Hawker vs. Glider Midair - with photo!

"Aluckyguess" wrote:


As long as the glider doesnt pull out in front of the other aircraft.

Please explain the maneuver you have in mind here. How does a glider
"pull out in front of" a biz jet? Maybe after overtaking him?g
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

In article . com,
wrote:

The glider pilot was circling when he was hit. He reported that he saw
the jet just a blink before the impact with no possibility of evasive
action.

At 16k, what kind of vertical rate of ascent could the glider have been
experiencing in a thermal that day?

"Jim Vincent" wrote in message
. ..
I think for all intents, the glider would have been effectively a small
dot in the sky except for the last seconds.

No, it's the Hawker that was a small (2 meters) motionless white dot in the
white sky. The thermalling glider was an 18-meter white cross moving against
the desert background.

The jet was descending, wasn't it? That means no soot trail. Which, I am
convinced, is the only part of the jet visible head-on from far enough to
have any practical chance at all to evade, at glider speed.
--
Yuliy

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...

How can a glider hit an airborne jet from the side? It can happen, but
the glider is well in front of the jet until the point of impact.
Good timing

Assuming glider Vne of 150 kts and jet speed of 300 kts, the widest possible
azimuth angle from jet to glider is 26.5 degrees off center at any time
before impact (linear path).

At a more typical for a thermalling glider 60 kts this angle is reduced to
11.3 degrees.

Which one do you call "from the side"?
--
Yuliy

"Jose" wrote

But in general, an
incorrect transponder readout could cause pilots to look in the wrong
place for traffic they would have otherwise seen right away, increasing
the risk of a collision.

Come on, how far off could it be, to cause you to look in the wrong place
would be a gross exaggeration, no?

The fix on the lat. - lon. will not be off at all, since that is generated
from a radar return. The altitude might be 50 or even 100 feet off, but
still, that would not be enough to cause a person to miss finding the
aircraft by more than a couple seconds.

Me? Of course, this is all a hypothetical situation, but if my transponder
is off by only 100 feet, it will be on, whether wrong by law, or not. Get
in the air and ask for a check from the tower, as to what you are being
reported at. Make a decision, then.
--
Jim in NC

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:17:59 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


wrote

Did you hear about the one that survived the SAM strike?

No, but I would like to!

Basically, an African dignitary (president?) was riding along in a
Hawker escorted by at least one Angolan fighter.

Another Angolan fighter launched two heat-seekers at it. The first one
blew the #2 engine off the pylon and the second missile was decoyed by
the burning detached engine.

Some pieces penetrated the cabin, and there were some injuries
onboard, but it landed safely.

from http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/ne...m-threat01.htm

Although struck by an air-to-air missile, the Hawker 800 carrying
Juvénal Habyarimana, the president of Rwanda, shows what a manpad can
do. In the late 1980s, the business jet was flying over Angola when an
Angolan MiG-23 pilot attacked it with two heat-seeking air-to-air
missiles. The first warhead struck the right engine, tearing most of
it from the mounts and puncturing the pressure vessel. The second
missile locked onto the heat signature of the falling engine, which
spared the airplane and the president. After an emergency landing, the
Hawker was crated back to the UK and rebuilt to fly another day.

Pictures of it are tough to find, last ones I saw were at a Raytheon
Jet Ops Conference.

TC

P.S. looked at the midair pics again today at work-it really really
looks like the forward spar in the right wing is "seriously
compromised."

wrote:

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:17:59 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


wrote

Did you hear about the one that survived the SAM strike?

No, but I would like to!

Basically, an African dignitary (president?) was riding along in a
Hawker escorted by at least one Angolan fighter.

Another Angolan fighter launched two heat-seekers at it.
Sounds like a different kind of SAM! g
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

The fix on the lat. - lon. will not be off at all, since that is generated
from a radar return.

If the (secondary) radar return is late, would the position not be off?

The altitude might be 50 or even 100 feet off

It might be 10,000 feet off. It might be off by one bit (whatever that
would cause, depending on which bit). It might be intermittant.
Whatever. I do know that I've been instructed to stop mode C squawk on
occasion; whatever error I was producing at the time was causing
problems for ATC.

When you say that it would have been better (in this case) for the
transponder to be on, even if incorrect, you need to consider that you
don't get to know which plane is going to otherwise crash. You need to
do it for all planes.

Not just your plane. All planes. Everyone else who has a busted
transponder. Everyone else who figures that the rules don't apply to
them because they have a better idea.

This might not be a bad idea, but the unintended consequences should be
considered.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Yuliy, I assume this is the degrees off center for the jet pilot, what
will it be for the glider pilot under similar conditions. I forgot my
math, but sounds like we, as the slower aircraft, need much more
scanning then other faster aircrafts, like 360 degrees? So much for see
and avoid, unless you thermaling...

Ramy


Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...

How can a glider hit an airborne jet from the side? It can happen, but
the glider is well in front of the jet until the point of impact.
Good timing

Assuming glider Vne of 150 kts and jet speed of 300 kts, the widest possible
azimuth angle from jet to glider is 26.5 degrees off center at any time
before impact (linear path).

At a more typical for a thermalling glider 60 kts this angle is reduced to
11.3 degrees.

Which one do you call "from the side"?
--
Yuliy

Ron Natalie wrote:

Because the rule is that ALL powered aircraft ALWAYS give way to ALL
gliders and, in uncontrolled airspace,

There is NO SUCH RULE.

Well, there is in every country that adheres to the ICAO treaties and
annexes and you'd better believe it if you ever fly outside the US. I
know the US is the most non-compliant signatory but I'd be surprised if
these fundamental rules don't apply in the US. They certainly apply to
every US aircraft flying internationally.

I could of course be wrong - I make a habit of it.

All aircraft are required to see and avoid regardless of the right of
way rules.

Absolutely. But when they collide in spite of this, the powered
aircraft is prima facie at fault.

If you flew a glider into another aircraft from behind it would be
at fault. The overtaking rules do not have an exemption for class.

I'll stick to what I said.

1. In VMC, ALL aircraft are required to maintain a lookout so as to see
and avoid ALL other aircraft.
2. When on converging courses, powered aircraft are required to give
way to gliders. Powered aircraft give way to airships who give way to
gliders who give way to balloons.

There is, of course, a lot more to it than this but this is where the
lawyers, insurance companies - and probably the FAA unless you're right
- will start.

GC