grigolosi Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Phasing is the term we use for the isochronal inspections we do on the jet every 300 flying hours. We depanel them and inspect them for frame cracks, broken harness standoffs, wire chaffing, etc. We also pull the engine if required and rig landing gear components and replace any mechanical parts and flight control surfaces that we discover broken or out of limits. On this jet we had to replace a fuel line that had a sharp gouge in it. It looked like someone had pried on it with a screwdriver. The line supplies fuel to the augmentor spray bar line so we had to perform an afterburner run along with the normal post maintenance run. Leaks are not that common in the fuel lines but the hydro systems do leak a bit. As long as they don't leak under pressure or fluid is literally running out of them we tend to leave them. You are right though it was freaking hot out there tonight it was around 100 degrees with the sun down and felt like it was 120. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Phasing is the term we use for the isochronal inspections we do on the jet every 300 flying hours. We depanel them and inspect them for frame cracks, broken harness standoffs, wire chaffing, etc. We also pull the engine if required and rig landing gear components and replace any mechanical parts and flight control surfaces that we discover broken or out of limits. On this jet we had to replace a fuel line that had a sharp gouge in it. It looked like someone had pried on it with a screwdriver. The line supplies fuel to the augmentor spray bar line so we had to perform an afterburner run along with the normal post maintenance run. Leaks are not that common in the fuel lines but the hydro systems do leak a bit. As long as they don't leak under pressure or fluid is literally running out of them we tend to leave them. You are right though it was freaking hot out there tonight it was around 100 degrees with the sun down and felt like it was 120. surprised to hear about that damage to fuel line as you'd expect technicians who work on these fighters to know what they are doing and not do silly and potentially dangerous things like that!?!? from what I read about ongoing fighter maintenance that it must be full on and never ending! how many hours of maintenance are needed to every flight hour for an F-16? must be a pretty awesome job to work on em! being responsible for such a high performance machine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted July 26, 2016 Author Share Posted July 26, 2016 A whole lot less man-hours to flight-hours than the F-14 needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 A whole lot less man-hours to flight-hours than the F-14 needs. hehe! I suppose so eh! guess that was one of the (possibly many other) reasons why the poor old Tomcat was retired.. Wow its hard to believe its been 10 years since already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) Generally unless a system actually breaks hard, we spend less than 8 hours working on them between flights. The turn around time on them when they come comeback code 1 (no defects or problems) is usually an hour to an hour and half. If the pilot stays to do a face to face with the next pilot than we can have them ready in 30-40 mins with refueling and forms documentation times included. Unfortunately Spanner mechanics are people also. I have seen and heard of guys doing some very stupid s@#$ working on aircraft. Where that line was gouged was directly below a clamp on the engine that the line had to route through. It looked like they were prying it to move it and keep it in position while the clamp was tightened. Someone just didn't think about it when they did it. It was a quarter inch diameter line and it doesn't take much to damage those size lines due to the thinness of the wall material. The man hour issue is one of the main reasons the Navy retired the Tomcats. The guys I knew that worked on them said the biggest issue with the aircraft was its hydro system. Hydraulic system failures in flight was pretty common and it was nightmare to fix according to them. Edited July 26, 2016 by grigolosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 I wonder how the Iranians are doing with their Tomcats!? I read their biggest issue is they can't get hold of any spare parts.. I also wonder how many are still actually flying and or in combat ready condition! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) Are there any recent pictures of any Iranian F-14s in the air? Edited July 26, 2016 by Thom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) According to what I read they were actually flying escort for Russian TU-95's over Syria. They have apparently been overhauling the aircraft themselves and have even mounted their own radars in them. This is the most recent picture that is dated (2009). I think there are newer ones but they have no date on them. Edited July 26, 2016 by grigolosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 Regards maintenance workers messing up occasionally, as it happens today I visited the "Mary Rose", a Tudor-era warship that sank in the 1500s, later recovered from the seabed in the 1980s and is now on display at Portsmouth Historic Naval Dockyard, England. Whilst reading some of the exhibit descriptions, it turned out that one of the many items that was recovered alongside the wreck was a tool dropped by a dockyard worker when working on the ship that eventually worked its way into the interior so its not exactly a new problem... