Indian Aircraft Crash Notification

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
10th Su30MKI crash of IAF over the years.
1. 30th April 2009 (Problem with switches)
2. 30th Nov 2009 (Foreign material injestion in engine)
3. 13th Dec 2011 (Problem in Fly By Wire)
4. 19th Feb 2013 (Unknown reason)
5. 14th Oct 2014 ("")
6. 19th May 2015 ("")
7. 15th March 2017 ("")
8. 23rd May 2017 ("")
9. 27th Jun 2018 ("")
10. 8th Aug 2019 ("")
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Ashwin

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
Oh c'mon again? Why is equipment so crap?
Similar 250+ fleet of F15 (excluding new Strike Variant) has a aircraft loss rate of 1 aircraft every 50,000 flight hours.

Means around 200 flight hours per airframe per year for a fleet of 250+ active F15s has 1 accident. That's actually similar to our Su30MKI rate. Our ~250 aircraft fleet each do 200+ flight hours per year.

And with the HAL built quality, this is not bad.
 

Deathstar

Well-Known member
Jun 1, 2019
1,622
951
India
Waiting for the Pakistanis to spin propaganda on this.
They will , i wont blame them if they say this a cover up for 27th feb loss , pathetic , this is like 10th crash of this year , tax payers money wasted , IAF is probably weakest amongst 3 armed forces , pathetic , North east is the graveyard of IAF
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Gautam

GASOLINE_ON_FIRE

Active member
Dec 3, 2017
178
204
Russian stuff and its reliability... Check Migs and now Sukhois vs Mirages attrition ratio... it is horrible - against russian paraphernalia
Have we started blaming the russians already? Its made by Indians & operated by Indians. Russians would be responsible if there were design flaws, which I am sure the IAF would have rectified after operating the damn bird for close to 20 yrs. Maybe its time we accepted that Indians are at fault here. Its either HAL quality control or pilot's quality at fault here. And after seeing that a lot of previous MKI crash enquiry reports were not made public, everyone can guess the weak link in our system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smestarz and Paro

mastaan

Member
Aug 8, 2019
67
96
Germany
Have we started blaming the russians already? Its made by Indians & operated by Indians. Russians would be responsible if there were design flaws, which I am sure the IAF would have rectified after operating the damn bird for close to 20 yrs. Maybe its time we accepted that Indians are at fault here. Its either HAL quality control or pilot's quality at fault here. And after seeing that a lot of previous MKI crash enquiry reports were not made public, everyone can guess the weak link in our system.
oh HAL should be shut down.. I know too extremist a view... but they are useless.. and you are right.. most likely it is HAL again with their substandard manufacturing capability...
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
We laugh and taunt PAF , but with miniscule resources it has as compared to Pakistan army and IAF , it has built a formidable force , i dont hear their aircrafts crashing every year
This proves Americans>Russians
Even our Bison does 150 hours a year. Our Su30MKI does 200+ hours a year.

That's 3 times there best F16AM/BM fleet would be doing. (Remember Pak didn't bought new engines for their 31 A/B variants during MLU, and continue using the 1980s one to date).

Their JF17 hardly does 50-60 hours a year. (You can guess the reason , RD93....)

And the Mirages.... They only fly them when they are 100% sure they are to go to strike.
 

Deathstar

Well-Known member
Jun 1, 2019
1,622
951
India
Even our Bison does 150 hours a year. Our Su30MKI does 200+ hours a year.

That's 3 times there best F16AM/BM fleet would be doing. (Remember Pak didn't bought new engines for their 31 A/B variants during MLU, and continue using the 1980s one to date).

Their JF17 hardly does 50-60 hours a year. (You can guess the reason , RD93....)

And the Mirages.... They only fly them when they are 100% sure they are to go to strike.
That means they know how to use their available resources aptly , atleast i dont see their aircrafts crashing every year. This is the 10th crash of IAF this year (why no is held responsible for this?) , HAL, MoD , IAF brass ??? Everytime They get away with "court of inquiry"
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
That means they know how to use their available resources aptly , atleast i dont see their aircrafts crashing every year. This is the 10th crash of IAF this year (why no is held responsible for this?) , HAL, MoD , IAF brass ??? Everytime They get away with "court of inquiry"

Quality cannot be managed, its earned.

