Tuskar Rock Incident - Potez Connection ?

rushbrooke

Anyone out there know anything about the Potez operation in Baldonnel in the 1960's.

testicle

Go away and stop causing ****e.

For your information, reference the Air Accident Investigation Report into the Tuskar Rock air disaster, which is what you really want to know about, the reason a Fouga Magister appears in Appendix 5.2g is that that page of diagrams (note: not a photograph) was lifted from an article for a magazine called Scale Aircraft Modelling writen by a Mr Tony Kearns, in 1981. The caption is a mistake of the reports author.

Also. I'd like to quote some passages from your second letter to Madam at the Irish Times. The highlights are mine.

My guess is that the extra cost and extra weight, without more thrust than the standard Fouga, left the French air force unimpressed and no orders were placed.

My guess is that Sud Aviation, after assessing the assets of its newly acquired company, decided to try to persuade the IAC to go for the ejection-seat version, helped by the company's presence at Baldonnel.

My guess is that, as with the French, the prototype was lent to the IAC for flight trials in the hope that a firm order would be placed.

I surmise that it was this aircraft that was contacted by the Viscount captain while it was on a routine test flight that Sunday morning to come and check if the cockpit indications of a partially lowered undercarriage were true or false.

So where's the evidence?

rushbrooke

testicle wrote:

Go away and stop causing ****e.
For your information, reference the Air Accident Investigation Report into the Tuskar Rock air disaster, which is what you really want to know about, the reason a Fouga Magister appears in Appendix 5.2g is that that page of diagrams (note: not a photograph) was lifted from an article for a magazine called Scale Aircraft Modelling writen by a Mr Tony Kearns, in 1981. The caption is a mistake of the reports author.

Also. I'd like to quote some passages from your second letter to Madam at the Irish Times.
The highlights are mine.So where's the evidence?

Your reply is interesting. I did not write any letters to the Irish Times. The Investigation by the AAIU made no mention of Appendix 5.2g ....this document in is recorded in the Study by the International Team published in 2002. Have you read (a) The Investigation published in 1970. (b) The Review of Irish and UK Filles published in 1999 and (c) The Study published in 2002
If you did you are probably aware that a number of witnesses in the Fethard area of south Wexford made statements to the effect that they observed an aircraft flying from the north west...the aircraft had red wing tips etc. This evidence was taken seriously by the AAIU but failed to identify such an aircraft. Any discussion about this particular matter is to be welcomed...it might jog memories. Could I suggest that if you are not totally familiar with the contents of the above mentioned documents you should obtain copies of them...I can help you in this regard. Just ponder on this...We (Joe Blogs) are expected to believe that the Viscount more or less fell from the sky(10,000 ft) shortly after take, recovered at 3000 ft then flew along the south coast of Ireland in a disabled condition without sending out any distress message. She eventually crashed off Tuskar.....nobody wearing life jackets !!!. If you would like to come onboard and contribute I may be able to send you copies of the a/m docs. Please keep an open mind until then.

testicle

Right, you stated elsewhere the author of the letters is your "friend" - well you appear to be doing a lot of the fishing for information for him.

Whatever report it came from, your "friend" was making this point :

I am well aware of this. Perhaps he could explain, however, why appendix 5.2g of the 2002 report by the international team, which is headed "Irish Air Corps Aircraft 1968", clearly shows a picture of a Fouga Magister in between the Vampire and the Dove aircraft. And please don't try to fob me off with the lame excuse that it is an error on the part of the person who produced the montage for this appendix.

I have just told you where the diagrams came from, which seems to be your "friend's" only evidence that a Fouga Magister could have been involved, the rest is just conjecture. Now that we have cleared up that, lets move on.

As for the witness statements, your "friend" seems very selective in the ones he choses. I personally have not read the witness reports, but here was the reaction from someone who has.

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.

Also, why would someone have a routine test flight on a Sunday morning?

