Experience in finalizing the Yak-130 UBS can be applied to the Su-57


The deployment of the fifth-generation Su-57 fighter to the Russian Air Force is postponed from the end of 2019 to the year that has come. The reason, as you know, was unsuccessful acceptance tests of a combat vehicle in the Khabarovsk Territory.


As previously reported, the pilot at an altitude of about 8 thousand meters lost control of the aircraft, the Su-57 began to lose altitude, and then went into a tailspin. The pilot ejected at an altitude of 2 kilometers. The plane crashed and burned out almost completely.

The assumption of experts is due to the fact that the cause of the fall of a new generation fighter could be problems with the tail, as the acceptance tests were carried out at the "maximum flight conditions." There are no official comments on this subject.

Acceptance tests according to GOST 15.309-98, adopted by the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and Certification on May 28, 1998 (it will be introduced exactly 20 years ago in the Russian Federation in January 2000):

... are carried out with the aim of monitoring the conformity of products with the requirements of the standards established for this category of tests, as well as a control sample or standard sample (if provided for in the standards) to determine the possibility of product acceptance.

The same document notes that in the case of negative test results, the manufacturer is engaged in identifying the causes of defects and works to eliminate them. Which is logical.

Paragraph 6.11 indicates the parameters for finally rejected products.

“On the street” of the opponents of Russia, of course, there would be a universal and global holiday if the above paragraph 6.11 worked.

But for Russian manufacturers aviation technicians have accumulated experience in identifying the causes of problems on the latest aircraft. As an example, painstaking work on the Yak-130 UBS is possible. For a number of reasons, including those related to the engines of these combat training aircraft, several emergency situations have been recorded since the start of the trial operation of the Yak-130. The first - in June 2006, when the UBS collapsed near Ryazan. Then there were incidents in 2010, 2014, several - in 2017, in 2018, including cases with the performance of flights on pre-production samples. As a result, the developer (Yakovlev Design Bureau) and the manufacturer made a series of structural changes to the aircraft design, improved the engines, and the Yak-130, to which the pilots themselves initially complained, was "brought to mind."

In this regard, it can be stated that a similar experience in finalizing the latest aircraft can be used in relation to the Su-57. Moreover, it is important that once again there is no idea to force events: for example, to deliver aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces by a certain date.
Photos used:
Sukhoi Corporation
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mountain shooter 3 January 2020 09: 31 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    Yes, they will bring the plane ... The sooner all the fleas are shaken, the more reliable the plane will be ...
  2. Dmitry Donskoy 3 January 2020 09: 33 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    "At the same time, it is important that once again there is no idea to force events: for example, to deliver aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces by a certain date."
    We have such a tradition. To coincide with a specific date. But in this case, I think everything will go according to plan and there will be no more failures. yes
    1. orionvitt 3 January 2020 14: 12 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      Quote: Dmitry Donskoy
      deliver aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces by a certain date. "

      This "fashion" rested along with the collapse of the Soviet Union and state ideology. Now everyone deeply spit on dates. Everyone is looking at the terms agreed upon in the contract.
    2. Guillon 3 January 2020 19: 47 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      The main thing is that there is no international certification, as with the MC-21 and other civilian sides! belay And therefore, there is a high probability that this year the Ministry of Defense will receive their Su-57! yes soldier
  3. Thrifty 3 January 2020 09: 35 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Well, we are waiting for this year in Lipetsk 2 Su57! good
    1. Ivan is not indifferent 4 January 2020 11: 30 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      If you are from Lipetsk, then you know that we are no longer waiting.
  4. bessmertniy 3 January 2020 09: 35 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Let's hope that failure with the SU-57 will delay the delivery of these aircraft to the Air Force for a short time. Good luck to aircraft builders in perfecting the aircraft, and military pilots in mastering a new machine! hi
    1. Vlad.by 3 January 2020 14: 02 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      It is rather a big success that this bjak happened at the very beginning.
      It is not necessary to redo already produced serial cars.
  5. knn54 3 January 2020 10: 06 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Folk wisdom cannot be ignored — don’t say gop until you jump over.
  6. valeryb 3 January 2020 10: 21 New
    • 2
    • 7
    -5
    Yes, but how many kamentov flowed here when the F35 was discussed, I’ll leave aside all the epithets, I’ll just say such a publicity, when many of the shortcomings were brought to public debate, only helped the success of the aircraft.
    1. Dreamboat 3 January 2020 10: 36 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      F-35 problems are identified in serial samples, including those exported, and not during the state. tests. And these, as they say in Odessa, are two big differences!
      1. valeryb 3 January 2020 10: 39 New
        • 2
        • 4
        -2
        Quote: Dreamboat
        And these, as they say in Odessa, are two big differences!
        Yes, the differences have become clear.
      2. Good_Anonymous 3 January 2020 11: 56 New
        • 1
        • 7
        -6
        Quote: Dreamboat
        F-35 problems are identified in serial samples, including those exported