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 The Iranians were pretty resourceful with their Tomcats. They didn't have AIM-54 missiles, for example, so they modified Hawk SAMs in their place. Now with the loosening of restrictions and the advent of CnC machining and metal 3D printing, keeping them airborne should be relatively easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Read an interview done with a Tomcat pilot recently who flew the F-14B and D along with the Super Bug. As stated, the Tomcat was tough to maintain, especially the older A models but even the newly built F-14Ds had their issues he confirmed. From a business perspective, he preferred the Super Hornet just because of its multirole capabilities but from a pure pilot's perspective, the F-14 won hands down as the better aircraft to fly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazareno2012 Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Read an interview done with a Tomcat pilot recently who flew the F-14B and D along with the Super Bug. As stated, the Tomcat was tough to maintain, especially the older A models but even the newly built F-14Ds had their issues he confirmed. From a business perspective, he preferred the Super Hornet just because of its multirole capabilities but from a pure pilot's perspective, the F-14 won hands down as the better aircraft to fly. There was a proposed multirole version of the Tomcat, but it has been passed over in favor of the Super Hornet. However, naval versions of the F-15 or Eurofighter Typhoon would be very interesting for me if built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 There was a proposed multirole version of the Tomcat, but it has been passed over in favor of the Super Hornet. However, naval versions of the F-15 or Eurofighter Typhoon would be very interesting for me if built. WOW! that navy F-15 model looks perfectly legit! I wonder if it was ever actually considered!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Regards maintenance workers messing up occasionally, as it happens today I visited the "Mary Rose", a Tudor-era warship that sank in the 1500s, later recovered from the seabed in the 1980s and is now on display at Portsmouth Historic Naval Dockyard, England. Whilst reading some of the exhibit descriptions, it turned out that one of the many items that was recovered alongside the wreck was a tool dropped by a dockyard worker when working on the ship that eventually worked its way into the interior so its not exactly a new problem... Finding tools in aircraft happens more often than people think. Back in 95 when the 13th FS was transferring in the new F-16 Block 50's some of the guys discovered a 1/4 inch ratchet with an 6 inch extension with a socket on it inside one of the engine access panels when they were performing the acceptance inspection. I have heard of B-52's with whole tool boxes left inside the wing fuel cells being found when the fuels specialist went in to do maintenance on the inside of the tank. Definitely right about it not being a anything new F-ZeroOne. A navalized F-15.....damn that would need some serious beefing up around the landing gear bulkheads reinforced/enlarged tailhook and completely beefed up landing gear. The only draw back would be another aircraft with an overly complex hydraulic system (F-15's have 4 systems to deal with). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 I like the navalized Typhoon but not so much the skijump idea. Britain needs to bring back the catapult carrier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 Finding tools in aircraft happens more often than people think. Back in 95 when the 13th FS was transferring in the new F-16 Block 50's some of the guys discovered a 1/4 inch ratchet with an 6 inch extension with a socket on it inside one of the engine access panels when they were performing the acceptance inspection. I have heard of B-52's with whole tool boxes left inside the wing fuel cells being found when the fuels specialist went in to do maintenance on the inside of the tank. Definitely right about it not being a anything new F-ZeroOne. A navalized F-15.....damn that would need some serious beefing up around the landing gear bulkheads reinforced/enlarged tailhook and completely beefed up landing gear. The only draw back would be another aircraft with an overly complex hydraulic system (F-15's have 4 systems to deal with). is there a requirement to have more hydraulic systems on navy jets over land based aircraft? or was the complicated hydraulic system unique to the Tomcat? and yes the F-15 would definitely need some beefing up! their bulk heads rear of the cockpit were cracking anyways if I recall correctly!? And wow! a whole tool box in the wing tank! that's just nuts! I bet the guy who those tools belonged to felt a bit stupid afterwards! and im sure he knew where he left em too! hehe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazareno2012 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I like the navalized Typhoon but not so much the skijump idea. Britain needs to bring back the catapult carrier.The carrier in the picture is an Indian Navy carrier, and their carriers in service and under construction have ski jumps to acommodate the MiG-29K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slide Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 is there a requirement to have more hydraulic systems on navy jets over land based aircraft? or was the complicated hydraulic system unique to the Tomcat? The Tomcat had the swing-wing mechanism to deal with for maintenance, I would consider that a complicating factor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 The Tomcat had the swing-wing mechanism to deal with for maintenance, I would consider that a complicating factor I suppose so.. hey does anyone know of any good websites with good quality high resolution jet fighter photos, wallpapers etc etc? much appreciated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefox Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) The navalised F-15 has been proposed. It will be designated as F-15N Sea Eagle, an alternative to F-14 back in the 70's, but F-14 was ultimately selected. Another F-15N below (Original link: http://s1356.photobucket.com/user/markkeogh73/media/EagleGB/DSCF4875800x600_zpsb0aad5ed.jpg.html) Edited July 28, 2016 by Firefox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) I like the navalized Typhoon but not so much the skijump idea. Britain needs to bring back the catapult carrier. Simply not going to happen for at least twenty plus years. We're kind of committed to the F-35B and ski-jump equipped carriers at least for now (I suppose technically would be possible during a mid-life refit, but extremely unlikely I think). Edit: and, I suppose we could potentially buy more carriers - just need a find a goose that lays golden eggs first...! Edited July 28, 2016 by F-ZeroOne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 (edited) Its not a requirement for Naval aircraft to have complicated hydro systems. it is mainly driven by the design itself and the redundant backups that most combat aircraft tend to have built into them. I do believe Slide is correct in that the F-14's complexity problems were