Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[slide]

2 hours ago, electric indigo said:

For comparison: An F-16 seems to start at $19m per unit...

Yea... in 1998 money, which is $30,269,721.02 in 2020 money.

[sketchley]

6 hours ago, electric indigo said:

That's what I meant. Add another million for the AIM-120, and it's a pretty expensive fireworks from my perspective.

For comparison: An F-16 seems to start at $19m per unit...

Wait a sec... don't they fire dummy (no warhead) missiles at those target practice drones, and reuse them many times?  And don't they only destroy the target practice drones when a dummy missile hits a critical area that knocks the drone out of control?

[electric indigo]

Not necessarily, according to this article:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a29847417/f-16-drone/

10 hours ago, slide said:

Yea... in 1998 money, which is $30,269,721.02 in 2020 money.

The F-16s turned into QF-16s have had a service life before, so the net cost for the drone are much lower. I'm not saying the stealth FSAT is redundant, it's just the $10m = low cost bit that baffled me.

[AN/ALQ128]

The FAA released its ruling on the Collings Foundation B-17 crash a while back, and it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2001-11089-1673

[M'Kyuun]

For quicker reading concerning the FAA's B-17 crash outcome

[Thom]

Sadly, lessons on basic safety just never seem to stick.

[Sildani]

The pilot was ALSO the Maintenance director who signed off on the Fortress’ airworthiness?!

The Collins Foundation needs to lawyer up, yesterday. 

[M'Kyuun]

2 hours ago, Sildani said:

The pilot was ALSO the Maintenance director who signed off on the Fortress’ airworthiness?!

The Collins Foundation needs to lawyer up, yesterday. 

The Collings Foundation needs some serious oversight, and a reorganization under leadership who insist on good maintenance practices IAW FAA standards.  I don't know how it was back in the day when these planes and their pilots were young, but in the modern Air Force, pilots are in no way involved in maintenance activities, which is performed by various trained enlisted entities across a multitude of specialties. Crew chiefs are the front line, and thus it's imperative that they know their stuff, as they're involved in, or have peripheral knowledge of most maintenance activities that occur, whether or not they're actually performing the maintenance. The sense I get from reading the quick and dirty details of the FAA's findings is that these B-17 pilots were just that and, with no formal maintenance training, tinkered with the aircraft over the years, learning enough to be 'dangerous' but neither proficient nor thorough, and  who took on an inexperienced crew chief who they probably used more as an errand boy than a true maintainer. The elderly pilots were probably very protective of their baby and wanted no other hands in the pot, so to speak.  Old planes need a lot of maintenance- I worked on our aging fleet of KC-135s, most of which are over 50 years old and flying regularly, with constant care and upkeep to keep them in the air. Even while I was active duty, there was beginning to be a relaxation of certain inspection criteria on those planes to milk out their longevity. As I watch them fly over my house day after day, I sometimes wonder when our good fortune will fail us tragically. I digress. Hopefully the FAA will step up and exercise their authority to either influence the maintenance culture at Collings, or shut them down if they balk. This was a tragedy that could have been avoided.

[AN/ALQ128]

The Stratolaunch lives!

https://www.stratolaunch.com/vehicles

Talon A

"Talon-A is a fully reusable, autonomous, liquid rocket-powered Mach 6-class hypersonic vehicle with a length of 28 feet (8.5 m), wingspan of 11.3 feet (3.4 m), and a launch weight of approximately 6,000 pounds (2,722 Kg). The Talon-A will conduct over 1-minute of hypersonic flight testing, and glide back for an autonomous, horizontal landing on a conventional runway. The vehicle will also be capable of autonomous take-off, under its own power, via a conventional runway."

Black Ice

"Black Ice is a fully reusable space plane that enables advanced on-orbit capabilities and cargo return. Initial designs optimized for cargo launch, with a follow-on variant capable of transporting crew."

[Thom]

On 3/30/2020 at 1:26 PM, AN/ALQ128 said:

The Stratolaunch lives!

 

Damn cool!

[Sildani]

Hey, all right!

[electric indigo]

NASA makes a giant leap (again):

 

[AN/ALQ128]

6 hours ago, electric indigo said:

NASA makes a giant leap (again):

 

Very nice.

[Chronocidal]

I'm kind of torn, because I also love the classic blue logo, but that does hit a few nice nostalgia bits seeing the logo I grew up with.  

