| Author |
Message |
|
Lieven
|
 Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 10:49 AM
|
 
|
|
F-16.net Webmaster
Joined: May 23, 2003 - 04:44 PM
Posts: 2997
|
<a href="news_article3304.html">Belgian F-16s in Afghanistan heavily damaged</a>
Quote:
Three of the four Belgian F-16s stationed in Kandahar sustained heavy damage after a rough landing by a transport aircraft.
So who pays for this?
De Standaard wrote:
Defensie wil wel nagaan of het de schade kan verhalen op de operator van het vrachtvliegtuig dat de schade heeft veroorzaakt.
It seems that the Belgian Defense will check if they can get compensation from the operator of the transport aircraft.
Anyone knows what the usual settlement is on cases like this? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: Jun 18, 2013 - 7:12 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
VarkVet
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 12:13 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 04:31 AM
Posts: 1443
Status: Offline
|
No pun intended, but I think the Belgium’s are going to have to suck it up.
We all have to pay for it in the long run one way or another as a Coalition Force.  |
_________________
My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scanor
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 03:46 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 20, 2005 - 03:38 PM
Posts: 74
|
Well yeah. if they where US vipers loaded on an AN-124 and the hauler made a tough landing causing damage to the vipers. I bet USAF would suck it up and say , "sure, don't worry about it, accedents happen". And the damage cost is not your concern..
*duck and cover* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JoeSambor
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 06:13 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Dec 28, 2004 - 05:56 AM
Posts: 751
Status: Offline
|
|
Scanor wrote:
well yea. if they where US vipers loaded on an AN-124 and the hauler made a tough landing causing damage to the vipers. I bet USAF would suck it up and say , "sure, don't worry about it, accedents happen". And the damage cost is not your concern..
*duck and cover*
Did you read the news item before you posted? The F-16s were FODed by the dust and rocks kicked up by the transport aircraft. This is always a possibility when operating from forward locations used by multiple aircraft. |
_________________
Joe Sambor
LM Aero Field Service Engineer
Woensdrecht Logistics Center, The Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
JoeSambor
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 06:15 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Dec 28, 2004 - 05:56 AM
Posts: 751
Status: Offline
|
|
Lieven wrote:
<a href="news_article3304.html">Belgian F-16s in Afghanistan heavily damaged</a>
Quote:
Three of the four Belgian F-16s stationed in Kandahar sustained heavy damage after a rough landing by a transport aircraft.
So who pays for this?
De Standaard wrote:
Defensie wil wel nagaan of het de schade kan verhalen op de operator van het vrachtvliegtuig dat de schade heeft veroorzaakt.
It seems that the Belgian Defense will check if they can get compensation from the operator of the transport aircraft.
Anyone knows what the usual settlement is on cases like this?
Part of operating from bases such as these is knowing where (or where not) to park your aircraft. I doubt that the Belgians will see any compensation.
Best Regards, |
_________________
Joe Sambor
LM Aero Field Service Engineer
Woensdrecht Logistics Center, The Netherlands
|
|
|
|
|
|
That_Engine_Guy
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 06:43 PM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Dec 14, 2005 - 05:03 AM
Posts: 2208
Location: Under the engine somewhere.
Status: Offline
|
FOD is a HUGE issue anytime you operate a Viper from a "non-Viper" base, you'll have issues; they tend to not be as FOD conscious.
Even at home when large "heavies" use the field we often need to sweep the runway and taxi-ways. The outboard engines, and the down-wash of the wings on the runway pull in all sorts of debris.
Heavy bases are bad, and Navy bases seem to be bad. Iraq and Afghanistan's fields are horrible.
I know the GE Vipers play hell with FOD at deployed locations, seems they change lots more motors than PW Vipers; the rejectable limits on the F110 are much more stringent than the F100.
PW has much tougher blades.  Maybe this is another reason why so many FMS countries have purchased PW over GE lately?
Keep 'em flyin'  (FOD-Free!)
TEG |
_________________
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lieven
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 09:24 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Webmaster
Joined: May 23, 2003 - 04:44 PM
Posts: 2997
|
I agree with you all. This is just a risk of operating on that base and Belgium should just take the cost of this one.
The crew of the transport aircraft should buy the beers though for the crew who have to replace the engines!
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
asiatrails
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 11:59 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Aug 30, 2005 - 03:11 AM
Posts: 865
Status: Offline
|
|
That_Engine_Guy wrote:
FOD is a HUGE issue anytime you operate a Viper from a "non-Viper" base, you'll have issues; they tend to not be as FOD conscious.
Even at home when large "heavies" use the field we often need to sweep the runway and taxi-ways. The outboard engines, and the down-wash of the wings on the runway pull in all sorts of debris.
Heavy bases are bad, and Navy bases seem to be bad. Iraq and Afghanistan's fields are horrible.
I know the GE Vipers play hell with FOD at deployed locations, seems they change lots more motors than PW Vipers; the rejectable limits on the F110 are much more stringent than the F100.
PW has much tougher blades. Maybe this is another reason why so many FMS countries have purchased PW over GE lately?
Keep 'em flyin' (FOD-Free!)
TEG
I believe that the Belgian Air Force fly P&W powered Block 15's and 20's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cywolf32
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 02:51 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Nov 21, 2005 - 12:04 PM
Posts: 616
Location: USA
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
That_Engine_Guy
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 03:52 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Dec 14, 2005 - 05:03 AM
Posts: 2208
Location: Under the engine somewhere.
Status: Offline
|
PW-220Es (and PW-220s) are much better at resisting FOD than GE F110s, but the PW-229 is even better than the PW-220 series.
PW went to great lengths to make the fan blades "FOD Resistant"
TEG |
_________________
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scanor
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 07:56 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 20, 2005 - 03:38 PM
Posts: 74
|
|
JoeSambor wrote:
Scanor wrote:
well yea. if they where US vipers loaded on an AN-124 and the hauler made a tough landing causing damage to the vipers. I bet USAF would suck it up and say , "sure, don't worry about it, accedents happen". And the damage cost is not your concern..
*duck and cover*
Did you read the news item before you posted? The F-16s were FODed by the dust and rocks kicked up by the transport aircraft. This is always a possibility when operating from forward locations used by multiple aircraft.
Well that changes things alittle, I entrurpreded like the jets was onboard the freighter when it made a heavy landing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharkey
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 08:14 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 27, 2006 - 02:18 PM
Posts: 52
Status: Offline
|
|
Scanor wrote:
Well that changes things alittle, I entrurpreded like the jets was onboard the freighter when it made a heavy landing.
I must admit, my first thought was the same, heavy landing damaged aircraft on-board.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guysmiley
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 04:14 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM
Posts: 1496
|
| That'd be one hell of a large transport aircraft to carry MULTIPLE F-16s... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Master-of-Disaster
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 06:04 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: May 08, 2005 - 10:26 PM
Posts: 104
Status: Offline
|
| Must have been the Millennium Falcon. |
_________________
When flying, always make sure the pointy end goes forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael_HHN
|
|
Posted: Mar 10, 2009 - 04:22 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Sep 26, 2005 - 12:52 PM
Posts: 29
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Russians too close for comfort for Belgian F-16s
Russian freight plane caused damage to Belgian fighter jets.
In the war against terror in Afghanistan three Belgian F-16s have been damaged on the tarmac at Kandahar Airport.
The Belgian fighter jets sustained the damage from stones thrown up into the air when a Russian freight plane came too close to the parked aircraft.
The Russian civilian plane made a mistake and taxied too near the Belgian F16s, blasting stones and sand into their engines.
The engines of the three aircraft were ripped to bits. Belgian technicians were soon able to replace one of the engines, but replacements are needed for the two others.
These will be flown in on Monday by a Belgian C130 Hercules transport plane.
With one aircraft immediately repaired the Belgians were able to meet their commitment and had two fighter jets back in the air patrolling the airspace above Kandahar Airport on Saturday night.
Last year Belgium sent four F16 fighter jets to southern Afghanistan as part of the Nato mission in the country.
They have the task of protecting the airport in the southern Afghan city.
Source:
http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/Russians-too-close-for-comfort-for-Belgian-F_16s_50354.html.
|
_________________
'78-08' 1.5m N of Hahn *lol*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
