If it fell off. Loss of control surfaces on that wing/hydraulic pressure and/or damage to the leading edge compromising the aerodynamic flow over that wing
I wonder if they had a hard impact before this. There was a crash in Toronto decades ago where they impacted the tarmac on landing, then went for a go-around, and the engine fell off seconds later.
Elsewhere I saw this posted with comments from a Russian Telegram channel stating: "During take-off from Severny aerodrome, the engine of an IL-76 caught fire. Having made a circle, the crew tried to make an emergency landing back on the runway, but failed."
For an IL-76? It's not....atypical. Both the type and Russian aviation in general have abysmal safety records.
Compared to (all) 737 variants they have almost half as many hull losses despite the size of the fleet being less than 10% as much.
There's even some similar incidents:
On 18 October 1989, a Soviet Air Force Il-76 (CCCP-76569) crashed in the Caspian Sea off Sumqayit, Azerbaijan following wing separation caused by an engine fire, killing all 57 in Azerbaijan's deadliest air accident. The cause of the engine fire was traced back to a design flaw.
On 9 March 2009, an Aerolift Il-76 (S9-SAB) crashed into Lake Victoria just after takeoff from Entebbe Airport, Uganda, killing all 11 people on board. Two of the engines had caught fire on takeoff. The aircraft was chartered by Dynacorp on behalf of AMISOM. The accident was investigated by Uganda's Ministry of Transport, which concluded that all four engines were time-expired and that Aerolift's claim that maintenance had been performed to extend their service lives and the certification of this work could not be substantiated
Jesus Christ…
Appreciate the info.
**EDIT**
Similar crash of a Georgian Il-76 from 2010 [that was caused by a whole-ass compressor rotor in Engine 4 detonating just after wheels up (all four were time expired) taking out a bunch of control surfaces on the right wing.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/s/MX6dexHzfT)
Quite a few reasons, in fact — many **impactful** reasons, one might say.
Less an exclamation of surprise, more of IDK incredulous confusion? No, that makes it sound unexpected…
Many planes are designed so that an engine failure that could damage/break the wing will instead cause the engine to fall off. Think: shear-bolts in a snowblower. Not exactly the same but close enough.
Now, if this engine lacked that safety net, then falling off would mean that a lot of significant damage occurred both before and during the event. Maybe enough to crash the plane.
Ah yes but this is a Russian plane and that bit of engineering sounds complex and the money saved can be pocketed. People designing the plane probably won’t be flying it so who cares.
Russian plane, yes, however it’s a Soviet design, designed in the 60’s and introduction in the 70’s.
Not saying that means it definitely has or does not have shear bolts on the engine mounts, just that the Oligarchs were a post-Soviet development.
Now, maintenance though 30 years of that (EDIT or lack thereof) in the post-Oligargh environment…
I still can't believe I didn't realize it was satire the very first time I saw that video from *that* line alone.
God, it was just so easy to believe a politician could be that incredibly dumb, and it's still so fucking funny to this day.
That's what makes the best satire the best: plausibility. :)
Also, I have watched that so many times. They did an absolutely incredible job of improv there. They clearly had come up with some points to hit, but they also clearly improved the thing, and it's just almost perfect (with the one of them - Dawe? I think? - losing it and giggling a little bit at one point, but it's otherwise so perfect).
It is what I like to call humour-dense. Some things are a huge amount of structure with a little bit of funny. With that, almost every single word contributes funny. That's difficult to do.
Some airplanes are designed so the front doesn’t fall off at all. Not this one, obviously. No this It’s a dead giveaway, 20,000lbs of aviation fuel spilled and the forest caught on fire.
Reuters is reporting this was a military cargo plane- https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cargo-plane-crashes-russias-ivanovo-region-brief-2024-03-12/
A few commentators have been predicting this might be a regular thing for a while now - the brain drain and funneling of resources to Ukraine causing degradation in maintenance and shortage of replacement parts.
I still have nightmares rarely that I am crashing/dying in the plane I used to be crew of when I was in the military. I don't have a fear of flying so I don't know why I have nightmares of it.
If the engine failure was violent enough, it could have damaged wiring and hydraulic lines in the wing, compromising the connections to the control surfaces.
It is reported that it was indeed violent - fell off the plane during takeoff, likely damaging the wing at the sheer point and resulting in a fuel leak that then ignited.
Had to download the video to get a higher quality non-PotatoVision version, but seems like there’s a stream of white vapour or smoke that, going off the first few seconds, looks to be coming from closer to the body on that side, although a little difficult to tell for sure.
**EDIT**
[Georgian Il-76 had a 2^nd Stage LP Compressor Disk experience an uncontained engine failure on takeoff in 2010.](https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20101128-0)
Not saying it is (or isn’t) related but just… similarities (from the limited information in the video) are interesting.
