Tornado GR1 ZA610
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tornado GR1 ZA610
Hello this is my first post on such a forum and I have to be honest from the start and say that I am not from any type of aviation back ground.
What I am asking is being written with the greatest respect to the people how were involved.
In 1985 Tornado GR1 ZA610 crashed into the sea about 16 miles of Flambrough head on the east coast of the uk. I think I have read everything on the net that can be found about the crash. However I have found a news paper report from that time stating that Flt-Lieut John Sheen was found with ejector seat 16 miles off Flambrough head. It goes on to say another body was found 36 miles to the east with an ejector seat. But that body was not the body of the pilot...The paper does not name the pilot. But he was Flt-Lieut Mike Barnard. The story becomes even more strange as I have now spoken to the man who found John Sheen on that sad day and pulled him and the ejector seat from the water. This man was part of a 3 man trawler who first located the Tornado on their sounder. I am still trying to establish if Mike Barnard was ever found. I have searched old archives of the time but can only find the reference to the mystery of the body being found who was not the pilot.
I also would like to know why the Tornado would be highly Radioactive ?
There is quite a lot more to add but out of respect to the Pilot and Navigator I will stop.
Regards Paul
What I am asking is being written with the greatest respect to the people how were involved.
In 1985 Tornado GR1 ZA610 crashed into the sea about 16 miles of Flambrough head on the east coast of the uk. I think I have read everything on the net that can be found about the crash. However I have found a news paper report from that time stating that Flt-Lieut John Sheen was found with ejector seat 16 miles off Flambrough head. It goes on to say another body was found 36 miles to the east with an ejector seat. But that body was not the body of the pilot...The paper does not name the pilot. But he was Flt-Lieut Mike Barnard. The story becomes even more strange as I have now spoken to the man who found John Sheen on that sad day and pulled him and the ejector seat from the water. This man was part of a 3 man trawler who first located the Tornado on their sounder. I am still trying to establish if Mike Barnard was ever found. I have searched old archives of the time but can only find the reference to the mystery of the body being found who was not the pilot.
I also would like to know why the Tornado would be highly Radioactive ?
There is quite a lot more to add but out of respect to the Pilot and Navigator I will stop.
Regards Paul
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tornado
Well I have to say, you said that not me. Strange thing is though. The 1970 lightning you are talking about was in the same area just off Flambrough head. The radiation I am asking about is not made up to make a mystery. The trawlers catch went over board and I have this on tape and quite a bit more, but first I would like to find out about the body with the ejector seat 36 miles to the east. That body was picked up by a Duch trawler.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not found
Well thank you so much for that bit of information. I have the accident summaries from June the 12th 1987and that says the crew probably did not eject. So I am assuming the trawler pulled John and the ejector seat from the Tornado. The trawler man told me Johns parachute was open when he pulled up the nets. He did say the seat looked like brand new as well with no marks or bends on it, something he could not understand if he had in fact pulled it out of the tornado. I am trying to be as honest as I can be with the information I have. We even have a letter from Johns wife thanking him for his efforts. So if the accident summaries say they probably did not eject. What happened to Mike.
Paulif, a very good question and well done for introducing yourself so well. And for your respect for the subject of your question.
Be prepared for a few harsh responses - it's only guys being amusing. Someone will be along soon with some info and then the thread will go on to related issues that you may well find interesting.
Welcome!
Be prepared for a few harsh responses - it's only guys being amusing. Someone will be along soon with some info and then the thread will go on to related issues that you may well find interesting.
Welcome!
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Taif-Saudi Arabia
Age: 64
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the more exotic metals and alloys are radioactive and a hazard, especially if inhaled as a dust or powder. This could be where your reference to highly radioactive may have come from.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tornado
So as you stated Mikey B was not found. But if the Tornado was found on the sea bed, and it was. And the trawler located it on the sounder and hit it with the nets. In the process pulling the ejector seat and the navigator to the surface. Then where was Mike Barnard if not in the tornado.
The accident summery clearly says it is thought that the crew did not eject. That in itself is incorrect as they know the navigator did not eject, and having the exact location of the tornado they could soon ascertain if another crew member was still in the plane. The RAF guy who was in radio contact with the trawler crew told them not to touch the ejector seat as there was enough explosive in it to blow the back off the trawler. I don't know how true that would be but that's what they were told. The trawler crew new the exact location of the Tornado and passed this on to the RAF guys.
So why did the M.O.D pay another trawler from Grimsby £1000 per day for 2 weeks to search for the Tornado after it had been located.
When the ejector seat was pulled to the surface the trawler man says that it was just like a new pin with no obvious marks or bends to be seen. Would it be possible to pull an ejector seat from the plane without damaging it. He says the parachute was trailing in the water and that's what he thinks got caught in the nets.
AGS man pointed out that a reason for the high radioactivity could be due to exotic metals and alloys that are radioactive and a hazard, especially if inhaled as a dust or powder. That may well be true, but would dust and powder be present in the north sea. And if they had to discard there entire catch because it was contaminated. Then you would think that an boats fishing in the immediate area would have to do the same.
I am not trying to create a mystery around this tragedy, I am though trying to understand why there seems to be so many discrepancies surrounding it.
Regards Paul
The accident summery clearly says it is thought that the crew did not eject. That in itself is incorrect as they know the navigator did not eject, and having the exact location of the tornado they could soon ascertain if another crew member was still in the plane. The RAF guy who was in radio contact with the trawler crew told them not to touch the ejector seat as there was enough explosive in it to blow the back off the trawler. I don't know how true that would be but that's what they were told. The trawler crew new the exact location of the Tornado and passed this on to the RAF guys.
So why did the M.O.D pay another trawler from Grimsby £1000 per day for 2 weeks to search for the Tornado after it had been located.
When the ejector seat was pulled to the surface the trawler man says that it was just like a new pin with no obvious marks or bends to be seen. Would it be possible to pull an ejector seat from the plane without damaging it. He says the parachute was trailing in the water and that's what he thinks got caught in the nets.
AGS man pointed out that a reason for the high radioactivity could be due to exotic metals and alloys that are radioactive and a hazard, especially if inhaled as a dust or powder. That may well be true, but would dust and powder be present in the north sea. And if they had to discard there entire catch because it was contaminated. Then you would think that an boats fishing in the immediate area would have to do the same.
I am not trying to create a mystery around this tragedy, I am though trying to understand why there seems to be so many discrepancies surrounding it.
Regards Paul
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paulilf
A couple of points to consider:
1. What is "highly radioactive"? The quantity of background radioactivity walking down Union street in aberdeen is "high" when you compare it to the background radiation in another city which does not have so many granite buildings. Without quoting specific measurements you are relying on someones interpretation (perhaps without any training or knowledge of radioactivity) of what a "high" figure is.
2. There are some instruments in aircraft which emit ionising radiation (are 'radioactive') such as gaseous tritium light sources. They are very small and the quantity of 'radioactive' material is small, but if they are damaged in a crash they may contaminate other material such as wreckage, fish, or bodies. The general reponse to contamination such as this is to get rid of everything rather than potentially contaminate other articles. Again, just because there is some measure of radioactive contamination does not mean to say the whole thing glowed in the dark!
3. If the aircraft crashed into the sea at speed and broke up, then there is a good chance the ejection seat would be in the ARMED state and would not have fired. Therefore there would be a serious risk of the seat partially or fully activating if mishandled, which could include firing off the drogue gun or initialing the rocket pack. Neither of these events are things you want to do on a small fishing vessel!
I don't think there are discrepancies around the crash, but perhaps innacuracies or mis-interpretations of comments made which were badly reported or not reported in the full context.
A couple of points to consider:
1. What is "highly radioactive"? The quantity of background radioactivity walking down Union street in aberdeen is "high" when you compare it to the background radiation in another city which does not have so many granite buildings. Without quoting specific measurements you are relying on someones interpretation (perhaps without any training or knowledge of radioactivity) of what a "high" figure is.
2. There are some instruments in aircraft which emit ionising radiation (are 'radioactive') such as gaseous tritium light sources. They are very small and the quantity of 'radioactive' material is small, but if they are damaged in a crash they may contaminate other material such as wreckage, fish, or bodies. The general reponse to contamination such as this is to get rid of everything rather than potentially contaminate other articles. Again, just because there is some measure of radioactive contamination does not mean to say the whole thing glowed in the dark!
3. If the aircraft crashed into the sea at speed and broke up, then there is a good chance the ejection seat would be in the ARMED state and would not have fired. Therefore there would be a serious risk of the seat partially or fully activating if mishandled, which could include firing off the drogue gun or initialing the rocket pack. Neither of these events are things you want to do on a small fishing vessel!
I don't think there are discrepancies around the crash, but perhaps innacuracies or mis-interpretations of comments made which were badly reported or not reported in the full context.
I'm sure we all understand that Paulilf's posts are arriving a long time after he is sending them (presumably due to moderation) which makes them read a little oddly.
1. There is very little holding an ejection seat into an aircraft (which another tragedy illustrated rather too well) so it is unlikely to remain in place in such an impact.
2. Tornado has a command eject system, if the nav's seat has not been fired then neither has the pilot's.
3. This is not the only case of an ejected casualty not being recovered from the North Sea, there are many options for entanglement on the sea bed and strong currents.
4. Jamming pods, 'exotic' construction materials, practice bombs, gaseous light sources, unfired live seats, an aircraft which (at that date) neither air- nor groundcrew really understood, previous cases of hepatitis from recovering casualties. The MOD advice would be very cautious, and, to someone not familiar with officialdom, its tone might be misinterpreted.
5. Maybe the MOD had a contract with a fishing company for search work which would be under MOD control with appropriate personnel on board.
1. There is very little holding an ejection seat into an aircraft (which another tragedy illustrated rather too well) so it is unlikely to remain in place in such an impact.
2. Tornado has a command eject system, if the nav's seat has not been fired then neither has the pilot's.
3. This is not the only case of an ejected casualty not being recovered from the North Sea, there are many options for entanglement on the sea bed and strong currents.
4. Jamming pods, 'exotic' construction materials, practice bombs, gaseous light sources, unfired live seats, an aircraft which (at that date) neither air- nor groundcrew really understood, previous cases of hepatitis from recovering casualties. The MOD advice would be very cautious, and, to someone not familiar with officialdom, its tone might be misinterpreted.
5. Maybe the MOD had a contract with a fishing company for search work which would be under MOD control with appropriate personnel on board.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was on board the Sea King from Boulmer that was sent to find it. (student helicopter crewman = extra eyes) We spent a very long day looking over the search area, including refuelling on HMS Leedscastle to extend the sortie. Beyond a slick of POL, nothing was found. There were no H&S 'warnings' and no conspiracy theories. There was no audible evidence that the seats had been initiated. I didnt take notice of any follow up events or evidence but as far as the SAR crew on the day was concerned, they gave 100% before conceding that the rescue sortie was over and the subsequent wreckage recovery phase began. The concentrated slick and knowledge of tides would have been sufficient to narrow down the actual crash site to pretty accurate L&L co-ordinates.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for late replies
Well thank you for the replies so far and yes my posts are not showing up as fast as I would hope in response to replies.
[Ogre] I have to go with your superior knowledge when you are talking about radioactivity. And you may have hit the nail on the head with you explanation, I still do not understand why other boats in the immediate area were not asked to discard there catch also. And as stated by [Tiger mate] There were no H&S 'warnings issued'
I am not expecting definitive answers to this as memories of 1985 will be somewhat vague.
But there is still the News paper report of the day that states a second body was found 36 miles to the east with an ejector seat. Found by a Dutch Trawler. However it says that body was not the pilot, that in itself is a mystery. But not created by me.
The East Yorkshire trawler was the first vessel to locate the Tornado and I have a first hand taped account from the man who found it. And it is the words, from his mouth that talk about radioactivity. Not conspiracy theories. Words from the man who was there on that day. This trawler man assisted an RAF guy with the body. And it was the trawler that took the body back to Bridlington as they were told the RAF vessel had no mortuary facilities on board. Once back in Bridlington the body was flash frozen and placed in a stainless steel coffin. This is probabley standard procedure, I don't know. I am speaking to a second crew member later in the week who has a letter of thanks from the Navigators wife for his help. I am sure that if I was making this story up certain points that I have made in my replies could be checked.
[Tiger mate] You say that a Sea King from Boulmer to search for the Tornado. Do you think they would have records from 1985 that may contain information about the Dutch Trawler and the second body. I would have thought that all information regarding the crash would have been documented at the time.
As I said in my first post there still more but out of respect for the families and men involved I will not post on here. I am willing to speak via phone or other if anyone wanted to.
Regards Paul
[Ogre] I have to go with your superior knowledge when you are talking about radioactivity. And you may have hit the nail on the head with you explanation, I still do not understand why other boats in the immediate area were not asked to discard there catch also. And as stated by [Tiger mate] There were no H&S 'warnings issued'
I am not expecting definitive answers to this as memories of 1985 will be somewhat vague.
But there is still the News paper report of the day that states a second body was found 36 miles to the east with an ejector seat. Found by a Dutch Trawler. However it says that body was not the pilot, that in itself is a mystery. But not created by me.
