INCIDENT AT VALLEY
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Between Chippenham and Wooton Bassett
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 April 1983 I was a member of the RAF SAR Sea King crew that picked up the injured engineer after he ejected near Fort Augustus. I believe the team were on a low level transit and this aircraft managed to hit wires about 40 feet agl (measured later by Sea King Rad Alt!). At that height I think the passenger was prudent to self eject rather than wait to hear if the pilot decided they should leave. Unfortunately he sustained fractures/dislocations to both knees and elbows, if my memory serves me correctly after 35 years. After dropping the injured crewman at Inverness hospital we flew back via Inverness airfield and I took a photo of the Hawk, looking rather strange with the post sticking out of the rear cockpit.
I was thinking back to that incident as I was at Machrihanish with Met Flight when the Hawk departed. We heard that somewhere en route he had lost the back seater and nobody was sure where.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South of Old Warden
Age: 87
Posts: 1,375
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Similar thing happened at Akrotiri in the mid 60’s. A Javelin suffered a shattered canopy whilst in the circuit. The pilot, over the noise of the slipstream shouted to the Nav, “if we have to, will you be able to eject?” The Nav heard the key word ‘eject’ and did so. The pilot managed to land safely, the Nav was picked up in Episkopi Bay!
With regard to non-aircrew backseaters, I can’t help feeling that, in spite of all the safety briefings, ( of which I’ve experienced) the split second reactions required in an emergency, are possibly not as sharply honed as experienced Aircrew.
With regard to non-aircrew backseaters, I can’t help feeling that, in spite of all the safety briefings, ( of which I’ve experienced) the split second reactions required in an emergency, are possibly not as sharply honed as experienced Aircrew.
OC Supply tasked me to raise the F34 (Write-off) for the incident after the BoI was concluded and the various VSOs had made their comments. One thing that sticks in my mind was a comment in the P1 file that they (I believe there were two aircraft flying together) were "gathering heather". The value of the write-off (including such things as damage to Scottish Hydro property, damage to the aircraft, loss of the seat, etc) exceeded the CinC's powers meaning it had to go to 2nd PUS level for approval.
Most aircrew I've met in my life are pragmatists schooled in the University of Hard Knocks.
So let's live in the real world people shall we?
By way of example, one of the off-duty Nimrod crewmates in Toronto was introduced to the unfolding events on a TV screen on his way to take The Telephone Call. That's how it happens these days.
Getting bent out of shape because photographs appear in the media pretty promptly is basically a denial of the world we live in...whether we like it or not.
So let's live in the real world people shall we?
By way of example, one of the off-duty Nimrod crewmates in Toronto was introduced to the unfolding events on a TV screen on his way to take The Telephone Call. That's how it happens these days.
Getting bent out of shape because photographs appear in the media pretty promptly is basically a denial of the world we live in...whether we like it or not.
My introduction to the OCU as I walked into the entrance hall of the OM was to overhear a discussion of a multi-fatality crash.
O1: "Yes, you know him; he looked a bit anaemic!"
O2: "Well, he's 'kin anaemic now all right!"
Last edited by Basil; 22nd Mar 2018 at 15:42.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Age: 75
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the comments about the "command ejection" configuration I have been researching whether there was any previous incident where the front seat occupant of a Hawk was the pilot and ejected, and a rear seat occupant, who was not a pilot, remained with the aircraft.
I have found an example and very fortunately both survived. No explanation is given as to why the rear seat occupant did not eject.
The accident happened as the Hawk was landing in 1982.
The rear seat occupant was a flight test observer.
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=55500
I have found an example and very fortunately both survived. No explanation is given as to why the rear seat occupant did not eject.
The accident happened as the Hawk was landing in 1982.
The rear seat occupant was a flight test observer.
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=55500
No explanation is given as to why the rear seat occupant did not eject.
I'm sure his bonedome is a treasured memento.
Most aircrew I've met in my life are pragmatists schooled in the University of Hard Knocks.
So let's live in the real world people shall we?
By way of example, one of the off-duty Nimrod crewmates in Toronto was introduced to the unfolding events on a TV screen on his way to take The Telephone Call. That's how it happens these days.
Getting bent out of shape because photographs appear in the media pretty promptly is basically a denial of the world we live in...whether we like it or not.
