Hunter Flight Crash at Maroochydore
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hunter Flight Crash at Maroochydore (photos)
The Curry Hawker Hunter based at Maroochydore Queensland was forced into a wheels up landing on the main strip this afternoon. Pilots are all ok by all accounts. The jet touched down on the main runway and slid off the end coming to rest just inside the fence.
sorry about the quality , there was a 1nm exclusion zone.
sorry about the quality , there was a 1nm exclusion zone.
Last edited by deeper; 1st Nov 2005 at 05:19.
Any civil operator of an ejection seat equipped ex-mil aircraft who either chooses not to or is prohibited from maintaining a serviceable ejection seat needs his head examining. At times there are few options and to eliminate one potential option is verging on criminal.
It is therefore essential that you know the capabilities of what you are strapping onto your backside before find yourself in a position of having to consider using it.
Ejection seat use and safety is bread and butter to (ex) military pilots, not so for all civvy-trained folk I'm affraid.
Old chestnut and soapbox.
Tarnished
It is therefore essential that you know the capabilities of what you are strapping onto your backside before find yourself in a position of having to consider using it.
Ejection seat use and safety is bread and butter to (ex) military pilots, not so for all civvy-trained folk I'm affraid.
Old chestnut and soapbox.
Tarnished
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Morton-in-Marsh
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tarnished, we take your point. But one thing you have to bear in mind: the majority of pilots flying vintage jets these days are in their 60s! Ejecting just isn't something to look forward to, as it will probably lead to severely fractured spine and life in a wheelchair, or worse. When you get into your 60s and 70s, the thought of being paralysed, and possibly having broken limbs in the landing, and maybe getting severely concussed, and maybe turning into a vegetable, just isn't a prospect keenly anticipated. Instead one takes one's chance and hopes that all goes well!
Younger people have less brittle bones and more muscles, and can handle the acceleration of ejection and the ultimate landing better, and of course it makes sense for them to use an ejection seat.
As it happens, the vast majority of vintage jets HAVE to have serviceable ejection seats.
Younger people have less brittle bones and more muscles, and can handle the acceleration of ejection and the ultimate landing better, and of course it makes sense for them to use an ejection seat.
As it happens, the vast majority of vintage jets HAVE to have serviceable ejection seats.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using the seat is likely your final option... Broken body or dead!!
You may have 2 seconds to decide!!
Sorry time up...
Tarnished points are well made. If you are a seat user your decision to make use of the seat, should the occaision arrise, should have been made long before you enter the cockpit. Know your seat and it's capabilities or fly something else.
If you admit to having doubts about using any safety equipment on your type YOU may be flying the wrong type.
Just my opinion.
You may have 2 seconds to decide!!
Sorry time up...
Tarnished points are well made. If you are a seat user your decision to make use of the seat, should the occaision arrise, should have been made long before you enter the cockpit. Know your seat and it's capabilities or fly something else.
If you admit to having doubts about using any safety equipment on your type YOU may be flying the wrong type.
Just my opinion.
http://www.ejectorseats.co.uk/seat-regs.html
http://www.ejectorseats.co.uk/rules.html
These pages on the worlds favorite ejection seat web site
tells you what you need to know in the UK. There are links from the website for othercountries also. I'm not sure that I would want to crash land an ex mil jet with a three ton engine BEHIND me!!
As has been mentioned before, if things go pear shaped there really is only one option.
The service agents for the seats and associated survival kit do run very good training days for all the kit and any pilot or regular passenger should take that training. Who knows, you might enjoy it!!
http://www.ejectorseats.co.uk/rules.html
These pages on the worlds favorite ejection seat web site
tells you what you need to know in the UK. There are links from the website for othercountries also. I'm not sure that I would want to crash land an ex mil jet with a three ton engine BEHIND me!!As has been mentioned before, if things go pear shaped there really is only one option.
The service agents for the seats and associated survival kit do run very good training days for all the kit and any pilot or regular passenger should take that training. Who knows, you might enjoy it!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: west sussex
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"But one thing you have to bear in mind: the majority of pilots flying vintage jets these days are in their 60s."
errrr - I don't think so.
delta wing aircraft = ejection seats mandatory
normal wing = ejection seat recommended, but not compulsory
errrr - I don't think so.
delta wing aircraft = ejection seats mandatory
normal wing = ejection seat recommended, but not compulsory
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do worry that when faced with a emergency in a warbird,some people will think of the cost of the airframe BEFORE themselves. Would any of our ex-RAF Hunter jocks on PPRUNE have done this when they were flying them in the service?.
Rgds Dr I
Rgds Dr I
Firstly, how did you beat the 15 character minimum Beags?
Now then, this thread has diverted a little bit but is nonetheless interesting.
Riverboat: You seem to be suggesting that the age and condition of the pilot will affect the outcome of a particular situation and that old aircraft are being flown by old and brittle pilots.
I give you three scenarios which lead to a possible ejection decision:
1. Structural failure, aircraft disintegrating around you or loss of control (flick, spin, crash, burn or control malfunction - jammed or runaway controls). Pretty straightforward - pull the handle or die when the aircraft meets the air/ground interface at a time and speed of its choosing.
