Canberra U.10 drone crash

nazca_steve · Post by **nazca_steve** » 23 Mar 2007, 17:53

Hello all,

I found this rather nice clip of a U.10 or U.14 Canberra drone crashing on You Tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naQy1jUx-88

I know some of these were tested at Hal Far in Malta, but can anyone shed any light on this clip in particular? Looks like the drone guidance system must have failed on it...

Steve

Nigel H-J · Post by **Nigel H-J** » 23 Mar 2007, 18:58

Watched that clip a couple of times:

1). It looked very much as though it took off with full flap setting unless it wsa misleading or that the Canberra only had one setting.

2). The rate of climb appeared a fraction too high for te speed it was flying.

Maybe I'm wrong or maybe I'm right - Some-one must know!!

nazca_steve · Post by **nazca_steve** » 23 Mar 2007, 22:42

I think it did only have one flap setting...maybe some of the experts can clarify. Either way, a pretty spectacular crash. Speaking of which, if you haven't seen this one, have a look (be warned, tragically this one is not a drone, but there is a backstory to the crash if you are interested. Human error does not even begin to describe it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUEhNKBi4DY

Paul K · Post by **Paul K** » 24 Mar 2007, 02:40

Seen that B52 crash a number of times, and its awful. I've heard that the pilot, a Lt. Col. had a reputation for pushing things a little too far, and some aircrew in his squadron had refused to fly with him. How true that is I don't know, but thats the story I remember from the time.

Dreadful to watch. :sad:

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 24 Mar 2007, 12:50

The "classified" portion of the investigation (the internal one) has never been released (not that I really expected it to), but the safety investigation, the one that does get released hinted that while this guy was a wild one, the accident may not have been his fault and may have actually been a mechanical failure of the aircraft at the wrong time. When he began the maneuver, it wasn't 100% "safe", but it wasn't anything extreme - he was simply doing a steep turn. I had the opprotunity to view the raw video of the accident several weeks after it happened and one thing I noticed (and some of the investigators noticed according to the report) was that the aircraft stabilized with a 60* bank for about 5 seconds then suddenly started rolling to 90 degrees and then nose over. About 2 seconds before impact, the aircraft wing was at an angle that revealed something that should never happen - both spoileron panels (1 per wing) were at full deflection. These are hydraulically powered and the solenoids are setup to prevent simultaneous activation unless on the ground. There are wing spoilers used for air brakes separate of the spoilerons. However, the information as to why the system failed is not in the safety report, so we probably will never know what caused the failure (if they were even able to figure it out), only that it occured and the plane crashed not because of his maneuver, but because of a mechanical failure at an altitude and attitude that prevented any recovery

This still puts the accident on the pilot since he shouldn't have been doing the maneuver at such a low altitude, but still, I doubt any pilot would have been able to recover from a steep turn where the spoilerons failed at any altitude, the difference would have been that the crew would have had time for ejection and thus only the plane would have been lost since steep turns are not a prohibited maneuver in the B-52.

Post by **Garry Russell** » 24 Mar 2007, 13:18

This is the full video

After the go around the aircraft is in a steep turn then you see it change and tighten up.

This is before the usually shown sequence

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64Y-gtXD ... ed&search=

Garry

Nigel H-J · Post by **Nigel H-J** » 24 Mar 2007, 13:31

It is all so very easy to say 'in hindsight' but I have also seen that before and watched it a couple of times and strongly felt that at least one of the crew could have ejected but didn't.

Could it have been 'I must stay with her because I must keep fighting for the sake of the rest of the crew?' Whatever the reason, it is still so sad to see peoples' lives come to an end in that way.

Post by **Garry Russell** » 24 Mar 2007, 13:43

I read somewhere that the copilot ejected but too late and was still caught up in the crash

Garry

nazca_steve · Post by **nazca_steve** » 24 Mar 2007, 15:53

Chris, thanks for sharing that version of events, as I only read 'psych essay' as it were that covers the pilot's turbulent career and nothing of the technical problems that occurred. I watched the second video Garry posted, which puts things in a lot better context.

THere is another video out there that shows an earlier incident in which the same pilot buzzes a hilltop at god knows how low. Quite exhilarating to watch, but of course somewhat dangerous in a bird of that size. I do feel for the other crew members in that crash, as I heard one of them had their wife and kids watching which is just plain horrible.

On a much lighter note and something that will appeal to the Hunter fans on here, here is a rather nice little clip of a Hunter taking off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AJcdtGh8fA

Tweek · Post by **Tweek** » 24 Mar 2007, 16:07

It always baffles me as to why he was at such a high angle of bank, so close the ground.

A collection of clips leading up to the crash:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU

It was just an accident waiting to happen...