So let's live in the real world people shall we?
By way of example, one of the off-duty Nimrod crewmates in Toronto was introduced to the unfolding events on a TV screen on his way to take The Telephone Call. That's how it happens these days.
Getting bent out of shape because photographs appear in the media pretty promptly is basically a denial of the world we live in...whether we like it or not.
Service personnel might be used to hard knocks, but less so the family and friends of victims.
Seems the Mail bowed to the overwhelming negative response in its comments section.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well here it still is
Moment Red Arrows pilot escaped crash fireball | Daily Mail Online
Moment Red Arrows pilot escaped crash fireball | Daily Mail Online
Moment Red Arrows pilot escaped crash fireball | Daily Mail Online
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edited out my follow up because, upon reflection, a discussion about the rights and wrongs of media intrusion are probably not appropriate, and definitely not necessary at this sad time.
RIP & condolences to the deceased and family.
RIP & condolences to the deceased and family.
Last edited by The Old Fat One; 22nd Mar 2018 at 16:10.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,538
Received 220 Likes
on
134 Posts
Was he/she actually on the base? If so, it would be an even more astonishing 'up yours' response to the RAF's request.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,475
Received 2,598 Likes
on
1,100 Posts
I believe the Tornado command ejection was brought about during early testing of the Aircraft, if I remember rightly they were up on an Test Flight over the North Sea and an incident occurred ( birdstrike? ) disabling the front seater , the aircraft was in a shallow descent and the rear seater stuck it talking to the pilot hoping he would start to respond until at low height he was forced to bang out leaving the poor guy to his fate. The command ejection came about from that incident. Or am I getting confused?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,475
Received 2,598 Likes
on
1,100 Posts
People keep complaining about the photographer so I thought I'd say my thoughts as a keen amateur photographer, a lot appears to revolve around the RAF's request, well it is just that, a request, copyright belongs to the photographer and rightly or wrongly it is up to him to decide what happens to his images.
Yes, he has sold then via an agency to the press and so is making money from them, but that does not mean he hasn't also provided them to the RAF to assist in their investigation.
Photography is a double edged sword and an expensive one at that, I currently own over 20K's worth of camera equipment and I am just an amateur, a lot of you probably are unaware a single lens can cost 10k though the most I have paid is about half that. Without people funding their hobby and spending time at the fence, the RAF would have nothing image wise to assist them, hence the double edge sword, would I have provided my images to the RAF and AAIB, undoubtably yes, but that's the ex RAF / Aircraft Engineer in me, would I consider selling any of them, that's a hard one, possibly as long as they do not include any distressing scenes, but in this case probably no.
Back to the photographer involved, I do not know his financial status, so the thousand or so he may get per image could well be life changing for him and I do not begrudge him that, and if he has provided the images then they will be of valuable assistance to the inquiry. With out the likes of him they would have none.
As for the Daily Fail printing them, end of the day they are a newspaper and that is what they do no matter how odious we see it personally, on the same note the BBC was running the film on their website of the Uber cab right up to it hitting the victim.
Yes, he has sold then via an agency to the press and so is making money from them, but that does not mean he hasn't also provided them to the RAF to assist in their investigation.
Photography is a double edged sword and an expensive one at that, I currently own over 20K's worth of camera equipment and I am just an amateur, a lot of you probably are unaware a single lens can cost 10k though the most I have paid is about half that. Without people funding their hobby and spending time at the fence, the RAF would have nothing image wise to assist them, hence the double edge sword, would I have provided my images to the RAF and AAIB, undoubtably yes, but that's the ex RAF / Aircraft Engineer in me, would I consider selling any of them, that's a hard one, possibly as long as they do not include any distressing scenes, but in this case probably no.
Back to the photographer involved, I do not know his financial status, so the thousand or so he may get per image could well be life changing for him and I do not begrudge him that, and if he has provided the images then they will be of valuable assistance to the inquiry. With out the likes of him they would have none.
As for the Daily Fail printing them, end of the day they are a newspaper and that is what they do no matter how odious we see it personally, on the same note the BBC was running the film on their website of the Uber cab right up to it hitting the victim.
Last edited by NutLoose; 22nd Mar 2018 at 21:05.