German drone almost collided with Afghan Airbus

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/drohne-luna-bundeswehr-verheimlicht-beinahe-crash-mit-airbus-a-903337.html

I assume this text will be released in the English intenraitonal ediiton tomorrow as well, but here is the German version already.

It says in 2004 a German drone, a Luna-type which is laucnhed by catapults and stays in the air for 6-8 hours, almost collided with an Airbus of the Afghan airline.

The video embedded in the text shows a rear view of the drone - and how the airbus chases by, approaching the drone's six and almost flying into it. It is on youtube sinc elonger, but not before now has Der Spiegel claimed to have gotten documents proving the incident which the German army so far has kept strictly secret.

The city below is Kabul.

The German lost another Luna years later, over Kunduz. In 2010.

The German army currently sees many troubles. The Euro Hawk drone porject colapsed, due to incompetence in the ministry and the drone not being equipped with an anti-collision warning system. Short while ago, the issue around the G36 turned hot both physically and legally, whith seriosu criticism beign voice dnow to havwe that tiny callibre which is not even allowed to chase roe deer, red deer and wild boars in Germany due to its lacking power. Just days ago the ministry had to admit that an order for 100+ Eagle V transports had to be stopped, the reasons still beign kept secret so far and the armoured transport cars being already expected in Afghanistan. And in general the reform of the army turns out to be "sub-optimal", with the army said to have personnel issues with too few recruits joining since the draft was cancelled, every fourth recruits is bailing out early, and then some more in later stages of the engagement.

[Herr-Berbunch]

I'm guessing there was no graffiti on the Airbus?

[August]

The German army currently sees many troubles.

Of course it has troubles. You can't really expect quality after 60 years of neglect and disdain. I've been surprised they have done as well as they have.

[Catfish]

But the bset is that the 'eurohawk' thingie has been cancelled because of missing proximity sensors. As the US said it just is not installed, the part itself is cheap and could be installed within an hour. Cables and plugs are all there. But the project is now being abandoned because of that missing sensor lmao.
I think there's another reason behind all that fuss :03:

[Skybird]

I think there's another reason behind all that fuss :03:
Yes there is, I called it the ministry's incompetence. The sensors are one of the two main reasons why the European authorities would not have certified the drone for flight operation over European land. Having installed that sensor earlier, would have allowed that certification in that regard.

The other reason - and that is where the manufacturer and the US on the one side and the German defense ministry play ping-pong over - is that America is traditionally extremely hesitant and unwilling to give any documentation on the defense technology it sells, like the intelligence agencies also give information only extremely rarely and prefer to just take instead. But the German side should have known that they would not get the documentation needed from the Americans that would have been inevitable for proper certification by European authorities. One should have known and forseen that problem for sure.

[Penguin]

I'm guessing there was no graffiti on the Airbus?

:haha:
I hope they shot some of those damned Taliban with spraycans before they could do any damage...

[Herr-Berbunch]

:haha:
I hope they shot some of those damned Taliban with spraycans before they could do any damage...

I'm glad somebody got the joke, even if it was you. :woot:

[Penguin]

I'm glad somebody got the joke, even if it was you. :woot:

You got me: I cheated. I just rang the German Ministry of Humor, Unpunctuality and Recreation to explain it to me. Its only employee told me "zis is no laughing matter!".
Thanks to you, now I have to go to the reeducation camp, this means biting into lemons all day - though i hope I won't become a limey. :O:

[Herr-Berbunch]

At least you won't get scurvy.

[Stealhead]

Do not be so fast to discredit 5.56mm as a cartridge Skybird it is a very effective round.Your German hunters must be horrible shots because many American hunters use 5.56mm against boar and ours are much much larger and more aggressive.

It is all in how the round is applied under the correct circumstances it is very effective as a combat cartridge.The G36 has other design flaws not caused by the cartridge.

[Skybird]

I only quoted or base on reports based on Bundeswehr, police and hunter assessment. When the Bundeswehr says the G36 after 3 magazines shot empty sprays so much that hitting somethign with it, not mentioning: man-stop-power, becomes a serious concern, then I dare to conclude even as a niovice that there is a problem. Even under normal firing coinditions, wind seems to be of more a concern than should be the case for the infantries primnary AR. The bullet for the cartridge they say weighs only, if I recall correctly, 4gr or 5gr. A 7.62 has 8 gr, I think I recall. Well, wind and weight and velocity - there is an inevitable interrelation between these three, you just cannot sneak around the elemental rules of physics.

