PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - - The Canberra - Unsafe in 1950, Still unsafe
Old 4th Sep 2004, 15:51
  #34 (permalink)  
Beeayeate
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Over there, behind that tree.
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jackonicko

I don't think it's unreasonable to infer what the 'specific technique' was.

Yes I read the beeb's report but didn't automatically infer that asymetric was the special technique referred to. Two thoughts here. The spokesman could have said that to in order to save having to explain a procedural complexity to the jurno and thereby risk having overly speculative or 'sensatational' reportage on a sensitive issue. Secondly, there are several "special techniques" that the Sqn Ldr could have meant. Such things as flapless landings practice, tailplane actuator "failure" practice, and many more. I believe that there are even some techniques that are practised only during night flying. A Canberra jocky could probably give you a whole list (if you don't know them already).

That's not to say that asymetric wasn't the first thing I thought of too as, I suspect, you probably did, and as have others here. If it turns out to be the case (as found by the BoI) then that's the way it goes. I was just trying to prevail on the posters not to automatically assume that asymetric was the cause before the findings of the BoI.

Curiously though, after seeing the video film of the crash site on Look East last evening, the T.4 looked to be amazingly "flat" on the landscape, almost like the result of a wheels-up landing. Although I realise that every crash is unique, I understand that there is a certain "wing-down" component to asymetrics which generally results in a more damaged and sideways-sloping airframe. But this is just a whimsy on my part, no more than an idle speculative thought.

I was puzzled about your remarks about ejection seat tubes and hatches. Wouldn't the aftermath of a 'last minute' emergency ejection look exactly the same as the aftermath of a 'premeditated' ejection in these respects?

Both your instances seem the same to me, all ejections would seem to be emergency and premeditated. My conjecture was that the crew seemed to have had sufficient time to 'evaluate and decide', then blow the nav's hatch, canopy and then eject. All this takes time (albeit several seconds), but it's an element that's usually sadly lacking in asymetric emergencies. A few have walked away from such crashes but more have not, hence the infamous nature of the thing.
Beeayeate is offline