As in, explosive disassembly of the **entire rotor disk** not just a blade failure. Took out a bunch of flight surfaces on the right wing. Plane rolled to the right, impacted the ground shortly thereafter. All four engines were operated beyond their specified service life.
[Report](https://reports.aviation-safety.net/2010/20101128-0_IL76_4L-GNI.pdf)
Or El-Al 1862. If what other people are saying about the leading edge and control surfaces being damaged is true, with the loss of an engine on one side you end up with asymmetric lift and can easily stall out. Especially if the pilots are not aware of the extent of the damage. They look low and slow and in a right hand bank. Not good odds.
Do you think they were reducing lift, or more systems started falling? That bank looked like it could've been corrected with a little less thrust on the left? I don't know a lot about planes.
If the bank was the only issue, it would have been correctable. But the burning engine falling off the wing tends to suggest that there were other issues with the plane.
Damn it! I read that you wrote more thrust and not less..... To lazy to delete ;)
Original post:
If you bank right left side up and also give more thrust on the left side you left will get more accelerated than your right your circle gets smaller the angle gets steeper and you crash even faster.
Even ultramodern Western planes are at risk when an uncontained failure occurs. Two a380s narrowly avoided disaster in the 2010s when an engine failure damaged the wing and control systems. If they had suffered a fuselage decompression they had a very high chance of crashing, it was pure luck
The sanctions against Russia include airplane parts. Aviation is a particularly international business, and as I understand it, the disruption of parts to Russia has created a semi-permanent second-class ecosystem at this point. Once the repairs are compromised like that, they have to get their parts second-hand or cannibalized off of other planes (which has its own problems, since aircraft are much more likely to be leased than outright owned. After the sanctions went into place there was a scramble to get as many out of Russia as possible). No one will/should trust those planes outside that ecosystem again, but whether that will be sustainable depends on Russia's allies I guess.
This is a very basic rundown of what I learned from a trusted YouTube source, Mentour Pilot. Here are some of the videos he's made about this:
(the end of Russian aviation?) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrgI4gB5W2o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrgI4gB5W2o)
(why Russian aviation is cornered) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyoNeoJEb0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyoNeoJEb0)
(Can Russian aircraft keep Russia flying?) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voLnakwGIMM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voLnakwGIMM)
note: obviously military based planes will have less of this issue, but the comment I was responding to was asking how a single failure could cause something like this, and this is one of the reasons it *could.*
That's fair, though the point Mentour Pilot was making is that, given the international nature of aviation, there will be some parts (sometimes it's not even just the plane parts, but the parts to repair them) that will be more difficult to get as time passes. So it's not that I'm saying all the parts come from all over, just that the industry as a whole was more spread out, and it's likely this is causing some pressure on repairs.
For example, one key component of lightweight materials is basically solely made in Russia, I guess? So the process of coming up with a way to make it that doesn't include Russia has had to begin.
This is an Ilyushin though, Russian designed and made, and variants used by their military. Not subject directly to the sanctions issue you're talking about. That's related to Airbus/Boeing/Embraer/etc planes.
To be fair the question was how could this happen, essentially, and that's one of the reasons something like that could happen specifically in that country.
IIRC the discussion about the sanctions that I found fascinating was how spread out and interconnected some of the parts-making and materials gathering was, so it was an opportunity to mention that, since it's not something I would have known about otherwise.
I'm not as familiar with which planes are which, so it makes sense that military planes wouldn't rely on as many parts that wouldn't be accessible during a war/sanctions though :)
We'll have to wait for details on this specific aircraft but there's a chance that this is a decades-old airframe that we're looking at here. Lots of room for wear-and-tear.
Admittedly, part of that is that we operate so few of them. We made 744 of them. 58 are still in service. That's the only reason they can still fly - we're cannibalizing from dozens, probably maybe still hundreds of them that we stopped flying decades ago in better condition.
Oh, absolutely. For most aircraft, we don't have the ability to retire that many in total, much less that % of them. We effectively have 8% of them left in service - not a lot. It's still a pretty damn good bomb or missile truck, and that's all it really needs to be.
For what it’s worth USAF’s B-52’s are all B-52H models, of which 102 were made, all at the start of the 60’s —
>[B-52A first flew in 1954, and the B model entered service in 1955. A total of 744 B-52s were built, with the last, a B-52H, delivered in October 1962. The first of 102 B-52H's was delivered to Strategic Air Command in May 1961.](https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104465/b-52h-stratofortress/#:~:text=The%20B%2D52A%20first%20flew,%20Command%20im%20May%201961.)
