Check-Six Forums

Knell a écrit :Au vue des photos, si il ne s est pas crashé en vrille a plat, alors moi je suis le Pape

In my opinion, having flown the F-15 for 15 straight years, and having seen a few accidents along the way, that jet looks like it hit the ground with no forward velocity at all. The most probable way for that to happen is not if it got shot down, but if it was out of control in flat spin. And the most probable way for that to happen is if there was a large lateral imbalance ( like a full and empty external wing tank ) and too much AOA or Gs. The aircraft would enter a flat spin and many times is not recoverable.

However, it is reported that the crew ejected at high altitude. That is not consistent with a spin ejection.

There are few mechanical failures that would cause the crew to eject at high altitude and have then aircraft hit the ground in a flat attitude with no airspeed. In fact I can't think of any that would cause that.

It looks like it had plenty of gas when it hit the ground.

My guess is that it was in a spin and they bailed about 10,000 feet and somebody considers that high altitude. It is high enough to cause separation of the crew on ejection and it's the standard out of control ejection altitude.

That is the only thing I can think of to cause it to hit the ground with no forward velocity, intact in the same spot and no crater. I doubt it was hit by enemy fire.

ETA DISCLAIMER: I was not a safety puke ( spitting to the right )

agree with your points but our CAS controls are different than the C model, its nearly impossble to spin our jet (even with imbalenced external loads). I doubt it was a spin becuase of what they were doing. I would put money on ejection from a trimmed aircraft and it "flew" into the ground vice the lawn dart strait in type crash.

If it were a spin, there would have been more lateral scatter of parts

We shall see in the SR

Keep in mind an Israeli F-15 lost an entire wing at the wing route in a mid air collision and the pilot landed it with only one wing.
There was an F-15 that hit a guide wire of a 1500 foot tower when I was at Tyndall AFB and the jet lost all functions on the left side of the jet: engine, gear, all flight controls and hydraulics on the left side were cut from the jet by the wire and the pilot cam back and landed.
An F-15 in Alaska was hit by 2 Aim-9M right up the engine accidentally shot by his wingman and both engines kept running and the pilot came back and landed.
A St Louis ANG aircraft had a midair with an F-16 and lost 3/4 of the right wing and he came back and landed.
I lost the entire forward half of the right horizontal stabilizer in flight and never knew it. I landed and noticed it on the post flight.
I landed, the right gear collapsed and I went around on the right wingtip, the centerline tank, and the right horizontal stab all in contact with the ground and the jet got airborne and flew just fine with a cracked wingspar and significant damage.

It is a very survivable jet and can suffer a lot of damage and keep flying.

I don't think it's likely that it was hit by AAA or a missile and then lost all it's airspeed and pancaked it. If the nose drops, it would pick up airspeed and leave a hole in the ground with parts spread out for a long distance.

This thing hit the ground falling like a leaf in a flat attitude. The only way I know for that to happen is a flat spin, and the most likely entry into that is a lateral imbalance due to fuel or stores and some high AOA.

But like I said, It;s just supposition on my part.

I was not aware of the CAS difference.

If it flew into the ground, it would have had some decent forward velocity,, the ground behind it doesn't look like it had a jet skidding across the ground. The pylons and missile parts are all in the same spot.

I have seen some pics of jets fly into the ground level and there are usually parts along the trench made by the metal sliding along the ground. I just don't see any of that here.

If the CAS was lost would it be easier to spin with a lateral imbalance?

Franck66 a écrit :la question est : quelle cause peut-elle amener le pilote dans cette situation connue comme à risque pour l'avion et son équipage

Yesterday a few members here outed their concern about the AIM-120 and AIM-9 that were "intact" at the crash site of F-15E Strike Eagle serial 91-0304 from LN 492FS.
Well, they are not so intact anymore... Pentagon confirms that the site was bombed to avoid technology being recovered from the site.

Franck66 a écrit :la question est : quelle cause peut-elle amener le pilote dans cette situation connue comme à risque pour l'avion et son équipage

Merlin (FZG_Immel) a écrit :lollollol

Milos a écrit :Pour le Transall Gabriel, ce n'est que du renseignement (MRE). Pas de CME ni imagerie.

TOPOLO a écrit :Anémométrie ou capteur AoA/slip HS (givrage ou autre) non détectée par FLCS, ou détectée mais présenté au pilote à un moment où l'attitude avion est déjà trop critique... Le pil ne prend aucun risque, il fait juste confiance au FLCS qui est aux fraises (imaginez une erreur de 10 degrés sur un capteur d'AoA alors que la conf dissymétriques des emports impose un AoA limite de 15...).
Normalement ce genre de problème est rare, mais il me semble bien que c'est déjà arrivé sur 2000 (je ne me souviens pas si l'avion a été perdu ou si le pil a récupéré).

Ce qui expliquerait la mention pas l'USAF de l'incident technique tout en restant compatible avec le flat-spin.

JulietBravo a écrit :Moins immersif que le récit de Knell d'hier , mais intéressant quand même, l'interview des 2 premiers pilotes de Rafale à avoir survolé la Libye au début de l'opération Harmattan, sur le site de l'Armée de l'Air :
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/actus-ai ... de-mission

vince-16 a écrit :Sans le genre émouvant, je ne sais pas si la vidéo datée du 22 sur le site du ministère sur le CDG a été signalée. Elle est superbe, catapultages à gogo c'est à pleurer d'émotion :notworthy

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/actualites/d ... tan/videos

Cougar FFW04 a écrit :Désolé si le lien a déjà été donné, j'ai pas eu le temps de parcourir les 41 pages...

http://cencio4.wordpress.com/

TooCool_12f a écrit :il y eut dans les années 1990 une simu: "Jane's F-15" qui, parait-il montrait très très fidelement le comportement d'un Strike eagle en vol.. et ça se dandine à mort au moindre coup de manche


si le réel est aussi "louvoyant", je me dis qu'il suffit qu'un pil après avoir largué une partie de son bordel soit pris pour cible et tente un break pour se dégager... et zou: ça part en c...

mav-jp a écrit : (enfin pour 1997 c'etait pas si mal)

TOPOLO a écrit :Comme quoi en 1 an, on peut progresser