Tornado GR1 ZA610
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paulilf
The request not to transfer a potentially live ejection seat onto another vessel could just have been the fact that they did not know how to handle it safely and were reluctant to take the risk. A small fishing vessel probably would have stored the seat on deck until arriving in port, a naval vessel without much open desk space would have had to store it below decks which means a bigger risk to personnel if it even partially fires off.
The cold truth may be that the skipper of the naval vessal was not prepared to risk his own crew. However these thoughts would not have been articulated at the time and the intent may have been lost in translation, perhaps over poor channels of communication.
Is there not maritime law preventing or limiting the transfer of live munitions between vessels under way? That may give some insight into the reasons why the order was given rather than some deeper conspiracy.
All I can add is that I was always very careful around ejection seats when they were supposed to be in the safe state (i.e. safety devices have been fitted to prevent operation), I wouldn't go anywhere near one when it was in the armed state (i.e. no safety devices).
All this analysis would not have been reported in a newspaper, and in general (with no disrespect to the reporters) those who write the story do not necessarily have the technical background to understand what they write. Bracken / Brecon sounds the same, but the fact that the incorrect name was used may just be that no-one bothered to check the facts before the story was printed
The request not to transfer a potentially live ejection seat onto another vessel could just have been the fact that they did not know how to handle it safely and were reluctant to take the risk. A small fishing vessel probably would have stored the seat on deck until arriving in port, a naval vessel without much open desk space would have had to store it below decks which means a bigger risk to personnel if it even partially fires off.
The cold truth may be that the skipper of the naval vessal was not prepared to risk his own crew. However these thoughts would not have been articulated at the time and the intent may have been lost in translation, perhaps over poor channels of communication.
Is there not maritime law preventing or limiting the transfer of live munitions between vessels under way? That may give some insight into the reasons why the order was given rather than some deeper conspiracy.
All I can add is that I was always very careful around ejection seats when they were supposed to be in the safe state (i.e. safety devices have been fitted to prevent operation), I wouldn't go anywhere near one when it was in the armed state (i.e. no safety devices).
All this analysis would not have been reported in a newspaper, and in general (with no disrespect to the reporters) those who write the story do not necessarily have the technical background to understand what they write. Bracken / Brecon sounds the same, but the fact that the incorrect name was used may just be that no-one bothered to check the facts before the story was printed
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think your reasoning about not moving the ejector seat is spot on. But once again the paper is being used as the giver of that information. I never said that. The trawler man told me this. The news paper reported on the second ejector seat and second body that was not the pilot.
Paul
Paul
Paulilf,
Do you still have the newspaper article in paper form? Or do you know which publication it was? It would be interesting to read about the second seat, there is something way at the back of my mind about the subject.
Do you still have the newspaper article in paper form? Or do you know which publication it was? It would be interesting to read about the second seat, there is something way at the back of my mind about the subject.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did have one news paper report now I have two. I found another today from another areas archive. It says the second body was strapped in an ejector seat and was found be the Dutch trawler. It says they do not think it is the body of the pilot. Then goes of the say that an MOD spokesman says the remains are believed to be from another jet crash which was over a year ago.
Then the same paper reports the next day that the story has changed, and it is now believed the body could be from that of a civilian aircraft crash.
All of this within days of each other. And all the while the trawler that found the navigator says they were on top of the tornado. So if they did not eject where was the pilot.
regards Paul
Then the same paper reports the next day that the story has changed, and it is now believed the body could be from that of a civilian aircraft crash.
All of this within days of each other. And all the while the trawler that found the navigator says they were on top of the tornado. So if they did not eject where was the pilot.
regards Paul
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for the replies about this, it has helped answer a few questions. I have now contacted the historical records office who inform me that the files pertaining to this should be in the National archive in about 6 months time. I am still no closer to finding out the identity of the second body and ejector seat. An M.O.D spokesman back in 1985 said at the time it was from a previous jet crash a year before. He then changed the story the next day to say it was from a civilian aircraft. Civilian aircraft ejector seat? the second body was airlifted from the Dutch trawler and flown by RAF helicopter to great Yarmouth. There the trail has gone cold. But who was the second body.
The royal navy's Mine counter-measures vessel Brecon was one of the 5 mine sweepers to search for Tornado.
But the mystery still remains as to why they continued to search when the crew of the trawler had already found the aircraft. They were also told by the crew of the Brecon that the tornado was sat 180ft below them on the sea bed. And apart from being dragged by the trawlers nets was in full form.
Thank you for your help Paul.
The royal navy's Mine counter-measures vessel Brecon was one of the 5 mine sweepers to search for Tornado.
But the mystery still remains as to why they continued to search when the crew of the trawler had already found the aircraft. They were also told by the crew of the Brecon that the tornado was sat 180ft below them on the sea bed. And apart from being dragged by the trawlers nets was in full form.
Thank you for your help Paul.
Brecon was a Hunt class minehunter, they use high frequency sonars to look for small ground mines. This makes them ideally suited to search for objects on the seabed, they also carried divers to investigate objects.
pauliff might be able to get something from he Dutch under their freedom of information act in relation to the other body found. Also Distant Voice suggestion on searching for a coroners inquest seems is an excellent suggestion.
pauliff might be able to get something from he Dutch under their freedom of information act in relation to the other body found. Also Distant Voice suggestion on searching for a coroners inquest seems is an excellent suggestion.