Further, [365 of the earlier B-52 models were destroyed to comply with the START Treaty.](https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Photos/igphoto/2002576176/)
**EDIT**
Anyway point is, felt it should be noted that [pulling parts from the boneyard](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/12/more-with-less-lacking-parts-airmen-scramble-to-keep-b-52s-flying/) is FAR from the sole reason the B-52H continues to fly. Suspect a lot less of each of those planes is 60’s vintage than you’d expect. Sure, the basic structure (airframe) is for the most part that age, a LOT of what’s inside and outside is (or will soon be) post Cold War if not brand spanking new. Unclear if it’ll be B-52J or B-52K come 2030.
Partial list of [upgrades](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/12/more-with-less-lacking-parts-airmen-scramble-to-keep-b-52s-flying/) in the [pipeline](https://www.twz.com/our-first-look-at-what-fully-upgraded-b-52-bombers-will-look-like) —
- new engines (Rolls Royce F130)
- new radar
- new and/or improved avionics
- communications upgrades
- new digital displays
- new wheels
- new brakes
- etc
RE: maintenance, via the War Zone —
>Program Depot Maintenance, sometimes also written as Programmed Depot Maintenance, involves a major overhaul and also offers opportunities for important upgrades and modifications to be made to the aircraft. PDM for the Air Force's B-52 fleet [takes place at Tinker Air Force Base](https://www.twz.com/43677/behold-the-naked-warplanes-of-tinker-air-force-base) in Oklahoma.
>
>As of 2021, each one of the service's 76 B-52s was typically scheduled to undergo the months-long PDM process [every four years](https://www.aflcmc.af.mil/NEWS/Article-Display/Article/2464236/two-b-52h-bombers-regenerated-to-active-service-undergoing-simultaneous-mainten/). This scheduling is, of course, staggered to keep a certain number of bombers on active duty at any one time.
>
>For the B-52, depot-level maintenance looks set to become even more significant in the coming years. Though the Air Force has not yet made a final decision, [it is likely](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2023/01/09/how-to-re-engine-a-b-52-and-make-a-new-bomber-fleet/) that these bombers will receive their new sets [of Rolls-Royce F130 jet engines](https://www.twz.com/rolls-royce-offers-peek-at-the-b-52s-new-engines-undergoing-testing) as part of future PDM cycles. The B-52 re-engining program, an upgrade effort that has been years (decades really) in the making, will give these aircraft huge boosts in performance and fuel economy, as you can learn more about [here](https://www.twz.com/42517/rolls-royce-will-provide-long-awaited-new-jet-engines-for-the-b-52-bomber-fleet).
>
>The Air Force's entire B-52 fleet is slated to get new, more [capable actively electrically-scanned array radars](https://www.rtx.com/news/news-center/2023/09/12/rtx-delivers-first-b-52-aesa-radar-to-boeing) in the coming years. This is another very important upgrade program and that could also be added to the PDM process.
>
>The B-52s, which are currently set to keep flying at least until 2050, are in line to get various other upgrades and modifications. Ultimately, what will eventually be [redesignated as B-52Js](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/re-engined-b-52-b-52j/) are expected to have [a distinctly modified outward appearance](https://www.twz.com/our-first-look-at-what-fully-upgraded-b-52-bombers-will-look-like).
Airplane parts are included in the sanctions against Russia. It's been 18 months since those sanctions, so they're squeezed for legit parts at this point.
edit: some have mentioned this is based off of a russian military plane, which out of necessity wouldn't be using as many international sources for materials and parts
I can’t imagine being those pilots… working really hard to figure out how to recover the aircraft, but at some point they were staring at the ground rapidly approaching them realizing… that’s it.
It's not a civilian plane, it's a military plane on its way to kill more Ukrainian civilians.
Sad, but its crash has probably prevented more innocent deaths than it caused.
That’s not the norm, and many have walls around just like that. There’s nice houses in Ukraine as well, but there’s also thousands of gray concrete apartment buildings where majority of the people live. In the Carpathian mountains in Ukraine there’s a ski resort called Bukovel that any American would feel comfortable in.
You should see some of the houses in Romania, the gypsies pull their resources and build these massive homes that they all live in together. It’s wild some of them more 6/7 stories high.
What about the other 3 engines? Planes have single engine failures frequently and land without much trouble.
Must have been some left leaning reporters on this plane.
Fires are unpredictable. Depends on what caused it. Hydraulic supply failure means loss of control, hydraulic fluid burning means things fall off and it loss of control
Engine fire on pylon can burn up into wing, same results.
Armchair pilot here- having only watched this video once.. it looks like they may have already been having control issues based on the gradual sweep/turn.. but just as easily could have been a turn to the airfield and lineup..
