Bad day...

[Wraith27 6]

Anyone know when and where it was happen:

 

[Nesher 628]

that's a bad fender bender

 

 

[ShrikeHawk 384]

And like a good neighbor, State Farm is there...

[+daddyairplanes 10,241]

yeah but think of the crew or ground crew. does the ukrainian AF have AFLAC?

[FastCargo 412]

That'll leave a mark...

 

FC

[Derk 265]

Bad day for me too: wrecked my car yesterday in the fresh snow. Not as expensive as the Flankers, but just the same.....

 

Houdoe

 

Derk

Edited December 8, 2010 by Derk

[Slartibartfast 153]

Bad day for me too: wrecked my car yesterday in the fresh snow. Not as expensive as the Flankers, but just the same.....

 

Houdoe

 

Derk

 

But your okay thats the important thing...

[+Typhoid 231]

That should buff right out.............

 

[Derk 265]

Bad day for me too: wrecked my car yesterday in the fresh snow. Not as expensive as the Flankers, but just the same.....

 

Houdoe

 

Derk

 

Edit: damage between E 7.000,- and E 8.000,= , meaning that basically it's a total loss. Strange as it was not a big bang at all: skidded against a tree at such a low speed that the airbags didný even activate...... and it was a VOLVO, having the reputation of being very sturdy.......... Sad thing, liked it very much, can only afford a much smaller car at the moment

Edited December 15, 2010 by Derk

[Abhi 3]

Was the pilot watching porno on his MFD's??????

[FastCargo 412]

Actually, I'm wondering if it was a ground crew accident. The reason I ask is that obviously, the aircraft underneath ran into the aircraft up top that was parked (the upper aircraft had it's ground ladders in place).

 

Also, the lower aircraft has a tow bar connected to the nose gear. Looking at the situation, no way I would want to connect that tow bar to try to slide the aircraft...you don't know how stable the upper aircraft is and could fall on your head. In fact, if you tried to start moving the lower aircraft first, the upper aircraft would probably slide right onto your tow vehicle. So, from that logic, the tow bar was connected before the accident occured.

 

The best explanation is that the aircraft was under tow, and somehow the tow vehicle lost control and ended up towing the lower aircraft under the upper aircraft. There is a picture of a similar kind of accident (involving a military police car and an F-15C) on the internet.

 

FC

 

PS But now I'm wondering, because the first pic shows them around the tow bar...wondering if they're connecting it or disconnecting it...

[+Typhoid 231]

I agree with the ground crew accident. Otherwise, the nose radome would not likely have been crunched as it is and hanging over the tow bar.

 

It will be interesting to see if any details come out on this.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Typhoid

[Silverbolt 104]

what about the wind? i think sometime back somebody here posted an accident due to high speed winds on tamarc that ended up with one F-16 over another hehe

[JediMaster 451]

The lower plane had to move in because there's no way the upper plane could move its nose gear up and over the nose of the lower plane. The crushed radome on the lower plane also wouldn't have been touched by the upper plane if it had been moving. In the foreground of the bottom picture, and lying on the ground to the left in the upper one, is what appears to be the boarding ladders from the lower plane. No one taxis with boarding ladders.

 

While it may be hard to say with 100% certainty which plane was being towed (although I believe the fact the towbar is attached to the lower plane indicates that it is the one that was under tow), I think we can say neither plane was under power.

 

There appears to be an Su-27 behind the 2 UB's as well (notice the green-tipped fins in the upper picture and the open canopy to the left in the lower picture). This looks like it was parked next to the upper UB.

 

Ah! There is a wheel chock on the upper plane's right wheel I think, just visible in the lower picture next to the rear of the guy in the blue jacket, but none on the lower plane. Yeah, that plane was stationary. Maybe the lower plane wasn't towed at all, but rather had the towbar attached, chocks removed, and then rolled into the upper plane out of control? I mean, if it was towed, the tow vehicle had to pass UNDER the nose of the upper plane, and that should've damaged the nosewheel and/or ladders of the upper plane, but they're intact. Plus we see no sign of a tow vehicle, and I hardly think after this incident they would've pulled it out of there.

 

 

[FastCargo 412]

JM,

 

I think you're close.

 

Here is my latest theory:

 

Because the upper picture shows what appears to be the tow bar getting attached, I think the tow bar was connected after the collision (the wisdom of doing such a thing is for another discussion).

 

I think the aircraft were parked next to each other, and the lower aircraft was parked in parallel on the right side of the upper aircraft. The lower aircraft was doing an engine run...not necessarily a full power run, but maybe just some testing at lower than full power. The reason I think the engine(s) was running is that you notice the lower aircraft does not have any intake covers, but the upper aircraft does. The aircraft had a person at the controls, and either he was standing on the brakes, or the wheels may have been chocked.

 

At some point, the right main wheel brake fails and either there was no chock, or the chock was not enough to prevent the aircraft from pivoting around the left wheel and rolling underneath the upper aircraft.

 

The reason I think this is because when we line up for formation, we stagger line up and give ourselves 25 feet wingtip spacing. The idea is when the flight runs up their engines before brake release, if anyone has a sudden rod end failure, the aircraft will pivot around the wheel with the good brake, but will miss the aircraft next to it due to the minimum wingtip spacing and stagger. If you don't have either, this is what the accident would look like.

 

FC

[serverandenforcer 33]

JM,

 

I think you're close.

 

Here is my latest theory:

 

Because the upper picture shows what appears to be the tow bar getting attached, I think the tow bar was connected after the collision (the wisdom of doing such a thing is for another discussion).

 

I think the aircraft were parked next to each other, and the lower aircraft was parked in parallel on the right side of the upper aircraft. The lower aircraft was doing an engine run...not necessarily a full power run, but maybe just some testing at lower than full power. The reason I think the engine(s) was running is that you notice the lower aircraft does not have any intake covers, but the upper aircraft does. The aircraft had a person at the controls, and either he was standing on the brakes, or the wheels may have been chocked.

 

At some point, the right main wheel brake fails and either there was no chock, or the chock was not enough to prevent the aircraft from pivoting around the left wheel and rolling underneath the upper aircraft.

 

The reason I think this is because when we line up for formation, we stagger line up and give ourselves 25 feet wingtip spacing. The idea is when the flight runs up their engines before brake release, if anyone has a sudden rod end failure, the aircraft will pivot around the wheel with the good brake, but will miss the aircraft next to it due to the minimum wingtip spacing and stagger. If you don't have either, this is what the accident would look like.

 

FC

 

 

I think you're right. Look at the nose gear of the lower plane in relation to the mains. The nose gear is turned as if the lower aircraft hit the upper one while turning. If it was under tow, that tow bar would indeed hit the nose gear of the main aircraft, and that's is if the tow vehicle hadn't collided with the nose of the top aircraft.

Edited December 15, 2010 by serverandenforcer