Su-30MK2 Catches Fire during Top Speed Run

[@PSsquadron]

Pilot: I'm Catapulting! ( I eject) Tower: Catapult yourself! (Eject YORSELF) I`m Polish but this is very clear to me.

[@spartan_zero_1829]

I never see such kind of good crash analysis before in military aviation. Thank you sir. Your videos are awesome 😍

[@CommandT]

Thanks!! :)

[@GuyFromSC]

I’m a huge fighter jet junkie and in comprises prob 90% of my YT feed. This popped up after I watched your Su-35 vid with the FCS issues. I can say with complete certainty that you are an expert at explaining these things so we can understand. I’ve liked, shared, and have become your latest sub. Keep up the great work and do us all favor… Keep making more my guy 🙏🏼. I’m about to deep dive into your channel and hope to find more airplane accident explanations. #TeamCommandT. Thank you brother 🤜🏼🤛🏼

[@NickG_214]

That's interesting. It's very reminiscent of stalling out with the FCS bypassed and getting stuck in that "doomed turtle" state in DCS. I know it's a totally different scenario with only one engine and a supposed hydraulic failure but assuming the left engine is in idle I find that interesting that, as far as physics go, the aircraft wants to naturally stay inverted as it wobbles in its flat spin just like DCS.

[@deansawich6250]

Can hear the Gs being pulled in the voices of the pilots. 😮

[@Deltasayan]

Man awesome video again. Keep it coming!!!

[@CommandT]

Thanks!

[@PIANOPICTURES]

Mate, how is it possible that you pronounce Komsomolsk-na-Amure so perfectly fine in Russian? Are you Russian?!

[@CommandT]

I am :)

[@MrLangobard]

05:55-06:30 - Right before ejection there was a sneaky swear word that was gracefully passed over. And to be fair, thanks for that, it makes this video very professional from a perspective of analysis :).

[@CommandT]

Yeah but it was difficult to translate as the sequence of words makes no sense in English :)

[@andrisorinskis]

Weird angle on inverted spin is due to drag chutes have been deployed.

[@someoneelse9271]

Wouldn’t the air refueling light get sucked into the left engine? Seems unlikely that a part on the top of the left side of aircraft would be sucked into right engine which is under the aircraft on opposite side.

[@pilotabsolut3129]

Realy great channel!

[@nakotaapache4674]

i like RU Planes also. Hope they had no quality issues.

[@soul_train8901]

Great content. Well-detailed analysis. May I ask why you have the trackIR sensors on your headset flipped around? Any advantages to wearing it that way? Fellow simmer here. My trackIR always glitches and I have to reset.

[@CommandT]

No it was my own attempt at fixing a constant jitter issue with my trackir. I'd say this way improved it slightly but it's definitely not necessary for anyone to do this :)

[@xres1329]

The video shows the refueling light on the LEFT side. So that component could NOT cross over to the RIGHT ENGINE!

[@CommandT]

Ha, that's a very good question!! Hasn't even crossed my mind. Yeah, I always found that explanation to be somewhat dubious as the light is above the leading edge of the wing anyway. Very strange.

[@Mp57navy]

@@CommandT It was a refueling light. I wonder, would you like a good hot cup of tea? What floor do you live on?

[@devinthierault]

@@Mp57navy The tea was fantastic thank you

[@Amateur_Hr]

Yeah this is not a good situation to be in. On an aircraft like this with the engine spaced fairly far apart you will have serious asymmetric thrust and drag issues caused by one engine basically locking up and turning into a brick at those air speeds. However your initial theory of the refueling light being the culprit does not pass the stink check so neither are those sources that say that was the cause. Some thing else blew this motor up at high speed.

[@festol1]

Great video! Impressive accident!

[@CommandT]

NOTE! Some of you might be wondering how an A2A refuelling light which is on the LEFT side and above the leading edge of the wing has ended up getting sucked under the wing into the RIGHT engine intake - I have the same question and no answer for that. This was the only explanation that I found online in various articles. Watch my Su-35 FCS Failure analysis here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rXSmeJyknLR7has Watch my Su-34 Runway Overrun analysis here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6nToZqmo8Z9bZo

[@KirillAndreev]

Ground control ordered to eject. This was not a question. It was an order.

[@charlesbukowski9836]

Rita is talking like a Russian bride in America... 'take me to Disneyland' 'take me to Disneyland' 'iam hungry.. feed me.. ' iam hungry.. feed me' 'iam bored' 'iam bored'

[@BokserPerm]

7:50 Нихера, руководитель полётов именно сказал "катапультируйтесь", а не задал вопрос. Проблемы у тебя, автор, с русским языком.

[@CommandT]

Как скажешь…

[@BokserPerm]

@@CommandT Это факт. Руководитель чётко сказал "Катапультируйтесь". Если ты не согласен, оставайся при своём мнении.

[@timn4481]

the little wings on the front of an su30 are called foreplanes not canards. 'canard' is french for duck. having foreplanes and a main plane make this a canard configuration. and no the pilot would not have the stick pulled hard against him as it is fly by wire.

[@CommandT]

FCS failed as soon as the engine went on fire. But yes, you're correct, the stick wouldn't have moved most likely all that much. Also, it's extremely common practice to call them canards on Sukhoi jets. French or not. That's just what you call them :) And you'll see many sources refer to them as canards so it's a moot point.

[@Matias-fy3ey]

I hope you the best success! Your content deserves a service like P-R-O-M-O-S-M.