Red Arrows crash at Bournemouth Air Show

I'm fairly sure the hawks a single engine - but even in a double engined plane losing half your thrust that cose to the ground could still cause you to crash , plus on some bird strikes the compressor blades can disintegrate and rip into the fuel cells and avionics etc.
 
Tori said:
If a plane gets hit by a bird, is there not another engine? I don't know anything about planes, but I hoped there was a back up?

This is very sad, and I've seen the red arrows quite alot. Hopefully Jons family will take some comfort in all the lovely messages and well wishes that have been sent across the world. RIP
Click to expand...

No, the Hawk is a single engine jet, also bird strikes on other parts of the airframe, such as leading edges and aerofoils can also have devastating results.
 
Last edited:
:'( That's very sad. All planes should be like gliders so they can float down like birds.
 
Tori said:
:'( That's very sad. All planes should be like gliders so they can float down like birds.
Click to expand...

They are, they can and they do ;)
 
Tori said:
This one didn't though :(
Click to expand...

It's not always possible, there are many variables but the aircraft was probably too low and if the engine flamed out, the only way to glide and increase airspeed to get lift is to lower the nose, and as he was so low, there was no chance to do that.
 
The plane, the plane didn't glide like a bird and land safely. They should definitely have some sort of back up.
 
Why would you want to increase airspeed? I'd want to slow down and land? I think this is beyond me. I'm still amazed planes get off the ground at all. If what the papers are saying about him ejecting late to save others, he was a special person.
 
Tori said:
The plane, the plane didn't glide like a bird and land safely. They should definitely have some sort of back up.
Click to expand...

Ah! okay.... as Jim said above, they have to achieve an airspeed capable of lift and without that they are going to come down..... same with birds if they can't flap their wings they will come down hard..... Ever seen a bird shot out of the sky? ... They come down, straight down. :|
 
Last edited:
Tori said:
Why would you want to increase airspeed? I'd want to slow down and land? I think this is beyond me. I'm still amazed planes get off the ground at all. If what the papers are saying about him ejecting late to save others, he was a special person.
Click to expand...

Hi Tori

Have you ever seen anyone water skiing? When they are being pulled along at a certain speed they stay on top of the water but as soon as they stop..... they sink ...... same thing, but in air :)
 
Indeed, aircraft need to travel above a certain speed otherwise the wings can't generate lift. If they drop below this speed the wings become ineffective and the aircraft simply drops. If this happens while low to the ground, you're in serious trouble and without power you simply can't recover.

You might ask how they land then if by going so slow they just drop? When planes go into a landing configuration they raise the nose while dropping airspeed (actually using the slowing speed of the aircraft to make it decend) and deploy ailerons and flaps (in short, making the effective surface of the wing larger and create drag) using the whole craft as an airbake making a controlled decent from a certain height.

After turning the aircraft away from occupied areas without power, all the time losing the small amount of lift he had is what is likely to have caused this., though we won't know the true cause until the investigation is complete.
 
Last edited:
Total guess but i kind of thinking possible faults where. Engine trouble, bird strike or out of fuel.

I thinking they must of been low on fuel as they had just done a display and where they not held up for a little while as all the displays where running a little behind (sure i saw on the news the displays where running late due delays from the rest of the displays) Plus the fact there was no fire after the crash.

Also thinking that the reason Eggman didnt eject was due to him steering away from homes etc.

No matter what the causes where its still a very sad loss to a fine display team.

As ive said before heart out to family, friends and team mates
 
odd jim said:
Indeed, aircraft need to travel above a certain speed otherwise the wings can't generate lift. If they drop below this speed the wings become ineffective and the aircraft simply drops. If this happens while low to the ground, you're in serious trouble and without power you simply can't recover.
Click to expand...

