British Plane on Fire in Afghanistan..
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right at the beginning of this thread I said that the Crew and the Loadmaster esp did a great job to get everyone off. looking at that photo it must have been a heroic effort. Congratulations on an extraordinary job.
ANYONE FOR ESF?
ANYONE FOR ESF?
Last edited by nigegilb; 7th Jul 2006 at 13:39.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: cambridge
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow...it's a miracle that there were no casualties from that, although i'm sure you don't escape being affected by how close you come to going to the great big bar in the sky and that should be remembered. i am so glad that everyone escaped. just out of interest flip, what do you think it looks like?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eng 2 is already feathered, and Eng 1 is becoming engulfed in fire along with the LH aux and external fuel tanks.... and the ac is canted over to port - all of which is interesting but, for me, the big clue is an awfully large cloud of black smoke, which looks suspiciously like an explosion - occuring a few secs prior to the pic.
What caused it tho, is anyone's guess - RPG (rocket propelled grenade), land-mine, remotely-detonated IED (improvised explosive device), HE round, who knows?? I would like to think that the BOI will tell all when they know. My money is on landmine/IED that took out the left wheels and started a fire in LH fuel tanks. Must have been 'kin hot as the No3 prop blades have melted - yikes (see link to other pics)!
Would ESF have helped contain the spread of fire? It sure looks like it to me!
Even more now, I am extremely impressed with the crew for getting out unharmed - the ambassador is a very lucky man! Well done boys, hope you get due recognition!
What caused it tho, is anyone's guess - RPG (rocket propelled grenade), land-mine, remotely-detonated IED (improvised explosive device), HE round, who knows?? I would like to think that the BOI will tell all when they know. My money is on landmine/IED that took out the left wheels and started a fire in LH fuel tanks. Must have been 'kin hot as the No3 prop blades have melted - yikes (see link to other pics)!
Would ESF have helped contain the spread of fire? It sure looks like it to me!
Even more now, I am extremely impressed with the crew for getting out unharmed - the ambassador is a very lucky man! Well done boys, hope you get due recognition!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd want it fitted, along with ESF, given the chance!
I'm sure the BOI would have found any crater - any news on that?
It also looks like, Nos 1, 3 and 4 engs are ground-stopped or maybe the 'shutter speed' of the camera makes it appear so?
Flip
ps I'm intrigued to know......exactly how did the crew get out? Using which doors/hatches?
I'm not sure I would have wanted to have got out the Port Para-Door, or even the main Crew Entrance Door and, without GTC/AC power, I'm not sure the ramp would have been an easy option? That leaves those 'holes' on the RHS along with various others on top. All of which, apart from the Stbd Para-Door, have interesting problems for use!
I'm just curious but it really does underline the fine job the crew did to ensure a safe evac! Thank the Lord for the OCU's EKQ on 'escape exits'...........ummmm!
I'm sure the BOI would have found any crater - any news on that?
It also looks like, Nos 1, 3 and 4 engs are ground-stopped or maybe the 'shutter speed' of the camera makes it appear so?
Flip
ps I'm intrigued to know......exactly how did the crew get out? Using which doors/hatches?
I'm not sure I would have wanted to have got out the Port Para-Door, or even the main Crew Entrance Door and, without GTC/AC power, I'm not sure the ramp would have been an easy option? That leaves those 'holes' on the RHS along with various others on top. All of which, apart from the Stbd Para-Door, have interesting problems for use!
I'm just curious but it really does underline the fine job the crew did to ensure a safe evac! Thank the Lord for the OCU's EKQ on 'escape exits'...........ummmm!
Last edited by flipster; 9th Jul 2006 at 00:40.
A USAF C-130 landed months ago on an Afghan runway which had a deep pit in it. Bad mess. They must have missed or misunderstood the NOTAMS.
Can't satellite photos be taken of all runways in Afghanistan at different times, in order to indicate strange shadows etc and help prevent what happened to the US plane? Maybe many are just packed dirt strips for LAPEs and assault landings.
Check the regular photos of many areas on GoogleEarth! Not so detailed, but the better technology is already paid for and available. Or do operations against Al Qaeda etc demand most of the photo analysis?
Put US bureaucrats/technocrats to work on something effective and maybe many more could earn their keep. Right now it is quite doubtful.