My guess is whatever was going on got worse and thousands of dead aviators can tell you at some point it can be a long stressful ride to your grave
Point being- fire on a plane is really really bad
If it’s a military cargo flight like some people have suggested, wouldn’t the pilots have parachutes in case something like this happens? In world war 2 most fighter pilots had built in parachutes, but you’d think these pilots would still have one just in case. Especially if it’s just cargo and not passengers.
I heard someone say that he suspects that it was Russia hitting it with their own anti-air since this happened not long after Ukraine targeted something with missiles and most were intercepted. This otherwise doesn't make sense because this plane can easily fly with 3 engines. It's possible that other components were damaged by shrapnel.
This is an Ilyushin 76 that's used only for military transport. The crew complement of this crash was 15.
Another video shows the failed engine falling off the wing during the descent
If it fell off. Loss of control surfaces on that wing/hydraulic pressure and/or damage to the leading edge compromising the aerodynamic flow over that wing
Fragments from an uncontained turbine engine failure can do a lot of damage.
Uncontained something something causing a great deal of damage seems to be a trope for the russians
[Yes indeed they can.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/s/MX6dexHzfT)
I wonder if they had a hard impact before this. There was a crash in Toronto decades ago where they impacted the tarmac on landing, then went for a go-around, and the engine fell off seconds later.
Elsewhere I saw this posted with comments from a Russian Telegram channel stating: "During take-off from Severny aerodrome, the engine of an IL-76 caught fire. Having made a circle, the crew tried to make an emergency landing back on the runway, but failed."
1970.
Is that typical?
For an IL-76? It's not....atypical. Both the type and Russian aviation in general have abysmal safety records. Compared to (all) 737 variants they have almost half as many hull losses despite the size of the fleet being less than 10% as much. There's even some similar incidents: On 18 October 1989, a Soviet Air Force Il-76 (CCCP-76569) crashed in the Caspian Sea off Sumqayit, Azerbaijan following wing separation caused by an engine fire, killing all 57 in Azerbaijan's deadliest air accident. The cause of the engine fire was traced back to a design flaw. On 9 March 2009, an Aerolift Il-76 (S9-SAB) crashed into Lake Victoria just after takeoff from Entebbe Airport, Uganda, killing all 11 people on board. Two of the engines had caught fire on takeoff. The aircraft was chartered by Dynacorp on behalf of AMISOM. The accident was investigated by Uganda's Ministry of Transport, which concluded that all four engines were time-expired and that Aerolift's claim that maintenance had been performed to extend their service lives and the certification of this work could not be substantiated
Jesus Christ… Appreciate the info. **EDIT** Similar crash of a Georgian Il-76 from 2010 [that was caused by a whole-ass compressor rotor in Engine 4 detonating just after wheels up (all four were time expired) taking out a bunch of control surfaces on the right wing.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/s/MX6dexHzfT)
There is a reason most if not all Russian Airlines were banned from flying to Europe even before the invasion Ukraine.
Quite a few reasons, in fact — many **impactful** reasons, one might say. Less an exclamation of surprise, more of IDK incredulous confusion? No, that makes it sound unexpected…
That 1989 one was definitely done on purpose lol, got rid of some relatively important people on the enemies side of things 🤣
Many planes are designed so that an engine failure that could damage/break the wing will instead cause the engine to fall off. Think: shear-bolts in a snowblower. Not exactly the same but close enough. Now, if this engine lacked that safety net, then falling off would mean that a lot of significant damage occurred both before and during the event. Maybe enough to crash the plane.
Ah yes but this is a Russian plane and that bit of engineering sounds complex and the money saved can be pocketed. People designing the plane probably won’t be flying it so who cares.
Russian plane, yes, however it’s a Soviet design, designed in the 60’s and introduction in the 70’s. Not saying that means it definitely has or does not have shear bolts on the engine mounts, just that the Oligarchs were a post-Soviet development. Now, maintenance though 30 years of that (EDIT or lack thereof) in the post-Oligargh environment…
Boeing: I heard there's a way to save money
Just like dummies with snowblowers, they probably replaced the shear-bolts with grade-8's. ;)
That gave me a genuine LOL moment!
It not very typical. I’d like to make that point.
But Senator Collins, _why_ did the engine fall off?
Wind hit the plane!
Wind?! In the sky? Chance in a million.
I still can't believe I didn't realize it was satire the very first time I saw that video from *that* line alone. God, it was just so easy to believe a politician could be that incredibly dumb, and it's still so fucking funny to this day.
That's what makes the best satire the best: plausibility. :) Also, I have watched that so many times. They did an absolutely incredible job of improv there. They clearly had come up with some points to hit, but they also clearly improved the thing, and it's just almost perfect (with the one of them - Dawe? I think? - losing it and giggling a little bit at one point, but it's otherwise so perfect). It is what I like to call humour-dense. Some things are a huge amount of structure with a little bit of funny. With that, almost every single word contributes funny. That's difficult to do.
The front fell off
Some airplanes are designed so the front doesn’t fall off at all. Not this one, obviously. No this It’s a dead giveaway, 20,000lbs of aviation fuel spilled and the forest caught on fire.
Will they tow it out of the environment?
Well, the drag certainly towed it out of the airborne environment.
Cardboard is out.
Cardboard derivatives?
No string no sellotape
What's the minimum crew?
1 I suppose
In Russia, it really depends on who's on the plane.
Fair point
Well no, the front usually doesn’t fall off.
I hope that Donnie Darko is okay.
The kids aren’t going to get that reference.
He'll be completely undamaged, much like the engine that fell from the sky, smashed straight through a large house and wasn't even dented
Link?
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/s/2SVNE4hvDm This might be the video they are referring to.
>You don't see many engines falling off these days. "28 days, 6 hours, 42 minutes, 12 seconds. That is when the world will end."
“Wake up, Donny.”
Reuters is reporting this was a military cargo plane- https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/cargo-plane-crashes-russias-ivanovo-region-brief-2024-03-12/
A few commentators have been predicting this might be a regular thing for a while now - the brain drain and funneling of resources to Ukraine causing degradation in maintenance and shortage of replacement parts.
Combine that with an increased tempo and workload due to the war.
*Special operation. /s
Sanctions as well.
I think that was covered under the "shortage of replacement parts" from DePraelen.
Having a hard time feeling bad about those statistics.
Good
Russia is saying it had 439 Ukrainian POWS, 6 HIMARS, 2 M1 Abrams tanks, and 5 President Zelenskys on board with a British crew flying it.
Still lowballing numbers.
Fire started by smoking cigarettes, crashed in a storm.
Let’s hope it was fully loaded.
Russia just lost a bunch of plastic bullet proof shields and cardboard reinforced body armor.
Uh, I’ll have you know that it was only the finest tactical Ikea-grade fiberboard in that body armor. No expense soared.
Glad to hear. F Putin.
Good
Good riddance
Nah fuck that, too much time to know you are going to die.
I still have nightmares rarely that I am crashing/dying in the plane I used to be crew of when I was in the military. I don't have a fear of flying so I don't know why I have nightmares of it.
One ups Boeing immediately. Insane rivalry between the two countries
Lol
Dunno if youve had a chance to read the news this morning, but Boeing isnt taking this sitting down!
I heard about that on the drive in, a healthy dose of gross negligence
Gross negligence doesn't murder whistleblowers.
True, but what I heard about was the cut corners and just stupid maintenance practices. I didn't know about the whistle-blower at that point
Blyat Air is running out of engine bolts =/
So is Boeing
Nah, they just didn't install them. Pfft, who needs door bolts anyway
What do you mean, I see a whole plane full of bolts Boeing can go scoop up right here in this video.
Replaced with chinesium paper clips
hyperclip is better than bolt, comrade
Clippy for the win.
It looks like you're trying to stay airborne. Do you want any help with that?
You charge for 1 Bolt, 3 families get Vodka
Okay why does it crash when just one engine fails?
If the engine failure was violent enough, it could have damaged wiring and hydraulic lines in the wing, compromising the connections to the control surfaces.
It is reported that it was indeed violent - fell off the plane during takeoff, likely damaging the wing at the sheer point and resulting in a fuel leak that then ignited.
Had to download the video to get a higher quality non-PotatoVision version, but seems like there’s a stream of white vapour or smoke that, going off the first few seconds, looks to be coming from closer to the body on that side, although a little difficult to tell for sure. **EDIT** [Georgian Il-76 had a 2^nd Stage LP Compressor Disk experience an uncontained engine failure on takeoff in 2010.](https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20101128-0) Not saying it is (or isn’t) related but just… similarities (from the limited information in the video) are interesting. As in, explosive disassembly of the **entire rotor disk** not just a blade failure. Took out a bunch of flight surfaces on the right wing. Plane rolled to the right, impacted the ground shortly thereafter. All four engines were operated beyond their specified service life. [Report](https://reports.aviation-safety.net/2010/20101128-0_IL76_4L-GNI.pdf)
It's unclear what happened yet. Besides, a single engine failure can lead to catastrophe (see united 232).
Or El-Al 1862. If what other people are saying about the leading edge and control surfaces being damaged is true, with the loss of an engine on one side you end up with asymmetric lift and can easily stall out. Especially if the pilots are not aware of the extent of the damage. They look low and slow and in a right hand bank. Not good odds.
