Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Snowbirds ( Canadian Air Force display team ) lose an aircraft and crew member

Options

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,545 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Very clear footage of it online. It's shocking how fast things can go wrong. :(


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,749 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Very clear footage of it online. It's shocking how fast things can go wrong. :(

    Aye all happened very very fast less than a minute from takeoff to crash. RIP.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,763 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Very clear footage of it online. It's shocking how fast things can go wrong. :(

    Indeed.
    Im absolutely no expert but seems quite odd that there wasnt an obvious malfunction. Looks almost like a lost of control causing the climb and roll to the left, which the led to the crew ejection.
    Am I wrong in thinking that there were 2 crew? Looked like 2 ejections to my amateur eye.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Negative_G


    Tenger wrote: »
    Indeed.
    Im absolutely no expert but seems quite odd that there wasnt an obvious malfunction. Looks almost like a lost of control causing the climb and roll to the left, which the led to the crew ejection.
    Am I wrong in thinking that there were 2 crew? Looked like 2 ejections to my amateur eye.

    There was two crew. The public affairs officer was killed and the other pilot is in hospital.

    Any engine failure or indication of impending failure will result in the first action of trading altitude for speed which is what may have happened here. Turning back towards the airfield is generally advisable even if the aircraft can't be recovered for several reasons.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,763 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Thanks for the clarification. Certainly the climb seemed quite steep, in an (logical to me) effort to get away from the ground in order to attempt to asses and/or troubleshoot the situation.

    Very tragic accident. An operation to pay tribute to healthworkers resulting in this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,809 ✭✭✭Gone Drinking


    Negative_G wrote: »
    Turning back towards the airfield is generally advisable even if the aircraft can't be recovered for several reasons.

    I thought that turning back during an issue in takeoff is generally advised against as without power you can stall easily during the turn?

    Heart goes out to all involved.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Negative_G


    I thought that turning back during an issue in takeoff is generally advised against as without power you can stall easily during the turn?

    Heart goes out to all involved.

    It depends. You are correct, there is a heightened risk of a stall as the aircraft rapidly loses energy.

    The idea of doing a zoom climb and getting that altitude is to buy time to assess options.

    Every aircraft will be different of course. May well have been an attempt to merely point back towards the airfield to avoid aircraft damaging people and property adjacent to the airfield.

    If there was nowhere immediately in front to point the aircraft prior to ejection they may have elected to turn back.

    Certainly the initial turn at the top of the climb would suggest some form of deviation other than continuing straight ahead.


Advertisement