[M'Kyuun]

I embarrassed to say that I hadn't realized the logo had changed. Too, I've never heard it called "The Worm" before, and I've read a number of books about NASA related topics. In fact, I'm reading Last Man on the Moon by Gene Cernan currently.  Anyway, good to see America's return to launching people and resources into space without having to rely on the Russians. I appreciate the bonds that have been forged by that arrangement, but pride in my country and its heritage makes me glad to see that symbol emblazoned loud and proud on the side of that rocket.

 

[Thom]

I had to look up what the worm was... Really cool, esp as with @M'Kyuun says. We've been using the taxi service far too much!

[F-ZeroOne]

"Do you do gift wrap?"

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32869/this-man-owns-the-worlds-most-advanced-private-air-force-after-buying-46-f-a-18-hornets

[AN/ALQ128]

7 hours ago, F-ZeroOne said:

"Do you do gift wrap?"

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32869/this-man-owns-the-worlds-most-advanced-private-air-force-after-buying-46-f-a-18-hornets

Now all they need to do is get a contract to provide CAP for music concerts.

[Dobber]

If I missed this in March apologies, but this poor guy. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnn.com/travel/amp/france-fighter-jet-ejection-scli-intl/index.html

[F-ZeroOne]

I presume they mean "ejection handle"; has there ever been an ejection system outside of fiction that was activated by a button press?

[slide]

On 4/14/2020 at 6:18 AM, Dobber said:

If I missed this in March apologies, but this poor guy. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnn.com/travel/amp/france-fighter-jet-ejection-scli-intl/index.html

Now THAT'S an experience most civilians will NEVER get!!

 

On 4/14/2020 at 9:10 AM, F-ZeroOne said:

I presume they mean "ejection handle"; has there ever been an ejection system outside of fiction that was activated by a button press?

no "eject button" that I'm aware of... however there are "canopy jettison" buttons on some older jets and even prop-driven fighters... but looking at the Raphael's seat:

 That yellow/black stripey-thing sure looks an awful lot like an ejection handle to me...

 

Edited April 16, 2020 by slide

[Thom]

More than likely the writer's only reference was an airplane movie he saw once. That is the only time I've ever seen an ejection 'button.'

[M'Kyuun]

Likewise. I've seen handles in different forms, like the black and yellow pull cords on either side of the head or between the knees, and and as a pull-up handle on the seat, but never a push-button or toggle switch.  You definitely don't want to be stretching your arm out to the instrument panel to activate an ejection sequence, as you're likely to severely damage or lose it as you rocket out of the plane.

[sketchley]

Maybe it's a direct translation from French?  (as in they just Googled the translation...)

Or maybe the writer's watched a few too many James Bond movies, and the part that's getting lost in translation is that it's the pilot who did the ejecting. 

[Model-Junkie]

Ooof, lots of details missing from that article but seeing as the report is in French and needs to be translated maybe they were trying to get by with the bare minimum, I read a more detailed article from The Aviationist

Apparently, the gentleman was indeed stressed/nervous but the main factor seems to be him not being properly strapped in and the pilot was not notified of the limitations from the doc.

[renegadeleader1]

I wish people/friends/coworkers would organize a flight for me in a fighter jet.

 

The closest I was going to get was riding in a Chaffee tank at my local museum, but the corona f***ed that for me.

[electric indigo]

The Aviationist article has even more drama:

"Ironically (more or less), it was a technical malfunction that prevented the pilot from also being ejected from the aircraft along with the rear-seat passenger. The normal ejection sequence for a Dassault Rafale two-seat aircraft would cause both crew members to be ejected even if only one initiates the ejection sequence. This means the rear seat passenger accidentally pulling the ejection seat handle between their legs should have ejected the pilot as well. In this bizarre incident, both the front and rear canopies were disintegrated and ejected by explosive charge, the rear seat left the aircraft, but the pilot’s seat remained inside the aircraft. In other words, a technical glitch saved the aircraft."

[renegadeleader1]

19 minutes ago, electric indigo said:

The Aviationist article has even more drama:

"Ironically (more or less), it was a technical malfunction that prevented the pilot from also being ejected from the aircraft along with the rear-seat passenger. The normal ejection sequence for a Dassault Rafale two-seat aircraft would cause both crew members to be ejected even if only one initiates the ejection sequence. This means the rear seat passenger accidentally pulling the ejection seat handle between their legs should have ejected the pilot as well. In this bizarre incident, both the front and rear canopies were disintegrated and ejected by explosive charge, the rear seat left the aircraft, but the pilot’s seat remained inside the aircraft. In other words, a technical glitch saved the aircraft."

One of the things that came to mind when this board starting discussing this incident was what the process is for reloading an ejector seat . Now I'm not sure there is one? 

