KAL shot down by USSR in 1978 (_not_ KAL 007)
Douglas Rudoff
After KAL 007 was shot down I remember reading a paragraph or two
about a previous KAL flight that had been shot down - what I remember
was that only one or two passengers had been killed and the airliner
crashlanded on a frozen lake.
This is an incident I haven't heard about in years and I wondered if I
remembered it correctly (and I few people I asked don't recall ever
hearing of the incident).
Checking one of the air safety web sites I came across it: On April
20, 1978 a KAL Boeing 707 on a flight from Paris to Seoul was shot
down near Murmansk.
Does anyone have any more details on what happened?
I do find it interesting that this incident isn't well known. Although
I'm sure a big part has to do with the few deaths involved.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Doug Rudoff dou...@blarg.net Seattle, WA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
john r.
In article <airliners...@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Douglas Rudoff
<dou...@animal.blarg.net> writes
>Checking one of the air safety web sites I came across it: On April
>20, 1978 a KAL Boeing 707 on a flight from Paris to Seoul was shot
>down near Murmansk.
>
>Does anyone have any more details on what happened?
The crew got totaly lost due incompetence and poor equipment, were
intercepted and after refusing to follow signals were shot at, this
killed at least one passenger and depressurised the plane. They then put
down on the frozen lake and the Russians too ages to find them.
There are photos taken from insisde the plane of the fighters, it all
took place in daylight.
>
>I do find it interesting that this incident isn't well known. Although
>I'm sure a big part has to do with the few deaths involved.
Also it was more of a clear cut case.
--
_J_O_H_N____R_E_L_P_H____________ jo...@guava.demon.co.uk
ifly
There are many incidents worldwide that don`t catch the attention of the
public for one or another reason. My own favorite is the Aer Lingus
Viscount shot down (accidently) by the British in 1968 (they deny it to
this day).
I had heard of that KAL shootdown when it happened, and some hay was made
of it when The 007 was shot down,but as you say, if the deaths are few,
and noone from your neighborhood is on the airplane, it`s rapidly
forgotten by the general public in favor of tonight`s sports results.
Just curious, how much coverage did the Iranian Airbus shot down by the
US Navy get as opposed to KAL 007?
J Morris
michael keenan
On 16 Dec 1996, ifly wrote:
> There are many incidents worldwide that don`t catch the attention of the
> public for one or another reason. My own favorite is the Aer Lingus
> Viscount shot down (accidently) by the British in 1968 (they deny it to
> this day).
I never heard of this one. Do you have any details?
> I had heard of that KAL shootdown when it happened, and some hay was made
> of it when The 007 was shot down,but as you say, if the deaths are few,
> and noone from your neighborhood is on the airplane, it`s rapidly
> forgotten by the general public in favor of tonight`s sports results.
> Just curious, how much coverage did the Iranian Airbus shot down by the
> US Navy get as opposed to KAL 007?
>
Don't know what the US coverage was like, but in Canada it was well
covered by the CBC. Kind of interesting seeing how the US originally said
the plane was way off course, then backpedalling when it's pointed out
that it was exactly where it was suposed to be.
Mike
Mark Brader
J. Morris (if...@indigo.ie) writes:
> There are many incidents worldwide that don`t catch the attention of the
> public for one or another reason. My own favorite is the Aer Lingus
> Viscount shot down (accidently) by the British in 1968 (they deny it
> to this day).
Presumably they deny it because it didn't happen, which might also account
for why it failed to "catch the attention of the public".
