Two german Eurofighters have crashed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowing something of the chemicals released in a car fire, (including hydrofluoric acid, released by certain plastics as they combust) I can't say I blame them for taking care. I've heard of police officers who, having poked around inside burnt out car wrecks, have had the bones in their fingers dissolved away after getting them wet in a puddle of water in the bodywork.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Mountain Rescue Service carry industrial respirators (Not the GS respirator) as standard for such crashes to protect from the fibre hazard, plus from the products of combustion.
DV
We all understand and appreciate your crusade to see a CWS fitted to all UK fast jets.
However if, as reported, this was an air combat sortie then even if there had been one fitted it would have been very unlikely to have been of any assistance.
A breakdown in SA (remember, none of us know what actually happened yet) can happen for many reasons but during highly dynamic manoeuvring it is very unlikely that any CWS already invented or one in the pipeline could prevent a MAC during such circumstances.
Please don’t take this as a criticism, just want to avoid misunderstandings.
BV
However if, as reported, this was an air combat sortie then even if there had been one fitted it would have been very unlikely to have been of any assistance.
A breakdown in SA (remember, none of us know what actually happened yet) can happen for many reasons but during highly dynamic manoeuvring it is very unlikely that any CWS already invented or one in the pipeline could prevent a MAC during such circumstances.
Please don’t take this as a criticism, just want to avoid misunderstandings.
BV
Yes. Chip recorders just not civilian configured. Both are secured now yesterday one was still within the wreckage.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The German air force tweeted on Tuesday afternoon that the pilot killed in the crash was 27 years old and had 400 hours flight experience. The pilot who survived was more experienced, with more than 3,700 flight hours.
Mind you, that concept focused the mind when I was transiting the Lakes after conducting a pipeline photo survey contract a few years ago. Deliberately kept it high heading South with various FJ traffic clearly weaving through the valleys below at LL. Thought did cross my mind that, if one of them had an issue down there (bird strike or whatever) they'd just pull up out the valley and it would only be seconds before they would be through my level as H 'n' H and his phot man puttered on South! And I'd never have seen it comming - even if opposite direction.
Always so sad when this sort of accident happens and thank goodness one got out. RIP the other. V sad. H 'n' H
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have the RAF Typhoons got a CWS yet? I know that, over the past few years, there has been quite a bit in the Press about the Hawk and Typhoon fleets getting a Mod of some sort and there was the Tornado TCAS programme a few years back. I thought 2019 was when the Hawk andsoftewa Typhoon fleets were due to start getting a system.
In a recent Parliamentary Written Question, Douglas Ross asked, "What is the timescale for the Typhoon aircraft to be compliant with Part 13 sub paragraph 1.1.9.1 of MAA/Def Stan 00-970 (Aircraft Collision Avoidance System)". The answer he got back from MoD was, "The Typhoon Enhanced Collision Awareness System (ECAS) will enter service with the United Kingdom's Typhoon fleet later this year. The Typhoon ECAS is a collision awareness system. As such, it is not required to comply with Def/Stan 00-970 Part 13 sub paragraph 1.1.9.1 and there are no current plans to do so." . The same reply was given to a similar question asked about the F35.
DV
As an aside, really interesting to see Para 7 of the SS, which I originally assumed was fallout from the Typhoon/A400M "Humberside" Airprox which, of course, links back in to the ECAS/TCAS debate as well as some staff shortages at Swanwick. However, it seems the mitigation talked of at Para 7 of the SS was not followed on the day of the Airprox (3/8/18). So the issue which Para 7 was designed to prevent, occurred some 2 weeks after the SS was issued. Even the Airprox Report did not make the point that the agreed process was not followed despite the SS wording suggesting the mitigation was already SOP! It seems, even, that the Airprox Board may not have been aware of Para 7 of the SS - no mention was made of it, even in the Safety Barrier Assessment. You know, I think the 2nd sentence of Para 8 is probably the best understatement ever re perception!
Anyway, not going to cause any more Thread Drift here ... but your point well made! Just wondered if I'd missed something - but your subtlety was way too much for me to fathom out sadly so thanks for the nudge back on track!
Back on topic, as I said earlier, so desperately sad that Training once again causes such a loss....
H 'n' H
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, I think the 2nd sentence of Para 8 is probably the best understatement ever re perception!
The other thing that I have always found amazing is that ODHs declare risk Tolerable and ALARP by passing it up the line. It is if they believe the risk disappears by doing that.
DV
Or, maybe the ODH just ensuring that they will have company in the Dock, should there ever be a Court Case involving the topic! Doesn't prevent a crunch should one occur tho! "Tolerable" and "ALARP" are v. subjective - without the safety analysis behind them to give them substance. To get a "Catastrophic" down from "no way!" to something "tolerable" you have to push the probabilities out a loooong way. And yet, just 2 weeks after the 2018 SS was issued, bingo - an Airprox involving a Typhoon. The irony being, that time, it was RAF on RAF - tho it was traffic out of Humberside! Maybe a gentle nudge by the Fates ahead of something else? I hope not......... H 'n' H
Does anyone understand how a CAS would work during air combat training? The fighter’s job being to get close to, and point at another aircraft whilst the CAS is trying to stop you doing exactly that. The continual “Traffic, Traffic, climb, climb, descend descend” of current systems would train the pilot to ignore the warnings or to turn it off, both of which would be counter productive.
Similarly, there is not much challenge in acquiring and identifying the opposition if they are appearing on your CAS display.
Similarly, there is not much challenge in acquiring and identifying the opposition if they are appearing on your CAS display.
Timelord,
Switch it off?
Switch it off?
The real risks we are addressing here are simple transits or LL transit training etc and conflicts with GA or, even worse, airline traffic. As I mentioned earlier, transiting the Lakes with FJs whizzing below me really focused my mind. I'd have been far happier had the Mil traffic had TCAS. If one had pulled up following a bird strike and then got a TCAS TA, at least they could have booted in some rudder or released a bit of backpressure and altered the climb trajectory. It would have made their day a bit worse (“Ahhhg, NOW what?!!!”) but they would at least have “seen” me. So, why didn’t I go round the Lakes? Risk assessment vs commercial expediency! My judgement call. I decided to fly the route …. but I would have been far happier had I known TCAS was there in the FJ cockpits. And as a flying bod and a tax payer and having had several decades in the Mil ….. before "cost" is mentioned, I can have my say!
Sadly what may have happened in Germany is probably one of the “costs” to realistic training. For decades tho, the Mil have been having “events” in the open FIR in transits etc – and that’s really where we are talking I guess. But that is just my view…….. FWIW! I’ll bug out here – before I’m banned for Thread Drift!
Cheers, H ‘n’ H
Mid-airs during ATC usually don't end well. There is also a possibility that this might have been a low closure collision during close formation pre or post split. We don't know, nor will we until the Luftwaffe inquiry has done its thing.
The a/c are reported as nine years old with 1000 hours - maybe one flight per aircraft per week. Is the general sentiment that that's ok, or should a taxpayer think they're being ripped off?