[F-ZeroOne]

I would imagine its certainly possible, as I doubt the cost of an ejector seat is a major factor in the overall cost of a modern combat aircraft, but it probably is time consuming and awkward. Though having said that, Martin-Baker have for years used a Gloster Meteor (yes, you read that right) for ejection seat testing so presumably they have a procedure. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by F-ZeroOne

[sketchley]

I saw a show on Discovery a long, long while back about the German Air Force stripping down retired F-4 Phantoms for parts that could be reused in other aircraft.  The removal of the ejector seat (and presumably the installation of one) seemed pretty straightforward.  However, it was also the most dangerous—until the specialists removed (or rendered inert) the priming explosives that initiate the ejection from the aircraft.

Oddly, it was the removal of the outer wing (the part that cants upwards) required the most sweat and tears.  The long rod in the joint apparently wasn't meant to be removed...

[M'Kyuun]

In the USAF, we have an Egress backshop that specializes in maintenance, removal, and installation of ejection seats at the field level.  Crew chiefs often assist in the removal and installation, but it is a dangerous bit of business. I've seen pics of the aftermath of an occupied seat having ejected inside a hangar, and it's unpleasant. The ACES II is designed to propel the rider approximately 300 feet  straight up very rapidly, so there's an enormous amount of thrust being generated by those rocket motors. I've sat in them numerous times, having limited work experience on the F-15, and about three years on the B-1 Lancer, and the first thing you want to do is make sure the safety pin is installed to prevent any unwanted trips.

The fact that the ejection sequence seems to have failed, going by comments (I didn't read the article), is a huge red flag. If the pilot was able to land the plane due to his seat not firing, it's good that the plane was salvaged, but the larger issue is that a critical crew safety system failed. Had it been a real emergency, the pilot would have been lost. We can always build another plane.

[slide]

8 hours ago, F-ZeroOne said:

I would imagine its certainly possible, as I doubt the cost of an ejector seat is a major factor in the overall cost of a modern combat aircraft, but it probably is time consuming and awkward.

According to Quartz [c. 2018]:

Quote

 

MILLION-DOLLAR QUESTION
How much does an ejection seat cost?
A new Martin-Baker ejection seat runs in the neighborhood of $140,000-$420,000. A usable UTC Aerospace ACES II ejection seat—which has been installed (and replaced by the ACES 5) in the A-10, F-15, F-16, F-22, B-1, and B-2—runs somewhere in the quarter-million dollar range.

Much of the cost of an operational seat comes from the explosive charges used to propel it into the air, according to Kevin Coyne, who has eight ejection seats in his collection, in various states of repair. Minus the explosives, which must be replaced every 10 years, “the basic seat is probably about $60,000,” he says.

Purely decorative units for use as desk chairs or home furnishings are slightly more affordable, with a decommissioned Martin-Baker seat going for $19,500. (“Not for Flight Use,” says the listing.)

“If someone has restored a seat, it should not have any active cartridges on it, but even so, a seat should be treated like a firearm,” Coyne cautions on his website. “If you don’t know the situation, treat it as if it were loaded.”

 

so yea, not a big % of a $100 Million modern fighter...

[slide]

2 hours ago, M'Kyuun said:

In the USAF, we have an Egress backshop that specializes in maintenance, removal, and installation of ejection seats at the field level.  Crew chiefs often assist in the removal and installation, but it is a dangerous bit of business. I've seen pics of the aftermath of an occupied seat having ejected inside a hangar, and it's unpleasant. The ACES II is designed to propel the rider approximately 300 feet  straight up very rapidly, so there's an enormous amount of thrust being generated by those rocket motors. I've sat in them numerous times, having limited work experience on the F-15, and about three years on the B-1 Lancer, and the first thing you want to do is make sure the safety pin is installed to prevent any unwanted trips.

The fact that the ejection sequence seems to have failed, going by comments (I didn't read the article), is a huge red flag. If the pilot was able to land the plane due to his seat not firing, it's good that the plane was salvaged, but the larger issue is that a critical crew safety system failed. Had it been a real emergency, the pilot would have been lost. We can always build another plane.

They grounded the Rafael-B models for at least 24 hours because of it... then  re-instated them.

Which leads me to believe some maintenance personnel got one hell of a chewing-out.

[AN/ALQ128]

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/news/defense-aviation-news/2020/april/6167-germany-plans-to-buy-93-eurofighters-and-45-f-18s.html

Germany is buying up 45 Super Hornets to maintain its nuclear strike responsibility

[F-ZeroOne]

I didn't even know Germany had a nuclear strike capability. The UK, yes, France, yes, but somehow I'd never heard this until now.