If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
the report is at Military Aircraft Accident Summary for Tornado GR4A
ZG710 http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publi.../maaszg710.pdf |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"fudog50" wrote in message ... Gawd, 20 years ago (1984), onboard the Connie, as a young E-4 I stood 4 hour watches "shooting" using the then brand new APM-424 "star wars" test set on every A/C that was scheduled to launch. If the Mode 4 didn't work, they didn't launch,,,,period. Moreover, in the following 20 years, addtional improvements to the APM-424 "star wars" transponder test set and upgrades to the APX-72 and Kit-1C's have resulted in a successful method of determining reliabilty and accuracy of IFF systems onboard US Navy A/C prior to launch. I have worked at det sites with the RAF, they are incredible, top notch. However,in my opinion and experience they are willing to accept a little more risk than we normally do. The question is: Was there an adequate, reliable and accurate check of the Tornadoe's IFF system before it left the deck? Yes or No answers with explantions are all that are required before moving forward and/or speculating further. Nice top post, guy. Leaving no idea whatsoever as to what/who you were responding to. The fact is that the IFF was not operating properly when the aircraft was engaged, and that was a major contributing factor to the frat incident--it would actually be the proximate cause of the incident, as had it been working properly the less-than-optimal Patriot ROE would not be in question in regards to this action. Brooks On Mon, 17 May 2004 23:37:23 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Drewe Manton" wrote in message . 4... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in news:FbidnTOlj- : Does crow taste better roasted, or fried? Did you miss the bit about Patriot rules of engagement being "insufficently robust"? Seems to me that calling for meals of crow is in bad taste all around here. . . . it was a tragedy, it was war, the two go hand in hand. The Patriot had its share of troubles, no doubt. But immediately after it was announced that the Tornado had gone down, some folks took a "it's the Patriot, stupid" stance as to assigning the guilt in this case, despite an early mention of the suspicion that all may have not been right regarding the aircraft's IFF. Now the chickens have come home to roost. And since you are so keyed up in still trying to point the fickle finger of fate at the Patriot in this case, did you miss the part that said: "The investigation board determined that the Patriot crew fired in perceived self-defense in accordance with existing procedures and Rules of Engagement"? Yeah, it was a tragedy--the ROE doubtless contributed to it, too. But those ROE would never have been invoked had the aircraft had a functional IFF transmitting the proper code. Curiousity compels me to ask--were you one of the guys claiming it was just another case of trigger-happy Patriot engagement after it went down? Brooks -- Regards Drewe "Better the pride that resides In a citizen of the world Than the pride that divides When a colourful rag is unfurled" |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Drewe Manton" wrote in message . 4... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in : Curiousity compels me to ask--were you one of the guys claiming it was just another case of trigger-happy Patriot engagement after it went down? Nope, feel free to google it (though I doubt you have the desire to do so, I certainly don't!) but my stance from day one has been that it was a fog of war tragedy. Although I will admit to a wry smile when a couple of days later an F-16CJ fired on a Patriot radar system (I think I'm right in saying no-one was hurt in that incident, do you remember anything?). IIRC the radar got trashed, but no injuries to personnel. ISTR that incident *was* a case of "RoboPatriot" screwing up... Just another chain of events in large scale operations that come together at the worst possible moment and create the worst possible outcome for those involved. Agreed. But some of your fellow countrymen were quite a bit more accusatory (and one-sided in those accusations) in the immediate aftermath--and they are strangely quiet now. Brooks -- Regards Drewe "Better the pride that resides In a citizen of the world Than the pride that divides When a colourful rag is unfurled" |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
In message , fudog50