due mainly to the swing wing it used. If you talk to experienced F-15 crew chiefs, especially the old ones who crewed F-4's they will tell you the F-15 was essentially a redesigned F-4 when it came to the internal mechanic's. It does has its advantages over other aircraft hydro systems, mainly in that the pumps are quick disconnect style using check valves mounted internally in the pump mount plate to close off the system when the pump is removed instead of having a directly attached pressure and return line like the F-16 has. But if you were to read the study material on the F-15 we use for our promotion testing you would be surprised at how old a lot of the mechanical system designs are that it uses. Some of what I read on the Tomcats from pilots was mainly complaints about the A model with that damn TF-30. They said when you were landing it, you were literally flying the engine to the deck. It was easy to compressor stall which was bad news on a carrier landing approach and could also cause them to flat spin in flight. The GE was a blessing to the Tomcat. Spanner try this sight, they had some really good photos and paintings.... https://wall.alphacoders.com/by_sub_category.php?id=57237&name=Jet+Fighter+Wallpapers&page=5 Edited July 28, 2016 by grigolosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 Its not a requirement for Naval aircraft to have complicated hydro systems. it is mainly driven by the design itself and the redundant backups that most combat aircraft tend to have built into them. I do believe Slide is correct in that the F-14's complexity problems were due mainly to the swing wing it used. If you talk to experienced F-15 crew chiefs, especially the old ones who crewed F-4's they will tell you the F-15 was essentially a redesigned F-4 when it came to the internal mechanic's. It does has its advantages over other aircraft hydro systems, mainly in that the pumps are quick disconnect style using check valves mounted internally in the pump mount plate to close off the system when the pump is removed instead of having a directly attached pressure and return line like the F-16 has. But if you were to read the study material on the F-15 we use for our promotion testing you would be surprised at how old a lot of the mechanical system designs are that it uses. Some of what I read on the Tomcats from pilots was mainly complaints about the A model with that damn TF-30. They said when you were landing it, you were literally flying the engine to the deck. It was easy to compressor stall which was bad news on a carrier landing approach and could also cause them to flat spin in flight. The GE was a blessing to the Tomcat. Spanner try this sight, they had some really good photos and paintings.... https://wall.alphacoders.com/by_sub_category.php?id=57237&name=Jet+Fighter+Wallpapers&page=5 awesome! thanks man! I can't access it on the work computers so I'll check it out when I get home.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrov27 Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 Blue Angels going to Super Hornet.... http://www.newsairshow.com/headlines/2016/7/26/boeing-awarded-contract-for-blue-angels-transition-to-super-hornet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 Blue Angels going to Super Hornet.... http://www.newsairshow.com/headlines/2016/7/26/boeing-awarded-contract-for-blue-angels-transition-to-super-hornet Awesome! its about time they got an upgrade! I was only wondering about their next choice of aircraft just the other week! They have been using their current 18's since the 1980's if im not mistaken yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 Looks like it's time to by another Superbug model... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizman Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Nice that they finally are getting an upgrade, they will be flying around my area next year so I'll be sure to see the last season of the F/A-18 Hornet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted July 29, 2016 Author Share Posted July 29, 2016 IIRC, the F-14 was the poster child for the "if you keep if flying, it works, if you let it sit, it'll break" theory, regarding the hydraulics. I think that frequent use kept the seals moist. But if it sat, they'd dry out and shrink, and you'd get leaks all over the place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Been a while, so here's news the Air Force may declare the F-35 combat ready by next week: http://flip.it/JV8wZ Grabbing popcorn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areaseven Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles316 Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Whats going to happen to the paint job after the tour is over are they going to take the paint/decals off her? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hal9000 Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Delivering the monster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hal9000 Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Some more fun stuff to share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Okay, why are the naval F-15s so fond of wingtip Sidewinder rails? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grigolosi Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Thats a good question F-Zero. I know the majority of space in an F-15 wing is fuel cell. Running the harnesses would be a PITA, The early F-15's had problems with fuel leaking into the inboard leading edge nav lights. Sometimes fuel would seep in and the light assembly would blow due to the fuel fumes in the light. I can just imagine the issues with running the weapons harnesses through the wing for wingtip launcher connections. Plus with the way the F-15 was designed I can bet it would mess with its aerodynamics. The planes aerodynamics were verified before any of its flight systems were even placed into the frame, everything besides the engines and landing gear was placed where it could fit internally after scale frame models were test dropped from helicopters. I read about the F-35's last month. They completed/passed the evaluation requirement by the USAF to be declared combat/operationally ready. It is supposed to happen in the next 5-6 months, that was according the article I read. Nice pics hal, I especially like the the Fokker DR.1 and the Albatross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.