Bad landing @ Kuzentzov - Su33 Abort

Go229

New Member
Certainly the Su-33 has Unreal manoeuverability! :D But i've never seen such a close call, holee jeeze...
 

Kilo 2-3

New Member
Hmm...that's not helping the squadron boarding rate any.

The LSO screwed up big time, although the pilot probably bears some blame as well. (Note I'm not real familiar on how Russian LSOs and pilots interact. Are Russian LSO instructions orders or are they purely advisory?)

Still it's a credit to the pilot and the plane. That sharp pullup could have very easily turned into a nasty stall.
 

stoker

Member
It would seem that like quantity, raw engine power has a quality all of its own.
1st class pilot skills, no armaments being carried and most probably low fuel levels ( which should mean all over a 'light' aircraft ) all helped.

Very impressive.
 

Kilo 2-3

New Member
1st class pilot skills, no armaments being carried and most probably low fuel levels ( which should mean all over a 'light' aircraft ) all helped.

Very impressive.
In my mind, a "good, skilled, etc." pilot would probably never have ended up in such a situation in the first place.

While the Russian's last-ditch maneuver and his recovery showed he was an unusually good stick-and-rudder pilot who knew how to get the most of of his airplane, the fact that he even had to make the maneuver in the first place concerns me.

It was a clear day, good visibility, wing levels seemed fairly moral, minimal deck pitch. Not conditions which usually lead to such close calls. I'm not trying to in any way denigrate the skill it takes to land on a carrier, and I have utmost respect for all brownshoes, regardless of the uniform they wear, however, I'm hard-pressed to find a clear-cut reason for this event that doesn't boil down to pilot error or poor judgment on the part of the Russian paddles (LSO).

Someone screwed up big time and made a major error in judgment and the pilot only survived because he was good/lucky.

I know that I sound very judgmental is saying this, especially since I am a non-aviator and little more than an aircraft enthusiast.

If I am wrong or if I am missing something important here, I'd like to hear your opinions on this matter.
 

Thiel

Member
In my mind, a "good, skilled, etc." pilot would probably never have ended up in such a situation in the first place.

While the Russian's last-ditch maneuver and his recovery showed he was an unusually good stick-and-rudder pilot who knew how to get the most of of his airplane, the fact that he even had to make the maneuver in the first place concerns me.

It was a clear day, good visibility, wing levels seemed fairly moral, minimal deck pitch. Not conditions which usually lead to such close calls. I'm not trying to in any way denigrate the skill it takes to land on a carrier, and I have utmost respect for all brownshoes, regardless of the uniform they wear, however, I'm hard-pressed to find a clear-cut reason for this event that doesn't boil down to pilot error or poor judgment on the part of the Russian paddles (LSO).

Someone screwed up big time and made a major error in judgment and the pilot only survived because he was good/lucky.

I know that I sound very judgmental is saying this, especially since I am a non-aviator and little more than an aircraft enthusiast.

If I am wrong or if I am missing something important here, I'd like to hear your opinions on this matter.
Perhaps the pilot was new to carrier landings? Despite all the progress we've made in terms of simulators and other training aids, they still aren't 100% accurate. For all we know, this could be his very first carrier landing.

Or maybe he got told to abort.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
Perhaps the pilot was new to carrier landings? Despite all the progress we've made in terms of simulators and other training aids, they still aren't 100% accurate. For all we know, this could be his very first carrier landing.

Or maybe he got told to abort.
in case you are wondering the pilot was a new pilot Tomas Cruiseovski here is the transcript.

"Tower this is Lenins Ghost Rider requesting a landing."
"Negative Lenins Ghost Rider the pattern is full.."
"Please repeat"
"Go to the store get more vodka, and some smokes, dont come back without them!"


;)
 

Haavarla

Active Member
Certainly the Su-33 has Unreal manoeuverability! :D But i've never seen such a close call, holee jeeze...
Scary indeed.
But how about his Su-33 vid!
I think it qualified as a close call.
Thiel, what do you think about this pilot skill?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvJYu-8FIwQ&feature=related]YouTube - Su-33 and gurza podguzova maneuvre[/ame]
 

Thiel

Member
Scary indeed.
But how about his Su-33 vid!
I think it qualified as a close call.
Thiel, what do you think about this pilot skill?


YouTube - Su-33 and gurza podguzova maneuvre
The landing attempt itself wasn't, but the tail standing afterwards certainly was.

It seems to me that he pulled back too far on the stick. The fact that he could control the plane in such a steep and slow climb shows that he's good, but the fact that he got into the situation in the first place doesn't.
 

Haavarla

Active Member
The landing attempt itself wasn't, but the tail standing afterwards certainly was.

It seems to me that he pulled back too far on the stick. The fact that he could control the plane in such a steep and slow climb shows that he's good, but the fact that he got into the situation in the first place doesn't.

Yeah, 1+.
I've heard a while back that a Flanker with little fuel and weapon onboard are a little aft-heavy on the stick..
But why the hell doesn't the FCS address such a problem:confused:

But if this is so, then it could explain some of the overcompansating manuvering on these two vids.
But then again i could be wrong here..



Thanks
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Pilot flight hours are poor in general. This has a particularly nasty effect on the carrier-based aviation. Especially given how few of them there are.
 

Haavarla

Active Member
Pilot flight hours are poor in general. This has a particularly nasty effect on the carrier-based aviation. Especially given how few of them there are.

Yes that would be a nasty side effect Feanor.
But thinking of it, do you think any other Navy-fighter that could recover from any of these crazy manuveres?



Thanks
 

Kilo 2-3

New Member
I just though of this...:hitwall

The Su-33 was able to pulls this off in part because of its proxmity to the deck. Those massive engines were basically pushing agaisnt the hard barrier of the deck, giving the jet a very nice burst of added apparant thrust.

Had the pilot tried to do this maneuever at greater altitude, he probably would have fallen out of the sky.
 

Haavarla

Active Member
Regardless of the Thrust on those AL-31F.
The Su-33 with those Carnards have even better low speed handeling vs a Su-27.
And the Su-27 have very good low speed handeling, this goes to show on those two vids here..
Hense, the Su-33 work nicly on Carrier;)
Too bad the Russian doesn't field a somewhat larger Carrier with larger deck.
That would fix the low weapon and fuel take-off weight on the Su-33.




Thanks
 
Last edited:

Kilo 2-3

New Member
Too bad the Russian doesn't field a somewhat larger Carrier with larger a deck.
That would fix the low weapon and fuel weight on the Su-33.
Perhaps a better solution would be a proper CATOBAR carrier, although the extra deck space you propose would certainly be useful on Russian carriers.
 
Top