Video: Bird sucked into F-15 engine at takeoff

[Matt Barrow]

http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40

Interesting!


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Peter R.]

Matt Barrow > wrote:

> http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40
>
> Interesting!

Interesting, perhaps, but the video I see when clicking this link is of a
water main break video taped by a police car.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[George Patterson]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40

I checked the video index. I believe the id you want is 47, not 40.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[George Patterson]

Peter R. wrote:
>
> Interesting, perhaps, but the video I see when clicking this link is of a
> water main break video taped by a police car.

Try http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=47

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[buttman]

wrong link:

http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=47

by the way, all those videos are cool to watch

[150flivver]

I don't think this was an F-15, more likely an F-16 (B or D model). I
would think an F-15 would have been able to recover on one engine. It
was obvious on this video that the crew needed to restart that engine
or they were ejecting.

[150flivver]

I don't think this was an F-15, more likely an F-16 (B or D model). I
would think an F-15 would have been able to recover on one engine. It
was obvious on this video that the crew needed to restart that engine
or they were ejecting.

[Dave in Columbus]

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 17:56:34 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:

>http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40
>
>Interesting!
Hey Ernie

I visit your site quite regularly, but I've never written in till now. The
jet in question is a CT-155 Hawk. It is a jet trainer built by British
Aerospace Systems and flown by the Canadian Air Force.(CT-155 is the
Canadian designation. The British designation is BAE 115 Hawk, or something
like that.) The accident happened about 2 years ago in Moose Jaw,
Saskatchewan, where a lot of the pilot training for the Canadian Air Force
is done. I just completed pilot training there myself, although I didn't
fly the Hawk.

Anyway, as you can see, they had a bird strike shortly after take-off. They
were doing about 230 knots, and at 200 feet when they sucked in the bird.
The one and only engine flamed out almost immediately. There was a student
and instructor in the airplane at the time. The instructor immediately took
control and attempted to turn around in order to carry out a forced
landing. However, they didn't have enough altitude and decided to eject.
They were at about 800 feet, 150 knots when the ejected. Both pilots
survived. The student had virtually no injuries. The instructor severely
injured his spine and broke his leg. The student returned to flying almost
immediately. I am unsure if the instructor is back flying, but as of about
7 or 8 months ago, he was not.

Here is a link to a site with several pictures of the Hawk, as well as more
info. I'd be happy to answer anymore questions you may have.

Cheers,
Mike G.
Pilot, Canadian Air Force


(Courtesy of http://www.ehowa.com/home.shtml)
--

Dave in Columbus

[Matt Barrow]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow > wrote:
>
> > http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40
> >
> > Interesting!
>
> Interesting, perhaps, but the video I see when clicking this link is of a
> water main break video taped by a police car.

Hmmm...seems they scramble them to keep people off balance.

Try this http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=47

Or try this http://www.fazed.org/video and scroll to "Bird vs. Jet Engine"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"buttman" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> wrong link:
>
> http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=47
>
> by the way, all those videos are cool to watch
>

Did anyone notice that they've changed Bitch'n Betty to Bitch'n Slightly
Effeminate Bob?

[ShawnD2112]

A couple of seriously cool customers. The instructor talks about abandoning
the aircraft with about as much emotion as I use when I'm ordering a burger
and fries. I only hope I'm that calm and collected when I meet my first
in-flight emergency. My hat's off to these guys.

Shawn

"Dave in Columbus" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 17:56:34 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> > wrote:
>
>>http://www.fazed.org/video/view/?id=40
>>
>>Interesting!
> Hey Ernie
>
> I visit your site quite regularly, but I've never written in till now. The
> jet in question is a CT-155 Hawk. It is a jet trainer built by British
> Aerospace Systems and flown by the Canadian Air Force.(CT-155 is the
> Canadian designation. The British designation is BAE 115 Hawk, or
> something
> like that.) The accident happened about 2 years ago in Moose Jaw,
> Saskatchewan, where a lot of the pilot training for the Canadian Air Force
> is done. I just completed pilot training there myself, although I didn't
> fly the Hawk.
>
> Anyway, as you can see, they had a bird strike shortly after take-off.
> They
> were doing about 230 knots, and at 200 feet when they sucked in the bird.
> The one and only engine flamed out almost immediately. There was a student
> and instructor in the airplane at the time. The instructor immediately
> took
> control and attempted to turn around in order to carry out a forced
> landing. However, they didn't have enough altitude and decided to eject.
> They were at about 800 feet, 150 knots when the ejected. Both pilots
> survived. The student had virtually no injuries. The instructor severely
> injured his spine and broke his leg. The student returned to flying almost
> immediately. I am unsure if the instructor is back flying, but as of about
> 7 or 8 months ago, he was not.
>
> Here is a link to a site with several pictures of the Hawk, as well as
> more
> info. I'd be happy to answer anymore questions you may have.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike G.
> Pilot, Canadian Air Force
>
>
> (Courtesy of http://www.ehowa.com/home.shtml)
> --
>
> Dave in Columbus

[Sylvain]

ShawnD2112 wrote:
> A couple of seriously cool customers. The instructor talks about abandoning
> the aircraft with about as much emotion as I use when I'm ordering a burger
> and fries.

....and he keeps giving good instruction in the process (i.e., "Fly
the airplane")


--Sylvain

[Frankie]

Ya know...

.....this video made wonder: Is it common practice to eject from planes which
have ejection seats instead of ditching?

I was surprised they chose to eject and lose the plane instead of make an
off-airport landing in a clearing. Ejecting has risks of its own. It's a
violent event which can result in injury (which evidently happened).

Perhaps jets like that are considered too dangerous to ditch due to their
high landing speeds. Then again, a Hawk lands about the same speed as a
Citation.

Humm...

[Matt Whiting]

ShawnD2112 wrote:

> A couple of seriously cool customers. The instructor talks about abandoning
> the aircraft with about as much emotion as I use when I'm ordering a burger
> and fries. I only hope I'm that calm and collected when I meet my first
> in-flight emergency. My hat's off to these guys.

I was thinking the same thing. I guess that is one advantage of now
owning the airplane you are flying! :-)

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Frankie wrote:

> Ya know...
>
> ....this video made wonder: Is it common practice to eject from planes which
> have ejection seats instead of ditching?
>
> I was surprised they chose to eject and lose the plane instead of make an
> off-airport landing in a clearing. Ejecting has risks of its own. It's a
> violent event which can result in injury (which evidently happened).
>
> Perhaps jets like that are considered too dangerous to ditch due to their
> high landing speeds. Then again, a Hawk lands about the same speed as a
> Citation.

Yes, you don't want to land a jet full of fuel at 130 knots or more on
rough terrain. That is what the seats are for.

Matt

[Jose]

Re:
http://www.fazed.org/video/
scroll down to the video in question (F-15 bird into engine)

There are aural cockpit warnings: "T6 NL" and "We are not done"

What do they mean?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Sylvain]

Jose wrote:
>>
> There are aural cockpit warnings: "T6 NL" and "We are not done"
>
> What do they mean?

I thought the second one actually was 'gear not down', wasn't it?

--Sylvain

[Craig]

Jose wrote:
> Re:
> http://www.fazed.org/video/
> scroll down to the video in question (F-15 bird into engine)
>
> There are aural cockpit warnings: "T6 NL" and "We are not done"
>
> What do they mean?
>
> Jose

There's a thread about this video on the Pprune military forum at :

http://www.pprune.com/forums/showthread.php?s=300daac9f2aef27f8716208ff1b98e9c&threadid=184747

The 'more info' link in the second post talks about the T6NL. I agree
that the other warning sounds like "gear not down".