Sui-30MKI fighter jet goes missing

[assassin123]

Looking at the debris I do not foresee any survivors.

That's not from this crash look at the registration it's JT.MKI's are usually SB ---

IAF lacks advanced trainer, so they have to train on fighter jet. It consumes the fuselage.

With the recent addition of hawk's and PC-7's the problem lack of trainers is being solved.
Also earlier they transferred new pilots into mig 21 squadrons only not directly into the Frontline fleet.

 

[ashok321]

IAF lacks advanced trainer, so they have to train on fighter jet. It consumes the fuselage.

The plus point is to train the pilots on actual aircraft.
As for the fuselage, it has its lifespan registered in the rulebook already.

 

[帅的一匹]

That's not from this crash look at the registration it's JT.MKI's are usually SB ---


With the recent addition of hawk's and PC-7's the problem lack of trainers is being solved.
Also earlier they transferred new pilots into mig 21 squadrons only not directly into the Frontline fleet.

IAF lacks funds.

 

[ashok321]

IAF lacks funds.

Check my profile signature:

Poor Indian Armed Forces are forced to pay import duty by GOI, while Apple Inc got the waiver.

 

[帅的一匹]

Looking at the debris I do not foresee any survivors.

Can you find the ejection seater in the debris?

 

[ptldM3]

The US may have lost hundreds simply because of it's commitments, the USAF flies all over the globe, it's involved in one kind of conflict or another, if not war then maintaining no fly zones also requires sustained effort, Russia and China also have large air arms but i doubt they suffer crashes anything like US and maybe not even like India...so your argument doesn't hold.... another interesting point to note, once i read that it takes something like $10 Million to train a Western combat pilot and a PAF pilot told me that it probably takes same if not more to train a pilot in the smaller budget airforce, since in the West and big budget airforces, they do a lot of training on simulators on the contrary, others have to fly extra training sorties to achieve the results.

Large air forces that maintain high flight hours have more crashes. I'm not sure why you are bragging about Pakistani F-16s crashs vs MKI. Pakistan lost 1/5 of their first 40 F-16s. After that they were under embargo for decades and on top of that Pakistan doesn't have the money to keep their pilots flying as much as better funded militaries.

Pakistan has had at best a few dozen operational F-16s over the decades with very little money and spares to keep them flying. India has had hundreds of MKIs that get flown extensively.

 

[Imran Khan]

hope pilots safe

 

[CalmDown@all_Dude]

Large air forces that maintain high flight hours have more crashes. I'm not sure why you are bragging about Pakistani F-16s crashs vs MKI. Pakistan lost 1/5 of their first 40 F-16s. After that they were under embargo for decades and on top of that Pakistan doesn't have the money to keep their pilots flying as much as better funded militaries.

Pakistan has had at best a few dozen operational F-16s over the decades with very little money and spares to keep them flying. India has had hundreds of MKIs that get flown extensively.

Dude Calm Down Its time to END THIS

 

[ptldM3]

Dude Calm Down Its time to END THIS

What are you talking about? And why are you telling me to calm down when I'm having a light hearted debate?

 

[ashok321]

Can you find the ejection seater in the debris?

I can only see the empennage.

 

[Windjammer]

Large air forces that maintain high flight hours have more crashes. I'm not sure why you are bragging about Pakistani F-16s crashs vs MKI. Pakistan lost 1/5 of their first 40 F-16s. After that they were under embargo for decades and on top of that Pakistan doesn't have the money to keep their pilots flying as much as better funded militaries.

Firstly I'm not the one bragging about anything, it was your country fellow who even opened a comparative thread and if it was just the question of being large then as i said Russia and China would be up there with highest crash rate. Pakistan may have lost some F-16s but it was over three decades and not forgetting those F-16s were involved in almost a decade of combat against Afghan/ Soviet aircraft achieving something like a Dozen kills.

Pakistan has had at best a few dozen operational F-16s over the decades with very little money and spares to keep them flying. India has had hundreds of MKIs that get flown extensively.

There you go, trying your best to demean PAF without an iota of logic,,,,F-16 is not the only aircraft in PAF fleet, it may be small but proven hard hitting force and the 100,000 accident free flying hours is not credited while aircraft sit on the ground and unlike Indian SU-30s, the PAF F-16s haven't been grounded numerous time.

 

[third eye]

ouch! and ouch!
Is it really that difficult to trace an aircraft IF it were withing india controlled territory? Or indian political and military establishments are fooling indians because truth will have blow back and has political cost????

Obviously, you have no knowledge of the terrain where this bird has come down. Not surprising as BD has nothing even close to to that kind of terrain.

 

[CalmDown@all_Dude]

What are you talking about? And why are you telling me to calm down when I'm having a light hearted debate?

Because you are debating for the thread is about the missing and since its your light hearted debate that me escalate into chaos of heated exchange of comments later on

 

[ravinderpalrulez]

https://twitter.com/x/status/868048471730790400

 

[Raider 21]

The Indians have 3 times more MKIs then Pakistan has F-16s. Pakistan also has a minuscule budget of 10 billion per year compared to Indias's 56 billion, meaning there is no way Pakistani pilots get similar flight hours as Indian, which in some cases are as high as 300 hours annually for some pilots.

What matters is crashes per flight hours and not totall crashes. You know the US has lost hundreds of F-15 to crashes? That's what happens when you have thousand of aircraft that rack up millions of flight hours over many decades.

Twin engine aircraft also have very little to do with reliability since most engine failure happenes on takeoff and the aircraft is usually too low to correct the problem.

There is plenty of videos of twin engine aircraft such as F-18s, JH-7s, Mig-29s losing an engine. The first thing those aircraft do is bank and yaw and then go into a dive.

I'm unaware of the actual current Su-30 annual flight hours by the IAF, but do know for a fact that it used to be about on average of 120 hours/year about 10 years ago. As for PAF F-16 annual flight hours....I believe you're mistaken. They still manage 250 hours/year, plus the F-16 doesn't break down as badly compared to the Su-30 during post maintenance. The F-16s still flew roughly that same amount of time during the embargo years.