Lynx Down on SPTA
I’m sorry, but I don’t see the point in slagging someone for posting simple facts. Uninformed speculation, yes.
Hyd3 said;
“Many of those flying incidents you have mentioned refer to the AAC Mk 7 and Mk9 which are very different to the Navy Mk 3 and Mk8 particularly with regards to Engineering standards and practices”.
TRUE
”I think it is a bit early to call the AAC lynx the widow maker due to 2 accidents in a week when one of them was clearly aircrew error”
SENSIBLE, although I suppose you can call an aircraft what you want.
”1989: Kenya crash kills nine crew from the Royal Navy
1998: Three servicemen killed during air tests in Bosnia
1999: Leicestershire crash kills three crew
2001: Two crew escape after crashing into the Arabian Sea
2002: Two perish when Lynx comes down off coast of US
2004: Navy crash in Antarctica seriously injures three people
2004 Crash in Czech Republic kills six soldiers
2004: Lynx, carrying four crew, crashes into the sea off the coast of Cornwall
2005 Bosnia no fatal
2005 SPTA no fatal (stc)”
FACTUAL, to which I’d add that, from 25.2.82 – 10.3.88 the RN lost 6 from a fleet of 80+. Included in that was one on Coventry when she sunk, one destroyed on deck by bombing (Broadsword?), and one which went down with Atlantic Conveyor. Leaving 3 lost to what one would call “normal” incidents. All in all, a pretty good record. (I think 2 of these 6 weren’t Cat 5s, and were recovered).
“This aircraft has been in front line service for 30 years. One flying accident every three years does not make a widow maker. The expected accident rate is one every 18 months and so using that, this aircraft is extremely safe”.
TRUE, the only caveat I’d add is that the attrition rate is measured against fleet flying hours. Hyd3 is spot on if the fleet flies expected hours. I recall a 30% reduction being ordered to the anticipated attrition because of (RN) Lynx safety record (articulated above). It is disingenuous to highlight a surge in incidents without also stating the fleet flying hours during that period and the conditions under which they were operating.
So what’s the problem with Hyd3’s post? Come on, just be glad the crews got out.
Hyd3 said;
“Many of those flying incidents you have mentioned refer to the AAC Mk 7 and Mk9 which are very different to the Navy Mk 3 and Mk8 particularly with regards to Engineering standards and practices”.
TRUE
”I think it is a bit early to call the AAC lynx the widow maker due to 2 accidents in a week when one of them was clearly aircrew error”
SENSIBLE, although I suppose you can call an aircraft what you want.
”1989: Kenya crash kills nine crew from the Royal Navy
1998: Three servicemen killed during air tests in Bosnia
1999: Leicestershire crash kills three crew
2001: Two crew escape after crashing into the Arabian Sea
2002: Two perish when Lynx comes down off coast of US
2004: Navy crash in Antarctica seriously injures three people
2004 Crash in Czech Republic kills six soldiers
2004: Lynx, carrying four crew, crashes into the sea off the coast of Cornwall
2005 Bosnia no fatal
2005 SPTA no fatal (stc)”
FACTUAL, to which I’d add that, from 25.2.82 – 10.3.88 the RN lost 6 from a fleet of 80+. Included in that was one on Coventry when she sunk, one destroyed on deck by bombing (Broadsword?), and one which went down with Atlantic Conveyor. Leaving 3 lost to what one would call “normal” incidents. All in all, a pretty good record. (I think 2 of these 6 weren’t Cat 5s, and were recovered).
“This aircraft has been in front line service for 30 years. One flying accident every three years does not make a widow maker. The expected accident rate is one every 18 months and so using that, this aircraft is extremely safe”.
TRUE, the only caveat I’d add is that the attrition rate is measured against fleet flying hours. Hyd3 is spot on if the fleet flies expected hours. I recall a 30% reduction being ordered to the anticipated attrition because of (RN) Lynx safety record (articulated above). It is disingenuous to highlight a surge in incidents without also stating the fleet flying hours during that period and the conditions under which they were operating.
So what’s the problem with Hyd3’s post? Come on, just be glad the crews got out.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
"Maybe hyd and SS should start their own little thread? Could be fun to watch on a dull Thurs night if nothing else."
Mmmm, wg13_dummy;
WG-13 (Lynx) dummy (crash test) ?
As your name would suggest, perhaps my freind you are more onside that you would like us all to believe.
____________________________________________________
tucumseh;
In respect, I shall regard you as a different person than Hyd3.
