US cargo plane hit by missile in Baghdad lands safely

Agence France-Presse | January 8, 2004

[js1138]

Iwould imagine that anything hitting a turbojet engine would destroy it completely. I also assume that if the engine housing performs to spec, it would contain the damage. Pretty expensive though.

[hershey]

NPR this morning was chatting about the Iraqui 'insurgents'-- it's a wonder they don't come right out and call them 'freedom fighters'-- and their growing use of mortars to attack US troop emplacements and convoys. They said the 'insurgents' could fire from up to 5 miles away and hit us. We need to put a stop to this asap.

[Guillermo]

Would you fly on a 4 engine plane if you knew a SAM would hit one of the engines?

It's not about reality, it's about perception.

[Jaxter]

The first time I saw my oldest grand daughter was after she arrived at Dover AFB from Ramstein on a C-5
that had just landed with 1 engine out. I'm glad they have four engines.

[finnman69]

I would not fly on any plane if I 'knew' a SAM would hit it.

The point is moot. However a passenger jetliner being hit and surviving would have far less negative impact perception wise than one crashing don't you think?

[John H K]

Hence the problem for the users of a Shoulder-fired SAM when something has three or four engines :-)

And aircraft are designed to fly with the catastrophic failure of one engine.

But even for a given jet engine hit it's actually far from certain that the warhead will even destroy that one engine.

[Blueflag]

Small SAMS like this one are guided to a heat source within a certain range of IR spectrum -- so they seek to an engine exhaust. They then explode a relatively small proximity warhead that fires a cone-shaped pattern of shrapnel roughly forward into the target.

The idea is to disable the powerplant, sever fuel lines, hydraulics, critical electronics etc. Thus the damage they inflict on a large multi-engine jet is similar to that sustained in an explosive compressor failure or FOD/bird incident. The plane loses one engine at best, nearby systems at worst. In a dog fight, a SAM hit makes you the loser, because you instantly lose speed, thrust, maneuverability, etc. You are out of the fight. Small SAMs are good for helos and small planes. Larger aircraft are more appropriately targeted with self-contained, 'radar'- terminal-guidance AAMs and SAMs that go for center of mass with a more destructive warhead.

All jet pilots, commercial and military, drill on loss of power / unilateral loss of thrust on takeoff. Doesn't make it any less exciting when it happens for real. These guys did a good job. Especially since they did not know if #2, 3 and 4 were after them. Vampire vampire vampire.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I thought we had the technology to fire back at the source of these missiles.

[Guillermo]

Of course, but if a commercial airliner in this country was hit by a SAM and made a safe landing, it would still have an extremely negative effect on percieved airline safety.

Less people would fly.

Now, for me, it wouldn't change my flying habits at all. I would still fly een if the pre-9/11 safety measures were in place, because I know that no Mohammedan will ever again be successful in hijacking an airplane.

[Bean Counter]

Yep! The C-5 has had a very stout sagety record. It helps a lot that the thing is built like a tank too. I rode in one back in the 80's and it was amazing to see how the thing was built inside...

[bt_dooftlook]

Preferably by being tied to a pig and being fed into the FRONT of a jet engine...

[Blueflag]

Your point is well made - that no jihaader will ever successfully hijack a commercial airliner with US passengers on board.

The only issue will be the lawsuits filed by the ACLU because the hijackers' civil rights were violated by the passengers who beat them DRT. I hope one of the passengers has a video camera.

[Blueflag]

We have HARMs - hi speed anti-radiation missiles that target the fire control radars of more sophisticated systems. These are fired from mid-altitude aircraft. They render a SAM system blind. They do not target the launchers. HARMs are irrelevant to a discussion of shoulder launched infra-red guided SAMs like these.

These SAMs are the size of a TV reporter's camera with a ~1 meter tube attached. We do not fire back at the launchers. Infantry or mounted troops are the best counter to these.

We have flare dispensers on aircraft that distract the missiles to help make them miss. You have to know you have been fired at and punch the 'flare button'.

There does exist technology that 'sees' the inbound missile and literally shines a laser into the seeker head of the missile to make it divert. This is the technology reported to be on El Al aircraft, and is rumoured to be responsible for the "miss" down in Africa.

[Guillermo]

The only hijacked airliner we'd ever have to worry about is when Mohamemdans hijack a plane full of Frenchmen, because they'd never put up a fight.

[Mackey]

Preferably by being tied to a pig and being fed into the FRONT of a jet engine...

Or by being fed to starving wild boars. They'd be buried as pig manure.

[Blueflag]

Thus the reason why Air France is so closely watched, scrutinized and escorted.

I know your point was in jest, but only to a point.

Based on numerous 1:1 conversations, US Flight attendants/crews are now FAR more worried about drunks and excess carryon than hijackers.

[BulletBobCo]

This is my favorite photo of a C-5. I was a flight engineer on them with the 22nd MAS out of Travis AFB in the late 80s.

[Ben Hecks]

I got to know the individual who was crew chief on the Baby Lift flight. They first bellied into a rice paddy about 5 miles from the runway, bounced over the Saigon River then landed and skidded for another mile. His recollections about the accident were incredible. Two more C-5s were damaged in landing accidents: one landed short in Alaska and one landed with gear up at Travis AFB. These two were repaired and reconfigured without the upper troop seat area and with a larger pressure door to accomodate oversize loads. Other pilots kidded the pilot that landed with gear up and said that, after the aircraft came to a stop, he should have calmly made an annotation on a squawk sheet to indicate "excessive power required to taxi".

[commish]

C-5 Crash during Desert Storm was at Ramstein AB not Rhein Main. I lived it Ramstein Village at the time, and the crash literal knocked me out of bed.

I then had the unenviable task of doing the FOD walk of the crash site. We were given little flags and told to mark all body parts with a flag. Not an enjoyable day to say the least.

[BulletBobCo]

We had a C-5 at Travis in 1989 that was doing closed pattern touch and go training when a fire broke out in the upper aft troop compartment. A misting hydraulic line caught fire and the fire burnt through the emergency oxygen line. The crew landed the aircraft and the fire was put out, but not until the whole top of the troop compartment was burnt off. I believed that it was repaired and placed back in service.