The East Yorkshire trawler was the first vessel to locate the Tornado and I have a first hand taped account from the man who found it. And it is the words, from his mouth that talk about radioactivity. Not conspiracy theories. Words from the man who was there on that day. This trawler man assisted an RAF guy with the body. And it was the trawler that took the body back to Bridlington as they were told the RAF vessel had no mortuary facilities on board. Once back in Bridlington the body was flash frozen and placed in a stainless steel coffin. This is probabley standard procedure, I don't know. I am speaking to a second crew member later in the week who has a letter of thanks from the Navigators wife for his help. I am sure that if I was making this story up certain points that I have made in my replies could be checked.
[Tiger mate] You say that a Sea King from Boulmer to search for the Tornado. Do you think they would have records from 1985 that may contain information about the Dutch Trawler and the second body. I would have thought that all information regarding the crash would have been documented at the time.
As I said in my first post there still more but out of respect for the families and men involved I will not post on here. I am willing to speak via phone or other if anyone wanted to.
Regards Paul
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 54
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
paulilf,
I was just wondering what your motivation is in this? Are you an aviation enthusiast, local historian or is there a personal link?
Also, if there's a single newspaper report referring to a second body, I wouldn't get too hung up on that. Newspapers do get things wrong and situations such as this seems to have been with various actors from different nations are ripe for disinformation and misunderstanding.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
I was just wondering what your motivation is in this? Are you an aviation enthusiast, local historian or is there a personal link?
Also, if there's a single newspaper report referring to a second body, I wouldn't get too hung up on that. Newspapers do get things wrong and situations such as this seems to have been with various actors from different nations are ripe for disinformation and misunderstanding.
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not so much motivation Tashengurt ....something just is not seem right about this.
Rhino power mentions in an earlier post about the Lightning vs ufo story. Well I went into that years ago. To the point of contacting and working with Tony Dodd on the story . But my findings were nothing to do with a ufo. And to Tony Dodds credit he did not dismiss what I found out. But as they say that is another story. I have again spoken to the trawler man today and his story remains the same. One point he did make was that the ship that came to them during this. The HMS Bracken. Would not allow the them to transfer the body or ejector seat, they had to take it in. I am not sure what more I can add to this as my main focus was the mystery of the second ejector seat and the body that was not the pilot.
Regards paul
Rhino power mentions in an earlier post about the Lightning vs ufo story. Well I went into that years ago. To the point of contacting and working with Tony Dodd on the story . But my findings were nothing to do with a ufo. And to Tony Dodds credit he did not dismiss what I found out. But as they say that is another story. I have again spoken to the trawler man today and his story remains the same. One point he did make was that the ship that came to them during this. The HMS Bracken. Would not allow the them to transfer the body or ejector seat, they had to take it in. I am not sure what more I can add to this as my main focus was the mystery of the second ejector seat and the body that was not the pilot.
Regards paul
HMS Bracken
There you are, you see - Re Tashengurt's post No 13 -
You'll have trouble finding HMS Bracken anywhere, any time (nb not "The HMS") Closest is "Empire Bracken" last heard of in HM service in 1946.
Brecon maybe – a Hunt Class MCM ship, Pennant No. M29 , now a training hulk at Raleigh -
or perhaps Brazen, a Type 22 Frigate, Pennant No. F91, now doing time with the Brazilian Navy.
Both are in the time frame. Take your choice. LFH
Newspapers do get things wrong and situations such as this seems to have been with various actors from different nations are ripe for disinformation and misunderstanding.
Brecon maybe – a Hunt Class MCM ship, Pennant No. M29 , now a training hulk at Raleigh -
or perhaps Brazen, a Type 22 Frigate, Pennant No. F91, now doing time with the Brazilian Navy.
Both are in the time frame. Take your choice. LFH
Nearly 30 years has passed since this tragedy and my memory has faded somewhat. I was tasked with RV-ing with Mike and John that night off Flamborough Head. I had the GR1 on my radar and as our closure rate increased we made visual contact with their anti-col light. We had fairly good SA and were in RT contact with them. We suddenly lost visual and never heard from them again despite many attempts to re-establish comms. I cannot remember all the details from the BOI but it was a tragedy upon a mystery at the time. Very sad.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bracken
The news paper never reported that the ship was HMS bracken, the trawler man did. Another point I forgot to say was that he also said that it was all fiberglass. So if one of the boats for the names suggested was fiberglass.
I think the other names suggested for the boat could apply,
Regards Paul
I think the other names suggested for the boat could apply,
Regards Paul
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bridlington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bracken
well thanks guys im only putting it out as it was told to me. Almost 30 years have passed and it was just one day in that trawler mans life. So if he did not quite get the boats name right in his mind this far down the line I think he could be excused that. Im just pleased that one of the names suggested was fiberglass.
Paul
Paul