dark light

Robbiesmurf

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 473 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Hunter Crash at Shoreham (First AAIB report released) #905036
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    I would speculate that the AAIB will be particularly focused on the images of Chris Watkins from the rear port quarter and the quality video screened right to left by ITV, both just seconds before impact…slightly nose up attitude, rate of decent, control and power settings etc.

    Very very sad.

    Mark

    That and, the mechanical state of the a/c, configuration and health of the pilot.

    in reply to: The best and worst looking 5th gen fighter thread #2189387
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    And this is big? It’s twin engined, one intake….
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]240033[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Hunter Crash at Shoreham (First AAIB report released) #905174
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Having videos and photos should make the work of the AAIB that much “easier”.
    Having to reply on eye witness accounts is always a bit “hit & miss”. As has been proved in countless
    civilian aircraft crashes.
    On the various TV news outlets, they were grabbing anyone they could for eye witness reports.
    There was some utter garbage coming out.

    The AAIB is very capable. Even the cause of the crash of G-YMMM was eventually found.

    in reply to: older jets with new equipment #2189462
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    When you want to improve things on them…..
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahPDs36n2Mw

    Be careful what you wish for…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0wT1efK6R0

    This might happen..
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUP2NM2cgBE

    Just a thought.

    in reply to: The best and worst looking 5th gen fighter thread #2189467
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Seeing as the B52 got the name BUFF by servicemen, I’d say the F35 will be called ‘Fugly’.

    in reply to: Strange nighttime howling jet aircraft #2189746
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Yep, a lot of things could land there, 10,000 ft runway.

    in reply to: Services And Skills Exchange Area #906436
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    PM sent.

    in reply to: Services And Skills Exchange Area #906453
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    That is a great idea.
    I unfortunately, live in the Netherlands but am willing to help out whenever/however possible.
    Can’t promise anything, but if you don’t ask, you don’t get…

    in reply to: Low Level…… #2189770
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Indeed, it was always thought that the a/c would flip like that, it didn’t.
    It’s an F6, the ventral tank could not be ejected. Why did it land with no u/c? Pilot error.
    Airbrakes closed would indicate it would have been another touch and go.
    The story. A combination of circumstances.
    The pilot was doing touch and go’s. A recent order had been made to not cycle the u/c during that due to excessive wear on the u/c trunnions. Also, to save money, there was no-one observing at the approach anymore. If they saw anything wrong with the a/c they would radio ATC or fire a flare as a warning. During the touch and go’s the pilot did unthinkingly cycle up and forgot to lower it again. It then landed a little lower and shorter than expected. The damage was to the ventral tank and the port wing tip. The pilot claimed first that the u/c collapsed but it was rigorously tested and nothing was wrong. Just before getting out I believe he quickly selected down and then vacated very smartly. I was outside standing on an a/c and had a clear view of the incident, I have never seen a pilot dressed in full kit run so fast!
    Btw for those of you who have seen late photo’s of an F6 with a full ventral tank and no cannons. For those of you in the know, the tanks were modified in the late ’60’s to hold cannons, but only for the F6 models. The a/c was of course brought into ASF and they surveyed the damage and demanded the parts. The front section ventral tank was an unmodded version and there was much scratching of the head by the team chiefs. I was posted shortly after that so I never found out if they could demand a modded tank. I assume not…

    in reply to: Low Level…… #2189863
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    The UK. It was my own first sighting of an a/c crashlanding.

    in reply to: Low Level…… #2189885
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    I don’t think anybody flew as low as this one…..
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]240020[/ATTACH]
    Well, his landing was a bit low..

    in reply to: Bird strike at Eastbourne ? #906951
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    So that counts as a Vulcan strike on the gull?

    Haven’t seen any report on ASN so I assume the seagull kept shtum.

    in reply to: Bird strike at Eastbourne ? #907238
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Looked more like piling on the coal.

    in reply to: Strange nighttime howling jet aircraft #2190209
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Sort of…………

    in reply to: Strange nighttime howling jet aircraft #2190220
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Machrihanish had very few aircraft based there when I served on it. I remember a Victor and a Shackleton, on the fire compound……
    The stories about it are very over-rated. It was a staging post and a weapons store, that’s all.

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 473 total)