Author Topic: Any fighter pilots out there? (Read 5989 times)

bb71challenger · « **Reply #15 on:** December 11, 2008 - 09:53:57 PM »

Sorry for biting your head off go-fish. I appreciate you replying in the classy way you did. I think after a long day I need to chill for a while before posting sometimes. I will say I am ignorant in regards to the way the military does things. Not saying that in a bad way either, just stating a fact. I know the pilot had to do exactly what he was told and I am sure he feels horrible and this will be in his mind always. The sad thing is he will probably pay a much higher price than most pilots who crash simply because of the media backlash that will follow because people died.

JH27N0B · « **Reply #16 on:** December 11, 2008 - 11:51:34 PM »

I grew up in Glenview Illinois which until it closed in 1995, was the home of the Glenview Naval air station. Around 20 years ago, a new F16 was on its first break-in flight, apparently the procedure was to fly the plane up north from the factory in Fort Worth TX up over Lake Michigan where it met up with a tanker, aerial refueled and would fly back to Texas. For some reason this F16 had a flame out of its single engine over the lake at altitude. The pilot glided the plane in from the lake to the air station, which was around 10 miles inland from the lake. It landed safely! Only some damage to the rear fuselage from the hard landing. I'm not sure they ever figured out why the engine quit.
Of course everyone praised the pilot as being a hero, and this event in general. But I had to wonder if it wasn't too risky, gliding the plane in over a populated area to save it.
When I was a kid in the late 60's, an A4 Skyhawk from the base lost its engine I think after takeoff, and it crashed into a house about 2 blocks from ours. A girl watching Saturday morning cartoons in the family room perished and the pilot sustained some injuries when he ejected at the last minute.
It's hard to second guess after a crash. A jet with 2 engines should safely be able to fly on one engine. Engine failures are rare, and usually an engine fails because of a mechanical failure. In that case, the second engine is not at any great risk of failure just because the other engine failed.
Before passing judgement, it would be good to wait until the investigation is completed and the cause determined. Fuel contamination is a possibility, otherwise it is difficult to speculate why one engine would fail at a different time than the other on the same flight. Generally the only times two engines fail, at approximately the same time, is because of running out of gas or flying through a flock of birds that destroy both engines simultaneously.

NoMope Greg · « **Reply #17 on:** December 12, 2008 - 12:06:25 AM »

As a San Diego resident, I can tell you that the pilot had no choice but to go over a residential area. (As a former resident with family still here, Go-Fish can confirm this and anyone can look at the satellite shot and see the same thing.) MCAS Miramar is surrounded by residential and commercial land and there is no way for the pilots to get to and from the base without flying over civilians.

In this case, from what I've been able to gather, the pilot was taking the most direct route from the ocean to the base. When he bailed out, he was approximately a mile from the edge of the base and at most three miles from the end of the runway. While there is a freeway through an uninhabited canyon just south of this neighborhood, had he taken that, he wouldn't have been properly lined up to land the aircraft and would have had to go past the base, then do a 180 degree turn to the north to get lined up to land, putting him over more populated areas. I think we can safely assume that, given limited time to make a decision, the carrier Air Boss and/or the Miramar Flight Deck Commander decided to get him to the base as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, the engine didn't last for one more minute. This is not the first military aircraft to crash in the vicinity of Miramar and I'm sure it won't be the last.

I think it's significant to note that the man that lost his family holds no ill will towards the pilot, making a public statement asking people not to blame the pilot for what happened to his family.

go-fish · « **Reply #18 on:** December 12, 2008 - 12:20:58 AM »

Planes can do amazing things when they have power.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LveSc8Lp0ZE

As with JH27's account of the F-16, it was likely the f-16 was travelling at a good enough rate of speed that allowed it to "fall" a great enough distance to get to the base.
A parachutist can change his landing spot by miles depending on the speed at which he is moving horizontally. When your in the air at a great altitude you can really cover some ground. Luckily for that pilot he probably didn't have to change coarse much and he was moving fast.
The pilot in SD was moving slowly with one engine at probably part throttle and comming in for a landing. Not a good speed or altitude to lose your lone engine. They tend to drop fast then.
Greg is right about those neighborhoods, every couple years there is a crash. I wouldn't want to live there. Thoghts and prayers go out to the family.