When he says,
“Many of those flying incidents you have mentioned refer to the AAC Mk 7 and Mk9 which are very different to the Navy Mk 3 and Mk8 particularly with regards to Engineering standards and practices”,
would he like to enlighten us? Is there a flaw he would like to tell us about in the Army "Engineering standards and practices", that he knows about? Seems quite an accusation.
I'm sure we would all like to hear his claims! (obviously with your support.)
How can you call s'ensible' a claim that Hyd3 knows that this case is "clearly aircrew error"? What happened to the call of wait for the results of the board?
Yes of course we are all glad the crew(s) are safe.
Have a nice day everyone and wrap up warm.
SS
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somerset
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hyd 3
Your Quote:
----------------
“Many of those flying incidents you have mentioned refer to the AAC Mk 7 and Mk9 which are very different to the Navy Mk 3 and Mk8 particularly with regards to Engineering standards and practices”
----------------
Please can you enlighten the forum on what possible basis you have to make this statement.
True the Army does things differently, but just because people understand the S & P's in the RN Fleet, that does not by itself make the quality of engineering or airworthiness any higher.
Strek
Your Quote:
----------------
“Many of those flying incidents you have mentioned refer to the AAC Mk 7 and Mk9 which are very different to the Navy Mk 3 and Mk8 particularly with regards to Engineering standards and practices”
----------------
Please can you enlighten the forum on what possible basis you have to make this statement.
True the Army does things differently, but just because people understand the S & P's in the RN Fleet, that does not by itself make the quality of engineering or airworthiness any higher.
Strek
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One is always reluctant to enter this sort of pi**ing contest but, what the hell. Firstly, please do not forget the 1983 accident in the Falklands which saw two good friends killed when their Lynx crashed at night of West Falklands.
Secondly do not forget that during that particular tour we had to fly Lynx MK 5 (yes MK5 which was known as the GTI - i.e. MK 1 with uprated engines) we often flew with one engine pre upgrade and one post so we had 2 different eng limits on the same airframe.
Finally we had to fly with manual yaw pedal control, why did we do this? Because Wastelands anticipated the Tail rotor gearboxs were liable to fail if hyd power was connected, suffice to say in the Falklands manual pedals and normal cyclic and collective combined with strong winds whilst landing on top of mountains could be exciting.
Incidently the SPTA crash was a heavy landing following a downwind hover.
Time to retire quickly.
MM
Secondly do not forget that during that particular tour we had to fly Lynx MK 5 (yes MK5 which was known as the GTI - i.e. MK 1 with uprated engines) we often flew with one engine pre upgrade and one post so we had 2 different eng limits on the same airframe.
Finally we had to fly with manual yaw pedal control, why did we do this? Because Wastelands anticipated the Tail rotor gearboxs were liable to fail if hyd power was connected, suffice to say in the Falklands manual pedals and normal cyclic and collective combined with strong winds whilst landing on top of mountains could be exciting.
Incidently the SPTA crash was a heavy landing following a downwind hover.
Time to retire quickly.
MM
Guest
Posts: n/a
Good point about the Mk5...I'd forgotten about those babies...
Once had the opportunity to fly a Mk7 in Belize and following the walkround it was clear that the TRS had not been completed. The aircraft was covered in oil from the last sortie, the windscreen was dirty and so I politely declined the sortie.
But one of the funniest moments this week must have been the Sky news reporter standing on a hillside in Bosnia surrounded by bits of a Lynx and reporting that "it is rumoured that the aircrew flew the aircraft into a series of wires although the MOD are refusing to comment" at this, the camera panned to the main body of the wreckage and focused in on 3 sets of very large wires which lay over the wreckage... !!!!!
Hmmmmmm, bit of a tricky one for the BOI me thinnks
Once had the opportunity to fly a Mk7 in Belize and following the walkround it was clear that the TRS had not been completed. The aircraft was covered in oil from the last sortie, the windscreen was dirty and so I politely declined the sortie.
But one of the funniest moments this week must have been the Sky news reporter standing on a hillside in Bosnia surrounded by bits of a Lynx and reporting that "it is rumoured that the aircrew flew the aircraft into a series of wires although the MOD are refusing to comment" at this, the camera panned to the main body of the wreckage and focused in on 3 sets of very large wires which lay over the wreckage... !!!!!
Hmmmmmm, bit of a tricky one for the BOI me thinnks
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost as good as the Sky reporter on the steps of MoD following the Lynx Mk9 Fatal in the Czech Republic last year, again talking about wirestrikes and said:
"Army Lynx are fitted with radar but unfortunately the radar system cannot see wires"
I totally despair.
"Army Lynx are fitted with radar but unfortunately the radar system cannot see wires"
I totally despair.