writes I have worked at det sites with the RAF, they are incredible, top notch. However,in my opinion and experience they are willing to accept a little more risk than we normally do. The question is: Was there an adequate, reliable and accurate check of the Tornadoe's IFF system before it left the deck? From the accident report:- "The ground engineering check on ZG710’s encrypted Mode 4 IFF was completed satisfactorily pre-engine start, and an RAF Regiment Rapier Missile unit that regularly checked the IFF of departing aircraft did not report the aircraft or log a fault. In line with extant procedures, only Mode 4 was checked on the ground. However, there is no firm evidence that ZG710 responded to any IFF interrogations throughout the entire mission, although there is evidence that the navigator checked the IFF switches at the appropriate times." -- When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. W S Churchill Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Drewe Manton" wrote in message Nope, feel free to google it (though I doubt you have the desire to do so, I certainly don't!) but my stance from day one has been that it was a fog of war tragedy. Although I will admit to a wry smile when a couple of days later an F-16CJ fired on a Patriot radar system (I think I'm right in saying no-one was hurt in that incident, do you remember anything?). IIRC the radar got trashed, but no injuries to personnel. ISTR that incident *was* a case of "RoboPatriot" screwing up... Actually it's a case of poor signal identification on the part of the CJ. That's what you get when you put cheap EW pods on aircraft and expect them to identify radar signals. I seriously doubt a F-4G crew would have made the same mistake. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Of course, even though smartass remarks were not desired, you had to
add one,,,thanks buddy I asked a simple question, thank for the compliment on the top post, pal! (and you have no idea what/who I am and so are you!) On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:28:46 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "fudog50" wrote in message .. . Gawd, 20 years ago (1984), onboard the Connie, as a young E-4 I stood 4 hour watches "shooting" using the then brand new APM-424 "star wars" test set on every A/C that was scheduled to launch. If the Mode 4 didn't work, they didn't launch,,,,period. Moreover, in the following 20 years, addtional improvements to the APM-424 "star wars" transponder test set and upgrades to the APX-72 and Kit-1C's have resulted in a successful method of determining reliabilty and accuracy of IFF systems onboard US Navy A/C prior to launch. I have worked at det sites with the RAF, they are incredible, top notch. However,in my opinion and experience they are willing to accept a little more risk than we normally do. The question is: Was there an adequate, reliable and accurate check of the Tornadoe's IFF system before it left the deck? Yes or No answers with explantions are all that are required before moving forward and/or speculating further. Nice top post, guy. Leaving no idea whatsoever as to what/who you were responding to. The fact is that the IFF was not operating properly when the aircraft was engaged, and that was a major contributing factor to the frat incident--it would actually be the proximate cause of the incident, as had it been working properly the less-than-optimal Patriot ROE would not be in question in regards to this action. Brooks On Mon, 17 May 2004 23:37:23 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Drewe Manton" wrote in message . 4... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in news:FbidnTOlj- : Does crow taste better roasted, or fried? Did you miss the bit about Patriot rules of engagement being "insufficently robust"? Seems to me that calling for meals of crow is in bad taste all around here. . . . it was a tragedy, it was war, the two go hand in hand. The Patriot had its share of troubles, no doubt. But immediately after it was announced that the Tornado had gone down, some folks took a "it's the Patriot, stupid" stance as to assigning the guilt in this case, despite an early mention of the suspicion that all may have not been right regarding the aircraft's IFF. Now the chickens have come home to roost. And since you are so keyed up in still trying to point the fickle finger of fate at the Patriot in this case, did you miss the part that said: "The investigation board determined that the Patriot crew fired in perceived self-defense in accordance with existing procedures and Rules of Engagement"? Yeah, it was a tragedy--the ROE doubtless contributed to it, too. But those ROE would never have been invoked had the aircraft had a functional IFF transmitting the proper code. Curiousity compels me to ask--were you one of the guys claiming it was just another case of trigger-happy Patriot engagement after it went down? Brooks -- Regards Drewe "Better the pride that resides In a citizen of the world Than the pride that divides When a colourful rag is unfurled" |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Paul.
On Tue, 18 May 2004 17:52:44 +0100, "Paul J. Adam" wrote: In message , fudog50 writes I have worked at det sites with the RAF, they are incredible, top notch. However,in my opinion and experience they are willing to accept a little more risk than we normally do. The question is: Was there an adequate, reliable and accurate check of the Tornadoe's IFF system before it left the deck? From the accident report:- "The ground engineering check on ZG710’s encrypted Mode 4 IFF was completed satisfactorily pre-engine start, and an RAF Regiment Rapier Missile unit that regularly checked the IFF of departing aircraft did not report the aircraft or log a fault. In line with extant procedures, only Mode 4 was checked on the ground. However, there is no firm evidence that ZG710 responded to any IFF interrogations throughout the entire mission, although there is evidence that the navigator checked the IFF switches at the appropriate times." |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"fudog50" wrote in message ... Of course, even though smartass remarks were not desired, you had to add one,,,thanks buddy I asked a simple question, thank for the compliment on the top post, pal! If you had not noticed, per the lead post in this thread, the investigation has been completed--the malfunctioning IFF was found to be the proximate cause of the incident. Your question, following up that whole "Gawd..." introduction (starting a post (especially a top post) with an expression of disdainful, eyes-rolling disbelief, is probably not the most tactful way of introducing your message) has been answered by others--now how does that affect the *fact* that the Brits themselves concluded that the IFF was to blame? (and you have no idea what/who I am and so are you!) Not quite sure what that garbled blurb means, but one thing you mumbled does pop out as true--I don't have much of an idea who/what you are, which is understandable given your anonymous moniker. Now why would a guy be afraid to use his real name... Brooks On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:28:46 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "fudog50" wrote in message .. . Gawd, 20 years ago (1984), onboard the Connie, as a young E-4 I stood 4 hour watches "shooting" using the then brand new APM-424 "star wars" test set on every A/C that was scheduled to launch. If the Mode 4 didn't work, they didn't launch,,,,period. Moreover, in the following 20 years, addtional improvements to the APM-424 "star wars" transponder test set and upgrades to the APX-72 and Kit-1C's have resulted in a successful method of determining reliabilty and accuracy of IFF systems onboard US Navy A/C prior to launch. I have worked at det sites with the RAF, they are incredible, top notch. However,in my opinion and experience they are willing to accept a little more risk than we normally do. The question is: Was there an adequate, reliable and accurate check of the Tornadoe's IFF system before it left the deck? Yes or No answers with explantions are all that are required before moving forward and/or speculating further. Nice top post, guy. Leaving no idea whatsoever as to what/who you were responding to. The fact is that the IFF was not operating properly when the aircraft was engaged, and that was a major contributing factor to the frat incident--it would actually be the proximate cause of the incident, as had it been working properly the less-than-optimal Patriot ROE would not be in question in regards to this action. Brooks On Mon, 17 May 2004 23:37:23 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Drewe Manton" wrote in message . 4... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in news:FbidnTOlj- : Does crow taste better roasted, or fried? Did you miss the bit about Patriot rules of engagement being "insufficently robust"? Seems to me that calling for meals of crow is in bad taste all around here. . . . it was a tragedy, it was war, the two go hand in hand. The Patriot had its share of troubles, no doubt. But immediately after it was announced that the Tornado had gone down, some folks took a "it's the Patriot, stupid" stance as to assigning the guilt in this case, despite an early mention of the suspicion that all may have not been right regarding the aircraft's IFF. Now the chickens have come home to roost. And since you are so keyed up in still trying to point the fickle finger of fate at the Patriot in this case, did you miss the part that said: "The investigation board determined that the Patriot crew fired in perceived self-defense in accordance with existing procedures and Rules of Engagement"? Yeah, it was a tragedy--the ROE doubtless contributed to it, too. But those ROE would never have been invoked had the aircraft had a functional IFF transmitting the proper code. Curiousity compels me to ask--were you one of the guys claiming it was just another case of trigger-happy Patriot engagement after it went down? Brooks -- Regards Drewe "Better the pride that resides In a citizen of the world Than the pride that divides When a colourful rag is unfurled" |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
C wrote in
2.12: The only such missile in-theater was the HARM (High-Speed Ant-Radiation Homing Missile) Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? -- Regards Drewe "Better the pride that resides In a citizen of the world Than the pride that divides When a colourful rag is unfurled" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question about the F-22 and it's radar. | Scott Ferrin | Military Aviation | 128 | June 13th 04 01:23 AM |
Who's At Fault in UAV/Part91 MAC? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | April 29th 04 03:08 PM |
Mother Russia closer to develop an ABM system | Alejandro Magno | Military Aviation | 11 | January 11th 04 06:06 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |