Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
JAS 39 Gripen crash (rare alternate angle) due to pilot-induced oscillation on February 2 1989.
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 09. 2010
- On 2 February 1989, the first prototype JAS 39-1 crashed on its sixth flight, when attempting to land in Linköping. The pilot, Lars Rådeström escaped with a fractured elbow and some minor injuries. The crash was the result of pilot-induced oscillation (PIO). Extremely gusty winds were also a contributing factor
Amazing how the pilot survived.
He is lucky!
Hey your pic is a 37 viggen!
Carbon fiber wings
This was a plane in development, in a test flight, by a test pilot. It takes a special courage, backed by experience and skills to accept trying to take off and land such a machine. That whole profession as test pilot is special and those humans must be as well.
You remind me of a story involving an X-15 test pilot....
"Although the X-15 was blown in half and engulfed in flames, [Scott] Crossfield emerged un-scathed. He later told a reporter the only casualty was the crease in his trousers. 'The firemen got them wet when they sprayed the airplane with water,' he explained. 'Are you sure it was the firemen?' the reporter asked. Crossfield winced as he pictured the ensuing headline: SPACE SHIP EXPLODES; PILOT WETS PANTS."
This was on early software that was prone to coming into oscillation with pilot input. Pilot sense overreaction, put stick in other direction, plane overreacts in that direction, pilot pulls back , and so on. This same pilot was later trusted to fly JAS in a Stockholm City airshow where the 2nd case of oscillation and crash occured. He ejected and survived that one too. Software was later revised to reduce the risk for this type of control problem.
I sometimes push or pull my stick when I overcompensate. It gets so bad sometimes that I try to eject, but that just makes a HUGE mess. Like the pilot here, I fractured my elbow.
gunnarMyTube In fact, this was the first Gripen.
I think the early test pilots did great service in helping discovering limitations.
+Andrew C The genius in your comment went way over peoples heads! ;)
JonasHedvall You are too kind sir, and maybe a bit sick like me? ;)
It's rare to survive such a crash. I'm happy he survived.
The crash was NOT the result of pilot-induced oscillation. The crash happened because of an unstable computer system in the early models of JAS 39. The computer problem in the JAS system (now fixed) is something 10 million swedes were aware of after this having been a national issue for several years.
The same pilot later crashed another JAS over Stockholm because of the same computer problem. He was fully cleared from both incidents.
Afaik the official explanation is still PIO, even though they redesigned the control system..
Actually it was. The pilot was used to fly Viggen and Draken where manual stabilization was necessary. When he tried to correct a sudden dip on one side in the same time as the computer did it triggered the bug in the regulation module programmed to the computer that had too high K value resulting in over compensation and again manual action from the pilot. If the computer had stabilized quicker this would not have happened and the following action and reaction cycle would not have happened either.
Although the problem is called PILOT induced oscillation or PIO, the name implies that the pilot is to blame for the oscillations. In fact the flight computer is inducing the oscillations by trying to stabilize what it sees as unstable flight inputs. Until the FC Computer was reprogrammed, NEITHER the pilot nor the Computer could keep up with the oscillations. No human can keep up with such an inherently aerodynamically aircraft so it's up to a PROPERLLY PROGRAMMED COMPUTER to do that. Lars is to be commended for his ability to fly such aircraft and risk his life to bring such advanced aircraft to production!
Nu flyger du ur bild, Lars!
Lol
+1985Viggen hahahahaha
du e fan överallt
Don't judge Lars too hard. He quit anyway because he feared he might not survive his third crash. Nothing was this test pilots fault. They had to redesign the slow and overtly sensitive control system.
The cheapest chip, keyboard buffer in the world and the kept it for Stockholm too..
Det här måste vara filmen som Saabs egen fotograf tog. Den som visades i tv hade sekvensen när planet vinglar bortklippt. Janne Scherman och hans fotograf från Aktuellt blev snabb utsparkade från området.
Pilot induced oscillation. Pilot tried to "correct" what the computer did, and the computer tried to correct what the pilot did, basically. Same pilot in both crashes I think...
The primary structure looks very intact, the incredible strength of, and inherent to a composite-consuctruction Delta configuration are clearly demonstrated in very destructive roll of the aircraft. The accessory structures like the nose cone and wings shed away as they absorb otherwise dangerous kinetic energy with a high degree of resilience leaving the armored cockpit still intact.
I noticed that too..I was thinking Tough Bird.
An A-10 would "survive" in much the same way. The armor tub and structure surrounding the pilot is what stays intact.
I think any pilot will tell you they would rather have it absorb bullets as intended and let the ejection seat hold up it's end of the bargain in crash situations......
My Uncle flew the Delta Dart. I believe he told me once that if he crashed it would tear the wings off and roll without damaging the pilot or the engine too badly.
The Delta Dart is the only aircraft to ever survive after the pilot ejected and was even flown again by the same pilot. A couple of firsts and onlys in there...
Yep, that'll buff out.
@@nemome5837 im not sure. Looking at the slow mo I thought I saw the gear bend a little and at least the wings look like they might have made some moderate contact with the runway BEFORE reaching the grass....
Those scratches may require a little Bondo or at least some kind of a filler so as not to have lines in the paint after finishing.....
@@leveckfamily8841 Sure, and sell it after dark 😉
Thats one expensive rotary cultivator
They must be growing cauliflyer.
Search jas crash t shirt. With this plane on it saying world's most expensive rotary cultivator on it.
Oh yeah, that'll buff out...
ye
Nothing a little Bondo, a shitload of sanding and some touch up paint can't fix....
No, it wasn't a computer failure. This was an early edition of the control system, and in retrospect it is very obvious that it had its flaws. In fact the pilots knew they were taking a risk when they flew with it. The previous flights had been performed in calmer conditions, but the gusty weather on this occasion set off some aircraft motions that the pilot wasn't prepared for. You might call the result an engineer-induced oscillation.
That's a good name for it!
Afterburner landing !
Thats ......Cooler than Frieza !
And that, is how you shake a Martini...
No pilot error. Fly by wire software yet to be calibrated for low speed. This caused the oscillation.
6th flight, deliberately aerodynamicaly unstable design, fly by wire via new and barely tested computer algorithms. What ever could go wrong...
Brave pilot, glad he made it.
Powered by Windows Vista
It was DOS back then. No windows. LOL
@Superegio42
He survived, its actually the same pilot that will crash in Stockholm
The early version of software in the prototype aircraft,
allowed this kind of PIO
I miss the old You-tube. Adds all the time and you can´t reaply to any mesage older then 4 w.
It´s time to replace you tube.
Use ADBlock+
wow
Yeah, seems so ;)
I don't know about that, your post is four years old and I'm replying.
The oscillations may be Pilot-induced, but they are COMPUTER-Controlled!
0:05 the pilot thinks: "mmm, i have just crashed. I should eject...... Nah - FULL AFTERBURN!!!"
AFAIK, when he realized that he was about to lose control, he tried to abort, hitting full power. Unfortunately, the aircraft was still in "landing mode" and really didn't like that. He then tried to eject, but the ejection handle in the Gripen was in a different position than from the Viggen, so he failed to eject - which was probably a good thing since he would probably would have ejected straight into the soil.
What was that expression again?
...every landing you can walk away from, is a good landing? :P
Beyond known maps, courageous explorers.
That same pilot actually crashed another JAS 39 Gripen just a couple of years later at an air show in Stockholm
The pilot is in one piece and alive. So it's a good landing.
I thought you had to walk away for it to be considered a good landing? Lol
a little duct tape will fix this plane :)
Nah I think they need flex tape
Swedish barrelrole !
Not many airforces train this anymore due Cost-effectiveness analysis.
P.S its a joke, i love the gripen and respect the swedish airforce
None of the explanations given in the comments are correct. The manufacturer of two metal pieces in the control lever had achieved such a fine surface smoothness that they became mating parts and fused together. This caused the control lever to become stiff to operate, resulting in the jerky flight and eventually the crash in 1989.
Wow, I've never seen a PIO play out entirely in the air. All the PIO's I've ever seen, or did myself, were done with wheels on then off the runway.