Very well done by the RAF crew! I can't imagine the courage required for the challenges onboard the single-pilot RAF transports and bomber planes in WW2 which all burned high-octane avgas.
Can't satellite photos be taken of all runways in Afghanistan at different times, in order to indicate strange shadows etc and help prevent what happened to the US plane? Maybe many are just packed dirt strips for LAPEs and assault landings.
Check the regular photos of many areas on GoogleEarth! Not so detailed, but the better technology is already paid for and available. Or do operations against Al Qaeda etc demand most of the photo analysis?
Put US bureaucrats/technocrats to work on something effective and maybe many more could earn their keep. Right now it is quite doubtful.
Very well done by the RAF crew! I can't imagine the courage required for the challenges onboard the single-pilot RAF transports and bomber planes in WW2 which all burned high-octane avgas.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Ignition Override
A USAF C-130 landed months ago on an Afghan runway which had a deep pit in it. Bad mess. They must have missed or misunderstood the NOTAMS.
Can't satellite photos be taken of all runways in Afghanistan at different times, in order to indicate strange shadows etc and help prevent what happened to the US plane? Maybe many are just packed dirt strips for LAPEs and assault landings.
Check the regular photos of many areas on GoogleEarth! Not so detailed, but the better technology is already paid for and available. Or do operations against Al Qaeda etc demand most of the photo analysis?
Put US bureaucrats/technocrats to work on something effective and maybe many more could earn their keep. Right now it is quite doubtful.
Very well done by the RAF crew! I can't imagine the courage required for the challenges onboard the single-pilot RAF transports and bomber planes in WW2 which all burned high-octane avgas.
Can't satellite photos be taken of all runways in Afghanistan at different times, in order to indicate strange shadows etc and help prevent what happened to the US plane? Maybe many are just packed dirt strips for LAPEs and assault landings.
Check the regular photos of many areas on GoogleEarth! Not so detailed, but the better technology is already paid for and available. Or do operations against Al Qaeda etc demand most of the photo analysis?
Put US bureaucrats/technocrats to work on something effective and maybe many more could earn their keep. Right now it is quite doubtful.
Very well done by the RAF crew! I can't imagine the courage required for the challenges onboard the single-pilot RAF transports and bomber planes in WW2 which all burned high-octane avgas.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Turks and Cacos
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Where R We?
I think you will find the airfield was in Iraq and it was a pfaff with NOTAMS; the event happened late Dec 04. Unfortunately the TALON was a write-off. If you do a search on PPrune you will no doubt find the photos and the story behind it.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When XV206 was destroyed on the strip 3 theories were running in the press.
1. Tyre burst
2. Ground attack ie RPG
3. Land mine
Looking at the photo I can't help but discount tyre burst. That leaves 2 and 3. A land mine/ied would have left a crater in the strip. Should have been fairly straightforward to figure out the cause. The BoI into the shooting down of XV179 concluded that the RAF should look URGENTLY at the fitting of foam to the Hercules. What the hell is going on. James Gray has ascertained that September or even October are the latest dates for the firat aircraft. I know that Lyneham's crews will shrug their shoulders and get on with the job-these photos show how brave and professional they are. However if lack of foam is once more a factor here then heads should roll. On a platter.
1. Tyre burst
2. Ground attack ie RPG
3. Land mine
Looking at the photo I can't help but discount tyre burst. That leaves 2 and 3. A land mine/ied would have left a crater in the strip. Should have been fairly straightforward to figure out the cause. The BoI into the shooting down of XV179 concluded that the RAF should look URGENTLY at the fitting of foam to the Hercules. What the hell is going on. James Gray has ascertained that September or even October are the latest dates for the firat aircraft. I know that Lyneham's crews will shrug their shoulders and get on with the job-these photos show how brave and professional they are. However if lack of foam is once more a factor here then heads should roll. On a platter.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I can't understand is how did the RAAF get their ac all done so quickly without apparently reducing their commitment?
Whereas the RAF, with a bigger fleet and a home-grown design authority (all of which should give more flexibility), cannot get their sh!t anywhere near their sock-drawer, never mind the socks therein!
Surely Marshalls and 2 Gp can do better than this? Or has our 'effective' fleet shrunk below 'critical mass'? Either way, the delays are becoming unacceptable and the ministers will have to front up the cash to Marshalls to do it quicker.....or reduce commitments to allow the urgent fitment of better ac self-protection - which includes ESF.
