-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Crew in Fatal Crash Mistook Island for Carrier
- Thread starter Fly Navy
- Start date
- Status
I dont see how that could happen or be possible. Maybe there was a mountain or something they hit but still. What was going on with chit chat over the radio (was there any)?
I only fly cessnas so i dont know how to think about it exactly or how the whole carrier landing sequence goes. The crash is still confusing to me.
I only fly cessnas so i dont know how to think about it exactly or how the whole carrier landing sequence goes. The crash is still confusing to me.
Grant said:
No, not too hard to believe. As for the conclusion, the military has a tendancy to 'guess' what the crew was doing in an accident without the benefit of flight data recorders like they have in civilian airliners. It can lead to some interesting conclusions sometimes.
This article does not give you nearly enough facts to judge what happened. What time of day was the accident? Was it IMC or VMC? Was there any radar controller assigned to monitor (flight following)? What kind of info/fidelity does the radar in the S-3 give the operator? What was the S-3's mission at the time of the incident? Is this a lone island sticking up in the middle of the ocean or is it part of a chain of islands? Was this island even depicted on charts that the crew had onboard? What altitude was the S-3 at when it crashed (MSL)?
I was in the S-3 community when this happened and have read many of the reports on this accident. I promise that it wasn't as simple as this news article makes it out to be. There are many factors that contributed to this accident and some were even beyond the control of the crew.
I am not going to discuss in detail on here what the report actually said because it is priveleged info, but I caution all to ask someone in the know before assuming a news report is completely accurate. Sorry if I'm lecturing to those who know better, but useless speculation about an accident without accurate info is a pet peeve of mine. Especially when I know some of those involved and have access to the mishap report.
I was in the S-3 community when this happened and have read many of the reports on this accident. I promise that it wasn't as simple as this news article makes it out to be. There are many factors that contributed to this accident and some were even beyond the control of the crew.
I am not going to discuss in detail on here what the report actually said because it is priveleged info, but I caution all to ask someone in the know before assuming a news report is completely accurate. Sorry if I'm lecturing to those who know better, but useless speculation about an accident without accurate info is a pet peeve of mine. Especially when I know some of those involved and have access to the mishap report.
HooverPilot said:
Agree 100%. From the article:
No mention of the word "carrier." Given that the S-3 doesn't do an internal radar CCA type of approach, what planet did the author come from to infer and generate the article title?
Masterminds. Why can't people just stick to writing about things they actually know about and keep their pieholes shut if they don't. :tapedshut
Secondly, I agree on the privileged info aspect. No good to have a MIR and then share it with the rest of the class. Pretty self-defeatist.
I was out there when this happened, and you are correct in assuming this article is pretty far off. Like HooverPilot said, there isn't much you are actually allowed to say, but they were not on an approach to the carrier. The article reads that way, but I think they meant "a ship" and not necessarily "the ship." It was a very sad time and an unfortunate event for the Airwing. Needless to say it was a real wakeup of how dangerous our jobs can be.
- Status