„Friendly“ Shoot-Downs and High Attrition Rates

Maury Markowitz

From the Great White North!
Joined
27 February 2014
Messages
211
Reaction score
172
While poking about looking for bits on the Red Top, I have come across a story about a runaway RAF aircraft, a Harrier I believe, that was shot down using a Red Top.

Does anyone have a real reference for this story?
 
While poking about looking for bits on the Red Top, I have come across a story about a runaway RAF aircraft, a Harrier I believe, that was shot down using a Red Top.

Does anyone have a real reference for this story?
It never happened. But for some unknown reason Lightning's intercepting it have got linked...

Here's the story of the Harrier concerned from the pilot Air Commodore Peter Taylor AFC

"At about midday, I got airborne in XV 794, turned south and headed for my first target, flying at 420 knots and 250 feet AGL. All went well until I was preparing to attack my second target. I had just looked into the cockpit to re-arrange my maps, when looking up I saw a formation of three large (they have got much larger over the years!) birds flying straight at me. Instinctively, I pushed forward. I missed two of the birds, but the third went straight into the intake.
There followed an almighty bang, followed by some rather worrying mechanical noises from the normally robust Pegasus 100 engine. Clearly, it did not like what was going on. I noticed that the RPM was just below idle, the JPT in the middle of its range, height 200 feet and speed about 400 knots, although rapidly declining.
Generally, I was in open country, which was fairly flat with a few houses in my path. I opened and shut the throttle, but nothing much seemed to happen. I broadcast a quick 'MAYDAY' but since I was quite low, I had no great expectation that anyone would hear me. Since I had made up my mind that the engine had suffered what sounded like catastrophic damage, I turned my mind to what to do next. (In reality, I said to myself: "I'd better jump out quite soon or I'm going in with the aeroplane!") Then, exactly as you read it in books and newspapers, I saw that I was still close re to houses, and steered the aircraft away from them towards open ground as best I could. Time was now getting short, and as I reached open ground, I saw a small hill ahead with trees at the summit. I pointed the aircraft at the hill, took one last look at the height and speed (100 feet and 200 knots respectively) trimmed the aircraft straight and level, tightened my straps, and pulled the handle.
I recall everything working perfectly in my Martin-Baker Mk.9 seat. I was quickly in my parachute and heading for a field full of cows. Also in the field were some quite large concrete blocks, and remembering a parachuting technique I had learned some 17 years previously, I steered myself away from the blocks, and executed a hard, but perfectly serviceable, 'side-right' landing.
The whole event had taken less than 60 seconds.
To my astonishment, I saw the aircraft continuing to fly beautifully in a slight climb away from me to the north. I cannot tell you the feelings I had as I watched what now seemed to be a perfectly serviceable aircraft leaving the scene of my ejection. Indeed, the aircraft eventually flew into cloud at about 7,000 feet and disappeared from sight.
Apparently XV794 had climbed to over 20,000 feet and continued to broadcast on the emergency frequency. Because the aircraft was close to a Warsaw Pact border, a German F-104 was sent to intercept and was, I understand, mildly surprised to find a Harrier flying very nicely, but with no-one on board. Shortly after that, the aircraft ran out of fuel and glided into Southern Denmark, where it crashed in an open field, narrowly missing a farmhouse. The Harrier had stayed airborne for 38 minutes after my ejection. Apparently, the reason for XV794's 38-minute solo trip was that the bird which I hit had spread itself quite thinly across the engine's compressor. The flames and gases from the Martin-Baker ejection seat dislodged the bird as I left the aircraft. The engine heaved a sigh of relief, drew a deep breath and started working normally again. As it happens, I had trimmed the aircraft rather well and XV794 flew until she ran out of fuel!"

Per the RAF Accident Report:

The pilot took off from Royal Danish Air Force base at Skydstrup for a low-level sortie involving reconnaissance and simulated ground attack. Shortly after leaving the target in the northern area of Germany the pilot saw three large birds directly ahead and just below his aircraft. Flying at 400’ AGL and 360 knots the Harrier ingested a bird into the starboard intake. There was an immediate loss of thrust and RPM dropped to 40%.
The pilot immediately applied full throttle and hit the relight button. The aircraft began losing height and speed in a shallow descent. The pilot transmitted a distress call and trimmed the aircraft for stable flight. He turned the Harrier towards open ground and at 250 knots and 300’ ejected safely by pulling the seat pan firing handle. After landing the pilot was taken to a farmhouse where he contacted his unit by telephone. He was picked up by a German Army helicopter in an adjacent field.
The pilotless Harrier increased thrust and climbed away until it entered clouds at 9,000’. The ejection-initiated emergency tone was followed by several NATO control stations. A radar-directed intercept was made by a German F-104 which located the Harrier at 24,000’ doing a looping maneuver.
The Harrier flew by itself for 39 minutes before running out of fuel and crashing near Hutten.
The bird had passed through the engine without causing damage or extended blockage. A locked stall of the compressor was induced by the disturbance of the bird ingestion and/or a drop in P2 and P3 pressure caused by fouling of the fan by the bird carcass. Engine RPM recovery may have been due to intake pressure change caused by the ejection exhaust gases. This had possibly overcome the stalled compressor condition set up by the bird-induced disturbed aerodynamic flow. A local order was issued amending pre-ejection drills to include stop-cocking the engine.
 
