Air force trainer goes down at Bhumibol dam, 1 dead

[Cereal]

Having been raised an Air Force beat and worked for 10 years with an international carrier, I know and have befriended many pilots. I've yet to meet one who hasn't known or known of a pilot who hasn't been killed in a plane crash. 

 

It's inherently dangerous and accidents are common. 

[Norrad]

55 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

 Got this picture from my archive pictures;

Which reminds me a little of the older USA Lockheed Star fighter;

The first being subsonic and the latter being supersonic.

Sad but it does happen sometimes. My condolences to the family and I hope the survivour recovers.

Except the Starfighter had almost 0 glide ratio and needed loads of power to take off and even maintain stable flight. More than a 100 were lost to accidents because of that power need.

 

The Albatross is awesome. Loads of private collectors have them, because of their ease to fly and forgiving nature. My friend has one and I love getting a chance to fly it. It also has a nice glide ratio, 10/1 if you maintain glide speed.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Norrad

[duanebigsby]

12 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

 

This is a tragedy for the family and colleagues of the two men, so I mean no offence  - but I just realised the irony of the aircraft name.

 

Normally, on a golf course, an Albatross would be something to celebrate (a score of 3 under par on a single hole).

One of the finest fighters in World War 1 was named Albatross. 

[billd766]

19 hours ago, peterpaintpot said:

Why would two high ranking officers be flying together in a trainer? Surely they both already had a pilot's licence.

 

Perhaps the Group Captain was on a check ride whilst the Sqn Ldr who died was the check pilot. All aircrew are supposed to fly a certain amount of hours a month to keep their qualifications current and also to keep their flying pay.

 

It is SOP in the west.

 

 

16 hours ago, bangrak said:

CZ built = good quality, but 40+ years in service, ...in Thailand

 

Actually the last aircraft were delivered to Thailand in 2005.

 

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/63340/aero-completes-thai-l_39-refurbishment-(oct-3).html

[Kinnock]

3 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

Distance above ground????? 

The ejection system works from ground as well

Depends on the system - the older ones have a minimum safe altitude as they don't have the thrust to get high enough for the parachute to deploy properly if used at ground level.

[TKDfella]

4 hours ago, Norrad said:

Except the Starfighter had almost 0 glide ratio and needed loads of power to take off and even maintain stable flight. More than a 100 were lost to accidents because of that power need.

 

The Albatross is awesome. Loads of private collectors have them, because of their ease to fly and forgiving nature. My friend has one and I love getting a chance to fly it. It also has a nice glide ratio, 10/1 if you maintain glide speed.

Yep, agreed though I must admit I didn't know about the accidents with the Star Fighter. The reason I mentioned the Star Fighter is that a long time ago one of my family new a SF pilot and apparently he was going to pilot an English Electric P1 somewhere in Scotland (I think, but not sure).

[Srikcir]

16 hours ago, Psimbo said:

What does the crash of a military aircraft have to do with civil carriers like Air Asia setting up a maintenance hub?

At the EEC Aeropolis project anchored by the U-Tapao Airport, the MRO includes:

Airbus announced a partnership with Thai Aviation Industries in which Airbus will support all of Thailand’s law enforcement and military helicopters for the next two years.

https://www.thephuketnews.com/thailand-takes-a-giant-leap-closer-to-becoming-asean-premier-aviation-hub-66679.php#YflgmJqB1mIvMfTJ.97

No mention of military fixed wing aircraft. But such inclusion would bea  logical extension of Thai Airways International and Airbus plan to jointly open an aircraft maintenance and repair operations (MRO) at the EEC Aeropolis.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, bobnuts said:

Squadron leader rank is about the lowest grade to get in a plane. Understand that GC here is like a sergeant anywhere west of 50E.

Lowest grade is pilot officer followed upward by three ranks to squadron leader, followed upward by two ranks to group Captain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_ranks_of_the_Thai_armed_forces

So no "about" it.

If the Thai air force command follows tradition, the killed squadron leader will be posthumously promoted (regardless of cause of death if mission/training related), ie., wing commander, so that survivors receive better death benefits. 

[Rimmer]

A couple of disrespectful posts and replies have been removed

[billd766]

1 hour ago, TKDfella said:

Yep, agreed though I must admit I didn't know about the accidents with the Star Fighter. The reason I mentioned the Star Fighter is that a long time ago one of my family new a SF pilot and apparently he was going to pilot an English Electric P1 somewhere in Scotland (I think, but not sure).

 

During the 1960s the F104 Starfighter was known as the "Widowmaker" in the German Luftwaffe. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter#German_service

 

The safety record of the F-104 Starfighter became high-profile news in the mid-1960s, especially in Germany. The Federal German Republic initially ordered 700 (instead of the French Mirage), and later another 216, a total of 916 aircraft.[70] Deliveries started in January 1962 and before the end of the month, the first of no fewer than 262 German F-104s had crashed. In June 1962 four F-104s crashed on the same day. 116 German pilots died[70] during peacetime between 25 January 1962 and 11 December 1984. 

 

Some operators lost a large proportion of their aircraft through accidents, although the accident rate varied widely depending on the user and operating conditions; the German Air Force and Federal German Navy lost about 30% of aircraft in accidents over its operating career,[72] and Canada lost 46% of its F-104s (110 of 235).[73] The Spanish Air Force, however, lost none.

[Sir Swagman]

7 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

Distance above ground????? 

The ejection system works from ground as well

Not all aircraft have what is known as zero/zero ejection seats (0 speed, 0 altitude - and they will supposedly work) I doubt a 40 year old trainer had such seats fitted, so the question of ‘how high from the ground’ is quite valid

[sawadee1947]

1 hour ago, Sir Swagman said:

Not all aircraft have what is known as zero/zero ejection seats (0 speed, 0 altitude - and they will supposedly work) I doubt a 40 year old trainer had such seats fitted, so the question of ‘how high from the ground’ is quite valid

Actually you are poking in the fog. 

[sawadee1947]

4 hours ago, Kinnock said:

Depends on the system - the older ones have a minimum safe altitude as they don't have the thrust to get high enough for the parachute to deploy properly if used at ground level.

I doubt it. This army spend a lot of money for high quality. You think they risk the life of high decorated pilots,.? Not this high quality PM

[billd766]

4 hours ago, Sir Swagman said:

Not all aircraft have what is known as zero/zero ejection seats (0 speed, 0 altitude - and they will supposedly work) I doubt a 40 year old trainer had such seats fitted, so the question of ‘how high from the ground’ is quite valid

 

A lot depends on the last upgrade which was only some 12 to 15 years ago.

Edited May 23, 2018 by billd766

[coxyhog]

Modern military jets have rocket initiated ejection seats which give them the zero zero capability.

F-104 Starfighters had a downward firing ejection seat when first in service,which contributed to the widowmaker name.

Eventually they were fitted with Martin Baker upward firing seats.