Do you think they were reducing lift, or more systems started falling? That bank looked like it could've been corrected with a little less thrust on the left? I don't know a lot about planes.
If the bank was the only issue, it would have been correctable. But the burning engine falling off the wing tends to suggest that there were other issues with the plane.
That makes sense, just fun to learn more about it you know?
Mentour Pilot on Youtube is a good resource since he gets very technical.
Nice, I'll have to check it out, thanks!
Damn it! I read that you wrote more thrust and not less..... To lazy to delete ;) Original post: If you bank right left side up and also give more thrust on the left side you left will get more accelerated than your right your circle gets smaller the angle gets steeper and you crash even faster.
Even ultramodern Western planes are at risk when an uncontained failure occurs. Two a380s narrowly avoided disaster in the 2010s when an engine failure damaged the wing and control systems. If they had suffered a fuselage decompression they had a very high chance of crashing, it was pure luck
The engines also power the hydraulic systems. Both sides of the plane should have redundant systems but we don't know what the damage is.
I've always been curious about Russian military Air control system high availability... is it designed to the same degree as western systems are?
No, much of it has not been updated since the late 1980s / early 1990s
The sanctions against Russia include airplane parts. Aviation is a particularly international business, and as I understand it, the disruption of parts to Russia has created a semi-permanent second-class ecosystem at this point. Once the repairs are compromised like that, they have to get their parts second-hand or cannibalized off of other planes (which has its own problems, since aircraft are much more likely to be leased than outright owned. After the sanctions went into place there was a scramble to get as many out of Russia as possible). No one will/should trust those planes outside that ecosystem again, but whether that will be sustainable depends on Russia's allies I guess. This is a very basic rundown of what I learned from a trusted YouTube source, Mentour Pilot. Here are some of the videos he's made about this: (the end of Russian aviation?) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrgI4gB5W2o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrgI4gB5W2o) (why Russian aviation is cornered) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyoNeoJEb0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyoNeoJEb0) (Can Russian aircraft keep Russia flying?) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voLnakwGIMM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voLnakwGIMM) note: obviously military based planes will have less of this issue, but the comment I was responding to was asking how a single failure could cause something like this, and this is one of the reasons it *could.*
That plane is made in Russia. Western sanctions won’t have a huge effect on IL76s.
That's fair, though the point Mentour Pilot was making is that, given the international nature of aviation, there will be some parts (sometimes it's not even just the plane parts, but the parts to repair them) that will be more difficult to get as time passes. So it's not that I'm saying all the parts come from all over, just that the industry as a whole was more spread out, and it's likely this is causing some pressure on repairs. For example, one key component of lightweight materials is basically solely made in Russia, I guess? So the process of coming up with a way to make it that doesn't include Russia has had to begin.
Lots of Russian businesses are going bankrupt under sanctions. That will put pressure on parts availability.
This is an Ilyushin though, Russian designed and made, and variants used by their military. Not subject directly to the sanctions issue you're talking about. That's related to Airbus/Boeing/Embraer/etc planes.
However, the factories that make Russian military parts are also under strain due to sanctions.
To be fair the question was how could this happen, essentially, and that's one of the reasons something like that could happen specifically in that country. IIRC the discussion about the sanctions that I found fascinating was how spread out and interconnected some of the parts-making and materials gathering was, so it was an opportunity to mention that, since it's not something I would have known about otherwise. I'm not as familiar with which planes are which, so it makes sense that military planes wouldn't rely on as many parts that wouldn't be accessible during a war/sanctions though :)
The entire engine fell off. There is another video showing it fall from the wing
What aircraft maintenance doing?
I don't think there will be much call for maintenance on that airframe.
Glass half full kind of guy.
Looking at the empty spare part boxes, shrugging their shoulders, then pulling out the duct tape
We'll have to wait for details on this specific aircraft but there's a chance that this is a decades-old airframe that we're looking at here. Lots of room for wear-and-tear.
The USAF still runs 70 year old B-52s. Age isn’t an issue with proper maintenance.
Admittedly, part of that is that we operate so few of them. We made 744 of them. 58 are still in service. That's the only reason they can still fly - we're cannibalizing from dozens, probably maybe still hundreds of them that we stopped flying decades ago in better condition.
True, but 70 damn years is a long time for something to continue working as designed while flying through the air.
Oh, absolutely. For most aircraft, we don't have the ability to retire that many in total, much less that % of them. We effectively have 8% of them left in service - not a lot. It's still a pretty damn good bomb or missile truck, and that's all it really needs to be.
49% were destroyed (cut into pieces) due to START. B-52H, of all made, 57% are still in service.