Can someone please explain the hiatus?
Whereas the RAF, with a bigger fleet and a home-grown design authority (all of which should give more flexibility), cannot get their sh!t anywhere near their sock-drawer, never mind the socks therein!
Surely Marshalls and 2 Gp can do better than this? Or has our 'effective' fleet shrunk below 'critical mass'? Either way, the delays are becoming unacceptable and the ministers will have to front up the cash to Marshalls to do it quicker.....or reduce commitments to allow the urgent fitment of better ac self-protection - which includes ESF.
Can someone please explain the hiatus?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flip
4. Uncontained turbine failure....
is another possibility.
We had this on a #3 engine in Basrah a few years ago and the bits chose to exit at the 8 o'clock position (from the rear). There were fifty-odd witness marks on the R/H fuselage including as far back as the DIRCM head. Big Al at the R/H para door shat himself.
The L/H clamshell door is in 47/LXX groundcrew crewroom, signed by the det.
Bits of molten turbine are not unlike bullets. (ESF again Nige & Flip!)
The BOI should be able to rule this in/out fairly quickly, day one in fact.
4. Uncontained turbine failure....
is another possibility.
We had this on a #3 engine in Basrah a few years ago and the bits chose to exit at the 8 o'clock position (from the rear). There were fifty-odd witness marks on the R/H fuselage including as far back as the DIRCM head. Big Al at the R/H para door shat himself.
The L/H clamshell door is in 47/LXX groundcrew crewroom, signed by the det.
Bits of molten turbine are not unlike bullets. (ESF again Nige & Flip!)
The BOI should be able to rule this in/out fairly quickly, day one in fact.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nigegilb
Words of Gp Cpt Bennett RAAF
"The ballistic matting is intended as a protection against small arms rounds that might penetrate the aircraft, as occurred in an incident earlier this year when a US civilian died in a Hercules hit by small arms fire. The matting acts as a form of armour, similar to the underfloor and seat armour fitted to helicopters in Vietnam."
Believe me the Aussies do their homework.
"The ballistic matting is intended as a protection against small arms rounds that might penetrate the aircraft, as occurred in an incident earlier this year when a US civilian died in a Hercules hit by small arms fire. The matting acts as a form of armour, similar to the underfloor and seat armour fitted to helicopters in Vietnam."
Believe me the Aussies do their homework.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cambridge/Chippenham
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speculation
I have no handle on the scuttlebut at Lye, where no doubt the facts are known to some, but I wonder why the tyre explosion idea is being dismissed? My recollection of tyre/heavy braking problems is that the SOP was to stop gently, evacuate the ac and run away bravely due to the potential for tyres to explode, as they continued to heat up some time after coming to rest, hence brake cooling times of upwards of an hour in some cases.
Just noting a few things from the pics available on here:
There is no line of smoke, suggesting that the fire is recent to the time of the picture (40kts)
There is no sign of reverse (plenty of dust, but all behind the ac) - I don't recall the speeds through which reverse was used, but could this be indicative of and engine problem occurring early in the landing run? Engine problem > no reverse/caution reverse > increased use of brakes > hot tyres = 2 possible sources of combustion, tyres or dodgy Number 2.
The smoke could does not look particularly explosive (billowing, rounded edges) but rather more just expanding (ragged edges)
The cant of the aircraft suggests some sort of undercarriage issue, if it was simply a differential in fuel load, because one side had burnt a load off, it would be canted in the other direction surely?
If you lost a donk before landing, surely you would not land on a strip? On a v.important op task perhaps, but having the Ambassador on board might indicate that it was only a political, not warfighting task. Therefore, can one assume the engine was lost once committed to landing? (and therefore unlikely to be caused by SA, RPG etc)
All the fire seems to be below/behind the wing, SA might be stopped by a wing, but would something like an RPG not go through a wing leaving disruption to the top surface?
What was the strip usage? any runway grading/repair, heavy plant movement, previous landings, even Tac ATC runway inspections would have triggered a mine. Cant claim any mine laying experience, but I wouldn't have thought they coudl be easily, rapidly or discretely laid into a runway surface, even a strip 'overnight'?
