Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Two german Eurofighters have crashed

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Two german Eurofighters have crashed

Old 25th Jun 2019, 23:22
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
Fin or seat rail?

Tragic loss of life. RIP.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2019, 23:42
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The state of the German Air Force

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ow-death-25157


DV
Distant Voice is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 05:13
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 379
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rattman
Know a firefighter, they are starting to wear full rebreather suits for even standard car fires. Apparently burning carbon fibre breathed in could cause asbestos /silicosis like disease.
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.
msbbarratt is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 09:26
  #24 (permalink)  
 
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.
geniculate is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 09:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol Temple Meads
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I understand that the German Typhoons are fitted with the same Collision Warning System as that fitted to RAF Typhoons.


DV
Distant Voice is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 10:11
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,360
Received 455 Likes on 120 Posts
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
Bob Viking is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 10:31
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Age: 67
Posts: 166
Received 28 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
Both Crash Survivable Memory Units (CSMU) have been found.

Are they what we mere mortals know as black boxes?
golfbananajam is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 13:20
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,060
Received 64 Likes on 39 Posts
Yes. Chip recorders just not civilian configured. Both are secured now yesterday one was still within the wreckage.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 13:29
  #29 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,229
Received 1,498 Likes on 678 Posts
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.
ORAC is online now  
Old 26th Jun 2019, 15:10
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Here 'n' there!
Posts: 582
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Distant Voice
I understand that the German Typhoons are fitted with the same Collision Warning System as that fitted to RAF Typhoons.


DV
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 and Typhoon fleets were due to start getting a system. Genuine question. Tho, as BV says, doubt that would have helped in this case where it sounds they were conducting an ACS. I believe that's why there is usually a "knock it off" height band in case SA is lost at any time and so one can bail up into that and then get the picture back.

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
Hot 'n' High is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 10:50
  #31 (permalink)  
 
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.
Hot 'n' High you are quite right, I was being facetious. As long as 2* Duty Holders continue to sign off Safety Statements based on safety features planned for the future not what are currently in operation (ALARP - Temporal), aircraft like Typhoon, and F35, will never get fitted with a CWS. Statements such as, "I assess that the RtL as a result of MAC between a Typhoon and commercial air transport (CAT) is both ALARP and Tolerable [use to be the other way round]. However, whilst work on a Typhoon CWS is progressing, the MOD's operation of Typhoon without CWS does not align with civilian safety standards", are meaningless. Not only that, current installations do not align with RA 1205 and MAA/Def Stan 00-970; the latter stating, "All crewed aircraft types shall be fitted with an Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS)" .The planned Enhanced Collision Awareness System (ECAS) is a software fudge which falls well short of the goals set following the Moray Firth Tornado collision.

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
Distant Voice is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 13:41
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Here 'n' there!
Posts: 582
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Distant Voice
Hot 'n' High you are quite right, I was being facetious. .......

DV
Ahhhh! Sadly, H 'n' H can be a bit(?) slow on the uptake at times! My humble apologies. And re your background explanation I see what you mean. I have also just found the July 2018 T ODH SS (redacted) on line which discusses the strategy/hints at the limitations of the proposed ECAS, even if no real system detail is given in that top level document, particularly WRT Stage 2 ECAS. But I have enough understanding of TCAS vs L16 to see some of the issues.

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
Hot 'n' High is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 14:28
  #33 (permalink)  
 
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 Statement at para 8, under the heading 'RtL Currently Escalated to SDH Level', is exactly the same as that in the final paragraph of the SS dated 17 Dec 2014 signed by the previous ODH. Nothing changed in almost four years, and now we know that there is no intention to install CWS. Someone should inform the current ODH so that he can adjust his statement.

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
Distant Voice is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 15:33
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Here 'n' there!
Posts: 582
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Distant Voice
..............

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
Hot 'n' High is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 16:38
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 831
Received 98 Likes on 51 Posts
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.






Timelord is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 17:47
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,921
Received 137 Likes on 62 Posts
Timelord,

Switch it off?
pr00ne is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 18:04
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Here 'n' there!
Posts: 582
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Timelord
Does anyone understand how a CAS would work during air combat training? ........ there is not much challenge in acquiring and identifying the opposition if they are appearing on your CAS display.
While not a FJJ, you'd never use this in planned ACT for the reasons you cited – so there is always a risk in that activity which will only ever be mitigated with "knock it off" bands or similar should one jet lose SA on the other/rest. It will never be risk-free for participants. But the training should be in NOTAMed airspace with the equivalent of a Range Safety Officer with radar cover in case of intrusion by other non-participatory traffic bimbling along. But often I’d suspect the RSO cannot even separate the actual participants – let alone deconflict them it is such a dynamic environment!

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
Hot 'n' High is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 19:15
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 831
Received 98 Likes on 51 Posts
Originally Posted by pr00ne
Timelord,

Switch it off?
Exactly. So if the Germans were, as reported, conducting ACT, a CAS would not have prevented the collision.
Timelord is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 19:41
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 67
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 35 Likes on 12 Posts
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.
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2019, 19:51
  #40 (permalink)  
c52
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,259
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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?
c52 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.