MiG-29 K taking off in 2012.
Posted on 11/22/2016 3:04:39 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
A combination of faults on Russia’s carrier and an unexpected total engine shutdown led to a Russian pilot ditching his fighter in the Mediterranean Sea last week, read a translation of a Monday Russian press report.
The Mikoyan MiG-29K that crashed on Nov. 13 was part of a trio of fighters sortied from Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov for operations over Syria, USNI News reported last week.
Following the mission – armed reconnaissance runs over targets near Aleppo, USNI News understands — the fighters headed back to the carrier to land, read a translation of a report from Gazeta.ru.
“Upon completion of their flight missions, the fighters were returning to the aircraft carrier. In this situation, landings were to occur with an interval of three-to-four minutes,” read the translation.
“The first fighter landed without incident.”
However, the second fighter snapped one of the arresting wires during landing with the hook eventually catching on reserve arresting cable, the report said.
With the deck fouled from the cable break, the third MiG – which was on approach closely behind the second fighter – was told to circle back into a holding pattern while the crew of Admiral Kuznetsov cleared the deck for the next landing.
“While in the holding area, both of the fighter’s engines shut down,” read the translation. “A preliminary explanation is that they were no longer receiving fuel. ln such situations, a fighter falls like a rock, and the pilot has only one option — to eject.”
NATO ships monitoring the carrier offered assistance that was declined by the Russians, a NATO official told USNI News last week.
Following last week’s crash, the Russians continued operating fighters from Admiral Kuznetsov and used planes from the carrier to strike targets held by rebels opposed to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced last week.
The Kremlin has attempted to improve Russian carrier aviation over the last few years after decades of atrophy.
“A few years ago there were stories they were largely contractors as pilots,” Eric Wertheim — naval analyst and author of U.S. Naval Institute’s Combat Fleets of the World — told USNI News on last week. “They’ve been trying to pass that skill on but there’s not the ability to do that because the pool is small and they’re not a lot of facilities available.”
A land-based facility to train Russian naval aviators that was set to open in 2015 has been continually delayed.
The carrier – technically an aircraft carrying guided missile cruiser – is part of a four ship Russian naval force that deployed to the Eastern Mediterranean that includes cruiser Peter the Great and two Udaloy-class guided missile destroyers. The surface action group is also operating with one of Russia’s newest frigates — Admiral Grigorovich – that launched cruise missiles as part of the Russian offensive against targets in Aleppo.
As of Monday morning, the ships were operating south of Cyprus, a U.S. defense official told USNI News.
MiG-29 K taking off in 2012.
In fairness the US Navy crashed a lot of planes on the USS Langley back in the 20’s and 30’s learning how to do carrier operations.
Ran out of fuel? They don’t have refueling capability?
Double engine failure due to fuel starvation. Too much air in the fuel tanks?
Rookie mistake
Not on their carriers, no.
ping
Took too long to fix the cables.
Probably took off with a minimum fuel load in order to carry more ordinance. Didn’t leave very much reserve fuel in the event their landing was delayed.
Hey Rooskies, life’s a b*tch when you’re trick-or-treat and there’s no Texaco airborne...or even the ability to IFR. Back to the drawing board, wannabes.
From the headline, I was thinking that maybe Russian jet engines can't operate underwater.
What they’re not revealing is the damage and injury or death caused by the snapped CDP/cable and how long the deck was foul. My guess is more than just a few minutes.
Even without refueling this would still be a rookie mistake of failing to manage fuel reserves, bingo time to allow for exactly this type of thing.
We had arrestor cable snap on Indy at least twice in my time. On one occasion all remaining aircraft in the air were sent to closest air base as it was more involved than just changing the cable - that’s how well they managed the fuel - what I’m unsure is if they had to refuel enroute or they had sufficient reserves to do on their own.
The other time - it was a 10 minute swap and after a few laps aircraft resumed landing.
If it was the more complex situation the aircraft should have been immediately routed to a syrian airfield until the ship could resume recovery ops.
“A few years ago there were stories they were largely contractors as pilots,”
Where would they find experienced carrier pilots?
Do they have throttle-up limits on those engines. Some engines you just can’t firewall. Thinking pilot error might be possible if the pilot applied too much power too quickly.
No barricade netting system.
I have never done it, but my understanding is it is SOP to firewall the throttles as the hook catches the arresting gear, otherwise spoolup time will prevent a successful go-around should the hook miss the wires .
There was a question earlier if the Russians have air to air fueling equipment in the area.
I imagine the only thing their carrier aircraft may be able to do is ‘Buddy Refuel’ and probably not get much more than a splash of gas given the takeoff weight limitations with a ski-jump flightdeck.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.