2. Engine failure/cockpit fire/insufficient fuel - a case where IF there happens to be a strip of concrete close by you might be able to land OK, but if not, the advice to the air force pilot when the Queen owned the aircraft was to eject. There was a thread a while ago about dead-sticking aircraft into fields - not a thing to do I would contend especially with brittle bones!
3. Then there are the other cases where the service pilots were told to eject because the risk associated with landing had been considered (by the appropriate airworthiness authorities) to be too dangerous. More prevalent now in the risk averse society in which we live. Such was the case I believe in this case (the original post). Gear problem turning your high speed tricycle into an un-tried entity. The combinations and configurations become endless. This is where I believe most of the civil owned/operated aircraft with military experienced pilots would have the quandry and end up staying with it.
Don't post replies with the various single gear down, swept wing cartwheeling possibilities, my point is that fuel, time, weather, runway length/condition/width, run-off areas etc all feed the decision that the pilot has to make.
Dr Illitout raises the subject of the "hidden pressures" of operating these classic aircraft. There is no doubt the do exist, whether from the owner/operators or from within (pride/profesionalism/peer pressure or press-on-itis). We all uses best judgement and turn to all available advice to come up with an answer - but it doesn't always work. Jimgriff has given the link to his site, go read my G-BVVC story there. Sick aircraft, though I had all options covered but the donk stopped, no place to land, I ejected and broke my brittle back (and I was only 45!).
Enough food for thought, which remionds me, its lunch time (in Texas)
Tarnished
Now then, this thread has diverted a little bit but is nonetheless interesting.
Riverboat: You seem to be suggesting that the age and condition of the pilot will affect the outcome of a particular situation and that old aircraft are being flown by old and brittle pilots.
I give you three scenarios which lead to a possible ejection decision:
1. Structural failure, aircraft disintegrating around you or loss of control (flick, spin, crash, burn or control malfunction - jammed or runaway controls). Pretty straightforward - pull the handle or die when the aircraft meets the air/ground interface at a time and speed of its choosing.
2. Engine failure/cockpit fire/insufficient fuel - a case where IF there happens to be a strip of concrete close by you might be able to land OK, but if not, the advice to the air force pilot when the Queen owned the aircraft was to eject. There was a thread a while ago about dead-sticking aircraft into fields - not a thing to do I would contend especially with brittle bones!
3. Then there are the other cases where the service pilots were told to eject because the risk associated with landing had been considered (by the appropriate airworthiness authorities) to be too dangerous. More prevalent now in the risk averse society in which we live. Such was the case I believe in this case (the original post). Gear problem turning your high speed tricycle into an un-tried entity. The combinations and configurations become endless. This is where I believe most of the civil owned/operated aircraft with military experienced pilots would have the quandry and end up staying with it.
Don't post replies with the various single gear down, swept wing cartwheeling possibilities, my point is that fuel, time, weather, runway length/condition/width, run-off areas etc all feed the decision that the pilot has to make.
Dr Illitout raises the subject of the "hidden pressures" of operating these classic aircraft. There is no doubt the do exist, whether from the owner/operators or from within (pride/profesionalism/peer pressure or press-on-itis). We all uses best judgement and turn to all available advice to come up with an answer - but it doesn't always work. Jimgriff has given the link to his site, go read my G-BVVC story there. Sick aircraft, though I had all options covered but the donk stopped, no place to land, I ejected and broke my brittle back (and I was only 45!).
Enough food for thought, which remionds me, its lunch time (in Texas)
Tarnished
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The usual problem with seat activation in civil maintained ex-mil a/c is the certification of any work done.
In Oz, the CE of the Temora Museum has done the armourers course at MB, while the Hunter above has an appropriately rated engineer approved by CASA to do the job. Other operators either haven't gone to the trouble or can't obtain the correct parts for their seats.
The rest of the World........?
G'day
In Oz, the CE of the Temora Museum has done the armourers course at MB, while the Hunter above has an appropriately rated engineer approved by CASA to do the job. Other operators either haven't gone to the trouble or can't obtain the correct parts for their seats.
The rest of the World........?
G'day
In the UK, any work done by the Martin Baker recognised and certified agents is certified and logged on a maintainace log that follows the seats/chutes/dingy/harness etc. The maintainance is to or better than MIL spec. The maintainers are ex mil and have loads of experience in this field. Maintainance schedules as specified by MB are strictly adhered to.
I should add that the same companies do work all over the world and the same procedure applies.
Enthusiastic amateurs (IMHO) have no place in this kind work.
Having said that there are some ex "bombheads" and "ragpackers" who work for military related establishments (qinetic etc) who are more than capable of doing the job.
I should add that the same companies do work all over the world and the same procedure applies.
Enthusiastic amateurs (IMHO) have no place in this kind work.
Having said that there are some ex "bombheads" and "ragpackers" who work for military related establishments (qinetic etc) who are more than capable of doing the job.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Tarnished and also applaud Dave's safe landing. As a former Hunter poler I know it is a hard decision to make because the Hunter nose section has a propensity to break away or bend on forced landings which can precipitate a below speed and usually fatal ejection. But with power available, a long runway and especially the drop tanks fitted, quite a few crew have walked away unscratched.
The only thing puzzling me from the pix is why was the brake chute not deployed? Unless the electrics were out, this would have shortened the drag distance by quite a lot.
The only thing puzzling me from the pix is why was the brake chute not deployed? Unless the electrics were out, this would have shortened the drag distance by quite a lot.