The control system was not up to snuff at this time. Also the test pilots lacked any actually test-pilot training for new control systems.....
Wow! Where´d you get this video? It has never been aired on TV as far as I´m aware. Interesting to see how the canards work. It´s amazing that the pilot only broke an arm!
In spite of this unfortunate incident,this Gripen & the French Rafale are what I would consider to being the most agile & swiftest,with the French aircraft even able to carry a remarkable weapons payload,whether by weight or numbers.While though the Sukhoi-30 MkI/35/37s all can perform phenomenal super-maneuvers,such as 'Hammerheads','Cobras' & 'Helis',they somewhat seemed to travel about much slower & Russian aircraft manufacturers need to seriously look into this.
Well shooting enemy airraft from 200 km distance makes up for speed. Anyhow military jets rarely fly on maximum speed as this reduces their radius significantly. If Swedes would fly at max speed to attack Russia (silly idea, just as example) their Gripens would fall into ocean somewhere near Gdynia...
I hope pilot is safe
Yeah, he survuved, but crashed again in 1993 /watch?v=mkgShfxTzmo
I was wondering the same thing. Thanks for the info. Does anyone know why he didn't eject? After the wing hit the ground, it was obvious he was crashing and had enough time to get out.
Barry Sabahat Most likely because if you've just crashed, the plane is liable to flip and roll. He had four seconds after crashing before the plane did exactly that.
He actually tried to eject, but wasn't used to the position of the ejection handle and grabbed in the wrong place, which arguably saved his life...
The pilot attempted to eject by reaching for the two handles on each side of his chair, but that was a JAS 37 Viggen design. The 39 Gripen has a single handle between the legs which he didn't have enough training with (yet). The injury on his elbow was caused by the firemen on scene who were not trained on the aircraft type and did not take time to read the printed text "In case of emergency opening, pull here" on the airframe. Instead, they took an axe and crushed the canopy and injured the pilot.
Pilot survived.
Es ist ein Glück, dass es nicht riesige Explosionen gab, die in der Regel tödlich Flugzeugabstürze charakterisieren.
It is fortunate that there were not huge explosions that usually characterize fatal air crashes.
;)
this is when the center of pressure is close to the aerodynamic center
The pilot turned the joystick like crazy even after he was told to only gently move them since he didnt need to do more then that which he didnt give a fuck about and pretty much slammed it from top to down on a sensitive wire plane and this caused the crash because he didnt listen.
That is a very durable structure. If it had 2 engines this would have been the most durable fighter jet. An F16 would had smashed in 1000 pieces and exploded
Brave pilot
Horizontalni stabilizatori na krilima uopce se nisu spustili nego samo prednji horizontalni stabilizatori (prednji udarni kut)..!?
I agree, it's a long way off, and as of right now having the pilot in the hotseat is certainly the most effective, but I think eventually a large proportion of combat aircraft will be remotely controlled.
Who will say that after 9 years it would be most perfect platform
What I have heard about this accident was that the software that controls the pitch law of this aircraft failed to switch to the mode it is supposed to follow when close to the ground. I'm not sure the pilot is to blame, i'm not sure it is PIO.
Well...so interesting, you've been learning a lot.
I've not known about JTAC until you said me, interesting but looks so difficult to pass.
I really pray for your pass. You'll pass it and be success absolutely!
good luck.
I have to say sorry if I got you mad or irritate by my poor English :(
Seems like someone dragged the sensitivity button all the way to right
Why is he turn on afterburner in landing, after left wing was crash?
@1pnoe He's going around after the first oscillation
That guys just like: Where the fuck is the ejection handle!!!!
Yeah, and a really good one is where they can use the aircraft again!
Thats not reheat, that's engine ingesting debris and being destroyed in the process.
And now they are criticizing KAAN 😂
No wonder indigo squadron got wrecked by me in ace combat the Belkan war lol
Seems the same type of pilot induced oscillation as over the capital city ?
Few has been so lucky to come out of such a thing, and twice.
Yes same pilot
Err yes since they said it on the TV when the investigation was partly finished..
FBW error? Canard wing looks working abnormally.
