The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - March 21, 2010




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Two Rafales crash
usajoe1    9/24/2009 4:52:45 PM
Reuters
Thu Sep 24, 2009 2:45pm EDT

PARIS, Sept 24 (Reuters) - Two French Rafale fighter aicraft from the carrier Charles de Gaulle crashed in the Mediterrenean on Thursday during a test flight, the military said.

One pilot has been rescued, another is still missing.

The Rafale, made by Dassault Aviation, is France's most advanced fighter. Brazil has been negotiating to buy the aircraft, which would be its first export order.

The accident took place about 30 km from the southwestern city of Perpignan. A spokesman for Dassault had no comment.

"It was a training mission, not an operational mission. The search is continuing for the second pilot," an armed forces spokeswoman said. A rescue vessel, a civilian helicopter and two military planes were taking part in the search. (Reporting by Marcel Michelson; editing by Andrew Dobbie)

 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4   NEXT
Bluewings12       9/25/2009 3:36:08 PM
Latest news (they don 't say much) :
 
After the mid-air collision , the pilot who ejected saw that the second Rafale was still flying and soon after it disappeared  from the CdG 's radars .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/25/2009 3:39:38 PM
If people didn't buy fighters because they crashed, there'd be nothing selling.  The F-105 had an abysmal safety record but turned out to be a fine fighter-bomber.  F-14As suffered from engine trouble for their entire service period; the F-111's first combat deployment was an utter disaster.  Hell, one of the F-22 prototypes crashed due to computer error.
 
This was pilot error, and it happens all the time, especially in combat training.  Unless it's somehow proven that the Rafales' onboard computers seized control from the pilots and committed robocide, it shouldn't affect sales at all.  Competitors to the Rafale could claim this as a problem with the aircraft, but it would be highly flimsy and would probably do more damage to the competitor than it would to Dassault.
 
It happens.  I hope the pilots are okay.
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/25/2009 3:40:42 PM

Latest news (they don 't say much) :

 

After the mid-air collision , the pilot who ejected saw that the second Rafale was still flying and soon after it disappeared  from the CdG 's radars .


 

Cheers .




That's not good.  It suggests that the second Rafale pilot could've been killed in the collision, or knocked out, and the plane just went into the ocean. 
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 4:09:21 PM
Hopefully this tragic accident will save the lives of other Brazilian and French pilots.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       9/25/2009 4:13:41 PM
""That's not good.  It suggests that the second Rafale pilot could've been killed in the collision, or knocked out, and the plane just went into the ocean. ""
 
Yes , this is what everybody 's here is thinking ...
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       9/25/2009 4:21:15 PM
Deici :
""Hopefully this tragic accident will save the lives of other Brazilian and French pilots.""
 
Strange response from you ...
Anyway , I would hope so (but dogfight accidents during training can happen with the very best aircraft and the very best pilots ...)
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 4:49:03 PM
And yes, I am serious about both.
 
As for this 'not being something we can blame Dassault for', I believe one should keep a holistic view of most subjects. This is a black mark, not a feather in the cap. F-22s crashing says something about their complexity of their design. Rafales in mid-air crashings says something about up to two planes.
 
This is further evidence of the mediocre quality churned out, but as we all know some people will argue their feelings regardless of actual combat records over Yugoslavia and Afghanistan indicating the needs for target designation and cover from both fighters and bombers.
 
Regardless,
I hope these pilots are in the hand of God and that their families are well.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 4:51:07 PM

"There goes Brazil sale..."

 

That is what is going through your head?

 

You are pathetic.

 





 
That's not fair of you towards him Rufus.
Where is your head for the 250-500k people that die every day?
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 4:53:55 PM
PS. I am not reading your replies BlueWing, it is a waste of time, and I was unaware you had created the thread until it was too late. (And I am still on the case of getting you banned.)
 
Railing back to stay appropriate, I think this is a good chance to introduce more VR.
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a       9/25/2009 4:54:44 PM
Deici, I don't see the argument here.  Two pilots doing combat training, they lose situational awareness, and blam, they run into each other.  They could be up there flying X-Wings and it wouldn't make a difference if one pilot loses track of where the other guy is. 
 
It's like when an airliner pilot isn't watching his instruments or is too busy staring at the stewardess' butt and plows a 747 into a mountainside.  It's not the fault of the aircraft: it was sound.  It's the fault of the pilot for not watching where the hell he was going.  You can argue "Why didn't the plane warn the pilot?" It may have, but things happened so fast the human pilot couldn't react.  This is doubly true in high-performance, high speed fighters like the Rafale.
 
You and I can argue the merits and flaws of the Rafale with BW for all day, but this isn't one of those arguments.  A pilot or pilots screwed up, and at least one of them now has to live with that.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 4:58:13 PM



@ Rufus







> That is what is going through your head?







Livelihood of many French workers depend on that deal.







@ ArtyEngineer







> WTF does losing two aircraft in what will likely turn out to be a mid air collison have to do with the sale to Brazil?







Would you feel comfortable selecting a fighter that just went down days before you are supposed to have signed the deal???







Now is the worst time for Rafale to crash, but perhaps fate doesn't want to see Rafale exported..



Seriously dude, are you really this stupid?  How does an accident which as much as I hate to say this is more than liklely going to be determined as "Pilot error" have any bearing on the capabilities of the aircraft and as such have any bearing on a procurement decision?



 
Maybe sensor fusion could have avoided it.
 
Yes, I'm being naughty. ^^
 
In all seriousness though, you don't know jack about what happened either, and mechanical error happens fairly often, even though the pilot is the weakest link.
 