Because the aircraft was close to a Warsaw Pact border, a German F-104 was sent to intercept and was, I understand, mildly surprised to find a Harrier flying very nicely, but with no-one on board. Shortly after that, the aircraft ran out of fuel and glided into Southern Denmark, where it crashed in an open field, narrowly missing a farmhouse.
Stupid me, I thought it was the F-104 that had ran out of fuel and crashed. :rolleyes:
 
Wait, looking for the RAF report turned up this thread:

Can't remember the date exactly, but the Harrier was on a test flight out of Dunsfold.

A/c climbed to 2000ft on a westerly hdg, conatcted Farnborough for climb. Duly arranged by Farnborough controller with LTMA CSC and the (then) HURN CSC.

A/c then climbed to FL330 (?) rapidly, still HDG west. Nothing more heard from pilot, a/c continued westerly track. D&D alerted.

An hour or so later a USAF C5 Galaxy was vectored alongside the Harrier and reported that "there was no-one in the cockpit". They videoed the Harrier continuing west, with seat, a broken canopy and no pilot. It eventually ran out of fuel an crashed in the Atlantic.

Several days later unfortunate pilot's body was found on Salisbury Plain somewhere

As I recall the seat had fired the drogue through the canopy for some reason with fatal results. There was some speculation about a loose article ( red light?) and the pilot adjusting the seat height.


I see the same post as above, as well as a bunch of other examples of similar things. I can add a more recent one here in Canada where a CF-18 pilot punched out due to single engine failure but the plane landed itself neatly and was returned to service. I guess he's been buying the beers ever since.
 
which earned it the endearing moniker of lawn dart...

In West Germany the F-104G became known as the "Widow Maker" on the account of the high rate of pilot deaths from Starfighter losses.
 
Last edited:
The VL capability was also fairly (un)reliably but repeatedly demonstrated by the F-104G, which earned it the endearing moniker of lawn dart...
The true flying "Lawn Dart" was the Lockheed X-7 drone.

lockheed-x-7-when-youre-on-the-cutting-edge-of-unmanned-v0-6gdd8osuvxpb1.jpg
 
In West Germany the F-104G became known as the "Widow Maker" on the account of the high rate of pilot deaths from Straighter losses.
I'm pretty sure that I've told this very joke on this here August forum before, but I remember that as a snot-nosed kid growing up in Germany hearing the question "So how does one go about acquiring a Starfighter in Germany" being answered by "buy a plot of land and wait."
 
In West Germany the F-104G became known as the "Widow Maker" on the account of the high rate of pilot deaths from Starfighter losses.
Was yesterday at the former Airforce Museum ( now „Military technology museum, aviation historical collection“) and now even there, those numbers are relativised, pointing to the German political magazine „Der Spiegel“ as the main reason for this bad reputation. The Suhkoi Su-7 is mentioned as an example for a much worse MTBA.

The only accidental shoot-down of an RAF aircraft by another RAF one,I can remember, was a Jaguar, shot down by a Phantom, because the tape, locking the firing button, was in short supply, so missing on the Phantom. But the missile probably was a Sidewinder, not a Red Top.
 
Was yesterday at the former Airforce Museum ( now „Military technology museum, aviation historical collection“) and now even there, those numbers are relativised, pointing to the German political magazine „Der Spiegel“ as the main reason for this bad reputation. The Suhkoi Su-7 is mentioned as an example for a much worse MTBA.

The only accidental shoot-down of an RAF aircraft by another RAF one,I can remember, was a Jaguar, shot down by a Phantom, because the tape, locking the firing button, was in short supply, so missing on the Phantom. But the missile probably was a Sidewinder, not a Red Top.
Maybe the Sidewinder has the highest number of accidental shot downs;- I reckon at least one B52, two F4 Phantoms, an F15 ( a second damaged ) and an A3D. There maybe more.
 
so missing on the Phantom. But the missile probably was a Sidewinder, not a Red Top.
No Red Top of Phantom, so definitely this. They did consider it, but ultimately no strong argument for it.

Red Top had limited all-aspect, and that was a major plus at the time, and could be aimed up to 60 degrees off-axis. But the Navy pointed out that it only really helped when you were radar-cued, and the only reason to carry an IR missile in addition to Sparrow was in case your radar was out or jammed. Without radar cuing, the Red Top had performance similar to Sidewinder, so they didn't see the point.

All of that said, my suspicion is that the massive warhead in that thing would still make it a lot deadlier in its intended mission of intercepting long-range Soviet aircraft, it's not like they were going to be facing MiG-23's or something.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom