>indian air force AN-34 crashed with 5 deadwhat went wrong?full vid:https://files.catbox.moe/9qcosb.mp4
>>65237774Maybe it was like the Boeing 787 crash?>Co-pilot jams his foot onto the left rudder, denying that he is doing so
it's a mystery
>>65237774that looks pretty survivable until the cockpit area was engulfed in flames
>>65237774looks like the right engine lost power or was turned off before the left engine which than forced the plane to veer off the runway or it could be >>65237788
>>65237774>Indian Air Force plane crashesthis isn't news, this is just a regular tuesday over there. https://idrw.org/indian-air-force-loses-152-pilots-534-aircraft-in-crashes-over-past-30-years-but-accident-rates-show-decline/https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_Naval_accidents
>>65237817Over the past year between summer of 2025 to summer of 2026 they've had 11 crashes by the way
>>65237774Watching the video and was about to complain that the plane landed safely. Oh. Never change, India.
>>65237774>samair!>you are breaking the plane!
>>65237774>>65237825OK, what the fuck?>comes in, little smokey but hey Russian turboprops >lands a little long, no big deal>OK, bit left of the centerline>suddenly veers hard to the left for no visible reason>goes off the runway, over the taxiway, into a ditch and burnsWhat.Not even hard left rudder and hard left front wheel steering could have done that, and I can't really see hard rudder or the front wheels being steered.Did the right prop fail to reverse, while the left went to full reverse or something?On the plus side:Firefighters arrive, and actually do their job in 60 seconds flat. They can't save the plane (obviosuly), but they put out the fire ASAP anyway.One guy gets out of the right hand cockpit window, holds his back, and it almost looks like he tries to go back in before the firefighters arrive and block the view.India moment: They're mowing the fucking lawn while flight ops are going on, one guy just stops and doesn't know what to do, the other runs off with some equipment..
>>65237774The fuck is this? Looks like a food street vendor.
>>65237774Left prop went into reverse pitch to slow the plane.Right prop feathered then killed the engine.
>>65238129>little Timmy confused by Indian army efficiency in having chow facilities on flight runwaySad
>>65238129The guy in the little lawn tractor and the one visible to the right were mowing the lawn, probably part of their equipment.
>>65238126was thinking the same thing, from here it looks like even just not doing anything after the front wheel hits would've more or less turned out better
>>65238126>Not even hard left rudder and hard left front wheel steering could have done that,Differential braking? That's how most planes steer on the ground.
>>65238285Initially I was thinking that they departed due to locked brakes, but that's before I read that the AN-34 has a reversing prop. I think the tire probably would have blown if he had locked brakes.
>>65238129Looks like a metal cage around a standpipe to me but honestly I can't see shit.
>>65238291>reversing prop Not "propS"? Just the one? Doesn't that mean you need to keep full rudder to the opposite side, so as not to veer off course due to differential thrust?
>>65238285An-32 has nose wheel steering.Pretty sure what happened there is one prop didn't reverse, the rolling shutter kinda looks liek the RPM on the props change at different times.But it's hard to tell with unknown framerate of the origianl camera, replayed on one display, filmed with a phone camera, etc.
>>65237822>nearly 1% of all Indian military aircraft crash every year>averaged out, assuming each pilot has a 20-year career, there is a 19% chance per pilot to crash at least 1 aircraft during his servicejfc
>>65237804>engines in idle>making the plane turn on a dime
>>65238126you can see the starboard prop change its RPM before the Port prop. So some fuck up with prop pitch or throttle and because they already landed left once the main gear hit turf while they were at speed the pilots probably were jostled and lost controls. my 2 cents
>>65237788Reminder that India is seething so badly over that incident still they are sending a whole team of engineers and bureaucrats to America to force Boeing to prove to them that it couldn't have been intentional like every single incident report states because they'll lose infinite izzat if they can't prove they dindu nuffin
>>65237774>what went wrong?jeet piloting and maintenance, vatnig hardware>>65238687the coolest thing the French ever did in recent years was to offer free maintenance and upgrades on their Rafale fleet, after the battle with Pakistan and the subsequent recriminations and threats......if India provided them with their full maintenance logs, to prove that they had carried out the company's recommended maintenance programme on the RafalesIndia mumbled something about combat factors and shut up right after that
>>65238687Isn't izzat supposed to be a North Indian thing (since it was imported from the Muslim Mughal culture)? Shouldn't South Indians not be affected by izzat?
>>65237774>Buying Russian That was the first mistake.
>>65238702NAYRT but call it izzat, call it face, call it denial, call it optics, any kind of lying to oneself in order to lie to others is disastrous
>>65238702Muslims ruled much of Southern India for centuries, and you've got the whole British thing. Plus machismo isn't exactly unique to India; it's extremely common among all turdies.
>>65238679Yeah, looks like it. Asymmetric thrust reversal is a bitch.
>>65238548If one side fails to go into beta, normally one could chop power on the functioning side, maintain direction with the rudder and nosewheel, and melt the brakes, but "LOL, India".Some 'jeet found the "Redeem" switch and flicked it.
>>65237774approach looks high and slow, pretty much stalling into the ground.maybe a risky style of landing even for such an aircraft.
>>65237774>what went wrong?The pilot didn't or couldn't stay on the centerline, until the left wheel fell off the tarmac into the grass, which caused the violent left turn and the runway excursion.
>>65237774>what went wrong?the front fell off the tarmac
>that fuel showerman
>>65238687I’m still curious as to whether the pilots who claim to have replicated an issue with the switches did it out of their own volition or if they were pressured to by the airline or government.
>>65239085retard here. what's the point of putting the engines on top of the wings instead of underneath?
>>65239228More hard points for missiles. Although the Bongs say you can put missiles on top of wings, and this isn't a missile truck, so probably just Soviet engineers fucking around because they could. It can end in either disaster or glory when they used to do that.
>>65237774The quality is bad but did that thing catch on fire before it even started trying to flip?
>>65239228wikipedia says it's so they can use bigger propellers without worrying about hitting anything on rougher/unprepared landing strips
>>65239228It's better for rough or no runaways.