According to David Gero in "Aviation Disasters", there was insufficient
evidence to determine any cause for the crash, which occurred off the
Irish coast on 1968-03-24 with 61 deaths. Gero writes:
# An in-flight fire or explosion, power plant failure, bird strike,
# crew incapacitation or encounter with severe turbulence were either
# ruled out or considered highly improbable. Althought there was no
# substantiating evidence of such an occurrence, the known facts did
# point to the possibility of a collision with another aircraft,
# possibly a pilotless drone, a near-collision that necessitated an
# evasive maneuver, or an upset of the Viscount by its wake turbulence.
Then, years later,
# ... the wing of a target drone was reportedly found in the vicinity
# where the airliner had gone down. But no such vehicle was known to
# have been launched anywhere in the area on the day of the crash.
Now, sure, the British might be responsible -- for an out-of-place drone
if not for an actual shooting -- and have managed to cover it up. And
there might be facts now out that weren't known to Gero in his 1993 book.
But until some facts are shown, let's mind what sort of accusations we
casually fling about here, okay?
--
Mark Brader \ "Oh, especially if it's accurate. There's nothing worse
m...@sq.com \ than *accurate*, ill-informed, irresponsible press
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto \ speculation." -- Lynn & Jay: "Yes, Prime Minister"
My text in this article is in the public domain.
ifly
The fact that it was accidental is of little consequence to the people
who died. That the british Government covered it up is a disgrace, to say
the least. Why the hell are they (still) playing with deadly weapons in
close proximity to civil aircraft and surface population?
In 1995, an engine from a Gloster meteor was retrieved From the exact
spot where witnesses (about 7 saw the collision) saw the orange
(drone) aircraft fall into the sea. Because of the fragile state of
affairs between our nations at the moment, little has been made of this.
The British military/government has a history of covering up military
accidents. Fishing boats, both British and foreign, are sunk fairly
regularly by their (and other nation`s) submarines. They routinely deny
this (unlike the US Navy, who make a habit of owning up) until presented
with evidence that forces them. The reason? Who knows. But the widows of
those fishermen still have not ben compensed, nor have the victims of the
Lingus accident.
After the Viscount went in, The British Navy offered to assist in the
recovery of the aircraft. They lifted it, nearly intact, had a good look,
and then dropped it. This isn`t innuendo, it`s a fact. When the Aircraft
was recovered again the tail section was missing, and it was never
recovered. The reassembled AC was found to have a streak of orange paint
on the top of the fuselage which couldn`t be accounted for.
The British have consistently maintained that no activity took place in
the ranges in either Wales or the Irish sea on that, or any other Sunday.
When advertising their missiles after the falklands war, however,they
released in the advertising the dates of numerous uses of these ranges on
Sundays in and around the date of the Accident.
As for the interest worldwide?
What do most people, (including pilots and others in the industry) know
of most accidents that take place in places of little concern to them?
Do you know, for example about a Midair collision between an NAF fighter
and a Nigerian Airways F27, for example? . Or from the same country a
Fokker 28 that crashed on approach to Enugu?
I admit that I wouldn`t if I had not been in country at the time.
How many freighters crash unnoticed. The DC8 at Guantanamo, for example.
This is an accident that is screaming about a deficiency in US far`s and
noone outside the industry gives a toss. Noone was killed in it. Even if
they were,it would only be the crew, right?
My original point was that only the flashy accidents get public opinion
whipped up enough to make drastic (and admittedly often inappropriate)
changes.
J Morris
Michael Carley
m...@sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:
>Now, sure, the British might be responsible -- for an out-of-place drone
>if not for an actual shooting -- and have managed to cover it up. And
>there might be facts now out that weren't known to Gero in his 1993 book.
Although I did hear (second-hand for what that's worth)
that one of the fragments that was recovered was burnt
in a manner suggestive of a missile strike. Is there
anything to this?
--
"You got your highbrow funk, you got your lowbrow funk, you even
got a little bit of your pee-wee, pow-wow funk" (Dr. John)
Michael Carley, Mech. Eng., TCD, IRELAND. m.ca...@leoleo.mme.tcd.ie
<A HREF="http://www.mme.tcd.ie/~m.carley/Welcome.html">Home page</A>
Paul Kearney
m...@sq.com (Mark Brader) wrote:
: According to David Gero in "Aviation Disasters", there was insufficient
: evidence to determine any cause for the crash, which occurred off the
: Irish coast on 1968-03-24 with 61 deaths. Gero writes:
: snip-snip
: And
: there might be facts now out that weren't known to Gero in his 1993 book.
: But until some facts are shown, let's mind what sort of accusations we
: casually fling about here, okay?
Well whatever happened , we should know in the latter half of 1998.
The 30 year 'secret' rule should release some documents about it.
And as you say yourself , no-one knows for certain , which implies by logic
that neither does Gero so no-point in quoting someone who doesn't know :-(
Bye
Props are for boats but..... What are 'b o a t s' ?
NAV130
I recall this incident and believe Reader's Digest had an article on it -
if you wish to dig through back issues - but my recollection is that the
navigator had incorrectly entered grid mode for the high latitudes. That
led to the aircraft straying over Soviet airspace with predictable
results.
Mike Martin
USAF Ret.
Jonathan Thornburg
In article <airliners...@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Doug Rudoff
<dou...@blarg.net> pointed out an often-overlooked "other" incident
when "another" KAL flight was shot down by the USSR air force.
In fact, there have been (that I know of) 4 major incidents of this
type (civilian passenger flight attacked by military forces) in recent
years:
Feb 1973
a Libyan airline
Boeing 707 (727 ??), 113 people on board
attacked by Israel air force
crashed in Sinai peninsula
108 dead
20 Apr 1978
Korean Air Lines flight 902 (Paris --> Seoul)
Boeing 707, 110 people on board (97 passengers, 13 crew)
attacked by USSR air force
crash-landed near Kem, 450 km S. of Murmansk
2 dead, 13 injured
1 Sep 1983
Korean Air Lines flight 007 (New York --> Anchorage --> Seoul)
Boeing 747, 265 (269 ??) people on board
attacked by USSR air force
crashed near Sakhalin island
no survivors
3 Jul 1988
Iran Air (??)
Airbus A310 (A300 ??), 290 people on board
attacked by US navy (USS Vincennes)
crashed in Persian Gulf
no survivors
The 1983 KAL incident has been the subject of numerous books, of
which
Seymour M Hersh
"The Target is Destroyed"
Vantage (Random House), New York, 1986, 1987
ISBN 0-394-75527-8 (pbk)
seems to have a particularly solid basis, including a good bibliography.
--
-- Jonathan Thornburg <bk...@island.net> (personal E-mail)
U of British Columbia / Physics Dept / <thor...@theory.physics.ubc.ca>
"The first strike in the American Colonies was in 1776 in Philadelphia,
when [...] carpenters demanded a 72-hour week." -- Anatole Beck
Michael Carley
The first thing that comes up when you do an Altavista
search for +"Aer Lingus" +Viscount is an Irish Times
story from 27/3/96 with little gems like
`publication of declassified British military files which,
they [campaigners] say, support claims that test missiles
fired from a military base off the Welsh coast could have
been responsible for the tragedy'
`Eye-witnesses reported seeing a second aircraft of the type
used as targets by the RAF in the area. But the British
authorities have consistently denied that the missile testing
site at Aberporth was operational that day.
A newly-released report, however, shows that the RAF base was
using and had problems during the late 1960s with missiles
designed to carry out interceptions up to the height at which
the airliner was flying.
The recently declassified report shows that missiles used at
the time logged a 25 per cent failure rate, often locked on
to the wrong targets and travelled out of the range danger area.'
So it suddenly looks a whole lot more plausible, doesn't
it?
You can find the report (there isn't much more hard information
than these extracts but it's worth a look) at
http://www.irish-times.com/irish-times/paper/0327/hom14.html
David Lesher
bk...@island.net (Jonathan Thornburg) writes:
>In fact, there have been (that I know of) 4 major incidents of this
>type (civilian passenger flight attacked by military forces) in recent
>years:
Was there not a shootdown in Eastern Europe in the late '50's -- one
that instigated a formal ICAO procedure for military a/c to
intercept civilian aircraft?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
ifly
Michael Carley <mjca...@maths.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
>Although I did hear (second-hand for what that's worth)
>that one of the fragments that was recovered was burnt
>in a manner suggestive of a missile strike. Is there
>anything to this?