<Pedant>

Very true...... However, the aircraft does not actually need to be moving or travelling! It's the wind speed over the wings we are talking about... If the wind is blowing fast enough over the wings then the aircraft will and can lift, allowing the aircraft to hover over the ground. </Pedant off> ;)

Sorry Jim.... I'm bored and the fridge is empty of beer :shake: ..... Sod it! .. Time for the wine :D
 
Splog said:
<Pedant>

Very true...... However, the aircraft does not actually need to be moving or travelling! It's the wind speed over the wings we are talking about... If the wind is blowing fast enough over the wings then the aircraft will and can lift, allowing the aircraft to hover over the ground. </Pedant off> ;)

Sorry Jim.... I'm bored and the fridge is empty of beer :shake: ..... Sod it! .. Time for the wine :D
Click to expand...

Lol what you say is true though! Good example, birds of prey "hovering" against the wind without flapping their wings.

Would have needed a massive gust of wind to keep the Hawk T1 up that afternoon though :(

Chiffs - I doubt he ran out of fuel. They carry more than enough for the display (and sometimes carry extra in an external tank slung under the fuselage) and have plenty of warning in relation to low fuel in the main tank, let alone the reserve tank so the only way lack of fuel could have caused this would have been damage to a wing tank but that's unlikely as they are pretty well enforced.
 
Last edited:
Splog said:
<Pedant>

Very true...... However, the aircraft does not actually need to be moving or travelling! It's the wind speed over the wings we are talking about... If the wind is blowing fast enough over the wings then the aircraft will and can lift, allowing the aircraft to hover over the ground. </Pedant off> ;)

Sorry Jim.... I'm bored and the fridge is empty of beer :shake: ..... Sod it! .. Time for the wine :D
Click to expand...

You need some seriously fast wind for that too happen.
 
I thought this was lovely:

Do not stand at my grave and weep,
I am not there; I do not sleep,
I may not now be in the group,
......But I am the diamond in the loop,
I am the white the red and blue,
......Entwined within the corkscrew,
When you look to the heavens above,
I am the arrow through the heart of love,
I am the smoke across the sky,
I am the reason why we fly,
I am the Hawk's engine roar,
I was proud to fly Red four

Again, taken from an aviation forum. Credit goes to 'Blue Bottle'.
 
Tori said:
:'( That's very sad. All planes should be like gliders so they can float down like birds.
Click to expand...

Hya Tori.

Civilian aircraft are designed to glide to some respect i.e airliners and such.

Military aircraft however, especially military fast jets are designed to be more maneuverable which in turn makes them very unstable during flight. The way they are still able to fly whilst being unstable is down to a few things like pilot skill, powered flying controls and flight computers etc

If the Jet lost an engine due to a bird strike then it would lose a lot more than just forward airspeed. The engine(s) drive gearboxes and generators which provide things like hydraulic pressure and electrical power for the aircraft.

There are back ups on every aircraft to provide the basic systems for an aircraft to attempt to land should it have any engine or electrical failures.
This particular one was flying very low and probably didnt have much time to do anything other steer the aircraft away from the houses and people out walking. He did very well to do what he did and its a great shame that he didint get out, but he no doubt saved quite a few people by staying in the aircraft so long. A true Hero.
 
kevshore said:
I thought this was lovely:

Do not stand at my grave and weep,
I am not there; I do not sleep,
I may not now be in the group,
......But I am the diamond in the loop,
I am the white the red and blue,
......Entwined within the corkscrew,
When you look to the heavens above,
I am the arrow through the heart of love,
I am the smoke across the sky,
I am the reason why we fly,
I am the Hawk's engine roar,
I was proud to fly Red four

Again, taken from an aviation forum. Credit goes to 'Blue Bottle'.
Click to expand...

:clap: very nice that Kev
 
So basically, if the engine stopped and he was low to the ground he didn't really stand a chance :( You all seem to know alot about planes! Thanks.
 
Depending on which ejection is fitted to hawk (I'm not sure) he could of ejected at any time and most likely survived. He stayed in though to stop the plane from crashing onto houses.
 
