NO casualties. Chinook destroyed after hard landing
Should we have an Mi-26 or an S-64 sitting on standby waiting to recover downed aircraft, rather than exercising the Paveway method of taking them off the books.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Here 'n' there.
Age: 53
Posts: 33
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But wouldn't that make an already big target even bigger?. One RPG in the wrong place at the right time could result in two downed aircraft. (And that scenario doesn't bare thinking about!).
It depends why the downed aircraft has gone down, and how close to the area of the initial incident, surely?
If it has been a precautionary forced landing that was not the immediate result of enemy action, then recovery would surely be an option?
And if there's time to secure the site for long enough to recover the crew/pax, and to recover some equipment, and to mount some kind of investigation, but not enough to secure the area for an extended period, then again, lifting equipment out is surely a good idea, even if there is insufficient time to repair an aircraft enough for it to be able to fly out under its own power?
If it has been a precautionary forced landing that was not the immediate result of enemy action, then recovery would surely be an option?
And if there's time to secure the site for long enough to recover the crew/pax, and to recover some equipment, and to mount some kind of investigation, but not enough to secure the area for an extended period, then again, lifting equipment out is surely a good idea, even if there is insufficient time to repair an aircraft enough for it to be able to fly out under its own power?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barnsley
Age: 64
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chinook Down
The rescue of Crew and Pax is the highest priority, but this thing is going to happen again and again if we are going to be in this country for some time. So being able to save important assets will have to be looked at, and not take the kaboom option every time. Are we saying we have no control on the ground. These are £40 million a chuck assets, yes its going to take effort to secure the Area and make it safe for the recovery teams to go in, but its got to be worth it in the long run as the £40 million a chuck assets save lives big time when they are working and in our hands. In a war assets are sometimes as important as your personnel and risks have to be taken to recover them. Don't get me wrong I would not risk a bean to recover a Land Rover or a Truck or a tin hat, but one of the most important asset we have in theatre bet your bottom dollar.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Odiham
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the F***???
I love reading the comments of all you guys who operate in this theatre regularly and know how this aircraft should have been recovered.
I am sure you are right and this decision (probably made by OC JAG) was not carefully thought about.
Come on MGD where are you to shoot this lot down???
I am sure you are right and this decision (probably made by OC JAG) was not carefully thought about.Come on MGD where are you to shoot this lot down???
Scafite, would you like to be in the outer cordon for about 12-24 hours while the recovery is planned and then carried out? Also bear in mind that another cab lifting with a very heavy underslung load is going to be a very attractive (and easy) target.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barnsley
Age: 64
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chinook Down
No I would not and it would be very risky and I am sure if they had to blow this aircraft up it was the right call. But sorry this will happen again and again, and I know it would be awful to be in this team which had to do the recovery and secure the area for however long it takes. This recovery type of operation some where down the line will have to be done and tactics and equipment will be needed. I am no expert and I am sure experts or folks with experiance are abound on the forum.
Are we saying once a major and important asset has to land for what ever reason, that this asset is lost or we dont control any of the ground in Afghanistan.
Are we saying once a major and important asset has to land for what ever reason, that this asset is lost or we dont control any of the ground in Afghanistan.
Jacko
I don't know the details of this situation enough to make anything conclusive but in other cases the envirnomental factors made recovery impossible. Often the terrain doesn't lend itself to recoveries not to mention the altitude and resultant DA from the high temps. These are performance and safety considerations, let alone the tactical considerations of keeping tommy taliban at bay during a very, very vulnerable phase of a recovery operation.
I don't know the details of this situation enough to make anything conclusive but in other cases the envirnomental factors made recovery impossible. Often the terrain doesn't lend itself to recoveries not to mention the altitude and resultant DA from the high temps. These are performance and safety considerations, let alone the tactical considerations of keeping tommy taliban at bay during a very, very vulnerable phase of a recovery operation.
Yes SACFITE, they are suggesting that we do not control the ground. There are too few boots and too much space to ever think about controlling the ground. The Soviets couldn't do it with far more troops than we've (as in NATO) got deployed. As has been said, OC JAG will have had to make the call, almost certainly in association with OC 1310 and the PW option will not have been taken lightly!
Stay safe out there girls and boys
Stay safe out there girls and boys
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: salisbury,uk
Age: 75
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aviationdoc
Do we know whether any of the aircrew sustained any injuries during the forced landing.
As some of you may know the rear crew do not have access to crash worthy seats.
There have been numerous attempts to secure these and different reasons are given ,as to why it is not possible at the moment .
Do we know whether the Mark 3 will have them?
As some of you may know the rear crew do not have access to crash worthy seats.
There have been numerous attempts to secure these and different reasons are given ,as to why it is not possible at the moment .
Do we know whether the Mark 3 will have them?
