Us familys were approached to appear in the programme so at least there maybe some facts in it...

Like Wingco said, I think the Beeb may be lining this one up for a follow on after the BoI has reported. Not that they'll get anything particularly useful out of the :mad: version released to the public.


P.S. Blogger 41,399........ 41,398........ 41,397....:\

Tucumseh
BOI's are honest and DO produce unpalatable reports
That's when politics and litigation kick in
The Nimrod BOI for Toronto was re-convened 3 times to achieve an "acceptable" conclusion - (unique in BOI history) - much like the EU Constitution shambles - keep on amending and organise the voting to get the desired result!

As we all know, the Toronto crash was caused by human factors. The jet was serviceable when it hit the sea. That fact caused major problems for the top brass and politicians, because ownership of human factor failings lies with the individuals involved and their supervisors i.e names are in the frames. Its very sensitive and needs careful management for obvious reasons.

However, when an aircraft causes its own crash, due to breakage, ie no human factors, the RAF is such a large, faceless, organisation that no one individual can be identified as the owner of the problem. The BOI will produce the established facts, the higher ups will thank the BOI and make suppporting comments, the politicians will shrug their shoulders and the RAF will do nothing, except move on.........to the next accident.

Incidentally, as a senior policemen said recently, there is no such thing as an accident; every crash was destined to occur for one reason or another. Someone or something failed to do what was expected. Thats not an accident.

Whoever wrote the synopsis for Panorama needs his ares kicking. Joe Public is being mis-informed that Panorama will provide the answer before the BOI. Thats not good.

In police parlance, RTA's (Road Traffic Accident) are now officially classified as RTC's (Road Traffic Collision) to accurately reflect the current belief that there is no such thing as an accident.

You can argue about this til the cows come home (and the police do, ad nauseum, on their forums).

With regard to 30, I was at a meeting not 2 weeks before the tragic day, when a senior officer, discussing flight safety issues, said:
".....all these 'accidents' and incidents were caused by a failure of leadership"

Sir, in the circumstances that was a very prescient remark, and you know what?

So very true

Can anyone answer this question ?

As Kandahar airfield is 3,300 feet above sea level if an a/c was flying over it at 23,000 ft does that include the 3,300 feet above sea level. Or would it actually be flying at a true hight of 26,300 feet ???

Probably 20000 feet agl. And above any SAM threat.

Yes the BOI will produce the established facts. However, their report will only form one part of the evidence for the coroner. Other factors will be considered in order to ensure the whole truth is revealed and blame (if there is any) assigned. So I say to Tapper Dad, and all the other families affected by this accident, keep digging - for the truth.

Let us not forget the recent "blue on blue" case, involving a British soldier and two American A10 aircraft. The US BOI, support by Des Browne and MoD cleared the pilots. The coroner, aided by a newspaper and family research and investigation, thought differently. He returned a verdict of "Unlawful killing". Big difference.

So in Churchill's words, the BOI report will not be the end, it will not be the beginning of the end, it will be just the end of the beginning. The rest will most likely by completed by the families involved, and people who are prepared to come forward to help.

DV

So I say to Tapper Dad, and all the other families affected by this accident, keep digging - for the truth.


Thanks for that DV, one example of our digging is a request via the FOI act on the Harrier in the air at the time of the accident. We were told by High Wycombe that " the Harrier which saw the Nimrod attempt to recover to Kandahar did not film the incident.

Yet I understand that they are fitted with CCD TV camera for video reconnaissance and as this was a major incident it would have been filmed . In fact we have been told by 2 parties at different ends of the country that a film exsists. So what are we to do forget it or keep digging ? The latter I think as in the Bue on Blue case mentioned. The relatives knew a film exsisted and yet they were told time and time again it did not.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...dlyfire107.xml

Mr Cameron raised the family's concerns that they had been "misled" by the MoD over the existence of the cockpit tape, in which the two US pilots were heard discussing whether to attack the British tanks - and their reaction when they were told that had fired on "friendly" vehicles.
He said three years ago, the British board of inquiry saw a copy of the video that had now been released. But the MoD told the family at the time that some classified material had been withheld from them, but didn't tell them exactly what it was. "The family thought they were told that no tape existed," he said.

You see even the MOD can mislead relatives :=

TD. If there is a film recording it will be similar to that taken by the A10. It is long time since I worked on Harriers, but I believe there should be a mission analysis camera which takes video through the HUD (Head Up Display).

DV

DV
I may be completly wrong here (I'm sure someone will tell me if I am ) but don't Harrier GR7 jets have a Lockheed Martin Sniper XR targeting pod
with CCD TV camera for video reconnaissance ?

TD,
I think you'll find the SNIPER was fitted post the tragic loss of the MR2. See http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jd...0223_2_n.shtml

Regards and best wishes.

Would they have a mission analysis camera on board then as DV suggested ?

Yes, but that simply records the HUD picture (if it is even switched on). It would be very unusual to point a live armed aircraft at another freindly one just to take HUD video and I'm sure that this unlikely to have happened.

Tappers Dad
He be at FL230 which depending on atmospheric pressure could be (usually) 21500-24500' amsl which equates to 18200-21200' agl at KDH

Low atmospheric pressure means the aircraft would be flying lower above the ground, higher pressure vice versa.

For every 1mb difference in the pressure, the aircraft would move up or down by 30'

At that level, it would be flying on Standard Atmospheric Pressure of 1013.2mb (or 29.92 inches of Mercury - this is a more accurate measure where 0.01 inches change results in 10' up/down)

Foxthreekill: This was an "unusual" event. You would get a HUD picture and a view of what was beyond ie. a Nimrod in distress.

Some Harrier pilot out there knows the answer.

DV

Toronto Crash
 

Does anyone know where I can find the BOI report for the Toronto crash?

DV

From what I understand DV all BOI reports are held in the Houses Of Parliment library. So a word in your MPs ear would be needed.

Thanks unclenelli.

However as I know B***er all about a/c can I ask you to repeat it in terms I can understand please.
What I would like to know is if the plane exploded at 3,000 feet which is what we were told .Is that 3,000 feet above the ground + 3,300 feet down to sea level. So the atmospheric pressure would be equalivalent to being at 6,300 ft . Yes ????

Apologies in advance as its from a non Air Force type, although one of my ex school mates is in Afghanistan, plus Grandfather served both during WWII and afterwards, And I knew both L/Cpl Mathew Ford and his folks,

Anyway, I digress....

The last time I saw a decent thing on Panorama, would be 25 years ago when they covered the Air Bridge to the Falklands, or was that Newsnight.?

Anyhow I suspect it will be P@@@ poor Beeb fodder anyway.


RIP to the Crew from XV230 is my final word


V1