But yes, we have huge scope of improvement.

And yes, Pak manages funds slightly better than us.

But the days ain't so bad that we need to compare ourselves to them.
 

screambowl

Senior member
Dec 19, 2017
2,795
1,226
switzerland
Russian stuff and its reliability... Check Migs and now Sukhois vs Mirages attrition ratio... it is horrible - against russian paraphernalia

Our IAF technicians don't have expertise hence poor in maintenance. Most of Military's arsenal is out of order and requires high grade maintenance.
 

mastaan

Member
Aug 8, 2019
67
96
Germany
Our IAF technicians don't have expertise hence poor in maintenance. Most of Military's arsenal is out of order and requires high grade maintenance.

I would disagree. How come Indian Airlines technicians keep their planes running and with more hours per person training IAF technicians would not be capable? And the same technicians keep the french jets flying even now. I humbly request you to not fall for such allegations.

Problem is with quality of the product - don't know enough about design spec but more from manufacturing and the spares. Not the maintenance personnel or their training..

If you recollect, when Kargil had started, India had to desperately look for 155m shells.. because the Russia supplied and India OFB manufactured (i might be mixing up the source of supply) shells were simply not working. Think Denel (South African) sent us emergency stock of 155mm shells and we knocked them off those heights.

Same, on aircrafts - Check the ratio of crashed imported - Imported from Russia vs other countries and own produced aircrafts... You will see there is a huge Gap on own produced aircrafts, with Russian stuff and also similar or higher magnitude between Russian stuff and Other country imported stuff.

Take the same comparison with ISROs success/Failure rate on engines vs HALs... ? Need i say more?

Like Indian should stop funding Indian Airlines, we should also stop HAL (atleast the fighter aircraft division) and privatise it to people who understand precision equipment and high stress equipment manufacturing - Tatas being the leaders in that in known & documented Industrial history of India. my 2 pidly cents
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bali78

screambowl

Senior member
Dec 19, 2017
2,795
1,226
switzerland
How come Indian Airlines technicians keep their planes running and with more hours per person training IAF technicians would not be capable?

Air India planes also get maintained abroad and they are commercial airlines don't go under aerodynamic stress nor stress of sorties. Where as fighter aircrafts go through badest climates stationed for days in desert and then suddenly moved to Himalayas etc.

More over the commercial airline engines send data to GE or Boeing and they keep updating as per the data for maintenance.
 

thinkingcap81

Active member
Jun 2, 2019
309
132
India
The number of crashes is disheartening. How is it that PAF maintains them better with limited funds. Is their flight rours really low? They are not some incompetent force. I can think of 3 reasons:
  1. Too many aircraft types causing maintenance issues.
  2. Russian design and production standards are inferior to Western ones.
  3. HAL has poor standards. However till now no LCA has crashed.
 

Milspec

सर्वदा शक्तिशाली; सर्वत्र विजय
Moderator
Dec 2, 2017
2,209
2,838
United States
Alright, HAL bashers here. I apologise for the long rant.

Lets address a few things I noted in the past few posts.

1> Quality is earned not managed: @Ankit Kumar, mate I respect and enjoy most of your post, but I have to admit this is the most cringe-worthy comment coming from a member of your repute. Quality Management is the most crucial element of any manufacturing ecosystem, right from process development, design development right up to lanch containment and PLM. Quality management is embedded in every aspect of manufacturing and even every phase of service industry today. Without Failure mode effect analysis for design and process, not a single commercial off the shelf equipment that you use in your life would exist in its form that you see it.

2> HAL quality, @Deathstar @Jaymax @mastaan There are three metrics to look at the quality that an organisation uses to measure its quality, viz FPY, ICQDPPM, COPQ

FPY: First Pass Yield is a percentage of failure at various stages of the line, and the Final Run test yield which is completed by CTP's commissioned from the IAF. FPY is measured for EOL tester of Final Assembly, Engines, Hydraulics, and Runtest.

ICQ : which refers to Initial Customer Quality, depending on product line it refers to the number of hrs used and the number of part numbers that need to replaced within that time by the manufacturer, let's assume this number is for x hrs how many failures were registered as claims vs the units manufactured.

COPQ: This stands for Cost of Poor Quality, i.e cost incurred by the company as a result of poor quality which includes Warranty costs (replacing components that fail within warranty), Concession (Cost eaten by the company for failures outside warranty), Scrap (parts and components scrapped during production) This is a currency amount that is tabulated for each product line.

The reason for mentioning this because, SU30MKI FPY for Run test, is between 100% - 93% i.e 0-1 aircraft out 15 doesn't clear the Flight test in the first go. In addition, IAF has 100% testing of aircraft it commissions so every MKI IAF commission is put through the standard test plan that clears the aircraft.

Next is the ICQ, there has not been a single report by IAF/MoD/CAG, that points towards failures in systems that are HAL caused failure in both serviceability as well as a catastrophic failure. As a matter of fact, If you look ar crash investigation reports Manufacturing defects that are barely in single digits actually most of the time points toward SEP instead of HAL caused defect.

Finally, towards COPQ, HAL's COPQ reduction goals for Nashik Division was the best among all of it's plants (Where incidentally MKI's are built) back when I worked for HAL. I can't comment on what it is now, as I have been away, but Scrap and concession costs on MKI remain extremely low.

Finally reading and perceiving quality is a tricky thing. It is extremely easy to pass blanket statements about quality when we have a catastrophic failure, as we tend to find a target to apportion blame, and who better than a fat, slow remnant of the socialist days like a HAL. I would plead to have some consideration for the Engineers and Managers who put in all their heart to ensure that these machines protect the sky, these are not some aliens who don't give a shit about the country or pilots who fly them. These are people who are exactly like you and me, who know the implications of poor quality and what it could lead to. Take it from me, no engineer in HAL will ever compromise quality over anything else.

Regards
Milspec.
 

mastaan

Member
Aug 8, 2019
67
96
Germany
Alright, HAL bashers here. I apologise for the long rant.

Lets address a few things I noted in the past few posts.

1> Quality is earned not managed: @Ankit Kumar, mate I respect and enjoy most of your post, but I have to admit this is the most cringe-worthy comment coming from a member of your repute. Quality Management is the most crucial element of any manufacturing ecosystem, right from process development, design development right up to lanch containment and PLM. Quality management is embedded in every aspect of manufacturing and even every phase of service industry today. Without Failure mode effect analysis for design and process, not a single commercial off the shelf equipment that you use in your life would exist in its form that you see it.

2> HAL quality, @Deathstar @Jaymax @mastaan There are three metrics to look at the quality that an organisation uses to measure its quality, viz FPY, ICQDPPM, COPQ

FPY: First Pass Yield is a percentage of failure at various stages of the line, and the Final Run test yield which is completed by CTP's commissioned from the IAF. FPY is measured for EOL tester of Final Assembly, Engines, Hydraulics, and Runtest.

ICQ : which refers to Initial Customer Quality, depending on product line it refers to the number of hrs used and the number of part numbers that need to replaced within that time by the manufacturer, let's assume this number is for x hrs how many failures were registered as claims vs the units manufactured.

COPQ: This stands for Cost of Poor Quality, i.e cost incurred by the company as a result of poor quality which includes Warranty costs (replacing components that fail within warranty), Concession (Cost eaten by the company for failures outside warranty), Scrap (parts and components scrapped during production) This is a currency amount that is tabulated for each product line.

The reason for mentioning this because, SU30MKI FPY for Run test, is between 100% - 93% i.e 0-1 aircraft out 15 doesn't clear the Flight test in the first go. In addition, IAF has 100% testing of aircraft it commissions so every MKI IAF commission is put through the standard test plan that clears the aircraft.

Next is the ICQ, there has not been a single report by IAF/MoD/CAG, that points towards failures in systems that are HAL caused failure in both serviceability as well as a catastrophic failure. As a matter of fact, If you look ar crash investigation reports Manufacturing defects that are barely in single digits actually most of the time points toward SEP instead of HAL caused defect.

Finally, towards COPQ, HAL's COPQ reduction goals for Nashik Division was the best among all of it's plants (Where incidentally MKI's are built) back when I worked for HAL. I can't comment on what it is now, as I have been away, but Scrap and concession costs on MKI remain extremely low.

Finally reading and perceiving quality is a tricky thing. It is extremely easy to pass blanket statements about quality when we have a catastrophic failure, as we tend to find a target to apportion blame, and who better than a fat, slow remnant of the socialist days like a HAL. I would plead to have some consideration for the Engineers and Managers who put in all their heart to ensure that these machines protect the sky, these are not some aliens who don't give a shit about the country or pilots who fly them. These are people who are exactly like you and me, who know the implications of poor quality and what it could lead to. Take it from me, no engineer in HAL will ever compromise quality over anything else.

Regards
Milspec.
Hey mate.. Good to see you here. Saw you got banned in PDF. Hope they lift the ban on you there... I have left it for good.

A few questions for you - Am asking for it on first principle basis and hope it gets taken up like that, given the passionate effort you put in to explain the HAL team view

1. FPY - The nirvana ratio that most automobile and aeronautical companies strive for is 3.4 defective parts per million operations... aka 6 sigma? In that era, you think FPY of even 5% is remotely enough or any standard to be respected?

2. ICQ - I have no understanding of this and in all manufacturing set-ups i have been to, we never used it.

3. COPQ - 11 SU 30s, out of 250 have crashed...? (I just counted it based on what i found on wiki). That is 4.4% full loss and you will agree there there will be additional losses that are covered during maintenance, FPY (3-5%) and other wastage? So you would agree, in any case the number will not be lower than 6-7%? I have worked in a few manufacturing set-ups.. a 6% COPQ would bring down a large company!

So, on 2 of the 3 metrics; in an industrial company - the company will be long dead, based on these ratios.. for designs that are imported. Am not including anything on failed projects etc, as that is a part and parcel of a growing research organisation.

I don't think it is about what HAL leadership and engineers feel. It is about the actual collective output when benchmarked against any industrial KPIs. Given the performance, won't you think, what and how they feel is irrelevant, as hard facts and efficiency numbers are the only truth that should be looked into, when looking at our defence assets and precious lives of our pilots?

Thoughts and brickbats welcome
 

Milspec

सर्वदा शक्तिशाली; सर्वत्र विजय
Moderator
Dec 2, 2017
2,209
2,838
United States
Hey mate.. Good to see you here. Saw you got banned in PDF. Hope they lift the ban on you there... I have left it for good.

A few questions for you - Am asking for it on first principle basis and hope it gets taken up like that, given the passionate effort you put in to explain the HAL team view

1. FPY - The nirvana ratio that most automobile and aeronautical companies strive for is 3.4 defective parts per million operations... aka 6 sigma? In that era, you think FPY of even 5% is remotely enough or any standard to be respected?

2. ICQ - I have no understanding of this and in all manufacturing set-ups i have been to, we never used it.

3. COPQ - 11 SU 30s, out of 250 have crashed...? (I just counted it based on what i found on wiki). That is 4.4% full loss and you will agree there there will be additional losses that are covered during maintenance, FPY (3-5%) and other wastage? So you would agree, in any case the number will not be lower than 6-7%? I have worked in a few manufacturing set-ups.. a 6% COPQ would bring down a large company!

So, on 2 of the 3 metrics; in an industrial company - the company will be long dead, based on these ratios.. for designs that are imported. Am not including anything on failed projects etc, as that is a part and parcel of a growing research organisation.

I don't think it is about what HAL leadership and engineers feel. It is about the actual collective output when benchmarked against any industrial KPIs. Given the performance, won't you think, what and how they feel is irrelevant, as hard facts and efficiency numbers are the only truth that should be looked into, when looking at our defence assets and precious lives of our pilots?

Thoughts and brickbats welcome
Hey, I did not realise you were the same Mastaan from pdf.
longtime since I have seen a post from you. Thoughts yes, brickbats no.

First, pass yield, is measured for end of the line, as well as run test. What I shared was the FPY for the Run Test, which is the qualification test for the product, Once the MKI is put together and goes through the ground check, it's handed over to CTP, acceptance is 100% to 93% over the years, either one aircraft in a fiscal year has issues, some years there is 100% acceptance. Also realise that FPY for Auto industry is a lot different from Aeronautical industry when it comes to Run Test, while is very similar when it comes to component testing. Harness testers and hydraulics validation have rated very similar to that of Auto Industry for HAL iirc. Engines , I can comment on, never did get an opportunity to go to koraput.