Only asked the question.
And I'm not criticising the decision this time, as without a dedicated asset in place and on standby, recovery is never going to be an option.
The question was whether having such an asset available would not be useful.
The consensus seems to be that it wouldn't.
And I'm not criticising the decision this time, as without a dedicated asset in place and on standby, recovery is never going to be an option.
The question was whether having such an asset available would not be useful.
The consensus seems to be that it wouldn't.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonicko
I too have wondered about differing recovery options.
Upon reading the above posts, there are many valid points.
Some things stand out, and some things have crossed my mind here.
While I appreciate that it seems we had to blow this aircraft up, as we do not control the ground. I understand that many would not like to spend 24-48 hours on site, but then also realise many many army personnel spend much longer than this totally surrounded as a matter of course (but then I am in no way volunteering myself or anyone else for the task, nor am I saying its a good idea).
I realise that we do not have enough SH or AH in theatre (I also have no idea how much would be the ideal amount, but guess it's not what we have now (because I don't need to know)).
So, here is a possibly contentious question. Do we have to recover the whole aircraft, or just destroy it?. Could it be useful to recover a part of the frame (such as front or rear)? I realise that it would take for ever to disassemble an airframe correctly (not made pleasant by unfriendly locals), but could we just take one end, so as to retrieve engines or avionics?
If this would be of any use, it would also mean that a lighter load would be recovered. As for the means or separating the frame, the only quick option I know of would be such things as: chainsaws (the type used by SF/rescue and bank robbers), disc cutters or 'sawing it with miniguns
. These may be totally stupid ideas, but they they are only ''starters for ten", as doing things correctly is out of the question it seems.
I only say these things, as has been pointed out, we are here for the long haul, and I am sure many of you have worked out just how long it would take to run out of Chinooks at the present attrition rate.
PLEASE NOTE. I am only putting forward ideas, and would not volunteer myself or any of you to do any of the tasks involved, and will declare that I am sat safe and sound in the UK.
Lastly, but very not least, I am very glad to hear everyone was picked up OK.
Upon reading the above posts, there are many valid points.
Some things stand out, and some things have crossed my mind here.
While I appreciate that it seems we had to blow this aircraft up, as we do not control the ground. I understand that many would not like to spend 24-48 hours on site, but then also realise many many army personnel spend much longer than this totally surrounded as a matter of course (but then I am in no way volunteering myself or anyone else for the task, nor am I saying its a good idea).
I realise that we do not have enough SH or AH in theatre (I also have no idea how much would be the ideal amount, but guess it's not what we have now (because I don't need to know)).
So, here is a possibly contentious question. Do we have to recover the whole aircraft, or just destroy it?. Could it be useful to recover a part of the frame (such as front or rear)? I realise that it would take for ever to disassemble an airframe correctly (not made pleasant by unfriendly locals), but could we just take one end, so as to retrieve engines or avionics?
If this would be of any use, it would also mean that a lighter load would be recovered. As for the means or separating the frame, the only quick option I know of would be such things as: chainsaws (the type used by SF/rescue and bank robbers), disc cutters or 'sawing it with miniguns
. These may be totally stupid ideas, but they they are only ''starters for ten", as doing things correctly is out of the question it seems.I only say these things, as has been pointed out, we are here for the long haul, and I am sure many of you have worked out just how long it would take to run out of Chinooks at the present attrition rate.
PLEASE NOTE. I am only putting forward ideas, and would not volunteer myself or any of you to do any of the tasks involved, and will declare that I am sat safe and sound in the UK.
Lastly, but very not least, I am very glad to hear everyone was picked up OK.
FX Guru
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 67
Posts: 900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks, Have a read of this Attack State Red: Amazon.co.uk: Col. Richard Kemp, Chris Hughes: Books
This is about last year's tour in the Stan by the Royal Anglians. It shows quite clearly why equipment has to be denied to the enemy. It is just not practical to potter around the Green Zone with chainsaws.
Wokkas only go in there with Apache escorts and then only to pick up T-1 casualties. The bravery of all involved is astonishing.
This is about last year's tour in the Stan by the Royal Anglians. It shows quite clearly why equipment has to be denied to the enemy. It is just not practical to potter around the Green Zone with chainsaws.
Wokkas only go in there with Apache escorts and then only to pick up T-1 casualties. The bravery of all involved is astonishing.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
They underslung one back to odiham years ago on the day we 'broke up' for xmas. It was a very very windy day and if the pilot had gone past the airfield, he would not have been able to go fast enough to get back against the wind. So without giving exact speeds, I would suggest an underslung chinook going at snails pace home would need a volunteer crew who are even braver than the normal crews. For those of you who have not underslung aircraft/large boxes/light boxes/boats (ouch)/wings/etc, it is a very challenging task!!! They do not fly well........