INCIDENT AT VALLEY
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irrespective of the cause of this tragic loss this will inevitably lead to searching questions about the carriage of non aircrew in the back of fast jets. There are good reasons why aircrew selection and in particular FJ training is so stringent and difficult. Having limited trained, non aircrew personnel in the back of a single engined FJ with as I understand it no command ejection is asking for trouble. Sadly nothing will bring back this man or lessen the pain for his family but undoubtedly this practice will be reviewed.
Very well said spannermonkey.
I was only a civil pilot, no military experience at all, but I don't think many outside the aviation community fully realise the distress and heartsearching that goes on in the aftermath of an accident - especially within such a close group as the Arrows.
My sincere sympathy to all the family, friends and colleagues of those affected by that crash.
I was only a civil pilot, no military experience at all, but I don't think many outside the aviation community fully realise the distress and heartsearching that goes on in the aftermath of an accident - especially within such a close group as the Arrows.
My sincere sympathy to all the family, friends and colleagues of those affected by that crash.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jayand
Irrespective of the cause of this tragic loss this will inevitably lead to searching questions about the carriage of non aircrew in the back of fast jets. There are good reasons why aircrew selection and in particular FJ training is so stringent and difficult. Having limited trained, non aircrew personnel in the back of a single engined FJ with as I understand it no command ejection is asking for trouble. Sadly nothing will bring back this man or lessen the pain for his family but undoubtedly this practice will be reviewed.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 65
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who was the guy on the BBC just now in the RAeS tie, suggesting you could eat your lunch of the Inside of the Jet pipe and describing a “Martin Baker letdown” could do without this at a time like this. He was almost rejoicing.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Swaffham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expert!
Originally Posted by dragartist
Who was the guy on the BBC just now in the RAeS tie, suggesting you could eat your lunch of the Inside of the Jet pipe and describing a “Martin Baker letdown” could do without this at a time like this. He was almost rejoicing.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Amblesidel
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the logic in the T1 for command eject for the front seat only from the back. I can see this might be useful in the case of a training flight where PUT sits in the front and P1 is in the back for example if there is a bad bird strike. But in the case of P1 in the front and an engineer or civilian in the back, why not have command over the rear seat.
In other words P! always has command of the other seat seems more logical.
daylyt... I rather agree with you, and I think the guy in the RAes tie, an 'ex-RAF pilot' thought he was being rather funny by using the term 'Martin Barker letdown, he cleary did not gauge the BBC audience would not understand him. But I think we all know the media always find these so called 'experts' who will speculate at the first opportunity, I think they like the thought of being on television.
In other words P! always has command of the other seat seems more logical.
daylyt... I rather agree with you, and I think the guy in the RAes tie, an 'ex-RAF pilot' thought he was being rather funny by using the term 'Martin Barker letdown, he cleary did not gauge the BBC audience would not understand him. But I think we all know the media always find these so called 'experts' who will speculate at the first opportunity, I think they like the thought of being on television.
Last edited by anchorhold; 21st Mar 2018 at 09:41.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had an associate, good oppo and fellow SNCO flung out the back of an F3 into the north sea (whilst on a "transit" flight to assist with the recovery aspects of another deployed F3) so "risk" is always there.
Sincerest condolences to all affected by this tragedy.
O/T F3 report.
Worth a read on how fragile the system is and how easily it falls apart.Mods feel free to bin as reqd.
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...2017-09430.pdf
Sincerest condolences to all affected by this tragedy.
O/T F3 report.
Worth a read on how fragile the system is and how easily it falls apart.Mods feel free to bin as reqd.
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...2017-09430.pdf
Last edited by glad rag; 21st Mar 2018 at 15:20.
The command system was designed only for back-to-front since there would be such a small percentage of trips where you may want anything else. (Invariably flown with QFI in the rear or flown solo) Quite a bit more pipework and valves if you want every combination. That said, I believe the T10 had a selector in the rear that gave you all of the options.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jayand
Irrespective of the cause of this tragic loss this will inevitably lead to searching questions about the carriage of non aircrew in the back of fast jets. There are good reasons why aircrew selection and in particular FJ training is so stringent and difficult. Having limited trained, non aircrew personnel in the back of a single engined FJ with as I understand it no command ejection is asking for trouble. Sadly nothing will bring back this man or lessen the pain for his family but undoubtedly this practice will be reviewed.