Micheal, I hadn`t heard of this fragment. One of the larger fuselage
fragments of the Viscount had an orange streak on it (drones are painted
orange, it`s actually thought it was a target drone, which is an obselete
jet fighter, probably a Gloster Meteor in this case, that collided with
the Viscount) But an engine was recovered near the Saltee`s last year of
the correct type and in the spot where witnesses saw the second aircraft
crash.
Jeff Morris
Mark Anderson
That KAL 747 was equiped with triplemix INS. INS systems determine
their own true heading and therefore do not depend on an external
heading input. There is no function to input grid navigational inputs
into INS. Heading indications to the Horizontal Situation Indicators are
also taken off the INS systems. Grid nav functionality is required with
electronic nav systems that depend on mag course as a primary means of
navigation. North of lat. 70N, navigational unreliability is compounded
with magnetic unreliability and accelerated changes in true or mag
course.
The final report regarding this accident was the entry of the route from
the flight plan. With triplemix INS's installed, one of the pilots keyed
in the incorrect route into one system and then crossed filled the bogus
route into the other two systems. The pilots didn't use procedures that
we use today which includes cross checking the flight plan to the
installed routes and to cross reference raw data with the flight plan to
determind electronic navigation performance. Purhaps we all learned a
lesson with 007.
Unlike the Air Force of today, the commercial airlines gave up on
navigators in the late 60's with the installation of electronic
navigation.
J. Heilig
Jonathan Thornburg wrote:
> The 1983 KAL incident has been the subject of numerous books, of
> which
>
> Seymour M Hersh
> "The Target is Destroyed"
> Vantage (Random House), New York, 1986, 1987
> ISBN 0-394-75527-8 (pbk)
>
> seems to have a particularly solid basis, including a good bibliography
Having been a USAF Intelligence Officer, I can tell you that you
shouldn't believe everything you read, especially if it's written by
Seymour Hersh. He obviously had an axe to grind with the USAF.
Jennings Heilig
brian whatcott
In article <airliners...@ohare.Chicago.COM>, haw...@aloha.net
says...
>
...
>Unlike the Air Force of today, the commercial airlines gave up on
>navigators in the late 60's with the installation of electronic
>navigation.
>
With the installation of triple Carousel IVs, the C-5 said farewell to
navigators for general ops.
brian whatcott <in...@intellisys.net>
Altus OK
Don Stokes
In article <airliners...@ohare.chicago.com>,
Mark Anderson <haw...@aloha.net> wrote:
>Unlike the Air Force of today, the commercial airlines gave up on
>navigators in the late 60's with the installation of electronic
>navigation.
I don't think any of the 707-era jets had a navigator's station. (The
earlier Comet did.) Two-pilot on long-haul aircraft was pretty much an
80s thing, although it did start in the late 60s with the DC-9 and 737
class aircraft.
(The DC-9 was two-pilot from the beginning. The 737 was going to be, but
ALPA put their foot down, even though the 737 was intended as competition
for the DC-9, something that slowed early 737 sales. ALPA eventually
relented, the engineer's station went, and the 737 could compete
head-to-head with the DC-9.)
--
Don Stokes, Network Manager, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
d...@vuw.ac.nz(work) d...@zl2tnm.gen.nz(home) +64 4 495-5052 Fax+64 4 471-5386
J. Heilig
Most, if not all, early overwater 707s and DC-8s had a nav station.
Remember, this was before the days of INS when you had to use Loran and
celestial to get over the pole.
Jennings Heilig
Louis A. Ramsay
In <airliners...@ohare.Chicago.COM> in...@intellisys.net (brian
>>navigators in the late 60's with the installation of electronic
>>navigation.
>>
Most of the supplemental carriers had navigators up until the
early 70's.
Lou.