RAF Lossiemouth 15-16th Oct 15

[kurt.fairhurst]

1.
IMG_0177 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

2.
IMG_0400 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

3.
IMG_0530 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

4.
IMG_0695 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

5.
IMG_0743 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

6.
IMG_0844 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

7.
IMG_0916 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

8.
IMG_1038 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

9.
IMG_1083 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

10.
IMG_1097 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

11.
IMG_1210 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

12.
IMG_1233 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

13.
IMG_1251 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

14.
IMG_1289 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

15.
IMG_1316 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

16.
IMG_8113 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

17.
IMG_8169 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

18.
IMG_8265 by Kurt Fairhurst Photography 2015, on Flickr

Thanks for looking

[venom]

Fantastic photos
Colin

[Mike]

Number 3 one of my favourite pics ever put on here

That kind of shot should not be aired on a forum, it only encourages others to stand in an incredibly dangerous place to take photos.

I was going to praise Kurt's shots until I saw that one.

[mprl]

Great photos, 1 & 3 are fantastic

[Phil H]

Some nice shots, Kurt, but ..........

I have to agree with Mike, posting shots such as No.3 and No.18 on the forum only encourages others to have an equally low mentality towards safely - not only their own by the pilot's too. Such photos do nothing to cement good relations with the base and can very easily spoil the trust local enthusiasts have fought hard to maintain and enjoy !!

[burnsy133]

3 and 18 are my favourites, fantastic shots.

[kurt.fairhurst]

Number 3 one of my favourite pics ever put on here

That kind of shot should not be aired on a forum, it only encourages others to stand in an incredibly dangerous place to take photos.

I was going to praise Kurt's shots until I saw that one.

With regards to this photo i was far back from the runway itself and the tornado was already airborne and climbing and passed about 600ft above us so not very low and number 18 i was also set back from the runway

[lhrlima]

Some beautiful shots there! Not wishing to comment on the 'safe, not safe' debate, but No 3, to me, sums up what Lossie and the mighty 'Tonka' is all about!

Steve.

[POL]

Number 3 one of my favourite pics ever put on here

That kind of shot should not be aired on a forum, it only encourages others to stand in an incredibly dangerous place to take photos.

I was going to praise Kurt's shots until I saw that one.

With regards to this photo i was far back from the runway itself and the tornado was already airborne and climbing and passed about 600ft above us so not very low and number 18 i was also set back from the runway

And herein you prove you have no idea why it's dangerous.

What if, whilst you were stood there and the Tornado was climbing away, it had a double engine failure? At that point, the crew will be looking for somewhere to put down in accordance with their EFATO procedures, I'm sure it's slightly different for fast jet operations but by PPL manual states you should look to set down immediately ahead and on the runway, or if not possible, immediately after the runway"

That means, on top of you. If the crew see you, they're going to have to avoid you, which vastly decreases their options and chances of putting the aircraft down safely.

P.S. At 300mm, you can't have been that far back.

[Hammy]

P.S. At 300mm, you can't have been that far back.

He wasn't, and having left the EXIF information attached to the image, Kurt has made it easy for us to establish how far away from the runway he was.

The image was made on an EOS 70D using a 300mm lens. The 70D has a cropped sensor (22.5x15mm), thus 300mm becomes 450mm.

Using these two figures, and by looking at the image, we can establish the width of the field of view by measuring the width of the piano keys in view; an area of around 10.45 metres or 34.28 feet (calculated using the measure distance tool on Google Maps).

(450/22.5)*34.28 is 685.6ft, or 208.97m. This is the distance from the edge of the piano keys to the photographer's position, between the edge of the piano keys and the edge of the runway there is 96.42m, thus Kurt was 369.25ft/112.55m from the runway's edge, presuming the image hasn't been cropped.

[kurt.fairhurst]

P.S. At 300mm, you can't have been that far back.

He wasn't, and having left the EXIF information attached to the image, Kurt has made it easy for us to establish how far away from the runway he was.

The image was made on an EOS 70D using a 300mm lens. The 70D has a cropped sensor (22.5x15mm), thus 300mm becomes 450mm.

Using these two figures, and by looking at the image, we can establish the width of the field of view by measuring the width of the piano keys in view; an area of around 10.45 metres or 34.28 feet (calculated using the measure distance tool on Google Maps).

