GAF Tornado loss in 80's due to HIRTA flyby?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GAF Tornado loss in 80's due to HIRTA flyby?
I am doing some research into electromagnetic effects on aircraft flight controls. I seem to recall during the 80's or early 90's that the GAF lost a GR1 (and sadly the crew) when it flew close to a mast in Germany. I believe the aircraft (against the pilots control inputs) rolled and pulled into the ground. Shortly after the crash all GR1's were required to avoid Hi Intensity Radio Transmission Areas (HIRTAS) by set margins. Despite a number of Google searches I have drawn a complete blank.
Can anyone help me with information with this, or any other, flight control interference by radiated energy?
Many thanks
Can anyone help me with information with this, or any other, flight control interference by radiated energy?
Many thanks
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't help there, but I heard of a Jaguar during weapons trials in the mid-70s flying past Belmont TV mast and having its load of bombs released for it. But the good old Phantom didn't need outside interference as uncommanded control inputs were occasionally created from within the AFCS.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Middle Drawer
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The event, IIRC, was over the radio free europe antenna.
It is theorised that the AFCS/ CSAS system was incapable of filtering away heavy and unwanted frequencies from the LRU's that contain it.
The exposure to the aforementioned frequencies caused the aircraft AFCS/ CSAS system to "drop out" and before "mech mode" ( nothing that isn't in Jane's) could be fully utilised by the crew, the aircraft had departed the flight envelope and at such a level as 500 ft was unrecoverable.
TW
It is theorised that the AFCS/ CSAS system was incapable of filtering away heavy and unwanted frequencies from the LRU's that contain it.
The exposure to the aforementioned frequencies caused the aircraft AFCS/ CSAS system to "drop out" and before "mech mode" ( nothing that isn't in Jane's) could be fully utilised by the crew, the aircraft had departed the flight envelope and at such a level as 500 ft was unrecoverable.
TW
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gonadz
- try here;
http://www.emc-esd.nl/Download/EMC/T...m_version2.pdf
Gives brief details of the Tornado and some others.
Rigex.
- try here;
http://www.emc-esd.nl/Download/EMC/T...m_version2.pdf
Gives brief details of the Tornado and some others.
Rigex.
http://www.cherryclough.com/Download...March%2007.pdf
This site has a lot of documented EMI instances, with a few aviation cases scattered through it. I seem to remember Jags having a similar problem in the mid seventies.
This site has a lot of documented EMI instances, with a few aviation cases scattered through it. I seem to remember Jags having a similar problem in the mid seventies.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks for all the info and pointers so far.
I have established that the Tornado crash occured on 6th July 1984 near Munich, Germany. A West German Tornado crashed after flying close to a powerful VOA transmitter.
I also recall that a while after the BOI the Tornado fleets were required to avoid certain transmitters by certain distances in order to avoid the effects of electromagnetic transmissions.
In addition the RAF fleet was banned from transmitting on HF or being in close proximity to the tanker when it was transmitting an HF position report. Again I believe the problem was the effect this radiation could have on the flight control systems. I also recall the uncommanded jettison of wing or pylon stores on several occaisions but they may have been more to do with the stores management system software rather than any electromagnetic interference?
Were the standards of electromagnetic protection poor or was this such a new field that standards of testing hadn't yet been fully developed?
Gratefull for any opinion or more pointers!
I have established that the Tornado crash occured on 6th July 1984 near Munich, Germany. A West German Tornado crashed after flying close to a powerful VOA transmitter.
I also recall that a while after the BOI the Tornado fleets were required to avoid certain transmitters by certain distances in order to avoid the effects of electromagnetic transmissions.
In addition the RAF fleet was banned from transmitting on HF or being in close proximity to the tanker when it was transmitting an HF position report. Again I believe the problem was the effect this radiation could have on the flight control systems. I also recall the uncommanded jettison of wing or pylon stores on several occaisions but they may have been more to do with the stores management system software rather than any electromagnetic interference?
Were the standards of electromagnetic protection poor or was this such a new field that standards of testing hadn't yet been fully developed?
Gratefull for any opinion or more pointers!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Mornington Crescent
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I strongly agree. Not for the internet and not for discussion unless you need to know - which most of us (myself included) don't.
Beadwindow. Mod's, I would ask that this thread be locked to prevent any accidental disclosure of information from the well meaning.
BluntM8
Beadwindow. Mod's, I would ask that this thread be locked to prevent any accidental disclosure of information from the well meaning.
BluntM8
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike,
Many thanks for that. Your memory may be failing you a little regarding the Tornado accident. I know the details of that particular accident in some detail.... The the front seater saw the A-10 head-on at a late stage and took immediate & moderate avoiding action. Meanwhile his navigator, who had been-head down taking a fix, and being mindful of the moderate manoeuvering and recent GAF accident initiated command ejection. I understand that the missunderstanding was cleared up whilst collecting parachutes in a field. So this particular accident was not directly attributable to the electromagnetic influence of HIRTA's.
L-P
I appreciate & understand your concern. However I have deliberately kept my comments to a period over 20 years ago when I believe military emc was likely in the early stages of development. I hope that things have moved on considerably over this period.
If you feel strongly that I am prying into an area beyond what is currently available in the public domain please feel free to pm me and I'll try to direct my postings appropriately. I have researched only public domain data through the internet and the engineering department where I am studying.
