TT logo
You are viewing a low-graphics version of this page. Click the headline to view full version:

Nimrod aircrash over Afghanistan

Saturday 2.Sep.2006

Toytown Germany > Discussion forum > Themes > Miscellaneous
bluedave
Sep 4 2006, 12:50 pm
Not sure how many people noticed this because it was at the weekend but a Nimrod crashed in Afghanistan with the loss of 14 lives. Story here.

This is the largest British Armed forces loss in a single incident since The Falklands War in 1982 and an investigation has started to see what exactly happened.

QUOTE
According to reports last night, air traffic controllers received several mayday calls before the plane crashed.

It was on its descent to Kandahar air base when it crashed 12 miles west of its destination.
It seems probable that there was a serious wiring fire problem that may have damaged other systems on the aircraft but to quote " hundreds of feet " of wiring in the plane is bloody stupid, try hundreds of miles ! dry.gif

The Nimrod fleet was grounded after the accident but they have now been allowed to carry on again and reported claims by the Taliban that they had brought down the aircraft by Stinger Missile are being denied.

QUOTE
the Taleban quickly claimed to have shot down the aircraft with a shoulder-launched Stinger missile, one of the American weapons that was left over from the days when the CIA was supplying such systems to the Mujahidin to fight Soviet occupying forces.

Hope they find out what the prob was quickly as i love the beautiful beast having spent a large part of my adult life working on it.



Sin
Sep 4 2006, 12:52 pm
The news in Blighty is full of the story. No word yet on why it came down. See another squaddie got killed on the ground today though.

EDIT: Hang on, something is coming up: Desperate last minutes as crew fought to save doomed Nimrod.

The confusing thing is that this plane does have a rather good safety record. Would an on-board short-circuit really bring this type of plane down (I don't know the answer)? The other thing is history: We had a Chinook and a Hercules downed in Iraq that the DoD and MoD PR categorically denied hostile action brought them both down... and in the end the truth was that hostile action did indeed bring both down. Jury is out. We gotta wait for more details.
bluedave
Sep 4 2006, 2:20 pm
A simple short circuit would be very unlikely to down The Nimrod, it has triple redundant systems in hydraulics and electrical so it would need to be a serious fire but there are also firewire systems all over the entire aircraft including in the bomb bay.
Sin
Sep 4 2006, 3:07 pm
Well, Abdul Khaliq, a spokesman for the Taliban, has claimed that a Stinger brought down the Nimrod. Of course the MoD PR is calling this 'totally preposterous' as per usual, and that it was the result of a 'terrible accident'. Time will tell. I suspect they'll wait for the dust to settle on the incident before the real cause comes out buried in the small print. As soon as it does, you can bet I'll post it up.
Allershausen
Sep 4 2006, 3:10 pm
QUOTE (bluedave @ Sep 4 2006, 3:20 pm) *
including in the bomb bay.

I thought they were survaillance aircraft, do they carry bombs as well then?
canaryman
Sep 4 2006, 3:15 pm
Gosh, Sin trying to score cheap conspiracy/political points by using the deaths of serving military personnel (a type of person he refers to as cannon-fodder). What a sick midget he must be!!
bluedave
Sep 4 2006, 3:19 pm
The " normal " MR2 is a maritime reconnaisance aircraft usually referred to as a sub hunter / killer and also performs search and rescue missions around the UK mainland mostly.

It has a mixed bag of ordnance that it carries including torpedoes, bombs, Harpoon anti ship missiles, sonobuoys and depth charges of all different types up to and including nuclear weapons.

I believe the aircraft they are talking about which was over Afghanistan would not be an MR2 but was probably an R Mk1 which is totally different and is a specialised ELINT ( Electronic Intelligence ) aircraft used for monitoring radio traffic and all other communications.
canaryman
Sep 4 2006, 3:19 pm
QUOTE (Allershausen @ Sep 4 2006, 4:10 pm) *
I thought they were survaillance aircraft, do they carry bombs as well then?

It depends on the variant. Some are submarine hunter/killers controlled from M.A.A.U and specifically track subs and potentially hostile naval targets. They carry a killer ability which may include nuclear capability. Others work in Elint in support of air, sea and ground forces, gathering and passing on int. They do not carry weaponary as the norm. They also monitor ground radar such such as anti-aircraft weaponary along with ground movement.
Darkknight
Sep 4 2006, 3:23 pm
According to Wikipedia, Nimrod's since ver. MR2 are/can be armed with an array of weapons..

QUOTE
MR2
Starting in 1975, 32 aircraft were upgraded to MR2 standard, including modernisation of the electronic suite and (as the MR2P) provision for inflight refueling and additional ESM pods on the wingtips. The inflight refueling capability was introduced during the Falklands War, as well as hardpoints to allow the Nimrod to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile (giving rise to the aircraft being called "the largest fighter in the world"). Eventually all MR2s gained refueling probes and the "P" designation was dropped. The Nimrod MR2 carries out three main roles; Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), Anti-Surface Unit Warfare (ASUW) and Search and Rescue (SAR). Its extended range enables the crew to monitor maritime areas far to the north of Iceland and up to 4,000 km out into the Western Atlantic. With AAR (Air-to-Air Refuelling), its range and endurance is greatly extended. The MR2 is a highly lethal submarine killer carrying the most up to date sensors and data processing equipment linked to the weapon systems. In addition to weapons and sonar-buoys, a searchlight can be mounted in the starboard wing pod for search and rescue (SAR) operations.
bluedave
Sep 4 2006, 3:26 pm
Yep Sidewinders were fitted during the Falklands in order to scare away Argentinian Hercules transporters but i have to tell you that during the test firings all it managed to do was burn all the paint off the underside of the wings from the rocket blasts laugh.gif
canaryman
Sep 4 2006, 3:31 pm
The torpedo capability was excellent though and the sonar buoys were cool. Have to say that I did not enjoy sitting in the thing, with a morse key on a "Tapestry" at the age of 19. Pass the sick bag (especially after the first climb to stall the engines!!!) biggrin.gif
Inflatablewoman
Sep 4 2006, 4:06 pm
QUOTE (bluedave @ Sep 4 2006, 3:20 pm) *
A simple short circuit would be very unlikely to down The Nimrod, it has triple redundant systems in hydraulics and electrical so it would need to be a serious fire but there are also firewire systems all over the entire aircraft including in the bomb bay.

My friend Sahir Mohammed, would like more posts like this. [img]http://www.keithball.net/img/smileys/dancejihad1tf.gif[/img]
bluedave
Sep 4 2006, 4:10 pm
It's not anything secret mate, all in the public domain
Sin
Sep 6 2006, 11:59 am
Bit more info:

The crashed aircraft was BAE Systems Nimrod MR.2, XV230, and had undergone depot-level maintenance two months prior to the incident. It was one of six MR.2's fitted with a L3 Wescam MX-15 EO turret. Nimrod XV230 was also fitted with RT Video 'Project Broadsword' early this year.
You are viewing a low fidelity version of this page. Click to view the full page.