(450/22.5)*34.28 is 685.6ft, or 208.97m. This is the distance from the edge of the piano keys to the photographer's position, between the edge of the piano keys and the edge of the runway there is 96.42m, thus Kurt was 369.25ft/112.55m from the runway's edge, presuming the image hasn't been cropped.

The images has been cropped and why is it just my photos that people are having a go at there loads more posted on here daily from the likes of Coningsby and so on where the aircraft come into land much lower ?

[DanBeeden]

Lovely selection of shots benefitting from some sublime Autumn light. No. 13 catches my eye particularly. Great work!

[benji1867]

P.S. At 300mm, you can't have been that far back.

He wasn't, and having left the EXIF information attached to the image, Kurt has made it easy for us to establish how far away from the runway he was.

The image was made on an EOS 70D using a 300mm lens. The 70D has a cropped sensor (22.5x15mm), thus 300mm becomes 450mm.

Using these two figures, and by looking at the image, we can establish the width of the field of view by measuring the width of the piano keys in view; an area of around 10.45 metres or 34.28 feet (calculated using the measure distance tool on Google Maps).

(450/22.5)*34.28 is 685.6ft, or 208.97m. This is the distance from the edge of the piano keys to the photographer's position, between the edge of the piano keys and the edge of the runway there is 96.42m, thus Kurt was 369.25ft/112.55m from the runway's edge, presuming the image hasn't been cropped.

genuinely cant believe someone took the time to do this arithmetic and for what? Sad, sad person

[onemac]

Why can't they just extend the fence back / or fence off at the end of the runway section if it's such a safety issue?

I mean there's nothing there other than a few bushes.

I suspect that Kurt was standing at the fence at 23 when they were using 05. Base security move enthusiasts on from there as it is a dangerous place to stand. Yes, others have posted similar shots taken from the same place but let me explain why it's so dangerous:

The Nav or WSO or whoever sits in the back seat of a Tornado has his finger on the jettison switch for the external fuel tanks. This is in case there is insufficient power (for whatever reason) for the Tornado to sustain a specific rate of climb. I know of one incident where fuel tanks were jettisoned and the resulting spillage was only just contained within the airfield boundary. It's not a place anybody should stand and yes - Mea Culpa, until I spoke to the crews.

Al

[zoomer]

What if... it had a double engine failure? .... I'm sure it's slightly different for fast jet operations but by PPL manual states you should look to set down immediately ahead and on the runway, or if not possible, immediately after the runway"

Blimey, could be bad news for folk using the M25 or the A30 round Heathrow, then.

[Ben Montgomery]

Argument about standing on the approach aside, you've got some nice sharp images here Kurt.

I'm curious if you were there for two days why you didn't try any other spots for photos?

Ben

[Bat21]

Outside perimeter fence safe - Inside (as I am sure Kurt was not) dangerous - end of

to the down runway Tornado shot.

[POL]

Outside perimeter fence safe - Inside (as I am sure Kurt was not) dangerous - end of

What total nonsense.

[balamorybuzzed]

Fantastic set, magic photies buddy

Seriously, though Kurt, I love that No3 tornado take-off, brings back many happy memories of standing on the hill at Leuchars, directly in line, watching 43,56 and 111 depart, just like in your shot!

Best wishes,

Mikey

[Thunder]

I know of one incident where fuel tanks were jettisoned and the resulting spillage was only just contained within the airfield boundary. It's not a place anybody should stand and yes - Mea Culpa, until I spoke to the crews.

If you're referring to the December 1999 Tornado incident the tanks actually landed in the field out on the approach of 05(452m from the runway end) with one landing just 6 meters from the public road. Upon impact, the fibre glass tanks disintegrated and 3000ltrs of fuel went everywhere covering the road to a depth of about 1" in jet fuel. Another incident at Lossie was Jaguar T2 on 18/09/96, when the a/c was departing in exactly the same manner as the Tornado on pic 3 suffered an engine surge on the R/H engine. The a/c started to lose height and would've came down on the golf course, in order to avoid this happening the pilot jettisoned the drop tanks to decrease drag and weight. The tanks landed in a massive 300ft fireball just 315m from where Kurt took his picture from, had the pilot jettisoned the tanks 'one' second later, the tanks would've hit where Kurt was standing.

So please, don't think it's safe to stand under the approach or climb out
and some of the remarks on here scare me.