priderocks · « **Reply #19 on:** March 04, 2009 - 04:17:44 PM »

Well, well

Thirteen US military personnel have been disciplined for their roles in a fighter jet crash in California last year that left four people dead, officials said.
Marine Corps officials told reporters that the December 8 tragedy in the San Diego suburb of University City was a preventable accident caused by mechanical problems and poor decision-making.
Officials said the pilot in the crash had mistakenly opted to fly over populated areas rather than make an emergency landing approach over water at an alternative landing site.
The pilot, Lieutenant Dan Neubauer, ejected safely from his stricken F/A-18D Hornet after his second engine failed.
Neubauer's plane slammed into a home in University City, killing three generations of a single family: Yoon Young-Mi, 36; her daughters, 15-month-old Grace and seven-week-old Rachel; and Yoon's 60-year-old mother.
According to radio transmission tapes released Tuesday, Neubauer alerted air traffic controllers his jet was in trouble while above the ocean.
"I've got, uh, down to (a) single engine ... possibly a problem with the other engine, and time, uh, fuel remaining about, uh, 20 to 30 minutes," the lieutenant advised.
A controller then asked him where he wanted to land, apparently assuming that Neubauer intended to go to Naval Air Station North Island, which was nearer and approachable over water.
"Uh, I'm actually going to try to take it to Miramar, if possible," the pilot responded.
Shortly afterwards Neubauer's second engine failed, forcing him to bail out in a residential neighborhood not far from where his plane crashed.
Military officials said that in addition to making a faulty decision to head to Miramar, the pilot and his supervising officers violated various other emergency procedures.
"Ultimately this tragic accident was avoidable through human factors," Major General Randolph Alles told reporters.
Colonel John Rupp said a "complex emergency" had been "compounded by a series of well-intentioned but incorrect decisions, both inside the cockpit and in the squadron's ready room."
Above all, the jet should have gone straight to the Coronado-area naval base, a move that would have prevented the deadly crash.

sleepychallenger · « **Reply #20 on:** March 04, 2009 - 04:26:28 PM »

dont know what to say, they did what they felt was right at the time and untill everyone else was in that plane at that time we will not know. the transmissions dont say he was advised otherwise so apparently they felt the other engine would get him there too.

NoMope Greg · « **Reply #21 on:** March 04, 2009 - 04:47:15 PM »

Quote from: sleepychallenger on March 04, 2009 - 04:26:28 PM

dont know what to say, they did what they felt was right at the time and untill everyone else was in that plane at that time we will not know. the transmissions dont say he was advised otherwise so apparently they felt the other engine would get him there too.

Drew, as an ATC, you know that you can only go on the information the pilot provides to you. In this case, the squadron allowed the plane to take off when the left-side engine had a known fuel-supply problem. The right side engine broke down for an unrelated issue and then, while the pilot was overflying a populated area with an aircraft he knew was in trouble, the fuel system for the left engine gave up the ghost and the plane fell like a stone. While he may have been more familiar with Miramar, the smart thing to do would have been to fly into North Island, which would have been a straight-in approach over the water.

We run into this from time to time with our drivers - the bus breaks down and causes greater problems because a driver takes it upon himself to make a decision to "hope for the best" instead of informing Operations about the extent of the problem. On some occasions, that decision has led to the bus stranding a group in a place without phone service, sitting on the side of the road for hours. We understand that "stuff breaks," but when the driver (or pilot) knows of a problem, it's incumbent upon him to give a full account of the issue up the chain of command and let those responsible make a more informed decision. In this case, the squadron maintenance department screwed up by sending an unsafe plane out and the pilot screwed it worse by "hoping for the best."

