Warbird Information Exchange

Just read this bad news at http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=95726

Tillerman.

_________________
Jets are nice. Props are nicer.

Fair winds Dave.

Sad to see such a thing happen, especially from a seat failure. I know the guys at AVCOM are speculating on it, but having had discussions with people who are close to ThunderCity, they do great work and have high maintenance standards, so I'm inclined to believe that the seat was maintained properly and it was just "one of those things" that something failed and he couldn't get out.

Very sad news, blue skies Dave! This could have a huge impact on operations at Thundercity as well as the MIssouri Lightning.

_________________
Cheers,
Peter

________

That is very sad news. I don't know what else to say. God Speed.

-David

So very sorry to hear news like this. My prayers go out to all affected in the loss of Dave Stock. Godspeed to you sir.
Robbie

_________________
Fly Fast Make Noise!

This is very sad and shocking. My condolences to the friends and family of the pilot.

This sucks, he was talking to them, & said he had hyd. failure (according the S.A. media) he was ejecting, then he reported "seat failure". I have read from other sources he tried 3 times to get the seat to fire! He rode it in! Sucks!!! Godspeed to him.
Robbie

_________________
Fly Fast Make Noise!

That's got to be one of the most horrifying ways to die, other than by fire. Trying to eject and being powerless to give any inputs into the aircraft and knowing that your fate was just seconds away is just terrifying. He knew what was coming.

I read on another aviation forum that the EE Lightning had problems with ejection seats while in service with the RAF. What exactly were these problems? Can anyone elaborate on this? I've also heard that this is supposedly the reason why the CAA won't certify any in Great Britain. Any more info on this?

Again, it's a sad day when anyone loses their life in an airplane, especially one who was so experienced and highly regarded.

If anything positive can come of this, hopefully it's some knowledge gleaned from the accident that can prevent a future reoccurrence.

No problems with the seats as such, as the same MB seat type was used in other RAF jets.

There was a single incident, back in 1965, when a F.3 of 56 Sqn (XR721) crashed during a practice approach to RAF Bentwaters when the No.1 engine flamed out, and a canopy fault prevented ejection resulting in the loss of the pilot. The fault was rectified, and there doesn't seem to be another occurance.

This is what is being infered regarding to the tragic loss of Dave Stock and ZU-BEX (XS451) in SA, whether there is a connection of not is not known, and isn't the reason the UK CAA won't certify them to fly in the UK. The main reason, is the one that's likely claimed this aircraft too, judging by photo evidence just prior to the crash, and that is the sadly common Lightning problem of a fuel leak/rear fuselage fire leading to brunt through tailplane controls and eventual loss of control.

The ejection failure or delay in working of the system is the dreadful scenario.

RIP DS.

Thanks for setting the record straight, Firebird. A few more follow-up questions:

1) What exactly is the "canopy fault"? Are there any modifications that can be done to the canopy to prevent this from happening? Have any been done to the modern-day flying Lightnings?

2) From the way you describe that, it sounds like the ejection seat is incapable of firing through the canopy. Is this correct? I know that on modern day jets, many seats will go through the canopy if it fails to be jettisoned correctly. I assume that this is not the case with the Lightning?

Right oh, have dug out the stuff on this, which isn’t quite what I wrote earlier from memory....it's my age

It was 5th Jan 1966 when FO Derek Law of 56 Sqn, suffered an engine flame out on his approach to Bentwaters, and tried to eject, but the canopy wouldn’t separate and he was forced to attempt a belly landing which was against SOP for Lightning ops. He succeeded in skilfully putting the a/c down in a ploughed field, but fate took over, and after shedding it’s tail and bouncing across the ground it came to rest against a farm building and tree, and which point the ejection seat fired, and launched the pilot up into the branches of the tree above killing him.

Investigations lead to one of the canopy shoot bolts failing to release in the original ejection initiation, but the impact of the crash landing loosed the canopy off, but it wasn’t ascertained as to why the seat had then fired. Either he’d inadvertently or deliberately instigated with a pull of the face blind handle or less likely, but possible, the impact of the crash landing (which it wasn’t designed for) forced up the seat breaking the top lock allowing the sear to displace and fire the seat, but there was no conclusive evidence of which of the possibilities caused the seat to fire.

So, it is possible that one of the canopy shoot bolts on ZU-BEX failed not allowing the seat to fire.
The Lightning has a substantial central metal framed canopy, which is why the ejection sequence starts with explosive operation of the canopy jacks, lifting the canopy up into the airstream, which lifts it clear of the airframe. The seat firing is on a 1 sec time delay from the canopy firing, to allow for the canopy to be blown clear. After the above fatal incident, a by-pass valve was fitted to all aircraft, which operated the front canopy locks instead of the explosive lifting of the rear jacks, and all 4 of TC’s Lightning’s would have had this modification.

It’s likely that DS would have resorted to this procedure to release the canopy to be able to pull the seat blind, but with a Lightning probably already in control failure mode and at lowish height, he may just have run out of time?
Or the same reason the canopy failed to fire also failed to fire the seat after he’d manually released the canopy, which is of course twice the size of the single seat fighter versions. That’s pure speculation on my part of course, as there could be all sorts of other reasons for what went wrong.

Thanks Firebird, interesting discussion.

Just seen these comments posted elsewhere by a couple of ex-Lightning pilots regarding the SA crash, which pretty much sums up the situation poor Dave Stock found himself in.

Regarding the ejection, he would have had little time at low level to do quite a lot. In the event that the seat wouldn't fire, he'd have to diagnose that the canopy was the problem. Then he'd have to jettison the canopy, and repull the handle. If that still failed, he'd have to manually separate from the seat, climb over the side and bale out. An awful lot to do in an aircraft at low level with little/no control.

Very much secondary to the human loss, it's also sad to see the loss of a beautiful aircraft. I had many enjoyable flights in that very machine.

And

Pilot's Notes for the Lightning T5 state (as amended in 1973):

"During an ejection attempt, if the canopy fails to jettison after both seat firing handles have been pulled, it is likely that the canopy jettison system is faulty; in this event use the normal opening handle to remove the canopy."

That's an awful lot of lateral thinking to be done at low altitude with faltering controllability, and with no Duty Pilot in the tower with all the books on hand and able to offer instant advice.

Rest in Peace David Stock; you will not be forgotten by the Lightning fraternity.

Perhaps, better to end with this stunning photo of Dave Stock in ZU-BEX taken the day before the crash, doing what a Lightning pilot does best....climbing like a lovesick angel.

Thanks for the info, Firebird. Keep us abreast of any new info you learn, please.

An Update:


Found it here:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/284417