Those documents are all freely available on the internet, there is no need to send me anything thank you very much.

rushbrooke

Thank you for your reply.
Maybe you could clarify a point. Is it possible for that person you know who read the witness statements to say what time does he think the Dove was observed. As far as I know the Dove departed Baldonnel at approx 1235 on the 24th. Would very much appreciate your help..thank you.

rushbrooke

rushbrooke wrote:

Thank you for your reply.
Maybe you could clarify a point. Is it possible for that person you know who read the witness statements to say what time does he think the Dove was observed. As far as I know the Dove departed Baldonnel at approx 1235 on the 24th. Would very much appreciate your help..thank you.

The time of take off was 1225 not 1235.

testicle

Do your own work. You'll get no help around here.

Air Corps aircraft have dayglo wingtips. Your nut case friend claims it was an Air Corps Fouga Magister. We have proven that it couldn't be. Is his whole theory changing now?

rushbrooke

Finally do you accept the findings of the 2002 Study carried out by the International Team. Only reply if you have read it. Good Luck.

testicle

Do you?

There is no mention of a Fouga crashing into it in its findings.

In fact, the report specifically rules out the possibility that the Vickers Vicount was struck by another aircraft, or indeed missile.

rushbrooke

testicle wrote:

Do you?

There is no mention of a Fouga crashing into it in its findings.

In fact, the report specifically rules out the possibility that the Vickers Vicount was struck by another aircraft, or indeed missile.

No we do not accept the conclusions in the Study....In particular para 6.1.2 in the Conclusions section.
Incidentally the aircraft with the red wing tips sighted over Fethard could not have been the Dove....see below extract from 1970 Investigation by the AAIU

"It was thought that perhaps some of these witnesses had observed the flight of one of the search aeroplanes, a Dove of the Air Corps, which is coloured silvery grey, with bright red/orange "dayglo" paint on the extremities, but the only Dove aircraft in the vicinity that day did not arrive there until after 1.45 hrs. local time."

I would still like to hear from anybody with information on the Potez operation in Baldonnel in the '60's. No tyre kickers please.

testicle

rushbrooke wrote:

I would still like to hear from anybody with information on the Potez operation in Baldonnel in the '60's.

Any particular reason?

rushbrooke

Somebody out there must know details of the Potez operation 1963-1968 or maybe all the work force were French. Help, please.

testicle

As before, why do you want to know?

Hagar

Rushbrooke, I'm a bit concerned with you dogged pursuit of this topic.
In your limited number of posts you have raised the issue in two previous threads here and here from Sept and Nov last year.

What's the story?
Are you a journalist or something or did you loose relatives in the incident?
If so please declare your interest.

Hagar

Ok, I've communicated with Rushbrooke via PM. It appears that the guy is 100% genuine and lost friends and neighbours in the incident. He's just trying to find out the truth behind the incident so that ghosts can be laid to rest so to speak. We should not be dismissive of his quest. Which one of use would not do the same?

It is not beyond belief that there is information regarding the incident that has yet to be made public. Given the secretive nature of governments the world over it would not surprise me at all. If anyone has anything useful to contribute to the thread, now renamed, please do so. If you wish you may also communicate via PM directly to Rushbrooke.

Thanks.

cp251

I used to work in the former Potez plant but in the 1980's when it was owned by Airmotive Ireland. It was built to manufacture the Potez 840 regional airliner but none were built, only parts, before Potez collapsed. That was the only aircraft to be built there. That much I gleaned from my time there. I never did meet anyone who actually worked for Potez.

As to whether a Fouga Magister might have visited the plant. Well, it's plausible. As to whether any were operated by the Air Corps at the time. That's implausible. Besides by the time of the Viscount crash the factory was in trouble and for sale
As to whether a Fouga Magister visited Baldonnel during the sixties. It is possible but your only outlet might be the spotter community. It was hard to hide any visitor to Baldonnel from the local spotters. The Armee de'l air have a long history of visiting Baldonnel for training purposes over a weekend. Most of those visits were well documented by the spotters, particulary an unusual aircraft like a Magister.