Sorry if any of this offends those that prefer not to speculate, but as the crew and pax are all safe - and undoubtedly very bravely so - I hope it does no harm. I undoubtedly had old colleagues onboard, but since I departed the fix for civvy street I have lost contact - which leaves my brain with little to do but wonder - with increasingly poor recall of the facts and figures involved!
I'll go back to lurking now!
Just noting a few things from the pics available on here:
There is no line of smoke, suggesting that the fire is recent to the time of the picture (40kts)
There is no sign of reverse (plenty of dust, but all behind the ac) - I don't recall the speeds through which reverse was used, but could this be indicative of and engine problem occurring early in the landing run? Engine problem > no reverse/caution reverse > increased use of brakes > hot tyres = 2 possible sources of combustion, tyres or dodgy Number 2.
The smoke could does not look particularly explosive (billowing, rounded edges) but rather more just expanding (ragged edges)
The cant of the aircraft suggests some sort of undercarriage issue, if it was simply a differential in fuel load, because one side had burnt a load off, it would be canted in the other direction surely?
If you lost a donk before landing, surely you would not land on a strip? On a v.important op task perhaps, but having the Ambassador on board might indicate that it was only a political, not warfighting task. Therefore, can one assume the engine was lost once committed to landing? (and therefore unlikely to be caused by SA, RPG etc)
All the fire seems to be below/behind the wing, SA might be stopped by a wing, but would something like an RPG not go through a wing leaving disruption to the top surface?
What was the strip usage? any runway grading/repair, heavy plant movement, previous landings, even Tac ATC runway inspections would have triggered a mine. Cant claim any mine laying experience, but I wouldn't have thought they coudl be easily, rapidly or discretely laid into a runway surface, even a strip 'overnight'?
Sorry if any of this offends those that prefer not to speculate, but as the crew and pax are all safe - and undoubtedly very bravely so - I hope it does no harm. I undoubtedly had old colleagues onboard, but since I departed the fix for civvy street I have lost contact - which leaves my brain with little to do but wonder - with increasingly poor recall of the facts and figures involved!
I'll go back to lurking now!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3PD
Tyres don't normally explode - they have 'thermal fuses' that prevent an 'explosion'. Also it takes a number of mins for the heat from the brakes to transfer by conduction to the tyres - about 3-5 mins at the quickest - so a tyre explosion resulting from hot brakes is most unlikely. Even if a tyre did go 'bnag', they do not normallly do so with large clouds of black smoke and dust - which is what has happened only a few secs before the photo (they look explosive to me).
I agree that the engine config throws up some interesting questions but, like you, I can't be sure of the explanation. (Tho' SPHLC is right, an uncontained turbine failure in No 2 is a possibility- I hadn't thought of that.......and probably a lot more!)
Why, though, do you presume that SA/RPGs could not be fired while the ac is on the ground? In this case, the firer has only 2 dimensions to consider when aiming, rather than 3 - so it is probably easier to a hit an ac on the ground rather than in the air. Of course, the firers have to be much closer to airfield but that is not a 'stopper' in this part of the world.
Now, an RPG fired from ground level would be likely to hit the side of the ac, not the top or bottom of the wing. Furthermore, it would have to be a very lucky shot as RPGs are bleedin' difficult to aim with any accuracy. However, 'lucky shots' seem to be getting 'luckier' these days - I guess the Talib are getting in lots of practice - let's hope they don't do the same with SA7s, double digits or Stingers!
I agree that strip work is normally not done with 3/2 engs but it depends mainly on the length of the strip and the weight of the ac, not to mention the importance of the missions. I am not privy to the actual data in this case but a feathered engine is inconclusive, one way or another. Remember that an aircraft's brakes do much of the stopping - reverse thrust is much less effective.
Neither am I a mine-expert, however, I believe that laying a well-hidden landmine is done suprisingly easily - that's why they are blowing off people's legs all over the world - thanks to the nations that sell them! The above strip looks like a nondescript 'bit of desert' and the surface is 'au naturel' making concealment easy. But you do rasie a valid point that brings into question the LZ defence/force protection issue. I would say it is very difficult to protect an LZ all night, in the desert with the few assets we have - as this LZ was not inside a 'perimeter'. Where are the RAFR when you need them? But its not their fault, they are all doing our IDT/IRT so we can deploy!! Neither can we blame the LZSO, if there was one; it would have been incredibly difficult to to spot a well-laid mine/IED on a few thousand feet of sand and rocks - of course, he could have driven over it and ......well, that's one way to clear an LZ - but one which is not taught on the LZSO course!
