Quantico mishap?

[Paul Michael Brown]

I've seen fragmentary reports of a Hornet mishap while doing "touch and
goes" at Quantico recently. Sounds wrong to me. Anybody have the gouge?

[Thomas Schoene]

Paul Michael Brown wrote:
> I've seen fragmentary reports of a Hornet mishap while doing "touch
> and goes" at Quantico recently. Sounds wrong to me. Anybody have
> the gouge?


http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046

Date published: 9/20/2004

An F/A-18, has crashed at the end of a runway at Quantico Marine Base.

Captain Tim Taylor with Prince William County Fire and Rescue says they
received a call of the crash at the Quantico Airfield. He says that one
person was taken to Potomac Hospital.

A base spokesperson would only say that the pilot is okay and received a few
cuts and scrapes.

The pilot was doing what are called “touch and goes" when the aircraft slid
off the runway about 12:20 p.m., according to Lt. Col. Rick Long, a base
spokesman. Long said. The F/A-18 landed in a marshy, muddy area off the
north end of the runway.

The pilot was a reservist with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 321, known as
Hell’s Angels. VMFA-321 is a detachment assigned to Andrews Air Force Base.

Long says, "As far as mishaps go, this is a minor one."



--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

[Greasy Rider]

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:10:39 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
> proclaimed:
>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046

If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
serious damage to an aircraft.

[Ogden Johnson III]

(Paul Michael Brown) wrote:

>I've seen fragmentary reports of a Hornet mishap while doing "touch and
>goes" at Quantico recently. Sounds wrong to me. Anybody have the gouge?

"Sounds wrong to me"?!?!?!?!

Why? Do you doubt a mishap happened? Do you question the
presence of FA-18s at MCAS Quantico? Do you question FA-18s at
MCAS Quantico doing touch and goes.

The presence of FA-18s at Quantico is a common occurrence. While
HMX-1, the helo squadron based at MCAS Quantico has CH-46 and
CH-53 helos assigned to it to provide most helo support needed by
the activities aboard Quantico, most notably The Basic School,
fixed wing support comes from squadrons based elsewhere. The
FA-18 was probably part of a det from a squadron tasked to
support the "three day war" that is part of the TBS curriculum.

As far as doing "touch and goes", pilots often squeeze in a
couple of landing approaches, time, fuel, and traffic load
permitting, when coming back from a training mission.
Particularly if it is the end of a quarter, and they are
deficient in meeting their non-precision instrument approach
requirements [a condition, IME, common for USMC pilots. They'd
rack up precision instrument approaches by the ton on
cross-countries, but for some reason didn't do non-precision ones
until the end of the NATOPS/MAW/Group required period started
fast approaching.]
--
OJ III
[Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.]

[Ogden Johnson III]

Greasy Rider > wrote:

>"Thomas Schoene" > proclaimed:

>>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046

>If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
>serious damage to an aircraft.

The aircraft ran off the runway into a marshy area, at least as
the article describes. By NavAir standards, that probably will
be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
amount required to repair the aircraft. What can be seen of the
fuselage/wings doesn't show extensive damage, and the nose end
/may/ not have much damage if it also impacted wet lands rather
than the embankment it is obscured by. It will certainly make a
trip to NARF [or whatever they're calling them these days],
before being returned to VMA-321.
--
OJ III
[Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.]

[Greasy Rider]

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:42:34 -0400, Ogden Johnson III
> proclaimed:

>The aircraft ran off the runway into a marshy area, at least as
>the article describes. By NavAir standards, that probably will
>be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
>amount required to repair the aircraft. What can be seen of the
>fuselage/wings doesn't show extensive damage, and the nose end
>/may/ not have much damage if it also impacted wet lands rather
>than the embankment it is obscured by. It will certainly make a
>trip to NARF [or whatever they're calling them these days],
>before being returned to VMA-321.

Wonder what his deductible was?

[W. D. Allen Sr.]

Want to see my USS Bon Homme Richard, CVA-31, barrier crash? It also was
classified an incident.

WDA

end

"Greasy Rider" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:10:39 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
> > proclaimed:
>>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046
>
> If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
> serious damage to an aircraft.
>

[Yofuri]

When was it?

Rick (BHR 4/64-5/67)

"W. D. Allen Sr." > wrote in message
...
> Want to see my USS Bon Homme Richard, CVA-31, barrier crash? It also was
> classified an incident.
>
> WDA
>
> end
>
> "Greasy Rider" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:10:39 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
>> > proclaimed:
>>>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046
>>
>> If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
>> serious damage to an aircraft.
>>
>
>

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Ogden Johnson
III > wrote:

> Greasy Rider > wrote:
>
> >"Thomas Schoene" > proclaimed:
>
> >>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046
>
> >If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
> >serious damage to an aircraft.
>
> The aircraft ran off the runway into a marshy area, at least as
> the article describes. By NavAir standards, that probably will
> be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
> amount required to repair the aircraft. What can be seen of the
> fuselage/wings doesn't show extensive damage, and the nose end
> /may/ not have much damage if it also impacted wet lands rather
> than the embankment it is obscured by. It will certainly make a
> trip to NARF [or whatever they're calling them these days],
> before being returned to VMA-321.