2. ICQ: Initial customer quality for warranty data is not measured in amount, but in instances. The best way to explain ICQ vs COPQ is; lets assume a zero scrap company with two product line, that makes Cars, and in the warranty period:
Product A within the warranty period has 3 Knobs break, along with 2 bulbs malfunction, ICQ count of 5, with each component roughly 5 bucks each; COPQ $25 (This is a low COPQ, High ICQ situation)
Product B within warranty has a just one failure, i.e starter motor fails (high dollar part), ICQ 1, COPQ $1500 (Low ICQ, High COPQ)

Both the situations will drive different action, COPQ goals are to reduce, but at the same time a Customer who has to return to the dealership 5 times is not great either. Both instances call for different types of containment actions. So as an effect for most, ICQ Pareto is looked at in conjunction with the COPQ. While FPY drives basic problem-solving A3's day to day for the MDI boards.

3. The way I see it, the crashes if directly tied to HAL quality would qualify for full concession add, Given HAL hasn't had to concede any full MKI aircrafts to the end-user, none of those crashes have been directly tied to HAL and thus none of those crashes *censored* to the COPQ, thus your calculation doesn't stand valid. For the overall crash data across all IAF platforms, less than 5% have been tied to a manufacturing defect and the ones that have been are mostly Mig27's where the B13 is a supplier part where HAL is an assembler, not the manufacturer and few mig21's tied to supplier parts from Kazhakistan in the early 2000's (which is another story altogether).
 

smestarz

Well-Known member
Nov 30, 2017
541
326
Actung Panzers
It can also be the quality of fuel, there was also an issue due to fuel quality.
If it ws engine failure, it would be one, not both, so, not engine failure.
Design flaws? NO
Pilot Error? We shall know it soon
as most su-30 MKI are made by HAL, its pointless blaming the russians,

Have we started blaming the russians already? Its made by Indians & operated by Indians. Russians would be responsible if there were design flaws, which I am sure the IAF would have rectified after operating the damn bird for close to 20 yrs. Maybe its time we accepted that Indians are at fault here. Its either HAL quality control or pilot's quality at fault here. And after seeing that a lot of previous MKI crash enquiry reports were not made public, everyone can guess the weak link in our system.
 

Deathstar

Well-Known member
Jun 1, 2019
1,622
951
India
Indian Air Force lost 26 fighter jets due to accidents in last five years: Government | India News

NEW DELHI: If depleting numbers in the fighter fleet of Indian Air Force (IAF) are a cause of concern, lack of procurement and delay in indigenous production are not the only reasons. India regularly loses aircraft in accidents and over the past five years, nearly one squadron has been lost to crashes.


As per data provided by the Defence Ministry in Parliament, 26 fighter jets have gone down in the past five years killing 12 pilots and seven other crew members.
In the first six months of 2019 alone, the IAF has lost six aircraft to accidents. A Jaguar was lost in January while two -- a Hawk Mk 132 and a MiG 27 UPG -- were lost in February. In March, the IAF again lost two aircraft to crashes -- a MiG 21 Bison and a MiG 27 UPG. An AN-32 was lost in June.
In August, a Sukhoi-30 was lost during a training sortie in Assam. These numbers do not include Mi-17 helicopter crash in Jammu and Kashmir`s Budgam in April, at the height of Indo-Pak tension following the Balakot airstrikes, which killed six people apart from a civilian.
A high-level probe carried out into the incident has revealed that the Mi-17 helicopter had been hit by an Indian missile in a mistaken case of F&F identification. Five IAF officials, including the chief operating officer of the base, have been held guilty for the accident.


The IAF crash report card of the last five years shows that seven fighters were lost in 2014-15 and 2018-19 each and another six in 2016-17.


Two years -- 2015-16 and 2017-18 -- were by far the best years in recent times. In 2015-16, four aircraft were lost and only two accidents took place in 2017-18
While a dozen pilots were killed in these accidents up to 2019, the total number of casualties is even higher. The total loss of lives in these accidents is 46 as seven aircrew and 27 service personnel also died in crashes.


Over the past five years, if crashes involving helicopters, trainers and transporters are included then losses go up to 37. A breakdown of numbers show six helicopters, nine trainers and three transport aircraft were lost in accidents