PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Aviation History and Nostalgia
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 30th Jul 2007, 21:01   #21 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 53
Posts: 569
Timothy

Why not have a wee think about how there are never any airproxes in IMC?

Do you think that, in a similar fashion to your lack of midair events, that airproxes also never happen? Of course the truth is that IMC airproxes also occur, but are never reported (for a rather obvious reason).

Methinks your premise is badly flawed. Interesting theory tho, maybe best left as such.
brain fade is offline   Reply
Old 30th Jul 2007, 21:26   #22 (permalink)

Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,733
Mid-air collisons make more noise than airproxes. No, that is a weak argument, it is obvious why there are no airproxes, the absence of collisions is much more telling.
Timothy is offline   Reply
Old 30th Jul 2007, 22:23   #23 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: due south
Posts: 1,328
Timothy: I have something ringing a faint bell in my head about this subject.
I could be wrong because it was such a long time ago

Many years ago, could be 30 or 40, someone well up in the gliding world in UK did a traffic analysis to counter the CAA argument that there was unacceptable risk of collision if gliders were allowed to fly IMC in uncontrolled airspace.

As far as I can remember the result he produced was accepted by CAA and the practice was allowed to continue.

Obviously the figures from that report would be useless now but if you could get a copy of it from BGA the methodology he used might still be valid.
henry crun is offline   Reply
Old 30th Jul 2007, 23:54   #24 (permalink)

Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,733
It seems to me that gliders are at much greater risk than powered aircraft because they fly round in circles (therefore not at a quadrantal) often in the same thermal.
Timothy is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 01:03   #25 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 53
Posts: 569
Tim

Without quoting your last, perhaps if more pilots believed you then your statement would lose its truth.

?

brain fade is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 08:02   #26 (permalink)

Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
perhaps if more pilots believed you then your statement would lose its truth.
The growth would have to be phenomenal to make a difference. Just look at the number of aircraft flying around in the early forties.

If only GA could reach those volumes!
Timothy is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 12:06   #27 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 53
Posts: 569
Tim
The reason you'd probably (well, almost certainly) get away with it, is because no one else is daft enough to do it!

Which does NOT mean it's a good idea!

Also it's not simply a matter of statistics. Pilots don't fly IMC out of controlled airspace, because if they DO find themselves on a collision course with another a/c there will be a sudden noise.

Therefore the lack of collisions is not because it is safe (as I think you allege) but because it is dangerous and therefore only a prize clot would do it!

However, if you are the ONLY one who does it- you should be ok.

If you talk other pilots into doing it, with the help of PPRuNe, you may meet one unexpectedly and not be in a position to post what would have surely been an interesting comment.

Also even if the growth is only tiny- that tiny increase will likely be you!

Which, I suggest, would make a difference to you.
brain fade is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 12:10   #28 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 6,586
Meteor Midair Sept 1955

Night IMC intercept with collision following radar failure.
ORAC is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 13:39   #29 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 6,586
I am going to add in another one here, though it was not in the UK FIR and I cannot find the serial numbers. I was involved as the RAF Stanley SFSO though, and it did involve two UK military aircraft.

The accient occured on 27th June 1985, it took place north of the Falkland Islands, inside the Maritime Exlcusion Zone, and involved a 1312 Flt C-130 on maritime patrol and a RN Sea King operating off the Guard ship - who's name I also cannot remember.

The procedure at the time was for the C-130 to visually identify all ships it detected on it's radar, on the day in question there was extensive cloud, so the C-130 would descend to pass astern the contact and break off if still IMC at minimum descent height. Picking up a contact the C-130 duly started it's descent.

Unbeknownst the contact was the RN guard ship which was about to launch it's sea king (4 POB) in IMC to head for Stanley. The RN procedure was to climb away astern the ship.

Minutes later the two collided at about 2-300ft in cloud. The C-130 crew caught a glimpse of the Sea King as they collided. The Sea King was lost and all 4 onboard killed.

The C-130, coincidently with a RN party on board for an air experience trip, lost the entire wing outboard of the No 1 engine, which itself had to be shut down due to extensive damage. IIRC they then also had to shut down No 2 because of vibration.

The pilot was able to maintain control of the aircraft and head for RAF Mount Pleasant which was open for use, thought not yet formally operational. After performing a low speed handling check he was able to land the aircraft.

The crew and RN party were then placed on a Chinook for the trip back to Stanley, which itself declared a Mayday a couple of minutes after take-off and landing in the Camp. They were then taken back by bus.

The end result was a rewriting of procedures for IMC, a common radio frequency to be monitored, mandatory calls to be made etc.

A point raised at the time was that a similar accident could well have occured in UK waters, and perhaps still could.
ORAC is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 13:56   #30 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 6,586
Royal Navy Casualties - 1985.... Thursday, 27 June 1985
Falkland Islands, air crash
HAYES, Duncan I A, Lieutenant
RODWELL, Simon J, Lieutenant
SIMPSON, Robert C, Lieutenant Commander
SUMMERS, Paul C, (rank not listed), D187469P
ORAC is offline   Reply
Old 31st Jul 2007, 22:02   #31 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: due south
Posts: 1,328
Reading about the midair in your #28 post Orac, brings to mind an event that very nearly had an identical result.

Night PI's again, NF11's, I am target with lights out.
The idiot behind me was an ex trapper, and his nav had a radar failure at about 2-3000ft in my 6.
When the nav told his pilot to call it off he said he thought he could see me (he lied) and would continue.

I am sitting there waiting for the Murder call, when out of the corner of my eye I saw a green light which suddenly rushed towards me.
This big black shape passed just over my canopy and the light turned to red.

My deputy flight commander had been creeping up my slipstream hoping to sight me !
henry crun is offline   Reply
Old 1st Aug 2007, 06:05   #32 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 6,586
I was the FA (Fighter Allocator) at Buchan when actually had an IMC midair!

It was, IIRC, 1988 or 89, and during an exercise. 360 Sqn Canberras were providing jamming targets and one was being intercepted by a Leuchars F-4.

Now, during jamming exercises, such as Coffee C, jammers and fighters are assigned safety height blocks and, when unsure of each others locations, stay inside them. Since this was an exercise none had been promulgated. It was also night and IMC. (I did express my concern about an hour before the accident to the MC and this was recorded for posterity in the subsequent investigation.

Anyway. The F-4 closed on the target, did so too fast, and got a breakaway cross on the radar and duly broke left. They felt a bump and suspected they'd crossed through the Canberra's wake turbulence.

The Canberra felt and impact which rolled them to one side and on recovering found they'd lost their port wing tank. They called a Mayday, said they'd had a midair, asked if the other aircraft was OK, and diverted to Newcastle.

The F-4 on being advised, ambiguously, that the Canberra had a "problem" suspected they'd thrown him around in their wake turbulence. When they were then ordered to RTB they were pissed off and thought they were in for a bollocking. It was only when duty pilot in LU ATC asked if they'd done a low speed handling check and were informed of the state of the Canberra did they realise what had actually happened.

On inspection after landing witness score marks were found on the underside skin of the right wing and the right tail piece, along with damage to the missile rail. The F-4 had broken at 90 degrees and the Canberra wing tank had gone between the F-4's wing tank and missile pylon, rupturing against the bottom of the wing and then the tail.

Both aircraft had been literally thousands of an inch from total destruction.
ORAC is offline   Reply
Old 1st Aug 2007, 07:23   #33 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 364
Remember that one - it was Roger Ramjet. Here's another one for you: Night ML PIs in ADVs (F3s) over a sandy place, some years ago. Fighter closes in stern of target for Fox 2, with large overtake. Fighter WSO loses contact, pilot calls visual, closes with target and shortly thereafter hits it. All 4 aircrew eject successfully and are eventually picked up. The target a/c WSO was not a local, if you follow me. Was this the only successful survival of a night catastrophic midair collision involving 2-crew a/c?
27mm is offline   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 13:22.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network