Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RAF Chinook airframe destroyed - Helmand Province

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RAF Chinook airframe destroyed - Helmand Province

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd Aug 2009, 14:12
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,125
Received 2,972 Likes on 1,266 Posts
Dengue_DudeIf we're really lucky, this airframe will be part of the £6.5 billion the auditors couldn't find.

Well done all involved, glad everyone's safe - mind you, getting the hell out of there as fast as possible is a bit of a no-brainer - it's not like you've got many other choices is it?

What a good result from a ****ty position . . .
Well if history is anything to go by, all those little things missing off inventory would have been on board her when it was destroyed, so much so it was a wonder she got off the ground in the first place

There goes the no claims discount seriously though,

Glad everyone was ok, shame about the cab, but my butthole will heal over before the Labour Government puts in an order for a replacement cab.....
NutLoose is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2009, 06:19
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,370
Received 667 Likes on 293 Posts
I gather that the Telegraph has been undergoing something of a sea change of staff this year starting with one senior appointment from a red-top who has subsequently replaced quality journos with more scum from the gutter-press. Maybe we will see more uninformed speculation from what was previously a quality paper.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2009, 09:34
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: SW England
Age: 69
Posts: 1,503
Received 92 Likes on 38 Posts
Aye, Crab - Private Eye has been thoroughly enjoying itself over the Mailygraph's reinvention of itself for the past many months. See the Princess Royal thread for something similar. If I want defence info that can be corroborated these days I go to the Guardian. Or in our part of the country, the Western "Cull Those Badgers" Morning News.
Thud_and_Blunder is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2009, 23:42
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Having to blow up the airframe

With the number of times I saw that salvageable and recoverable airframes were blown up so they would not fall in Taliban hands", I wonder how much real estate they really completely control in the country. Is there no way the area could have been secured long enough while technicians repaired the thing or hired a MI-26 to sling it back to base ?

Are we reduced to hit and run tactics in Afghanistan ?

Its not as though the Taliban could have repaired the thing themselves and flown it to their own base. Was blowing it up really necessary? The RAF Hercules that made a night hard landing in Aug 2007 was also blown up, although it was located on an airstrip. The military did not think they controlled the area enough to attempt recovery or salvage. The Taliban did.
Minorite invisible is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 02:49
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Republic of the Philippines ex L1011 GE
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As an ex tech I am sure they would not like to do an engine change or major repair within range of a Taliban sniper, But if securing the area then lifting the frame out was a viable option why was it not looked at?

As you say the Taliban were not going to repair it and fly off to their secret airfield, and I doubt very much that there were military secrets on a Chinook.
pigsinspace is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 09:06
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
anyone know which airrame was destroyed I am hoping its not BN!
NURSE is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 09:35
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: GMT
Age: 53
Posts: 2,092
Received 190 Likes on 73 Posts
But if securing the area then lifting the frame out was a viable option why was it not looked at?
Rough guess at about +45 deg C and about 4-5000'. Never going to happen due to performance.
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 10:38
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It was not BN.

But if securing the area then lifting the frame out was a viable option why was it not looked at?
Err, if it was viable it would have been looked at, so obviously it wasn't viable. Apart from what MGD rightly said would you want to do some extreme underslung load work in bandit country where where there had just been a contact.Would probably have ended up losing a second aircraft that way.

I doubt very much that there were military secrets on a Chinook.
Trust me, there's plenty of stuff you wouldn't want to fall into the wrong hands.

That said I always find it shocking when something like this happens. It's not a decision I could easily make especially with such a valuable piece of kit. Very unfortunate to lose the frame but fantastic that the crew are OK.
Torque Tonight is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 11:15
  #49 (permalink)  

Yes, Him
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Trust me, there's plenty of stuff you wouldn't want to fall into the wrong hands.
Yes, the thought of taleban fitting miniguns to pick-up trucks springs to mind.
Gainesy is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 17:29
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Even I, ex-involved with military aircraft kit, can think of much more sophisticated equipment than Miniguns, as I'm sure you can, ' wind-up Gainesy ' !
Double Zero is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 18:04
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,132
Received 28 Likes on 17 Posts
Aye, think of the damage the Taliban could do with a standard RAF-issue aircraft chock pasty. Thats if the aircrew managed to avoid succumbing to having to eat them.
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2009, 22:24
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is there no way the area could have been secured long enough while technicians repaired the thing or hired a MI-26 to sling it back to base ?

Not this one:

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!



Monday, July 20, 2009



A civilian helicopter chartered by NATO has crashed while taking off from Kandahar International Airport in Afghanistan, killing sixteen. The Mil Mi-8 did not come under enemy fire.

The helicopter had been chartered from the Russian company Vertical-T and all the victims were civilians. A NATO statement said that there was no obvious cause for the accident but hostile fire had been ruled out.

Emergency responders are on the scene.

Five other people were wounded in the accident.

...

The crash comes just days after another civilian helicopter chartered for military activities crashed near Sangin Airbase in Helmand. The Mil Mi-26 is believed to have been shot down; six Ukrainian civilians onboard and one Afghan girl on the ground were killed in the crash on Tuesday. The helicopter had been taking supplies to a British military base. ...

Helicopter crash kills sixteen at NATO base in Afghanistan - Wikinews, the free news source

Modern Elmo is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2009, 16:08
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Ok
I am really confused now!!!!
This is on SkyNews as breaking news?? Right now. 1700hrs 30 Aug
Roger Sofarover is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2009, 16:28
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,719
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Gobsmacked

...that the RAF have not lost more airframes or suffered more casualties in the 'stans.
Crazy flying that they're doing on a regular basis - before not too long such 'ops' will be regarded as 'the norm' - can only hope that crews' attitudes and planners' logic stay sharp in such an environment.

For many years the RAF thought 'Ops' meant Tacevals and missing a weekend at home - war in 'stans have seen a huge change in commitment with a reduced workforce and equipment operating at Mil Spec and beyond.......
Good luck all involved
EESDL is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2009, 16:34
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Different airframe..

..happened this morning (August 30th) (See BBC/Reuters). No casualties reported thankfully..but another 'nook lost will hit ops hard. (Son on det) Cheers bm
BoeingMEL is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.