a barrel roll that went wrong and ended up as a split 'S' or an attempt at a split 'S' that still went badly wrong.

Standing by to be corrected.
Above The Clouds is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2017, 09:09
  #22 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Above The Clouds
From the video that was either a barrel roll that went wrong and ended up as a split 'S' or an attempt at a split 'S' that still went badly wrong.
Like the one who photographed this plane and the program that he performs many times , I can say that he probably planned knife edge with sharp right turn and landing.

Originally Posted by Metro man
they can still take off from roads or improvised strips.
With proper wind it can take off from it's standing position with no need for strip at all like this.

The funds are being raised to support the families of Dmitry Sukharev and Boris Tylevich - two pilots who tragically died in the accident during the airshow in Moscow on September 2, 2017.

https://igor113.livejournal.com/889480.html
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2017, 15:40
  #23 (permalink)  
Longtimelurker
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vessbot
100% correct. This is why it's important to learn (and teach) to think in terms of lift vector control. The ailerons aim it, the elevator makes you go where it's aimed, but only under a long list of provisos. Best to aim it away from the ground first, and ask questions later.

The naive, easy, and deadly way to teach flying is as an extension of driving a car, with the addition of the "elevator" that moves you up and down. Not so. One of Wolfgang Langewiesche's high points in his book Stick and Rudder is his doing away with the word "elevator" for the control surface in questions.
So true ! It's sad that in aviation people seem to repeat mistakes that can be avoided. Very unfortunate that this same accident is available on U Tube abet with different aircraft some videos being decades old 😡.
filejw is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2017, 19:58
  #24 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2017, 21:17
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Only in Russia..?" If only! Twenty seconds on YouTube would demonstrate how wrong that is.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2017, 23:07
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Above The Clouds
From my understanding the AN-2 is not cleared for aerobatics !!!

From the video that was either a barrel roll that went wrong and ended up as a split 'S' or an attempt at a split 'S' that still went badly wrong.

Standing by to be corrected.
Been 20 odd years since i looked at a flight manual for one though don't recall any mention of aerobatics. Likely not relavent to this though. The routine looked to be all basic positive G stuff. Sorta stuff a Boeing 707 passenger jet could do.

Sundry thoughts:
The pilot gets a G loading coming out of the loop, a slight unloading, then back to a G loading in the turn...

Obvious aileron deflection in previous manoeuvres though no obvious aileron deflection in the turn and ground impact ?

Or a spanner in the works perhaps...






.
Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2017, 00:04
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry guys, the comment "Only in Russia" relates to a series of clips on YouTube featuring the most amazing crashes, cock-ups, acts of stupidity and things requiring huge balls. Unlike this incident, many are also very amusing as well.

I'm amazed this comment has pulled so many people's chains though.
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2017, 12:07
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And this is how it should look like:

Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2017, 14:26
  #29 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,611
Received 60 Likes on 43 Posts
In Canada, a part of the requirements for an airshow reads:

Air show aerobatic manoeuvres conducted inside the aerobatic box that have a descending recovery with a pull or push and having a flight path which, when extended, would contact the primary spectator area will not be approved for inclusion in an air show.
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2017, 17:54
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Age: 71
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kulverstukas
And this is how it should look like:
Thanks, that is very helpful in understanding what happened.
PrivtPilotRadarTech is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2017, 15:34
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Above The Clouds
From my understanding the AN-2 is not cleared for aerobatics !!!

From the video that was either a barrel roll that went wrong and ended up as a split 'S' or an attempt at a split 'S' that still went badly wrong.

Standing by to be corrected.
According to the An-2 Flight Manual

http://www.avialogs.com/en/aircraft/...2irengine.html

"Acrobatic flights" are forbidden (page 79) and bank limitation in turn is 45 degrees (page 81).

Laurence
l.garey is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2017, 16:08
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: GA, USA
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by l.garey
According to the An-2 Flight Manual

4498 Flight Manual for An-2 Airplane with Ash-62IR Engine

"Acrobatic flights" are forbidden (page 79) and bank limitation in turn is 45 degrees (page 81).

Laurence
That appears to be a Polish approved manual and may pertain to Polish built models.
B2N2 is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2017, 16:22
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Lakeside
Posts: 534
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmm...

Now we see this aircraft in an aggressive side slip, a "duck walk", and a demonstration of "flying on the prop".

This in an aircraft limited to 45 degrees of bank.

I think from the crash video that the reason this flight ended badly is because it remained in the "maneuver" too long....

The example of a successful maneuver completion also showed the aircraft exceeding limits.

Pushing certified limits is not acceptable. It sets a poor example, and should be discouraged. It is so sad the pilots died. It also was not necessary...

"Only in.....anywhere".
Concours77 is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2017, 16:29
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
B2N2: I think most AN-2s were Polish built, so maybe this one was too. In any case I can't see that it would make much difference. If a Polish An-2 is limited to non-aerobatic 45 degree banks, than I imagine Russian ones would be too.

Laurence
l.garey is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2017, 21:27
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by l.garey
B2N2: I think most AN-2s were Polish built, so maybe this one was too. In any case I can't see that it would make much difference. If a Polish An-2 is limited to non-aerobatic 45 degree banks, than I imagine Russian ones would be too.

Laurence
Yer likely right though the Polish flight manual may have got some 'added bits' to the original just to keep the export market happy.

At any rate, here in Oz at YBAF i watched Bob Hoover do some twin/single/no-engine aerobatic manoeuvres in a twin engine aircraft, and apparently with a medical written out by CASA just for the air show.. Seems air shows can legitimately have their own rules set out side of a flight manual.





.
Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2017, 02:19
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 5,923
Received 389 Likes on 204 Posts
apparently with a medical written out by CASA just for the air show
FB, two FAA people had it in for Bob Hoover, and grounded him on supposed medical grounds, this from observing one of his performances at an airshow, which they deemed to be sub par. When he came to Oz, Barry Diamond, ex Navy A-4 and then CASA, put Bob through the hoops and was unable to fault. Bob was given the OK then to perform. The FAA pair were subsequently hung, drawn and quartered, and Bob regained his FAA accreditation.
megan is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2017, 15:02
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Unna, Germany
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looking at the manoeuvres flown, I'm wondering whether if his altimeter was set 1 or 2hpa higher? The completed demonstration showed pretty low altitude when coming out of the descending turn, maybe 50 feet or so AGL.

If the pilot didn't set the barometer, then that difference would lead to the plane smacking into the ground....
Steve6443 is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2017, 15:37
  #38 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kulverstukas is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2017, 05:16
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Might just be me seeing what i want to see or the changing camera angle, though it appears just before ground impact a little right rudder went in ?

Originally Posted by megan
FB, two FAA people had it in for Bob Hoover, and grounded him on supposed medical grounds, this from observing one of his performances at an airshow, which they deemed to be sub par. When he came to Oz, Barry Diamond, ex Navy A-4 and then CASA, put Bob through the hoops and was unable to fault. Bob was given the OK then to perform. The FAA pair were subsequently hung, drawn and quartered, and Bob regained his FAA accreditation.
Shame Hoover had to come to Oz to get his U.S. licence back. He certainly put on a good display for the YBAF watchers..
Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 8th Sep 2017, 15:41
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Lakeside
Posts: 534
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FB:

"Might just be me seeing what i want to see or the changing camera angle, though it appears just before ground impact a little right rudder went in ?"

I see that. Also visible is an emphatic yaw response, right. That even though the left wings are dragging. There is no (applied) Rudder visible at 20 feet AGL.

NO Flaps. The airplane is not going to impress the audience with speed. Or slippery airframe. The max angle take off pays off at two body lengths?

This aircraft in an air show, (given its size), could impress the crowd with a forward slip to a short landing. It has no problems shedding airspeed, and the attitude of a large a/c in an aggressive slip is something to see. Getting down and stopped quickly would be a finale to be be enjoyed... Is the aircraft placarded no flaps in slip?

The actual maneuver leaves one mystified. What could have been the pilot's plan?
Concours77 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.