PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
View Single Post
Old 17th Feb 2008, 13:27
  #3212 (permalink)  
walter kennedy
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cazatou
<<The fact that there was a landing strip in the vicinity of the Chinook's planned route does not repeat not signify an intention to land at that strip.>>
It was not just that it was nearby:
they had turned towards it:
they had started to slow down;
the had the right QFI for it;
a RADALT alarm was on min;
Chinooks had landed there before;
they had a tactical c/s consistent with a SAR exercise;
with the reduced power setting that was required for the slowing down (and as found matched at intermediate setting), as well as the other well discussed reasons by others on this thread (eg icing), overflight of the Mull was not intended.
.
You have the habit of many contributors on this thread of fixing on one aspect - you have to realise that so many factors fitting a practical scenario give a statistical correlation - enough factors fitting that even if any particular one is not absolutely determining the situation, the product of them all makes it highly probable.
.
And JP - let me repeat to you that when travelling with the strong wind such that the weather is on right on the landmass ahead, you don't get much chance for action if you inadvertently enter it by misjudging your distance to it.

Last edited by walter kennedy; 17th Feb 2008 at 13:29. Reason: spelling & correction
walter kennedy is offline