Yeah you can see the canard diving down instead of keeping steady and up... I dunno what caused that, but when landing, that's not something you wanna see happening.
Very strong Jet!
It almost looks like the prototype F-22 crash…
I think it happened because it had some serious faults with its Fly by wire system.
If he lived, he lived only to loose his wings--provided it was there were no electical-mechanical failures.
Nej det brann inte eftersom de drivs av Gas/luft kompressorer.
interesting analysis
Where i got it from? Well from the Swedish governement..
Whoopsy daisy 😂😂😂
its fine, they still have the ikea instructions
looks more like a car crash than an aviation crash. btw you would get a shitload more views if your title was simply "JAS 39 Gripen crash" - this video deserves it
wah. najary aagye
How you can call this a PIO when the computer has the last word ? Could someone explain pls ?
I would except this in a conventional steered airplane, but not in a FBW system.
PIO is a dynamic between the pilot and the control system, it could happen to any system with lag that gives authority to the human.
it was not....pilot induced. It was a software malfunction
The pilot Who crashed With this plane Was The same Who crashed The Jas in Stockholm.
IT´S ONE ENGINE SOW ONLY ONE FUEL TANK IN THE MIDDLE INSTEAD OF TWO ENGINES AND TWO FUEL TANKS ON BOTH SIDES
Yeah the aircrafts are being more and more sophisticated, I don't know any planes without any little recurrent failure but even though there's a lot of factors that can make a plane crashing, a lot of progress have been made, e.g the french air force reckon that 1.5 plane crash each 100 000 hours. I think the pilot is still the master but you know, when you FLY, you take more risks than someone on the ground rolling a tank, you can't stop at any time and start again, that's part of the job...
Is it me or is it just sad when a plane crashes, even if there is no pilot in it
There was a pilot in it and he walked away
Pilot didn t eject?
IMPRESIONANTE! .
Yes i know very well what PIO is and as i said so didnt the pilot move the control stick as slow and calm as he should but did way to big and fast movements which caused this. Computer failure? It worked perfect pilor failure absolutely.The pilot didnt do as he was told to do when he controlled the plane since he was used to old planes where you had to but in some effort to control them them but absolutely not needed in fly-by-wire plane like this which could cause PIO exactly as seen here.
thanks.
At 0:02 what if the engine swutch was thrown off..
Too be short, the plane will not become the master, it has to be more reliable, safe, effective but it cannot accomplish a mission by itself. It will still be a tool even if the future opens a lot of crazy things in your mind.
Kudos to the pilot tried his best to save the jet, but I would have ejected.
He tried to eject but he was used to the ejection trigger being in another place.
If he were unlucky he'd have ejected straight into the ground though. That would mess up your day...
@ Skyraptor
You're watching to many Action Movies...
when you fly and do nascar moves
why he did no cut the power after the first hit?
Because jet engines operate on a delay to prevent engine stalls caused by rapid throttle movement. He throttled up just before ground contact to pull out but had to ride out the afterburner pushing the plane before the engine cutout.
WOW!!!!! it did not explode O_O AWESOME
And he is OK!!!!
On 2 February 1989, the first prototype JAS 39-1 crashed on its sixth flight, when attempting to land in Linköping. The pilot, Lars Rådeström escaped with a fractured elbow and some minor injuries. The crash was the result of pilot-induced oscillation (PIO). Extremely gusty winds were also a contributing factor
The Flying Gasmask
Now Gripen is ready. I think Finland can order like 100 gripens.
To replace 57 Hornets. Two-engined air superiority fihgter plales.
Billy Bob Bunton it has been ready for a long time, there is alot of countries that have bought it :)
I dunno and we will see but it will probably happen in a lot of years (I'll be dead maybe lol), progress has to be made on those aircrafts (it has limitations!), it's really expensive and require a lot of experience to fly it. At this time, I find that conventionnal aircrafts are more effective in almost all domains. But the idea of loosing a plane without loosing the pilot is interesting. But as dogfights are now rare it possible that future warfare will be fight from the distance.
So, are you dead?
Disclaimer: Not directed by Michael Bay.
God damn fly by wire.
Thanks friend.
It may be a big matter of modern air plane that which is the master of plane, human or machine? don't you?
That'll buff out...
What was this? The excuse from the software engineers.
Thanks, your english is pretty decent and I couldn't judge anybody on that, since I'm not a native. You're too much of nice guy lol, don't be sorry. Indeed it's "rock hard" to be a JTAC, especially with the slashed budget but I'll do everything for it, as the proverb says "When you have not given everything, you have given nothing."
LOL.. It may look like there is shit flying around but it isn't... it's mostly dust, dirt, plane parts and chunks of the lawn. And it's obviously due to the plane chrash you can see in the clip!
Fly by wire system is shutdown I think
Minizip Pilot needed a new pair of underpants after this I think
+Minizip No...it´s working just perfect. The pilot got a sneeze-attack.
Finland should have bought these back in the 90's I hope they choose gripen echo over f-35 or everything else.
Nordic countries should stick together. if our neighbor is designing and manufacturing FIGHTER PLANES that is kinda rare stuff they should for that reason alone buy them. Plus they are also decent and cheap. over 2 times cheaper than f-35 per unit. and flight cost is so much lower.
irou95 f35 is a mess, Navy hates it but USA spent too much on developing it so they can't back out. + Gripen has HUD built into the helmet unlike F35 also F35 requires a second plane to block any radars around it in order to be stealth. Its not really stealth on its own.
Damn! The Gripen looks pretty rugged after taking a nasty crash like that. Hopefully, the pilot is okay (possibly minor injuries).
Yeah he lived to crash again in 93. With the same type of error pilot induced occilation.
Indeed, that's a story of their life.
Thank you for your great knowledge and fine answer helped me a lot!
We would meet this matter soon, like a lot of near future novels,movies,and animations include of theme of military air plane.
Do you know Yukikaze the Japanese novels and animation about near future air force? I had reminded it when I thought about this clip after watching.
Crash like a boss
the wing looked a bit damaged or he just have too learn to fly better
Long time since you wrote that, but here we go. The unstable design is what gives the Gripen its incredible turnrate. What you see when that front wing started flapping, is compensations for the oscillation by counter-steering. This was at the earliest stage of the Gripen development, infact, this was just the 6th flight it had ever flewn. The problem was concluded to be an over-sensitive, yet slow-response steering system, which was fixed before the Gripen was adapted by the Swedish Airforce.
Thu Scalmeister what incredible turnrate are you talking about exactly? MiG-29 has an incredible turn-rate, F-16 has an incredible turn-rate. Gripen is just a toy. And it doesn't have 'front wing'. They are called canards.
Marcin Wawszczyk Nice, blame me for keeping it simple for someone who obviously doesn't know much about planes.
The F-16 has a better sustained turn rate, thats it. The only reason is because it has a better power-to-weight ratio which makes it bleed speed slower. They both sustain 9G's without a problem, except if a F-16 has a centerline fuel tank, then it's stuck at 7G's unless jettisoned or empty. Mig-29 and the Gripen instead has a better instantaneous turn rate.
The gripen has a better roll onset rate, better pitch rate, better instantaneous turn rate, the only thing the F-16 does better is flying around in a circle after the Gripen has bled it's speed. Nice.
Oh, and just to add. During Red Flag 2008, Gripens were put up against F16's and boasted a 7:1 kill ratio. The old Gripens, not the N/G's. I think that speaks for itself.
Marcin Wawszczyk instantaneous turn rate = Rafale > Gripen > Typhoon > F-22 > F-15 > F-16 > F-18 > F-35
Thu Scalmeister F-16 hasn't better turnrate then gripen sustained or instantaneous defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/03/01/missile-and-aircraft-turn-performance/
No I don't read Japanese unfortunately, I don't watch animations neither. Actually I don't know a lot about plane engineering (only dassault ones and the A10 so shame on me), I'm a guy that want to pass the JTAC course so I'm more about weapon systems. Also what I hear from pilots is always the same : "Flying the plane is a tool, it's enjoyable but it's a tool, what really matters is the success of the mission (correct use of the weapons)".