BBRuNe critiques Su-35 landing from 2014

[Ian Corrigible]

BBC: How not to land a fighter jet (http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150805-how-not-to-land-a-fighter-jet)

Interesting to see this on the front page of the Beeb today, given the on-going debate in the Gnat down at CarFest (http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/565505-gnat-down-carfest.html) thread on whether post-incident/accident speculation is appropriate.

(Still, it'll give the Cornish troll army something to do :E)

Coming soon to a TV near you:

http://i.imgur.com/nvzlcRd.png

[TyroPicard]

OK I'll bite... large left rudder input before touchdown which was maintained during the bounce .. no left wing stall just secondary effect of rudder.

[Cows getting bigger]

I'ld be quite pleased with a landing like that. :E

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

One recalls the 100 degree turn at half mile finals for fighters to land on 09 at Gibraltar (when the Spaniards were being difficult), and that was wet at both ends. However, I think the commentator, Graham Flack*, is right. The Su-35 was never stabilised on the approach, and if only for just a couple of seconds, I think you must have that.

*was he a Jag mate??

[Fonsini]

I always wondered how many fighters the Soviets really lost in takeoff/landing incidents during the MiG 15/17 years, especially bearing in mind some of the remote snow covered airfields they had their pilots flying out of.

As for the Su-35, yes the pilot botched it and he owes Mother Russia a new missile rail, but that's some impressive low-speed rudder authority to yank that huge beast back on track like that.

[Chugalug2]

The left wing stalls,
Does that mean that it "spun in out of control", and no mention of schools and hospitals that were narrowly avoided either. Come on Aunty, pull your socks up. The public has a right to know!

[a1bill]

By the look of the windsock, landing downwind wouldn't have helped.