RAF Tornado closes Newcastle Airport

[Harry Basset]

Following a birdstrike an RAF Tornado made a precautionary landing at Newcastle airport but ran off the runway. A spokesperson, probably related to the late Professor Stanley Unwin stated that 'Dinnington Road is shut because of the radiation threat from the jet's flare.
Anyone know what this means?

[Garry Russell]

There were two, the other declared an emergency to divert to Teeside but made it back to base.

Garry

[Quixoticish]

Following a birdstrike an RAF Tornado made a precautionary landing at Newcastle airport but ran off the runway. A spokesperson, probably related to the late Professor Stanley Unwin stated that 'Dinnington Road is shut because of the radiation threat from the jet's flare.
Anyone know what this means?

At first I thought they were referring to the Skyshadow pod; if they had lost the nose gear it may have dinged the ground and been damaged. (Well, not completely true, at first I thought they were just being retarded stereotypical journalist hacks trying to create a scare story). But someone suggested elsewhere on a different form that they are probably referring to the FLIR equipment under the Tornados nose which will have taken the brunt of the impact when the nose gear collapsed. I can't fathom what radioactive components are contained within the FLIR considering it is a passive system but I'll defer to those with greater knowledge of the subject than myself.

[SkippyBing]

If it's like the IR device on the Lynx, the front of the optic path (and other bits inside) may be made of germanium which is perfectly safe as long as you don't inhale it. Obviuosly this isn't a problem until you break it which is pretty hard to do. You can't use glass as it's not IR transparent and the best option is diamond which is strangely too expensive!

[Quixoticish]

If it's like the IR device on the Lynx, the front of the optic path (and other bits inside) may be made of germanium which is perfectly safe as long as you don't inhale it. Obviuosly this isn't a problem until you break it which is pretty hard to do. You can't use glass as it's not IR transparent and the best option is diamond which is strangely too expensive!

Thanks Skippy, that would explain it.

[Chris Trott]

In addition, if the aircraft had IR flares onboard, it might be a risk of having one be accidentally launched until the EOD guys got there and disarmed the aircraft.

Remember, always treat an aircraft with explosives of any type aboard as if they will go off until someone safes everything and hopefully it ain't you doing the safing.

[fmansam]

the FLIR does carry a small amount liquid that when in vapour form can be harmful, (we used to worry about it on the harrier)

as a rule though, you would be unlucky for something to go wrong though...

anyway a piccie and write up here....

http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east ... -21474698/

[Chris Trott]

I started reading that news report and thought, "well, this is decently written..."

Sadly it was not to be.

Scorch marks were visible on the tail of the plane.

Excuse me, but have you never seen a picture of a Tornado? If it's anything more than a few days out of a repaint, it always has "scorch marks" on the tail. It tends to happen when the jet efflux (and soot) gets blown past the tail from the engines when they engage the thrust reversers... :roll: :roll:

[TSR2]

Actually Chris, I have it from a good source that there was some sort of "engine fire" (using the term loosly) after the bird strike, so this may well be acurate.

[Chris Trott]

I'm doubtful simply because I don't think a pilot would knowingly engage the buckets on an engine on fire as it'd only make the conflagration worse. As well, the "scorch marks" fan up the fin as they move forward, exactly as the efflux does when the reverser buckets are deployed.