Understand, I have the highest respect for all our men and women in uniform. But these were human errors that should have been caught on several levels. The people responsible should be held responsible and I admire the Marine Corps for coming out and saying "Our people messed up" without trying to cover up the errors.

sleepychallenger · « **Reply #22 on:** March 04, 2009 - 08:24:28 PM »

i understand, but I have seen many issues where a pilot can be totaly oblivious to an issue. im not saying what they did was right or the right course of action, but 13 people were involved that believed the plane could make it back safely. the ATC should have advised against going to Miramar or brought it up their chain if they thought it was that unsafe, but with 20 - 30 min fuel left, everyone involved assumed the aircraft was safe to make it. where as i am not saying that it may have been poor judgement, i still have to say i stand behind them in their choices. many times i am sure that all of us have had the check engine light, service engine soon light, or low fuel light come on and we kept going because we felt we could make it and it wouldnt get worse or give out. like i said, not saying that the pilot couldnt have done something else, but he chose what he did because he felt it would work out.

heminut · « **Reply #23 on:** March 04, 2009 - 08:30:13 PM »

This incident is just like a police shooting, you do what you think is best and then stand back and watch the Monday morning quarterbacks pick it to pieces!

sleepychallenger · « **Reply #24 on:** March 04, 2009 - 08:33:33 PM »

pretty much. i feel bad for the family and the military members involved, all the military guys have to live with the thought of what if i did this instead

NoMope Greg · « **Reply #25 on:** March 04, 2009 - 09:28:04 PM »

Quote from: heminut on March 04, 2009 - 08:30:13 PM

This incident is just like a police shooting, you do what you think is best and then stand back and watch the Monday morning quarterbacks pick it to pieces!

With all due respect, I disagree. As a retired officer, you know that in a police shooting, the officer involved generally has seconds to make a life-or-death decision in a very high-stress environment. In this case, the aircraft was well south of San Diego when the problem initially occurred - approximately 150 miles away. The pilot had to bypass NAS North Island to get to MCAS Miramar and declined two offers to be guided in to North Island, which the Marine Corps stated was in violation of emergency procedures. He then attempted to restart the right engine while over residential communities (after bypassing both NASNI and San Diego International Airport,) impeding fuel flow to the left engine and resulting in both engines failing. Finally, he didn't take the most direct route into Miramar (although that may have been in order to lose altitude and maintain a safe glide slope.) From the time the decision was made to bring the plane to San Diego until the crash was 30 minutes. Further, as you can see from the graphic below, it was 10 minutes from the time the pilot received the first low fuel warning until he bypassed North Island. There was plenty of time for all involved to make the safe decisions that would have made this a non-event.

thedodgeboys · « **Reply #26 on:** March 05, 2009 - 05:25:03 AM »

looks to me if he had not had to pull the loop over the water he would have made it.

dutch · « **Reply #27 on:** March 05, 2009 - 08:32:39 AM »

I live a few miles from a ( former ) air force base. In `92 a F-16 had engine problems right after take-off and crashed between 2 blocks of houses in my town... many parts were in a childrens playgound. It crashed about half a mile from the pilots house.
I remember feeling sorry for him... people were holding him responsible, but I think there was not much he could have done... his route was planned and once the thrust was gone it fell from the sky like a brick... I actually heard it crash

It fell right between the houses in a pretty busy area, but nobody was killed or injured...

340Challman · « **Reply #28 on:** March 05, 2009 - 10:48:38 PM »

PrideRocks,

to answer your initial question, if you lose both engines you lose hydraulics, which work flight controls. You have just become a bomb.

I was stationed at NAS Miramar in F-14 Maintenance from 88 - 91, then onboard the USS Independence thru 94. When I heard about the incident I knew some bad decisions had been made. With NAS North Island being the logical choice for a stricken aircraft. As for comments made earlier about not attempting a trap onboard the carrier, Single engine traps are performed regularly. Maybe not as frequently as when the F-14 was still in service. The A's & B's were incredibly prone to compressor stalls. You can't just ditch an aircraft in the middle of the ocean because you lost an engine. Your Defense budget would be out of sight. Ditching is only opted for when no reasonable chance for recovery is possible, and taking a stricken aircraft over populated areas rather than attempting a trap was the first bad decision. Unless things have changed drastically they would risk 200 servicemen's lives before risking one civilian life.

priderocks · « **Reply #29 on:** March 05, 2009 - 11:13:51 PM »

Challman, what's a "trap"?

Author Topic: Any fighter pilots out there? (Read 5989 times)

bb71challenger

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

JH27N0B

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

NoMope Greg

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

go-fish

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

priderocks

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

sleepychallenger

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

NoMope Greg

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

sleepychallenger

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

heminut

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

sleepychallenger

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

NoMope Greg

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

thedodgeboys

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

dutch

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

340Challman

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?

priderocks

Re: Any fighter pilots out there?