JAS 39 Gripen crash (rare alternate angle) due to pilot-induced oscillation on February 2 1989. 

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."

He is lucky!

Hey your pic is a 37 viggen!

Carbon fiber wings

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? ;)

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!

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..

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 😉

They must be growing cauliflyer.

Search jas crash t shirt. With this plane on it saying world's most expensive rotary cultivator on it.

ye

Nothing a little Bondo, a shitload of sanding and some touch up paint can't fix....

That's a good name for it!

It was DOS back then. No windows. LOL

Use ADBlock+

wow

Yeah, seems so ;)

I don't know about that, your post is four years old and I'm replying.

Nah I think they need flex tape

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.....

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.

I thought you had to walk away for it to be considered a good landing? Lol

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.

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...

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.

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.

Yes same pilot

So, are you dead?

There was a pilot in it and he walked away

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.

Yes - look up Lars Radestrom on Wikipedia. He walked away with a fractured elbow.

Yes he survived.. and crashed another Gripen plane a few years later xD

lol

just imagine the amount of G in that roll

he was almost perfectly landing the aircraft then he used the canards!!

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 :)

you mean eject?

Oh yes...

Because the chute might not have been able to open in time, or because the plane could have rolled over or flipped up at any second (which it did), ejecting him into ground.

Yes, Its a very bad situation!

IIRC the pilot tried to eject but he was a old Viggen-pilot where the ejectionseat handles are placed differently. So he stayed in the plane but did not get seriously hurt.

+Eugeneius .......and he also managed to crash another Gripen later, right in the middle of Stockholm during a "Air Show" at Stockholm Waterfestival on the August 8 1993.

Survived

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/

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...

…caça…

@@joegod9057 Como disse, não é um caça.