I don't believe there is any possibility of everyone failing to notice the Air Corps using a Fouga Magister in 1968. The aviation community in Ireland is very small and not much goes unnoticed. I think you may already have had some contact with Tony Kearns who has a great deal of knowledge on the Air Corps. Another possibility is Donal McCarron who has written a history of the Air Corps. If they never heard of a Magister being operated then it's unlikely.

One other implausible aspect is the thought of the Irish Air Corps operating on a Sunday particulary in the sixties. At the time, on Sundays the Dublin gliding club used the airfield. You could walk straight onto the field from the road, no security and the they always had onlookers hanging around watching, including me much later.

I suggest your best bet is an armee de'l air visitor not Air Corps. I wouldn't hold out much hope though. If there's any cover up it will be on the French side and you know what they are like.

cushtac

Tony Kearns has said that the first visit by a Fouga Magister to Baldonnel was the French Air Force Magister F-TFTR flown by Col. Perrotte on 21 March 1974.

The theory that the Viscount was hit by a Fouga is being touted by a retired RAF Squadron Leader. Apart from a load of guessing, his only 'evidence' seems to be a drawing featured in appendix 52g of the 2002 report into the incident. Its titled "Irish Air Corps Aircraft 1968" and shows a picture of a Fouga Magister in between one of a DH Vampire and a DH Dove.

I think the biggest hole in his theory is that the Royal Navy, the only group to handle the recovery operation, failed to recover any wreckage of a Fouga. Given that they were getting the blame for the incident, surely the British authorities would have found any proof of Air Corp involvement and made it public?

testicle

cushtac wrote:

Tony Kearns has said that the first visit by a Fouga Magister to Baldonnel was the French Air Force Magister F-TFTR flown by Col. Perrotte on 21 March 1974.

The theory that the Viscount was hit by a Fouga is being touted by a retired RAF Squadron Leader. Apart from a load of guessing, his only 'evidence' seems to be a drawing featured in appendix 52g of the 2002 report into the incident. Its titled "Irish Air Corps Aircraft 1968" and shows a picture of a Fouga Magister in between one of a DH Vampire and a DH Dove.

The picture referred to above was drawn by the aforementioned Tony Kearns for a magazine in the early 80s. It was captioned as "Irish Air Corps Aircraft 1968" by the authors of the report.

rushbrooke

I have been endeavouring to obtain a reasonable explanation as to why nobody on board EI-AOM was wearing a lifejacket even though the a/c was flying in a disabled condition for approx. 30 minutes (according to the 2002 International Team Study)...any suggestions would be appreciated.

Cato

whats going on?

OS119

rushbrooke wrote: »

I have been endeavouring to obtain a reasonable explanation as to why nobody on board EI-AOM was wearing a lifejacket even though the a/c was flying in a disabled condition for approx. 30 minutes (according to the 2002 International Team Study)...any suggestions would be appreciated.

lifejackets are considered a potential menace aboard passenger aircraft, the chances are that if they are issued passengers, contrary to instructions from the crew, but knowing that an aircraft is in trouble, will inflate them and make an evacuation from the aircraft almost impossible due to the additional bulk of them.

hence captains of passenger aircraft being staggeringly reticent to order their use.

i have absolutely no specifc knowledge of the incident you seek information about, however i'd like to put forward some points:

if two aircraft collided and both survived the immediate collision, both would be broadcasting their tits off (MAYDAY), regardless of any orders regarding radio silence.

if the aircraft collided with suffcient force that one aircraft was immdiately destroyed by in that collision, then parts of that aircraft would be imbedded in the structure of the 'surviving' aircraft.

a 'simple' birdstrike feels like you've flown into a brick wall - even in a large multi-engined aircraft, a collision between two aircraft would feel like you'd clipped a mountain. the chances of the physical effects of a mid-air collision being mistaken by the crew for some other incident are infitesimally small.

i can well understand your need to find 'something' responsible for the deaths of your relatives - and perhaps someone - but the scenario you're tryng to put forward just doesn't fit wth the objective conditions. sorry.

Fratton Fred

Why could it not have been simple poor maintenance, which is what the reports seem to imply, why does there have to be an alternative theory?