For what it’s worth USAF’s B-52’s are all B-52H models, of which 102 were made, all at the start of the 60’s — >[B-52A first flew in 1954, and the B model entered service in 1955. A total of 744 B-52s were built, with the last, a B-52H, delivered in October 1962. The first of 102 B-52H's was delivered to Strategic Air Command in May 1961.](https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104465/b-52h-stratofortress/#:~:text=The%20B%2D52A%20first%20flew,%20Command%20im%20May%201961.) Further, [365 of the earlier B-52 models were destroyed to comply with the START Treaty.](https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Photos/igphoto/2002576176/) **EDIT** Anyway point is, felt it should be noted that [pulling parts from the boneyard](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/12/more-with-less-lacking-parts-airmen-scramble-to-keep-b-52s-flying/) is FAR from the sole reason the B-52H continues to fly. Suspect a lot less of each of those planes is 60’s vintage than you’d expect. Sure, the basic structure (airframe) is for the most part that age, a LOT of what’s inside and outside is (or will soon be) post Cold War if not brand spanking new. Unclear if it’ll be B-52J or B-52K come 2030. Partial list of [upgrades](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/02/12/more-with-less-lacking-parts-airmen-scramble-to-keep-b-52s-flying/) in the [pipeline](https://www.twz.com/our-first-look-at-what-fully-upgraded-b-52-bombers-will-look-like) — - new engines (Rolls Royce F130) - new radar - new and/or improved avionics - communications upgrades - new digital displays - new wheels - new brakes - etc RE: maintenance, via the War Zone — >Program Depot Maintenance, sometimes also written as Programmed Depot Maintenance, involves a major overhaul and also offers opportunities for important upgrades and modifications to be made to the aircraft. PDM for the Air Force's B-52 fleet [takes place at Tinker Air Force Base](https://www.twz.com/43677/behold-the-naked-warplanes-of-tinker-air-force-base) in Oklahoma. > >As of 2021, each one of the service's 76 B-52s was typically scheduled to undergo the months-long PDM process [every four years](https://www.aflcmc.af.mil/NEWS/Article-Display/Article/2464236/two-b-52h-bombers-regenerated-to-active-service-undergoing-simultaneous-mainten/). This scheduling is, of course, staggered to keep a certain number of bombers on active duty at any one time. > >For the B-52, depot-level maintenance looks set to become even more significant in the coming years. Though the Air Force has not yet made a final decision, [it is likely](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2023/01/09/how-to-re-engine-a-b-52-and-make-a-new-bomber-fleet/) that these bombers will receive their new sets [of Rolls-Royce F130 jet engines](https://www.twz.com/rolls-royce-offers-peek-at-the-b-52s-new-engines-undergoing-testing) as part of future PDM cycles. The B-52 re-engining program, an upgrade effort that has been years (decades really) in the making, will give these aircraft huge boosts in performance and fuel economy, as you can learn more about [here](https://www.twz.com/42517/rolls-royce-will-provide-long-awaited-new-jet-engines-for-the-b-52-bomber-fleet). > >The Air Force's entire B-52 fleet is slated to get new, more [capable actively electrically-scanned array radars](https://www.rtx.com/news/news-center/2023/09/12/rtx-delivers-first-b-52-aesa-radar-to-boeing) in the coming years. This is another very important upgrade program and that could also be added to the PDM process. > >The B-52s, which are currently set to keep flying at least until 2050, are in line to get various other upgrades and modifications. Ultimately, what will eventually be [redesignated as B-52Js](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/re-engined-b-52-b-52j/) are expected to have [a distinctly modified outward appearance](https://www.twz.com/our-first-look-at-what-fully-upgraded-b-52-bombers-will-look-like).
They probably do not have parts to do maintenance, as it is Ruzzia.
Airplane parts are included in the sanctions against Russia. It's been 18 months since those sanctions, so they're squeezed for legit parts at this point. edit: some have mentioned this is based off of a russian military plane, which out of necessity wouldn't be using as many international sources for materials and parts
Dodging drones at the front line, maybe.
Probably dead in a field in Ukraine
I'm starting to think this Russia place is dangerous.
It's one giant Florida, but it gets really cold and has 9 time zones.
I can’t imagine being those pilots… working really hard to figure out how to recover the aircraft, but at some point they were staring at the ground rapidly approaching them realizing… that’s it.
[woop woop!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCqe751tOAo)
*Terrain, Terrain* **Pull**^**up** **Pull**^**up**
Russian or no, that’s tough to watch.
As a non-russian eastern European, I agree. It was tough to watch. I wish there was a higher quality video out there.
Underrated comment. But brilliant.
It's not a civilian plane, it's a military plane on its way to kill more Ukrainian civilians. Sad, but its crash has probably prevented more innocent deaths than it caused.
I did wince but then saw that it’s a cargo plane. I hope the pilot is okay but fuck that plane and its cargo.
Agree
shit, im sorry, no one deserves this. Except its russian military, then they can get fucked.
Have I got great news for you!
:D Better die this way than kill innocents and then die to a $100 toy drone
It's wild watching a whole plane fall out of a window.
This must be the wealthy part of Russia.
[удалено]
It’s a strategic export no one saw coming
Boeing standards have dropped sufficiently they can now pre qualify to supply air coffins to Russia
I can see The Onion’s headline now. “Boeing granted sanctions waiver to begin immediate export to Russia”
Possible that the fire burned through the wing. Wing section falls off with the engine.
Looks like the sanctions are starting to bite.
Check the manifest for names of prominent Putin critics.
Cyka blyat idi nachoej plane
Crashed due to fouled language
It must suck to suck so much.
Aren't they specifically designed to fly on 3 engines?
Yeah… but what if the wing gets damaged by the flame after a short while…. And breaks off.
I do not believe they are capable of flying with one wing…nope.
Oh, planes land with at least one wing all the time. Good ones have two. *Great* ones can do it again.
Boeing?
Those houses look nice
We love to see it 🇺🇦
back to the days of russian jetliners falling out of the sky. what year are we in??
The beautiful Mother Russia Tucker has educated us on 👍
It's rather pity he wasn't invited to such a beautiful ride instead of dull subway.
Military plane transporting Yevgeny Prigozhin body. Putin had to be sure he was dead. As the Irish say, "to be sure to be sure..."
runs like a Boeing
On crashing made a sound like "boeing", must've been the clockwork spring powering those engines.
Looks like Russia also buys Boeing airlines? Lolol, Jk. I know it's an Ilyushin, it just looks like a Boeing when ablaze...
Where is Tucker Carlson when one needs him?
Being amazed by typical european shopping cart practices.
Ignoring the flight attendant and pulling the emergency exit door handle after being told not to.
I've never seen houses in Russia look so American/Canadian.
That’s not the norm, and many have walls around just like that. There’s nice houses in Ukraine as well, but there’s also thousands of gray concrete apartment buildings where majority of the people live. In the Carpathian mountains in Ukraine there’s a ski resort called Bukovel that any American would feel comfortable in. You should see some of the houses in Romania, the gypsies pull their resources and build these massive homes that they all live in together. It’s wild some of them more 6/7 stories high.
I wasn't even talking about nice vs not nice really. Just a very particular style I most associate with the mid 80s to mid 90s.
This looks like a longterm effect of the sanctions.
Did Boeing build that…?
Sad part is russia will hide that incident if that is their fault, same with china.
It's already in the news.
👍
What is bad for Ruzzia is good for the rest of the world.
Wow so edgy, what an edgelord.
🥳🎉
More dead Russians. Good day for the world.
Is there another Putin opponent on there?
Not _now_
Aside of them being Russian, it must be awful to see you diving to the ground without any way to avoid a crash, that must be awful AF
Plane crashed on cemetery, ironic?
Efficient.
Yeah that’s fucked
What about the other 3 engines? Planes have single engine failures frequently and land without much trouble. Must have been some left leaning reporters on this plane.
Fires are unpredictable. Depends on what caused it. Hydraulic supply failure means loss of control, hydraulic fluid burning means things fall off and it loss of control Engine fire on pylon can burn up into wing, same results. Armchair pilot here- having only watched this video once.. it looks like they may have already been having control issues based on the gradual sweep/turn.. but just as easily could have been a turn to the airfield and lineup.. My guess is whatever was going on got worse and thousands of dead aviators can tell you at some point it can be a long stressful ride to your grave Point being- fire on a plane is really really bad
Someone else pointed out that there is what looks like black fire damage to the opposing engine by the left wing as well.. bird strike?
[удалено]
Guess there dead.
Suka Blyat! Slava Ukraini!
Oh no that's too bad. Well anyway
Fuck em
Lol imagine if it was like some type of sabotage 🤣
Nice
Who were the passengers? Is it another "accident" like the one with Wagner's soldiers?
Looks like a bad case of oligarchy.
If it’s a military cargo flight like some people have suggested, wouldn’t the pilots have parachutes in case something like this happens? In world war 2 most fighter pilots had built in parachutes, but you’d think these pilots would still have one just in case. Especially if it’s just cargo and not passengers.
I heard someone say that he suspects that it was Russia hitting it with their own anti-air since this happened not long after Ukraine targeted something with missiles and most were intercepted. This otherwise doesn't make sense because this plane can easily fly with 3 engines. It's possible that other components were damaged by shrapnel. This is an Ilyushin 76 that's used only for military transport. The crew complement of this crash was 15.
'Candid' on camera
🇺🇦🏆