Some interesting points but I am VERY unconvinced about a tyre burst - especially with all that black smoke - if you look closely at No 1 engine - it, too, is on fire but there is no link with the fire around the No 2 engine. It looks as if something has caused another fire here as well - shrapnel from a large explosion perhaps (or uncontained turbine failure)?
However, we really ARE speculating now (which perhaps we shouldn't) but I stillthink ESF would have reduced the effects of any explosion and ensuing fire, and hopefully it may have saved the (expensive) ac. The fact that our guys and gals don't have it is most regrettable, nay, unforgiveable.
Tyres don't normally explode - they have 'thermal fuses' that prevent an 'explosion'. Also it takes a number of mins for the heat from the brakes to transfer by conduction to the tyres - about 3-5 mins at the quickest - so a tyre explosion resulting from hot brakes is most unlikely. Even if a tyre did go 'bnag', they do not normallly do so with large clouds of black smoke and dust - which is what has happened only a few secs before the photo (they look explosive to me).
I agree that the engine config throws up some interesting questions but, like you, I can't be sure of the explanation. (Tho' SPHLC is right, an uncontained turbine failure in No 2 is a possibility- I hadn't thought of that.......and probably a lot more!)
Why, though, do you presume that SA/RPGs could not be fired while the ac is on the ground? In this case, the firer has only 2 dimensions to consider when aiming, rather than 3 - so it is probably easier to a hit an ac on the ground rather than in the air. Of course, the firers have to be much closer to airfield but that is not a 'stopper' in this part of the world.
Now, an RPG fired from ground level would be likely to hit the side of the ac, not the top or bottom of the wing. Furthermore, it would have to be a very lucky shot as RPGs are bleedin' difficult to aim with any accuracy. However, 'lucky shots' seem to be getting 'luckier' these days - I guess the Talib are getting in lots of practice - let's hope they don't do the same with SA7s, double digits or Stingers!
I agree that strip work is normally not done with 3/2 engs but it depends mainly on the length of the strip and the weight of the ac, not to mention the importance of the missions. I am not privy to the actual data in this case but a feathered engine is inconclusive, one way or another. Remember that an aircraft's brakes do much of the stopping - reverse thrust is much less effective.
Neither am I a mine-expert, however, I believe that laying a well-hidden landmine is done suprisingly easily - that's why they are blowing off people's legs all over the world - thanks to the nations that sell them! The above strip looks like a nondescript 'bit of desert' and the surface is 'au naturel' making concealment easy. But you do rasie a valid point that brings into question the LZ defence/force protection issue. I would say it is very difficult to protect an LZ all night, in the desert with the few assets we have - as this LZ was not inside a 'perimeter'. Where are the RAFR when you need them? But its not their fault, they are all doing our IDT/IRT so we can deploy!! Neither can we blame the LZSO, if there was one; it would have been incredibly difficult to to spot a well-laid mine/IED on a few thousand feet of sand and rocks - of course, he could have driven over it and ......well, that's one way to clear an LZ - but one which is not taught on the LZSO course!
Some interesting points but I am VERY unconvinced about a tyre burst - especially with all that black smoke - if you look closely at No 1 engine - it, too, is on fire but there is no link with the fire around the No 2 engine. It looks as if something has caused another fire here as well - shrapnel from a large explosion perhaps (or uncontained turbine failure)?
However, we really ARE speculating now (which perhaps we shouldn't) but I stillthink ESF would have reduced the effects of any explosion and ensuing fire, and hopefully it may have saved the (expensive) ac. The fact that our guys and gals don't have it is most regrettable, nay, unforgiveable.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cambridge/Chippenham
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speculation
Thanks for that Flip, some very good points to mull over. Any news about BOI timings/reports filtering out yet?
I have to say, whatever the cause of the fire, it does look like a classic case of where ESF might have been able to do its job and save an extremely valuable airframe - to say nothing of extending the few seconds that the crew and pax must have had to complete a safe evacuation.
I have to say, whatever the cause of the fire, it does look like a classic case of where ESF might have been able to do its job and save an extremely valuable airframe - to say nothing of extending the few seconds that the crew and pax must have had to complete a safe evacuation.