The naughty field debate...a new twist

[RichPittman]

Thanks Kev.

Doesnt look so bad!

[Thumper]

It doesn't look dangerously low to me from that photograph, I think the Typhoon last year was lower?



Link for Typhoon pictures and video;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2361593/Typhoon-fighter-jet-flies-low-air-display-forces-onlookers-duck-run-cover.html

[Lee606]

Best angle so far here.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBwEFz_WIdQ[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBwEFz_WIdQ

[Traveller]

Should both be court marshaled, especially so in the RAF case. Inexcusable, and to say it was normal is utter BS on a runway that length. Touch down aiming point markers are 400m in from the end of the runway, still leaving 2200m!!

[T_J]

Should both be court marshaled, especially so in the RAF case. Inexcusable, and to say it was normal is utter BS on a runway that length. Touch down aiming point markers are 400m in from the end of the runway, still leaving 2200m!!

So you are telling us that the tapes weren't reviewed in the case of the RAF Typhoon?

In a statement, the RAF defended the landing.

"The aircraft tapes have been reviewed and this was a completely normal approach, within all normal parameters. The area concerned is directly under the flight path of the runway and has clear warnings and flashing traffic lights designed to ensure that the public stay clear. "Enthusiasts should not place themselves directly under the flight path of fast jet aircraft, if they choose to do so it is at their own risk.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... shire.html

[DaveH]

It is perhaps a typical elf n safety load of nonsense. If kids want to play in the road, they might get run over, but somewhere the National Accident Helpline would be waiting.

[Brevet Cable]

Seen similar & lower at RAF St Athan in the past......and they don't have traffic lights !!