Tori said:
So basically, if the engine stopped and he was low to the ground he didn't really stand a chance :( You all seem to know alot about planes! Thanks.
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

That pretty much sums it up.

The poor b****r was just so unlucky that his engine failed (if that's what happened) at such a low altitude.
Had he have been higher he would have stood a slim chance of bringing it down in a field or something..........

Check this video out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzpz261mU2A

His speed indicator is on the right, watch that rapidly go down on impact.
And the pilot puts the aircraft nose up, seemingly to gain altitude, as he knows he's going down.
(That may not be true - what do I know!)

Here's another one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN_Zl64OQEw&feature=related

See how quickly they go down.........

Scary business for sure.
 
Sean_m said:
Depending on which ejection is fitted to hawk (I'm not sure) he could of ejected at any time and most likely survived. He stayed in though to stop the plane from crashing onto houses.
Click to expand...

if that turns out to be the case, then he really ought to get something posthumously for it.
 
Speculation still rife then. Best to wait for the results of the air crash investigation I think rather than believing what the papers say/make up.

RIP Red 4.
 
Sean_m said:
Depending on which ejection is fitted to hawk (I'm not sure) he could of ejected at any time and most likely survived.
Click to expand...

Martin Baker Mk10B, which as I noted earlier can eject at zero speed and zero velocity from an upright plane.

Back in the 1980s I saw a test ejection with a dummy in the seat from a Meteor over Chalgrove airfield.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Martin Baker Mk10B, which as I noted earlier can eject at zero speed and zero velocity from an upright plane.

Back in the 1980s I saw a test ejection with a dummy in the seat from a Meteor over Chalgrove airfield.
Click to expand...

I assumed as much. Cheers :thumbs:
 
That second video is like something from a horror film :(

I understand how a plane might crash in those circumstances, but what about if a pilot ejects? Surely if a plane is upright it shouldn't matter if he's close to the ground or not? It still shoots them up in the air and brings them down on a parachute? Or is it that the parachute does not have time to deploy if it's too close to the ground? I assume it opens a parachute itself and doesn't need manually opening? And do pilots bump their heads on the glass above their head? Or does that open?

My local air show at Clacton is soon. They're not sure if the arrows will be there or not :(
 
Tori said:
I understand how a plane might crash in those circumstances, but what about if a pilot ejects? Surely if a plane is upright it shouldn't matter if he's close to the ground or not? It still shoots them up in the air and brings them down on a parachute? Or is it that the parachute does not have time to deploy if it's too close to the ground? I assume it opens a parachute itself and doesn't need manually opening? And do pilots bump their heads on the glass above their head? Or does that open?
Click to expand...

Loads of questions there. With the seat in question, it is possible to eject at zero altitude if the plane is upright and the parachute will deploy, I think they that one has both a cartridge to get the seat clear of the tailplane and a rocket motor which kicks in slightly after to give some height for the parachute to deploy. The parachute deploys automatically at a certain altitude (I think).

The canopy can be removed in one of two ways, either released complete when the ejection mechanism is operated or some have lines through them like a heated rear screen on a car, except they are explosive and blow it to pieces. Even if whichever method fails, the seat itself has two long metal rails running down the back which are the main structure to which everything else is attached. The top end of these sit higher than the pilot's head and they are formed into spikes and hardened so they can pierce the canopy if it is still present, which will cause it to shatter.

As I said earlier it's over 20 years since I worked there and I was helping with implementing databases for project management, not anything to do with design, the above is just stuff I picked up from talking to people that actually designed and made them and vaguely remember, so may be full of errors.

(oh and the ejection sequence in 'Top Gun' is the biggest load of cobblers ever, but you don't need to know anything about ejection systems to realise that)
 
The ejection process fires a small charge which is connected to wires in the canopy which shatter the canopy miliseconds before the seat fires and the pilot goes through . Some other models the whole canopy actually comes away.

The people who found him say he was separate from the seat, which would indicate an ejection at low level. It's also reported he was in the river trapped by foliage. My speculation would be he ejected at the last minute but maybe got caught in the wreckage as it went along the ground or he was ejected automatically, which I didn't even realize was possible. He could have been dead before the plane even came to rest.

I doubt we will know for sure for many months until the investigation is completed.
 
It's all very interesting. And very sad at the same time. Do you think they will be grounded for a long time?
 
I've never worked on Hawks but having looked at photographs of them its clear that the canopies are fitted with MDC (Miniature Detonating Cord). This is an explosive cord that shatters the canopy prior to the ejection seat being fired and ejecting the pilot to safety.

Its usual after an aircraft incident for the whole fleet to be grounded until any sort of mechanical or electrical failure can be ruled out. If any sort of failure is confirmed then its important that the fleet has been grounded so the rest of the aircraft can be inspected for the same fault, and it can then be rectified before its safe for them to fly.

If its confirmed that it was just an accident or pilot error then the rest of the fleet can fly again.
 
TCR4x4 said:
The ejection process fires a small charge which is connected to wires in the canopy which shatter the canopy...
Click to expand...

What you see in the canopy is actually not wire, it is the explosive charge. It is called MDC (miniature detonation cord) It is a shaped charge powerfull enough to shatter the canopy. It is one of the reasons Rodneys wear hard hats.

Going back to the point about wind over the wings, It doesn't have to be that fast on some planes. I have seen an Antonov 2 which has a stall speed of twenty something kts in a thirty something kt wind and it was (as percieved from the ground) going backwards.
 
Oggy said:
What you see in the canopy is actually not wire, it is the explosive charge. It is called MDC (miniature detonation cord) It is a shaped charge powerfull enough to shatter the canopy. It is one of the reasons Rodneys wear hard hats.

Going back to the point about wind over the wings, It doesn't have to be that fast on some planes. I have seen an Antonov 2 which has a stall speed of twenty something kts in a thirty something kt wind and it was (as percieved from the ground) going backwards.
Click to expand...

The bigger the wing, the larger volume of air it can use to create lift.

The Antinov has VERY big wings! A Hawk T1 has comparatively tiny wings of course, so needs far higher air pressure under the wing to create lift.
 
Last edited:
... or lower pressure above the wing, even.
 
photon said:
... or lower pressure above the wing, even.
Click to expand...

The pressure is generated under the wing when it's in a 'lift' configuration. Think how the flaps are set on a jumbo as it prepares for take off, particually, how the whole forward leading edge of the wing moves forward and arcs downwards (almost the whole leading edge of a 747 wing can move forwards extending it's total wing coverage by an extra 30% of it's total wingspan)

But yes, to create lift, air pressure has to be higher below the wing than above the wing, simple law of physics.
 
Last edited:
Oggy said:
What you see in the canopy is actually not wire, it is the explosive charge. It is called MDC (miniature detonation cord) It is a shaped charge powerfull enough to shatter the canopy. It is one of the reasons Rodneys wear hard hats.

Going back to the point about wind over the wings, It doesn't have to be that fast on some planes. I have seen an Antonov 2 which has a stall speed of twenty something kts in a thirty something kt wind and it was (as percieved from the ground) going backwards.
Click to expand...

Ah ok.. In the olden days the seats also used to have pull down canvas or some such visors to aid in not getting a bit of canopy stuck in your head.


RE: the Antanov.. Ive been in the thing... It feels like its going backwards too!!

Horrible aircraft. The pilot got out and started manually pumping fuel...
Whilst we were in the air!!
 
Wow,

I'm not really sure where to start with all of the points discussed in the last day or two! I'm reminded of the phrase 'a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing'.

As to the accident in question, the best advice is from Dorsetdude: "Speculation still rife then. Best to wait for the results of the air crash investigation I think rather than believing what the papers say/make up"

Remember that newspapers exist to sell newspapers.

We'll let the MAA publish their report - it will take about a year for the full report and then we'll know.

Cheesy
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top