This is exactly the sort of insensitive opinionated tosh I refer to. You have no idea what caused the incident, yet in your self appointed authority you now believe the RAF will/should now review the carriage of Pax in the back seat of any FJ. Your post can very easily be read as the guy who lost his life has no place to be in the aircraft in the first place as only aircrew have the capacity to appreciate the demands and risk of fast jet flying. Have you been through the selection process and do you speak form a position of authority? Have you even been through the pre-flight briefing that pax go though? Are you GC and are you versed in the operation and maintenance of an ejection seat as all GC are? I could go on. The guy in the back was not an idiot or some clueless buffoon, he was trained and possibly has flow in the back on more than one occasion. There is no released cause as yet and the family and friends are still getting to grips with this loss.
I suggest you and other who continue to post about what happened or why think about how utterly insensitive you really are. If you don't understand what I mean by that, by default that means you then have no idea about how insensitive such opinions really are.
Yes I know this is a public forum, but for goodness sake think before you post. While you may try to justify your opinions of how the press roll out some 'expert' to provide comment or opinion, you are doing exactly the same, only you feel justified as you are not doing so in front of a TV camera.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aside from the physical act of pulling the handle and all the decisions and timing that go with that what about the lack of Survival training non aircrew have for these backseat flights? What if an ejection occured over the sea, are they familiar/well practiced in the skills of sea survival? Annual pool drills? Liferafts, PSP's etc? The enquiry into this I suspect will be messy.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by spannermonkey
This is exactly the sort of insensitive opinionated tosh I refer to. You have no idea what caused the incident, yet in your self appointed authority you now believe the RAF will/should now review the carriage of Pax in the back seat of any FJ. Your post can very easily be read as the guy who lost his life has no place to be in the aircraft in the first place as only aircrew have the capacity to appreciate the demands and risk of fast jet flying. Have you been through the selection process and do you speak form a position of authority? Have you even been through the pre-flight briefing that pax go though? Are you GC and are you versed in the operation and maintenance of an ejection seat as all GC are? I could go on. The guy in the back was not an idiot or some clueless buffoon, he was trained and possibly has flow in the back on more than one occasion. There is no released cause as yet and the family and friends are still getting to grips with this loss.
I suggest you and other who continue to post about what happened or why think about how utterly insensitive you really are. If you don't understand what I mean by that, by default that means you then have no idea about how insensitive such opinions really are.
Yes I know this is a public forum, but for goodness sake think before you post. While you may try to justify your opinions of how the press roll out some 'expert' to provide comment or opinion, you are doing exactly the same, only you feel justified as you are not doing so in front of a TV camera.
I suggest you and other who continue to post about what happened or why think about how utterly insensitive you really are. If you don't understand what I mean by that, by default that means you then have no idea about how insensitive such opinions really are.
Yes I know this is a public forum, but for goodness sake think before you post. While you may try to justify your opinions of how the press roll out some 'expert' to provide comment or opinion, you are doing exactly the same, only you feel justified as you are not doing so in front of a TV camera.
In answer to your questions yes I have been through the process of a backseat briefing on a fastjet and if you think that is sufficient to cover all scenarios for even an experienced back seat flyer then I believe you are sadly mistaken and
yes I am well versed in the maintenance and operation of Ejection seats in FJ's.
Nobody suggested that the guy was a "Clueless idiot" far, far from it.
But if you think the enquiry after determining the cause of the crash won't look at the issue on non aircrew sitting in FJ seats then you are very, very naive!
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Amblesidel
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
spannermonkey I completely agree, there really is no problem on the whole with RAF engineers or civilians as PAX in the Hawk particularly in transit.
i say that having been lucky enough as a civilian and ATPL to fly on a low level sortie through the Welsh mountains in a Hawk. The preparation for that included a RAF medical for the day, included measuring my limbs, height and weight. Likewise the briefing on the ejection seat and survival was thorough, although I do not recall being briefed on the command of the front seat from the back, perhaps intentional from the RAFs perspective.
I see no problem with engineers as PAX on transit flights, it is just practical. Likewise in respect of civilian PAX with the Red Arrows, I see no problem as the Red Arrows are there to seek publicity.
Some memorable moments for the Red Arrows in recent years was seeing Brian May of Queen fame strapping into a Red Arrows Hawk, likewise the RAF had a competition to allow nine air cadets to fly as PAX on a transit flight.
i say that having been lucky enough as a civilian and ATPL to fly on a low level sortie through the Welsh mountains in a Hawk. The preparation for that included a RAF medical for the day, included measuring my limbs, height and weight. Likewise the briefing on the ejection seat and survival was thorough, although I do not recall being briefed on the command of the front seat from the back, perhaps intentional from the RAFs perspective.
I see no problem with engineers as PAX on transit flights, it is just practical. Likewise in respect of civilian PAX with the Red Arrows, I see no problem as the Red Arrows are there to seek publicity.
Some memorable moments for the Red Arrows in recent years was seeing Brian May of Queen fame strapping into a Red Arrows Hawk, likewise the RAF had a competition to allow nine air cadets to fly as PAX on a transit flight.
Originally Posted by Jayand
Aside from the physical act of pulling the handle and all the decisions and timing that go with that what about the lack of Survival training non aircrew have for these backseat flights? What if an ejection occured over the sea, are they familiar/well practiced in the skills of sea survival? Annual pool drills? Liferafts, PSP's etc? The enquiry into this I suspect will be messy.
This also isn’t the first multiple ejection where one crewmember has been survived but another hasn’t, so I’m also not sure at this stage that we can draw any conclusions about survival simply because one of those involved wasn’t a Fast Jet Pilot/navigator etc....
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Amblesidel
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jayand, I can confirm that before flying in a Hawk, I was well briefed on ejection over sea, the only difference was that unlike RAF pilots I did not actually do the 'wet drills' but was fairly confident of the drills. To add I was also bried in vacating the aircraft in the event of the ejection seat failing, clearly you need height for that.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by spannermonkey
Yes I know this is a public forum
Unless you are a moderator, it is not for you to dictate what people can or cannot post.
Guest
Posts: n/a
dragartist (#66),
In the mid-'50s, it was common for the "erks" to keep their NAAFI meat pies and Cornish pasties warm in a recently landed Vampire tailpipe. As the pipe is very hot just after shut down, any remaining traces of avtur are quickly burned off: the pipe is not at all smelly.
It was an (unofficial!) item on the next man's walk-around.
In the mid-'50s, it was common for the "erks" to keep their NAAFI meat pies and Cornish pasties warm in a recently landed Vampire tailpipe. As the pipe is very hot just after shut down, any remaining traces of avtur are quickly burned off: the pipe is not at all smelly.
It was an (unofficial!) item on the next man's walk-around.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dead Dog Land
Age: 76
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps someone with more knowledge than me could explain why the engineer was there in the first place, surely there is enough expertise at Valley to carry out an AF/BF or turnround on a visiting Hawk. Are there great differences between a RAFAT T1 and the Valley types?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The real world
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by anchorhold
spannermonkey I completely agree, there really is no problem on the whole with RAF engineers or civilians as PAX in the Hawk particularly in transit.
i say that having been lucky enough as a civilian and ATPL to fly on a low level sortie through the Welsh mountains in a Hawk. The preparation for that included a RAF medical for the day, included measuring my limbs, height and weight. Likewise the briefing on the ejection seat and survival was thorough, although I do not recall being briefed on the command of the front seat from the back, perhaps intentional from the RAFs perspective.
I see no problem with engineers as PAX on transit flights, it is just practical. Likewise in respect of civilian PAX with the Red Arrows, I see no problem as the Red Arrows are there to seek publicity.
Some memorable moments for the Red Arrows in recent years was seeing Brian May of Queen fame strapping into a Red Arrows Hawk, likewise the RAF had a competition to allow nine air cadets to fly as PAX on a transit flight.
i say that having been lucky enough as a civilian and ATPL to fly on a low level sortie through the Welsh mountains in a Hawk. The preparation for that included a RAF medical for the day, included measuring my limbs, height and weight. Likewise the briefing on the ejection seat and survival was thorough, although I do not recall being briefed on the command of the front seat from the back, perhaps intentional from the RAFs perspective.
I see no problem with engineers as PAX on transit flights, it is just practical. Likewise in respect of civilian PAX with the Red Arrows, I see no problem as the Red Arrows are there to seek publicity.
Some memorable moments for the Red Arrows in recent years was seeing Brian May of Queen fame strapping into a Red Arrows Hawk, likewise the RAF had a competition to allow nine air cadets to fly as PAX on a transit flight.
There is a WORLD of difference between receiving a thorough briefing and actually being well practiced and confident in the drills and skills needed to exit and survive an aircraft crashing or ditching! especially given that the moment you are going to need those skills and recall the details of the "Thorough briefing" is likely to be highly stressful, split second and life threatening!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 79
Posts: 16,775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jayland does have a point about post-egress survival. In several aircraft types we briefed the pax ' in the unlikely event ' and ensured they were properly dressed. AFAIK none were trained in pressure breathing or dinghy drills, and few underwent abandonment practise.
