Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tuskar Rock crash caused by collision - RAF man

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by hedgehog View Post
    are they vampires in the background or what
    Yep, Vampires they are, picture taken at family day 1975.
    Tony K

    Comment


    • #17
      well spotted me
      Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
      Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
      The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
      The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
      The best lack all conviction, while the worst
      Are full of passionate intensity.

      Comment


      • #18
        "The Germans installed the Martin-Baker GZ-4 ejection seat in three aircrafts, but abandoned the idea, otherwise the aircraft is without "hot seats".".......I still can't find if the Fouga 90 was equiped witha bang seat..but it doesn't really matter.

        score another one for IMO versus the press.
        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

        Comment


        • #19
          the potez 94 prototype was fitted with ejection seats as was the fouga 90 with re designed canopy similar to that of the alpha jet, neither went into production.....

          Comment


          • #20
            Yeah, it was the bit where the departing pilot gets his lower limbs cut off by the instrument panel that mighta done it.that's get your attention.
            regards
            GttC

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
              Yup..I rememeber him flying dauphins from the L.E Eithne;
              I remember him as a pilot of an Allouette while involved in a Mountain Rescue exercise in Glendalough, around 1980. I was a civilian then, but I do have a photo of him flying!

              Comment


              • #22
                ejector seat Fougas in Ireland?

                ... from the EADS website:

                "In 1963, the model "Super Magister" was constructed. This aircraft, also known as CM.173, had strong engines, a new fuselage and ejector seat. 137 copies were constructed between 1963 and 1968 and flown in France, Ireland and Lebanon."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by carrington View Post
                  ... from the EADS website:

                  "In 1963, the model "Super Magister" was constructed. This aircraft, also known as CM.173, had strong engines, a new fuselage and ejector seat. 137 copies were constructed between 1963 and 1968 and flown in France, Ireland and Lebanon."

                  Link?


                  Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    That wing commander just posted a letter in todays Irish Times

                    giving his version

                    weeeeoooooooo weeoooooo and such like are the noises he

                    must be hearing in his head
                    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
                    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
                    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
                    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
                    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
                    Are full of passionate intensity.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      link

                      Originally posted by Goldie fish View Post
                      Link?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Ok, for the umpteenth time, the Irish Air Corps Fouga Magister did not have ejection seats. They were Super Magister versions though, at least as far as I know. The main difference was the more powerful engines over the standard version (Marbor 6?).

                        This chap from the RAF sounds slightly demented and of the same mindset as your average conspiracy nut, i.e. When confronted with valid, scientific evidence which eradicates any iota of credibility in your argument, invent new "evidence". Muddy the waters.

                        I've read the "witness" reports, and by god they make interesting reading, more for what it says about the witnesses, than for the value of what they said. People talking about planes mysteriously landing on their farms that very day etc, mysterious planes in the sky.

                        The fact of the matter is that the plane which emerged from the clouds was a DH Dove. People are terrible at attempting to accurately describe events. That's why we've got people consistently mistaking Venus for a UFO. Even a military guy on this board reported seeing jets & a possible tanker aircraft last year - it turned out they were PC-9's and a Casa practicing for the Bray airshow.

                        People are generally no good at reliably and accurately reporting what they see. This ex-RAF nutbag is selectively picking witness statements and muddying waters for the sake of it. Normally I'd find the Irish Times the most tolerable of the daily papers, but their consistent publication of this guy who has no substance to his claims is mind numbing and quite infuriating. They obviously don't check the most elementary of sources before publication. If this is their new path then I sincerely hope they are consistent and start publishing every UFO and Atlantis nut jobs irrelevant made up ramblings and disappear down the route of the National Enquirer.

                        I'm angry about this.

                        Where is your evidence Mr. Evers?

                        To use a Carl Sagan line: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

                        You have none sir.

                        I'm not even going to get into the complexity of launching such a cover up, or even bring up for the discussion the rationale of covering such a terrible tragedy up - because this guy has no bloody evidence. But he's being published in a national newspaper, so some nitwit is going to think there's something to this.

                        It's not worth bringing up the fact that the supposed collision happened relatively far out, or that no Fouga at altitude and a distance away over the sea could be described as having a "thunderous" noise, or that such a slight and small aircraft as the Fouga apparently came out better in a collision with a 4 engined turboprop. Or that there's no detailed evidence surrounding where these mystery pilots ejected and landed.. or where and how they were transported covertly away?

                        *deep breath*

                        Produce the evidence or shut the hell up and desist adding to peoples suffering and pain.

                        The bullshit detection toolkit:

                        Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts.

                        Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.

                        Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").

                        Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.

                        Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.

                        Quantify, wherever possible.

                        If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.

                        Occam's razor - if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.

                        Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?
                        Last edited by pym; 3 April 2007, 20:15.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Can someone explain the Potez aircraft factory in Baldonnel by the way?

                          I've heard no mention of such a structures remains..... unless he's talking about what became Airmotive?

                          Also, it looks like our friend has been trying to research his conspiracy theory for the last 6 months or so.

                          Now that the Air Corps has no fighter planes- ok, it hasn't had any real ones since the early 70s and are looking for some new ones, what would be the best one for us considering the role we are/will play in European/International affairs?


                          The internet can be a pain sometimes, leaves a nice trail.

                          Look for posts by "Rushbrooke"
                          Last edited by pym; 3 April 2007, 20:37.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Can someone explain the Potez aircraft factory in Baldonnel by the way?
                            Its the part where the Air Motive factory is now

                            in fact at the bottom end near the roundabout

                            you may notice a curious looking bridge that that leads on to the runway

                            Woeeeeeeee woeeeeeeeeeeeeeee woeeeeeeeeeeee

                            and other noises meant to symbolise something strange
                            Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
                            Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
                            The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
                            The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
                            The best lack all conviction, while the worst
                            Are full of passionate intensity.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Airmotive was Potez originally

                              Originally posted by pym View Post
                              Can someone explain the Potez aircraft factory in Baldonnel by the way?

                              I've heard no mention of such a structures remains..... unless he's talking about what became Airmotive?

                              Also, it looks like our friend has been trying to research his conspiracy theory for the last 6 months or so.

                              Now that the Air Corps has no fighter planes- ok, it hasn't had any real ones since the early 70s and are looking for some new ones, what would be the best one for us considering the role we are/will play in European/International affairs?


                              The internet can be a pain sometimes, leaves a nice trail.

                              Look for posts by "Rushbrooke"

                              Yes, what is now Airmotive, and was previously Roadstone (I think), was originally a Potez factory in the 1960s. (Potez were the makers of the Fouga.)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                We didn't use the CM.173..we used the CM.170 Zephyr....
                                Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X