 
Kind of reminds me of the Aeroflot plane that dived because the father hadn't been properly instructed what half-activated the autopilot before he let his son try it out.
Sure it was massive pilot(s) error because of faulty training, but subsequent versions of the aircraft had a warning for partially engaged AP.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 5:03:01 PM

Deici, I don't see the argument here.  Two pilots doing combat training, they lose situational awareness, and blam, they run into each other.  They could be up there flying X-Wings and it wouldn't make a difference if one pilot loses track of where the other guy is. 

 

It's like when an airliner pilot isn't watching his instruments or is too busy staring at the stewardess' butt and plows a 747 into a mountainside.  It's not the fault of the aircraft: it was sound.  It's the fault of the pilot for not watching where the hell he was going.  You can argue "Why didn't the plane warn the pilot?" It may have, but things happened so fast the human pilot couldn't react.  This is doubly true in high-performance, high speed fighters like the Rafale.

 

You and I can argue the merits and flaws of the Rafale with BW for all day, but this isn't one of those arguments.  A pilot or pilots screwed up, and at least one of them now has to live with that.



Well, I don't know anything about what happened so technically I'm preempting foolishly by saying it's evidence. However I subscribe to the philosophy that either the plane had an error of some sort or it wasn't idiot proof enough somehow.
 
 
Ally McBeal had a case where a similar argument came up where an airliner exploded from an 'act of God'. I don't buy that, there's a reason for everything. Bird went into the engine? Still someone's fault for not knowing the birds were there (albeit that might not involve the pilot). Or why wasn't the plane birdproofed?
Unless they failed on the quantum level somehow something is responsible. That this may have nothing to with bad design is possible, but I find it unlikely that they are completely seperate.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 5:07:55 PM

It's like when an airliner pilot isn't watching his instruments or is too busy staring at the stewardess' butt and plows a 747 into a mountainside.  It's not the fault of the aircraft: it was sound.  It's the fault of the pilot for not watching where the hell he was going.  You can argue "Why didn't the plane warn the pilot?" It may have, but things happened so fast the human pilot couldn't react.  This is doubly true in high-performance, high speed fighters like the Rafale.

OK, you got me there as I didn't notice and mentioned 'warn the pilot' as a reason later. I suppose AIs might override, or a co-pilot could (but they weren't doubled up) and noone has AIs.
Regardless, as we've all said none of us know jack. All we know is it looks bad, which is besides the points.
 
What we do know is there is a good chance it was pilot error, and also that there's a significant chance of a flaw in either of these two planes.
Normally I'd lean heavily towards pilot error, but in a case involving more than one plane I find it about even odds some sort of mechanical or technical error is involved.
 
Of course I don't know much about planes, but this is my general impression from watching documentaries on crashes (mostly civvie which u have a good point is slower than fighters).
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 5:14:35 PM

"Would you feel comfortable selecting a fighter that just went down days before you are supposed to have signed the deal???



Now is the worst time for Rafale to crash, but perhaps fate doesn't want to see Rafale exported.."



 

All fighters crash you stupid kid. 

 

Not only that, but it is almost certain that the cause of this crash was a mid-air collision.   Collisions happen sometimes for a variety of reasons and it says nothing about the quality of the design or its prospects for export. 

 





 
That's nonsense. MOST categories of DESIGN have at least one crash. More importantly the rates differ from plane to plane.
 
I'm quite sure this pushes the Rafale's accident rate to above average.
 
You can passionately argue this was the victims fault rather than a hunk of metal, and if I was you I guess I'd call you coldhearted over that one.
 
 
Ultimately we don't know anything about that, and I know very little about mid-air crashes, but what's for sure is an 'act of God' is unlikely. It could be pilot error which would speak a little of France's airforce in general or an error with the fighter planes which would say more about the Rafale.
It seems most posters here are inclined towards the former explanation, and they may very well be right.
However I have my doubts, despite my lack of knowledge in this field. Everything sensible I've heard of the Rafale is worse than what I've heard of the French airforce and co.
 
We will see.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       9/25/2009 5:24:52 PM

@ Rufus



> That is what is going through your head?



Livelihood of many French workers depend on that deal.



@ ArtyEngineer



> WTF does losing two aircraft in what will likely turn out to be a mid air collison have to do with the sale to Brazil?



Would you feel comfortable selecting a fighter that just went down days before you are supposed to have signed the deal???



Now is the worst time for Rafale to crash, but perhaps fate doesn't want to see Rafale exported..

I'm a bit uncomfortable siding with you after that anti-Japanese crap you spouted (and I'm Chinese), but I agree that there is a larger picture that should be allowed to be spoken of (or else noone could support war or ever speak anytime). I remember reading about Mao's wife derailing from a major Earthquake though, it helped kill her career. I also don't like that Dassault didn't issue a comment of sympathy.
I do however believe that sympathy should come first though, which is why I tried to blend my first message. Some people will not like that or discussing in a mourning/consolation thread (which is what this seems to have turned into by the first half page), but that's their choice as it is mine and yours as it is a mostly open forum.
 
So apparently they want us to focus on the probably dead man and his loved ones and community around him. I feel I already have with my first two posts and subsequent mentions, but I'm quick and morbid and Aspergers. If the point was truly to start this thread to express sympathy, and only sympathy it should have said so.
 
It was my attempt to synthesize sympathy and a nasty statement towards the quality of the Rafale that led to me saying this might save lives. Not the most appropriate but definitely above board as there is noone who knew them personally on this board (we can assume) and no warning on this thread and I also made a second sympathy statement on my next post.
 
I do think they should tolerate your statement though, it's perfectly above board.
Simply because they choose to focus on love and sentimentality should not shackle any of us if we have done no wrong.
 
Noone after all, is happy about this.
Mentioning consequences negative or positive or simply commenting is something entirely different.
 
However sympathy is sympathetic and proper.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2010StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy