Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

USAF C-135 crashes in Kyrgyzstan

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 3 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Kyrgyzstan officials have confirmed that a US Air Force C-135 (most likely a KC-135) has crashed near the Kyrgyz-Kazakh border. The aircraft disappeared off radar screens, but citizens of the region reported seeing the aircraft crash into a mountain.

The wreckage has been found, but no word on the crew. Reports say it has broken into three pieces. The aircraft came down about 100 miles west of the base used by the USAF for refueling missions in the area.


BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan (AP) -- The emergencies ministry in Kyrgyzstan says a U.S. military plane has crashed in the country.
Kyrgyzstan hosts a U.S. base that is used for troops transiting into and out of Afghanistan and for C-135 tanker planes that refuel warplanes in flight.
A ministry official who did not give his name said the plane crashed Friday afternoon near the village of Chaldovar, about 100 miles (160 kms) west of the base.

www.krem.com...


A U.S. military plane crashed Friday in Kyrgyzstan, the Central Asian nation's emergencies ministry said. There was no immediate word on any casualties.

Kyrgyzstan hosts a U.S. base that is used for troops flying into and out of Afghanistan and for C-135 tanker planes that refuel warplanes in flight.

A ministry statement said the plane crashed Friday afternoon near the village of Chaldovar, about 100 miles west of the Manas air base. It was not immediately clear if the plane was a C-135 or another model.

The U.S. base in Kyrgyzstan, called the Transit Center at Manas, said it had no immediate information. Adjacent to the Manas International Airport outside the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek, the base was established in late 2001 to support the international military campaign in Afghanistan.

www.cbsnews.com...

The US Air Force flies both the KC-135 refueling tanker, and the C-135 (also known as the VC-135), which doesn't have a boom and has a specially configured VIP interior for transporting politicians, generals, and other VIPs. No word on which was involved, as the Kyrgyzstan ministry has only said it was a "707", which both types are based on (actually the 720, which was the 707 prototype).




posted on May, 3 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Yea, seeing these two crashes recently confirmed my hatred for flying.

Worst ride I've ever had was in a C-17, I found out the hard way the difference between military, and commercial flights.

Thanks for the info.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 08:17 AM
link   
According to witnesses the aircraft exploded in midair before falling to the ground in the mountains. Several years ago, two or three KC-135s were lost after the Air Force switched manufacturers of center wing fuel pumps, and the pumps malfunctioned, causing the aircraft to explode (at least one in midair). The pumps were supposed to use a small amount of fuel to cool the pump, but they were using it instead, causing metal on metal contact which would spark, causing an explosion. Still waiting for any sort of information, even on what type this is, so it's early to speculate. People in the village reported seeing an explosion in midair, then wings with an American flag landed nearby. They say that there are cell phone videos of the crash.

The Pentagon has said it was a KC-135, and reports say five crew on board.
edit on 5/3/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   

An American military refueling plane that took off in Kyrgyzstan crashed in a mountainous region Friday, Kyrgyz officials said. Five people were on board, said Elmira Shyrypova, at the Kyrgyz Emergencies Ministry press office. The plane crashed between Chorgolu and Cholok-Aryk -- two villages in the Chuysky region of Kyrgyzstan, and a fire crew and three ambulances responded, Shyrypova said. A Pentagon spokesman says the plane is a KC-135.


www.cnn.com...

Another link for you.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Very unfortunate for the crew. You wouldnt catch me in a KC-135 refueling plane. One spark or mistake, and Kaboom.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Sad day in the Boom Community. Still waiting to find out which squadron was stationed at Manas. Here's some pics of the crash. Definitely a KC-135, as you can see the boom.



















posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Glassbender777
Very unfortunate for the crew. You wouldnt catch me in a KC-135 refueling plane. One spark or mistake, and Kaboom.


That simply isnt true. I've flown over 2500 hours in a KC-135 and a spark wouldn't cause an explosion. We had St. Elms fire constantly jumping from the nozzle to the receptacle all the time when electricity built up. Never an explosion. That crap on the movie Air Force One with the KC-10 blowing up would never happen in real life.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I hoped that it was an error in my head on the date of this thread. sadly and with heavy heart reading on I found it is not.

although there are a millions reasons for things like this to happen, it is troubling to say the least when not one but two go down in as many days. I have a feeling of heaviness about this, like gravity pushing on my head and spine.

I know you guys will first look to the errors of technology, of humans making mistakes, but this is another tragic story for our USAF, their families and friends.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I do not even know where this is on the map, in which country or under who's rule?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Covertblack
Yea, seeing these two crashes recently confirmed my hatred for flying.

Worst ride I've ever had was in a C-17, I found out the hard way the difference between military, and commercial flights.

Thanks for the info.


Personally i'd take a C-17 over a C-130 any time. I haven't had a C-17 catch on fire on me yet, can't say the same about the C-130 (twice), luckily was still on the runway both times, one was an aborted take off.

Thankfully my days of flying in military aircraft are over.


My condolences to the family and friends of the crew of the tanker.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
According to some news reports, it's claimed that some crew members escaped the aircraft before it went down. I wasn't aware the KC-135 had an escape system? Or is it just the media being the media?



Some witnesses quoted by Kyrgyz media said that a pilot had apparently been seen parachuting out of the plane.




"The preliminary information is that the pilot jumped out with a parachute. They have gone to look for him," the deputy local district chief Anatoly Ivannikov told local radio.


AFP Article



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ReddishPlains
 


Most likely the media being the media. The "escape system" on a-135 consists of a big metal bar that hangs over the crew door in the cockpit. It falls, rips the door off, then it's up to you to get out through the door, parachute in place. From what I'm hearing in other news reports this was pretty sudden.
edit on 5/3/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReddishPlains
According to some news reports, it's claimed that some crew members escaped the aircraft before it went down. I wasn't aware the KC-135 had an escape system? Or is it just the media being the media?


The KC-135s do have an escape system but the parachutes have been removed for a couple of years now. The planes use an escape spoiler system, which is just a large air damn that extended out the entry hatch and you drop out the bottom hoping you dont run into the antenna, the tail or the boom.

All in all little chance as survival unless for some reason this crew had chutes and even then they would have to be lucky on the way out.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Pyle
 


The NY Times has a picture that appears to be the tail of the crashed aircraft. It looks like it's from McConnell AFB.

www.nytimes.com...



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gwampo
www.youtube.com...


Unrelated completely.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


I'm sorry, but not really, it's a cargo plane crashing to the ground in flames, just like the one described in the OP.

Now, I understand it's not the same exact plane, (oh and before I forget, I believe your wording is supposed to read: 'completely unrelated') but rest assured, it is a similar situation.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by bg_socalif

Originally posted by Covertblack
Yea, seeing these two crashes recently confirmed my hatred for flying.

Worst ride I've ever had was in a C-17, I found out the hard way the difference between military, and commercial flights.

Thanks for the info.


Personally i'd take a C-17 over a C-130 any time. I haven't had a C-17 catch on fire on me yet, can't say the same about the C-130 (twice), luckily was still on the runway both times, one was an aborted take off.

Thankfully my days of flying in military aircraft are over.


My condolences to the family and friends of the crew of the tanker.


Flown in a C-130 twice. Both times mechanical failure made us turn around. So yea, I've flown in a C-17 more and I'm grateful.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   
News reports have identified the aircraft as 63-8877, meaning it was built in 1963. I've heard a rumor that while the aircraft was from McConnell, the crew was from Fairchild. I'm trying to confirm that, but as of now it's just a rumor.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Hmmm, conditions seem sort of suspicious.

What do you think the odds are of a resistance fighter with some strelas?





new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join