The loss of Hercules XV298

I have just read with interest the above article in the August edition of your magazine (Touch and go in Syria, p74- 77) and have to take issue with the text box regarding RAF Hercules losses.

My main point is the erroneous attribution of the cause of the crash of XV298. The investigation into this incident clearly identified insufficient take-off distance as the cause. There is no mention of the load moving, which would point to serious derogation of duty by the movements team responsible. Indeed, photographs of the burnt-out shell clearly showed the load still securely restrained to the floor.

I also find the assertion that the A400M and C-17 are not used for such “dangerous” tasks because of their high price compared with a ‘Herc’ to be naive at best. Graham Langfield

Become a Premium Member to Read More

This is a premium article and requires an active Key.Aero subscription to view.

I’m an existing member, sign me in!

I don’t have a subscription…

Enjoy the following subscriber only benefits:

  • Unlimited access to all KeyAero content
  • Exclusive in-depth articles and analysis, videos, quizzes added daily
  • A fully searchable archive – boasting hundreds of thousands of pieces of quality aviation content
  • Access to read all our leading aviation magazines online - meaning you can enjoy the likes of FlyPast, Aeroplane Monthly, AirForces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, Aviation News, Airports of the World, PC Pilot and Airliner World - as soon as they leave the editor’s desk.
  • Access on any device- anywhere, anytime
  • Choose from our offers below