BAE 146 lightning strike - ABZ to Scatsta
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Accra
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAE 146 lightning strike - ABZ to Scatsta
Any news on an Aberdeen to Scatsta BAE 146 taking a lightning strike and recieving damage last week (heard it through the oil rig grapevine) apparently the A/C is now grounded ???????????
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flight Ops Dept
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ukdean
Er, whats the point in this thread, is this the first plane to have a lightning strike..........Like the 146 this thread is not worthy of "airtime"...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Bolivian Air Force 146 @SEN is going to be cut up that is about the 3rd 146 this year. A number have found new owners and Flightline seem to manage very well with the marque.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UKDean,
I'd have thought this info' well worth posting.
If trying to perform relatively STOL into austere airstrips, you might rather wish to be in a 146.
As to lightning bonding / protection, I have photographed then-new carbon fibre wings where a/c had taken lightning hits, and the results caused a great deal of worry.
As those aircraft were military fighters, I presume the risk was deemed acceptable.
Having seen the strike damage, and also that material's behaviour under simple physical impacts, personally I doubt it's suitable for warplanes - in a REAL war - let alone airliners.
Of course a big modern heavy twin is perfectly safe, as we saw with the AA 767 where the No.2 engine let go, ( very fortunately on the ground ), the main disc buzz-sawed through the lower fuselage and promptly took out the No.1 engine as well as various control surfaces.
I was never involved in building or flying the 146 ( though did work for BAe elsewhere before that organisation became what it is now ) but a simple, STOL job with 4 engines suddenly seems rather appealing...
I'd have thought this info' well worth posting.
If trying to perform relatively STOL into austere airstrips, you might rather wish to be in a 146.
As to lightning bonding / protection, I have photographed then-new carbon fibre wings where a/c had taken lightning hits, and the results caused a great deal of worry.
As those aircraft were military fighters, I presume the risk was deemed acceptable.
Having seen the strike damage, and also that material's behaviour under simple physical impacts, personally I doubt it's suitable for warplanes - in a REAL war - let alone airliners.
Of course a big modern heavy twin is perfectly safe, as we saw with the AA 767 where the No.2 engine let go, ( very fortunately on the ground ), the main disc buzz-sawed through the lower fuselage and promptly took out the No.1 engine as well as various control surfaces.
I was never involved in building or flying the 146 ( though did work for BAe elsewhere before that organisation became what it is now ) but a simple, STOL job with 4 engines suddenly seems rather appealing...
I flew the BAe146 for 19 years and it is great in a crosswind. As usual we are getting "informed" statements from some "learned" people who are probably not even qualified to push an empty pram.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minden Air Begins Conversion of World's First BAE-146 Air Attack Tanker
did this get any where
did this get any where
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Flight Ops Dept
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew the BAe146 for 19 years and it is great in a crosswind. As usual we are getting "informed" statements from some "learned" people who are probably not even qualified to push an empty pra
If it was directed at me then you are il informed as you didn't read my first post, that makes you a hypocrit