Many thanks for that. Your memory may be failing you a little regarding the Tornado accident. I know the details of that particular accident in some detail.... The the front seater saw the A-10 head-on at a late stage and took immediate & moderate avoiding action. Meanwhile his navigator, who had been-head down taking a fix, and being mindful of the moderate manoeuvering and recent GAF accident initiated command ejection. I understand that the missunderstanding was cleared up whilst collecting parachutes in a field. So this particular accident was not directly attributable to the electromagnetic influence of HIRTA's.
L-P
I appreciate & understand your concern. However I have deliberately kept my comments to a period over 20 years ago when I believe military emc was likely in the early stages of development. I hope that things have moved on considerably over this period.
If you feel strongly that I am prying into an area beyond what is currently available in the public domain please feel free to pm me and I'll try to direct my postings appropriately. I have researched only public domain data through the internet and the engineering department where I am studying.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Preston
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CSAS was analogue
At the time of the GAF incident I was still test flying at Warton. My recollection is that the aircraft was approaching the Voice Of America transmitter near Munich from the west with the navigator doing a radar fix. The significance of this is that this high powered aerial was directional beaming its signal into Eastern Europe. The aircraft flew over the top of the transmitter from the west and straight into the beam. The CSAS which was analogue got severely overloaded and went loopy. Hence the unfortunate loss of aircraft and crew.
If I recall, we already new there was a problem because a full power HF transmission did exactly the same. That led to some interesting test flying sorties! The HF's were depowered to a quarter power I think. But significantly, again if my memory is correct, GAF tornados did not have HF therefore they hadn't seen the problem at first hand
regards, muscat329
If I recall, we already new there was a problem because a full power HF transmission did exactly the same. That led to some interesting test flying sorties! The HF's were depowered to a quarter power I think. But significantly, again if my memory is correct, GAF tornados did not have HF therefore they hadn't seen the problem at first hand
regards, muscat329
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Sardos, France
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And a big hole it made too....Dumbo jet
....I helped pick this one up (well the pieces). Due to the nature of some of my duties at LBH at the time had a high clearance, had to sit in a tent after our shift and go through all the pieces of pcb and declare those of "interest" to the rafp who then bagged and sealed them!! Don't think we ever found the fin which was of great concern at the time.
More about EMI yes but not for here as has been stated, in fact my memory has gone blank too...................................
MoJo.
More about EMI yes but not for here as has been stated, in fact my memory has gone blank too...................................
MoJo.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chippenham, Wilts
Age: 75
Posts: 297
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OOps!
Meanwhile his navigator, who had been-head down taking a fix, and being mindful of the moderate manoeuvering and recent GAF accident initiated command ejection.
The legendary Mr Wooosh-bang: ex V force, like a lot of us.
3P
The legendary Mr Wooosh-bang: ex V force, like a lot of us.
3P
And they were originally intended to carry nuclear bombs? I pity the aircrew anywhere near an - what was it - upended sunshine bucket in something that can't deal with a bit of UHF.
I have watched TV cameras fold up under the, uh, interrogation of tactical radars but they do usually come back on immediately afterward. And I'm not relying on those to prevent me hitting the ground at 500mph.
Phil
I have watched TV cameras fold up under the, uh, interrogation of tactical radars but they do usually come back on immediately afterward. And I'm not relying on those to prevent me hitting the ground at 500mph.
Phil
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Not linked to interference with flight controls , but the TV mast on the high ground NW of Belfast City used to make a Gazelle TQ meter go doolally! 
Then again if a HIRTA was to interfere with a Gazelles flight controls there would be something seriously afoot!!
Then again if a HIRTA was to interfere with a Gazelles flight controls there would be something seriously afoot!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks for all your responses. I fully appreciate the sensitivity surrounding military equipment and would now like to hear of any civilian examples where EMI may have been present during a flight disturbance or upset? Preferably involving a fly by wire type.
I recall seeing an amateur video of an Airbus 320 (I think) perhaps three or so years ago that appeared to be out of control at low level. Does anybody know where I can find out more about the causes of this incident? Google searches have not helped me.
Many thanks
I recall seeing an amateur video of an Airbus 320 (I think) perhaps three or so years ago that appeared to be out of control at low level. Does anybody know where I can find out more about the causes of this incident? Google searches have not helped me.
Many thanks
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this the incident you refered to?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296
Very sad. I had always thought it was because the flight deck had the wrong "mode"? selected (ie:landing) so the fly by wire computers wouldn't respond as they wanted when they applied power and tried to climb. Oh well wrong again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296
Very sad. I had always thought it was because the flight deck had the wrong "mode"? selected (ie:landing) so the fly by wire computers wouldn't respond as they wanted when they applied power and tried to climb. Oh well wrong again
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: LHR/LGW
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ivan
No that wasn't the incident in mind. I seem to recall seeing the aircraft apparently out of control. Below 5000ft and oscillating in pitch and to a lesser extent in roll. The clip only lasted about 20 seconds and was taken near an airport I think?
No that wasn't the incident in mind. I seem to recall seeing the aircraft apparently out of control. Below 5000ft and oscillating in pitch and to a lesser extent in roll. The clip only lasted about 20 seconds and was taken near an airport I think?