        At this stage, problems are always identified, with the Su-57 it will also be so. The difference is that the F-35 is being debugged openly and issues are published.
    2. Monar 3 January 2020 11: 05 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Publicity? You are joking? What is the publicity in the development of the latest military equipment? So, only general phrases about problems. Level "byak with such a system. No comment." And that’s it.
      And what else
      public debate
      ??? So, a maximum of discussion in various forums. Or do you think that designers and military read them all day?
      1. valeryb 3 January 2020 11: 40 New
        • 0
        • 7
        -7
        Quote: Monar
        Publicity? You are joking?
        No more than yes.
        Quote: Monar
        general phrases about problems.
        And the people do not need more.
        Quote: Monar
        discussions on various forums.
        Do you mean normal discussions? Without michans?
        Quote: Monar
        designers and military
        And these have their own places of discussion. But they know what they are watching.
        1. Monar 3 January 2020 13: 44 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          And the people do not need more.
          If the Su-57 magazines didn’t fall, they would not even pay attention to the news. Information from journalists in specialized publications would have passed.
          But they know what they are watching.
          From these "observations" neither hot nor cold.
      2. Good_Anonymous 3 January 2020 11: 58 New
        • 1
        • 5
        -4
        Quote: Monar
        What is the publicity in the development of the latest military equipment?


        For example, like the F-35. The Su-57 is not even reported.
    3. sgrabik 4 January 2020 12: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But where did it come from then, this same success with the F-35, are you completely raving about it ???
      1. valeryb 5 January 2020 16: 14 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: sgrabik
        But where did it come from then, this same success with the F-35, are you completely raving about it ???
        You can’t explain it in principle. You are probably from "CYBERNETICS - AMERICAN Pseudoscience." And so on and so forth. Mikhan is listed.
        1. sgrabik 5 January 2020 16: 23 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Woodpecker, I, fortunately, and maybe unfortunately, belong to the category of those people who are directly related to military aviation, in order to objectively judge and compare capabilities, you need to know a lot of special information about these machines, which is not and never will be neither in those, nor anywhere else, so do not bother to explain something to me, I absolutely do not need your amateurish explanations.
          1. valeryb 5 January 2020 16: 50 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: sgrabik
            Woodpecker I'm fortunately
            I do not know to whose happiness you are secret about yourself. And if you are a specialist, I congratulate Russia on the country with such specialists.
  7. Cat Kuzya 3 January 2020 10: 43 New
    • 2
    • 6
    -4
    Yes, yes, that's right, you need to do everything "slowly", "slowly", etc., and there, you look, "either donkey, or padish ...." wink
  8. petr.tchetyrkin 3 January 2020 11: 26 New
    • 1
    • 11
    -10
    but why always overshoot, re-try, it is not better to recall the me-109 and i-16, because a bunch of f-36s have been flying and fighting for a long time, and where is the top-secret su-57, and the unfinished yak-130 is not a ground attack aircraft without a radar, and oversized super-airs on the TV screen.
    1. tomket 3 January 2020 11: 35 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: petr.tchetyrkin
      it’s not better to recall the Me-109 and I-16, because a bunch of f-36s have been flying and fighting for a long time,

      And what is wrong with the ME-109 and I-16?
      Quote: petr.tchetyrkin
      a bunch of f-36 long flies and fights

      the main word in your passage is a LOT.
    2. Piramidon 3 January 2020 11: 38 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: petr.tchetyrkin
      after all pile f-36 has been flying and fighting for a long time

      "Heap" is associated with a certain, not very pleasant substance. So everything is right
  9. Pete mitchell 3 January 2020 13: 22 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    What is the article about? Except loss -57: normal course of events
  10. gmb
    gmb 3 January 2020 14: 21 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Any manufacturer tries to bring its products to the stated requirements and capabilities, and to license it. But the length of this road depends on many reasons, especially the complexity of the product
  11. bald 3 January 2020 16: 38 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    --- "At the same time, it’s important that once again there is no idea to force events: for example, to deliver aircraft to the Russian Aerospace Forces by a certain date." - So it should be, well, as you know, let it be bitter (not in this case, pilot, glory to our developers of ejection systems is alive), but we learn from mistakes where to go.
  12. iouris 4 January 2020 00: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: “GOST 15.309-98, adopted by the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and Certification on May 28, 1998 (it will be introduced exactly 20 years ago in the Russian Federation in January 2000):“ End of quote.
    If the author of the publication is "in the subject", then let him explain
    1) why the state standard (GOST) was adopted by the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and Certification on May 28, 1998;
    2) why, he refers to this “document” if starting around the next year, in connection with the forthcoming (in 2012) adoption of the Russian Federation in the WTO, the process of destruction of state (mandatory) standards and the introduction of GOST_R - “voluntary”, t. e. non-governmental (optional) standards.
    3) what can you hope for?
    And if the author is "off topic", then what are we talking about? What does GOST have to do with it?