Miles
"Army Lynx are fitted with radar but unfortunately the radar system cannot see wires"
Very good! I recall in ‘85 the RAF proposed a development programme for a (Laser) device to detect wires xx cms thick at xx kms, to be integrated with, and displayed on, the HUD. RSRE promptly wheeled out a working device halving the thickness at double the range. Was it ever bought?
"Army Lynx are fitted with radar but unfortunately the radar system cannot see wires"
Very good! I recall in ‘85 the RAF proposed a development programme for a (Laser) device to detect wires xx cms thick at xx kms, to be integrated with, and displayed on, the HUD. RSRE promptly wheeled out a working device halving the thickness at double the range. Was it ever bought?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 85
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following is an extract of information from Defence Analytical Services Agency (DASA) and can be found at http://www.dasa.mod.uk/natstats/natstats.html which puts the Lynx safety record in perspective.
Number of aircraft Lost or damaged beyond economical repair in Air Accidents up to Dec 2003
Royal Navy
Lynx (All Marks) From 1980 15 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.43
Sea King (All Marks) From 1969 47 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.50
Sea Harrier From 1979 29 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 2.16
Army
Lynx (All Marks) From 1977 27 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.43
Gazelle From 1973 63 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.44
RAF
Tornado GR1 & GR4 From 1980 46 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.63
It can be seen that the accident rate is no worse than Sea King or Gazelle.
Number of aircraft Lost or damaged beyond economical repair in Air Accidents up to Dec 2003
Royal Navy
Lynx (All Marks) From 1980 15 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.43
Sea King (All Marks) From 1969 47 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.50
Sea Harrier From 1979 29 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 2.16
Army
Lynx (All Marks) From 1977 27 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.43
Gazelle From 1973 63 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.44
RAF
Tornado GR1 & GR4 From 1980 46 Rate per 10,000 flying hours 0.63
It can be seen that the accident rate is no worse than Sea King or Gazelle.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Somerset
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hyd3
-----------------
Once had the opportunity to fly a Mk7 in Belize and following the walkround it was clear that the TRS had not been completed. The aircraft was covered in oil from the last sortie, the windscreen was dirty and so I politely declined the sortie.
-----------------
2 things:
i) Army aircraft do not have a TRS
ii) Windows and windscreen cleaning is the responsibility of the aircrew (iaw AP100N).
Strek
-----------------
Once had the opportunity to fly a Mk7 in Belize and following the walkround it was clear that the TRS had not been completed. The aircraft was covered in oil from the last sortie, the windscreen was dirty and so I politely declined the sortie.
-----------------
2 things:
i) Army aircraft do not have a TRS
ii) Windows and windscreen cleaning is the responsibility of the aircrew (iaw AP100N).
Strek
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miles
Tcu has not been at the wacky baccy, laser detectors have been looked at seriously for a while:
http://ctilidar.com/applications/obstacle_detection.htm
Regards
retard
Tcu has not been at the wacky baccy, laser detectors have been looked at seriously for a while:
http://ctilidar.com/applications/obstacle_detection.htm
Regards
retard
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Tcu and Engineer - I obviously did not express myself to well. I understand very well that research was conducted using Lasers to detect wires - in fact I have spent some time at F'Boro discussing this in the past, but the point I am trying to make (without to much success) is that despite the millions spent on ARP by MoD we very rarely see any cutting edge technology (please excuse pun here!!) in service at the front line. We all know that wire cutters could help to save life but the Lords and Masters still refuse to fit them. Surely wire cutters would be a fraction of the cost to fit retrospectively, compared to some of the more fanciful research such as laser detectors that the then DERA and now QQ participate in.
MM
PS Hyd 3 I think you must be on the Weird stuff - no Lynx to my knowledge has cutters. Surely you are not serious.
MM
PS Hyd 3 I think you must be on the Weird stuff - no Lynx to my knowledge has cutters. Surely you are not serious.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard a buzz that the Lynx which had been caught flying down "wire Valley" this week was the only one on the squadron which is NOT fitted with wire cutters !!! dunno if there is any truth in that but if it is then that would truly be sods law
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miles
Common sense says that you are right, but I think research and procurement are different budgets now. Maybe the boys from town can give a better response?
Regards
Retard
Common sense says that you are right, but I think research and procurement are different budgets now. Maybe the boys from town can give a better response?
Regards
Retard
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineer you are right. Not only have the DECs money to spend on ARP but also FBG at Shabby Wood as well as all the IPTs. In the areas I know and work in, it all amounts to many many millions!!