Note that the internal tests of the Bundeswehr warned of the weapon's poor performance from early on, the according office seems to have recommended to not buy it in that state. It is under examination why these warnings were ignored and never heard of again, corruption seems to have been the case.

But the criterion that decides it for me is what gets reported by the German troops who field the weapon and ammo in Afghanistan. And they say its porked and has brought them very often now into critical situation, it seems, too little punch, too short legs, too little precision. With that kind of feedback, the decisive verdict has been delivered. The Wehrbeauftragte - and earlier last year I think the Generalinspekteur der Bundeswehr as well, but my memory may fail me there - said something like that he got "dozens and dozens" of complaints from Afghanistan. The ministry is up in arms against him now. Assuming he counted correctly, he just does his job - on behalf of the lives and physical wellbeing of the troops that were sent there.

[em2nought]

I'm glad somebody got the joke, even if it was you. :woot:
Trying to make jokes in a German thread. :har:

[Stealhead]

I only quoted or base on reports based on Bundeswehr, police and hunter assessment. When the Bundeswehr says the G36 after 3 magazines shot empty sprays so much that hitting somethign with it, not mentioning: man-stop-power, becomes a serious concern, then I dare to conclude even as a niovice that there is a problem. Even under normal firing coinditions, wind seems to be of more a concern than should be the case for the infantries primnary AR. The bullet for the cartridge they say weighs only, if I recall correctly, 4gr or 5gr. A 7.62 has 8 gr, I think I recall. Well, wind and weight and velocity - there is an inevitable interrelation between these three, you just cannot sneak around the elemental rules of physics.


Your still confusing a problem with the design of the weapon itself and not the cartridge.

Of course a larger bullet is going to have more power behind it that is obvious.That does not mean that a smaller round is just ineffective at all.


The grain weight of the bullet can vary greatly a 5.56x45 round can be as light as 45gr or as heavy as 100gr a 7.62x51mm round can range from 147gr to 175gr.

7.62x51mm can have problems as well it can simply punch right though a target and do little damage requiring a shooter have very good aim and hit a vital organ for the round to pass though.

If your ministry of defense blames all of the problems of the G36 on the bullet then they truly are inept.It would benefit H&K to claim the round itself is the problem rather than their weapon.The problems described are clearly a problem in barrel design and heat build up not the round.As I said though H&K would want people to blame the round not their crappy design.

Both the US and British military have over come issues of stopping power by no longer using the SS109 round and going with a different design.The US Army been using up to 100gr 5.56mm rounds in some applications and gotten very good effect close to 7.62x51mm.Not to say that one round can cover all applications but problems with 5.56mm can and have been over come by less inept military bureaucracies.

Again I question German hunters if they cant kill game that American and Canadian hunters drop all the time with 5.56mm.

a Roe deer typically weighs 33-77lbs if you are unable to take one with a 5.56mm rifle you are a horrible horrible marksmen on top of that 7.62x51mm is too large for game that size you would destroy too much tissue.

All of these boar where killed by 5.56mm rifles it is done very often in North America and our boars are larger.

http://i1162.photobucket.com/albums/q527/datsun260zyojimbo/SIG716TwoHogs_zps315f2456.jpg (http://s1162.photobucket.com/user/datsun260zyojimbo/media/SIG716TwoHogs_zps315f2456.jpg.html)

http://i1162.photobucket.com/albums/q527/datsun260zyojimbo/Hog39Side_zps9ade0a57.jpg (http://s1162.photobucket.com/user/datsun260zyojimbo/media/Hog39Side_zps9ade0a57.jpg.html)

http://i1162.photobucket.com/albums/q527/datsun260zyojimbo/SKC1_zpse41212ac.jpg (http://s1162.photobucket.com/user/datsun260zyojimbo/media/SKC1_zpse41212ac.jpg.html)

[Schroeder]

Your German hunters must be horrible shots because many American hunters use 5.56mm against boar and ours are much much larger and more aggressive.

You aren't allowed to hunt boars with that bullet here. It's a legal thing and has nothing to do with our hunters.;)

[Stealhead]

You aren't allowed to hunt boars with that bullet here. It's a legal thing and has nothing to do with our hunters.;)


Well that makes Skybirds claim clearly incorrect as I am sure that he getting his information from elsewhere.

[Tribesman]

Well that makes Skybirds claim clearly incorrect as I am sure that he getting his information from elsewhere.
Only one part is incorrect, the remington .222 is the lowest powered round which still fits the bill for Roe(though there is no minimum bore specified ).
For the bigger deer and the boars they are specified as double that power and the minimum bore is 6.5mm