WT Forums

Home | WT Forums | Hogpedia | Warthog blog | Hosted sites
It is currently 13 May 2025, 21:01

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 04 Aug 2005, 21:27 
Offline

Joined: 25 Jan 2003, 16:49
Posts: 970
Location: G-14 Classified
<img src="http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/US/08/04/fighter.jet.brakes.ap/story.brakes.ap.jpg" border=0>

Brake problems affecting the F/A-18 Hornet pose "a severe hazard to Naval aviation" that could kill pilots and ruin valuable aircraft, a Navy air wing commander wrote last year after one of his jets roared off a runway and splashed into San Diego Bay, destroying the $30 million plane.

Many of the brake failures have been traced to a $535 electrical cable -- about as thin as a drinking straw -- that controls the jet's antiskid brakes, the equivalent of antilock brakes on a passenger car. Investigators say the cable can chafe or break, since it runs close to where heavy tie-down chains secure the jets to a carrier deck.

In the San Diego crash, Navy investigators cited "a trend of similar, if not identical, emergencies" that date to 1990 but went unnoticed until a series of failures last year, according to records the AP obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

One Navy pilot aborted a landing last fall when his brakes failed after a combat mission over Iraq. He took off again, circled the runway in Kuwait for a second landing attempt, then lowered his tailhook and caught the emergency arresting cable on the ground. He was not hurt and there was no damage to the jet.

A month earlier, a Marine commander was seriously injured when he ejected after he lost his brakes landing on a short runway at Marine Corps headquarters in Quantico, Virginia. Other failures have occurred as recently as February.

Making matters worse, some pilots did not know the proper procedures for brake emergencies and took actions that contributed to crashes, the records show.

The Navy ordered fleetwide inspections last fall and is continuing to investigate whether it needs to redesign the Hornet's brakes, as some commanders have urged. "This matter is by no means closed," said Navy spokesman James Darcy.

The maker of the jet, Boeing Co., deferred comment to the Navy.

The U.S. military owns 561 Hornets, including those flown by the elite Blue Angels aerobatic team. Collectively, they represent a mainstay of Navy and Marine aviation, operating from both aircraft carriers and runways. They drop bombs and dogfight, and flew more than 50,000 sorties during the height of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Investigators have concluded that cockpit procedures were confusing for Hornet pilots landing with brake failures.

Lt. Jason Walker, low on fuel, was landing in San Diego at night after two unsuccessful landing attempts aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. The jet's brakes failed one second after touchdown, and, among other problems, Walker couldn't find the cockpit controls to engage emergency backup brakes. He ejected as the jet sped off the runway and into the bay at 60 mph. The Navy determined Walker shouldn't be disciplined.

"He stood on the brakes as much as possible but the aircraft was still not slowing," investigators wrote, concluding his brake cable severed.

The Navy last fall ordered fleetwide inspections of brake components, instructed mechanics to immediately replace any cables they previously had repaired and reminded pilots about procedures to help land safely even when antiskid brakes fail.

But fresh problems have surfaced.

At AP's request, the Naval Safety Center in Norfolk, Virginia, located about two-dozen formal reports describing failures of the Hornet's antiskid brakes since 1990.

The incidents caused the loss of one jet, damage of at least $1 million to another, damage of up to $200,000 on three additional jets, one serious injury and one other overnight hospital stay.

Officials acknowledge that their tally of formal reports probably understates the number of brake failures. One report filed in January referred to 14 Hornet brake failures and tire blowouts in a single squadron during 2004 alone.

"This trend of brake failures and blown tires cannot be ignored," Marine Col. Earl S. Wederbrook wrote to senior Navy and Marine officials after one of his jets spun backward on a runway from a blown tire in California. "Short of an aircraft system fix ... the pilot is the only control measure that can mitigate this hazard."

The Navy told the AP the antiskid brakes are safe and reliable, and that pilots should be able to land safely despite problems if they follow proper emergency procedures. It also said the sporadic brake failures must be viewed in light of the jets' roughly 6 million landings since the 1980s.

"There has never been a landing mishap to date where procedures were followed correctly," said Capt. Jeffrey Penfield, a Navy pilot for 17 years who is deputy program manager for F/A-18 system development in Patuxent River, Maryland.

The Navy also told the AP that based on its investigation so far, redesigning the brake system is unwarranted and would require lengthy and costly new safety reviews.

"It's been highly reliable," said Capt. Tom Huff, the executive officer at the Navy's Test Pilot School. "We don't want to venture too far from what we know works. We just know that wire is vulnerable in that location, and we've done some engineering changes to preclude damage to that wire."

Some commanders urged the Navy to do more.

"Ultimately, the wiring harness needs to be protected or redesigned," Cmdr. John R. "J.D." Dixon wrote to senior Navy officials after brakes failed in February on a Hornet speeding 115 mph down a runway at Lemoore Naval Air Station in California's San Joaquin Valley.

The jet blew two tires when the pilot activated emergency backup brakes. The incident happened months after the Navy's new mandatory inspections and training, and mechanics traced the problem to the same brake cable. The same problem was discovered later on another jet in the same squadron.

After last year's accident in San Diego, Naval air-wing commander M.C. Geron also wrote to the chief of naval operations to urge the service to improve the brake system. Failure to fix the problem "could lead to loss of use of the antiskid system, loss of normal brakes and potential loss of aircraft and life," Geron warned.

Pilots landing on shore are instructed to turn on the antiskid brakes, but pilots leave them switched off for carrier landings.


Investigators in the San Diego and Quantico accidents determined pilots didn't follow procedures when the brake system failed. Investigators and documents also said the Navy's instructions and computerized simulators do not train pilots adequately for brake hazards.

"The brake problem and loss-of-directional-control-on-ground emergency procedures are confusing," wrote investigators in the San Diego accident.

Days after the crash in San Diego harbor, the Navy used a heavy crane to hoist the destroyed jet out of the sea. The call sign "Lucky" was stenciled outside Walker's waterlogged cockpit.

"The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies, to chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth, to see their near and dear bathed in tears, to ride their horses and sleep on the white bellies of their wives and daughters."
-Genghis Khan

_________________
\"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. \"

George S. Patton


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 07:08 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2003, 08:32
Posts: 1097
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote><b>that could kill pilots and ruin valuable aircraft,</b><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote> maybe its just me but I would have phrased that "ruin aircraft and <b>KILL VALUABLE PILOTS</b> but thats just because I know that a trained troop is worth a lot more than a piece of metal...


unless you want to take a particularly well defended hill... then you want lots of stupid troops who don't know what your sending them into... and artillery lots and lots of that....

but enough about BR...

Non-compliant... Taser Taser Taser

Edited by - Stinger on Aug 05 2005 06:08 AM

_________________
\"One of you is gonna fall and die, and I'm not cleaning it up\"
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 12:50 
"but enough about BR..."

LOL!

<b>There are two kinds of soldiers.
Snipers...and targets.</b>
<img src="http://www.creedmoorsports.com/images/SA9121-M21.JPG" border=0>


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 13:34 
Offline
\"Some Pup\"
User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 17:17
Posts: 1022
Location: Missouri
So, a TCTO(or whatever the navy uses) to fix the cable that's the culprit wouldn't work? Seems to me to be simple to fix.

"Some pup"
Nickname by Fenderstrat72

_________________
Evil is evil, no matter how small.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 14:29 
Offline

Joined: 12 Oct 2002, 11:09
Posts: 2857
stinger is that what airforce, and navy call marines.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 15:20 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2003, 08:32
Posts: 1097
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
stinger is that what airforce, and navy call marines.


<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>Absolutly NOT... I'm an MP... I try to avoid taking hills myself

Non-compliant... Taser Taser Taser

_________________
\"One of you is gonna fall and die, and I'm not cleaning it up\"
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 05 Aug 2005, 17:54 
Offline

Joined: 12 Oct 2002, 11:09
Posts: 2857
so you find the dumb ones and make sure they are at the front. Read some where that eisenhower did not want seasoned troops in the first wave at D-day. Because the were smart enough to not want to run off the landing craft. He wanted green troops who would not hesistate, due to previous experiences with amphibious landings. Have to find the source again but the lodgic makes sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group