At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
fleet)

Pugs

[Tom Denton]

>By NavAir standards, that probably will
>be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
>amount required to repair the aircraft.

According to the Naval Safety Center, it's a Class A mishap.

http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/statistics/aviation/summary.htm

Mishap Date: 09/20/2004 Severity: A FM Time: 12:30 Evt Ser: 68157
Acft: F018A Count: Y Destroyed: N Major Command: 4TH MAW
Custodian: VMFA-321 Fatalities: 0
Location: QUANTICO MCAF
Summary: AIRCRAFT RAN OFF RUNWAY ON LANDING
Env: Aviation Operational

[Dr Doom]

Not to second guess the driver, but if I had just
touched down on the deck, and on centerline, but not
able to stop - with a soft marsh at the end of the
strip..... I'd have just gone along for the ride &
NOT bailed out .... had this happen once on an old
Lear 35, (lost hydraulics) - but on centerline - the
option to bail obviously was missing, but it wasn't
"that" dangerous since we knew it was just a grassy
field at the end of the runway we'd over run into &
not a building or rising terrain.

Anyone know why the pilot chose to bail out ? (as
opposed to just jettisoning the canopy once they
had ditched into the marsh/water).

What's the official vs. unwritten understanding among
the community regarding the "macho factor" of when to
bail out of a jet vs. staying in the jet ?

There was an Israeli Air Force Pilot several years ago
flying an F-15 (forget what version), during an aerial
training exercise, there was a midair collision.

His F-15 lost control, he told his rear seater to stand
by to eject- then decided to see if he could regain control
of the aircraft - by going full throttle, light AB's. He
got control of the aircraft back and managed to land it...
although at a substantially higher Vref.

McDonnell Douglas sent reps out after they saw pictures
of the aircraft - and the pilot said during interviews, if
he had been aware of the damage he would have bailed out -
the entire right wing of that F-15 had been sheared off.

What factors would make a Hornet driver, already on the
deck, on centerline, knowing a soft marsh was up ahead at
the end of the runway, decide to pull that handle ? (vs.
just riding it out, and open , or jettison the canopy
once stopped).

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 10/1/04 4:28 PM, in article
, "Allen Epps"
> wrote:
<SNIP>
> At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
> flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
> school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
> wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
> fleet)
>
> Pugs

Pugs,

I thought all of the USMCR Hornets got ECP-583 A+ upgrades. Were the Hell's
Angels the exception?

By the way, the Hornet community's mishap rate this year seems to be in the
toilet. Anybody got any comparative numbers?

--Woody

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 10/1/04 5:39 PM, in article , "Dr Doom" <Dr
> wrote:

>
> Not to second guess the driver, but if I had just
> touched down on the deck, and on centerline, but not
> able to stop - with a soft marsh at the end of the
> strip..... I'd have just gone along for the ride &
> NOT bailed out .... had this happen once on an old
> Lear 35, (lost hydraulics) - but on centerline - the
> option to bail obviously was missing, but it wasn't
> "that" dangerous since we knew it was just a grassy
> field at the end of the runway we'd over run into &
> not a building or rising terrain.
>

I didn't catch the runway conditions. If the pavement was wet, the Hornet
sometimes doesn't handle that well. It doesn't typically exhibit signs of
trouble until it gets slower, then directional control gets lost, and bad
things happen.

> Anyone know why the pilot chose to bail out ? (as
> opposed to just jettisoning the canopy once they
> had ditched into the marsh/water).
>

When the jet gets sideways, it has a tendency to flip over. Folks don't
typically like to stick around in the cockpit to see what that's like.

> What's the official vs. unwritten understanding among
> the community regarding the "macho factor" of when to
> bail out of a jet vs. staying in the jet ?
>

There's no official "macho factor." I have no idea what you're talking
about. Most pilots say: "Know when to go. Then GO."

<SNIP>
> What factors would make a Hornet driver, already on the
> deck, on centerline, knowing a soft marsh was up ahead at
> the end of the runway, decide to pull that handle ? (vs.
> just riding it out, and open , or jettison the canopy
> once stopped).
>

Just answered that. The Hornet tends not to be a good "four wheeler."

--Woody

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 10/1/04 11:20 PM, in article , "Doug
"Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote:

> On 10/1/04 4:28 PM, in article
> , "Allen Epps"
> > wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
>> flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
>> school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
>> wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
>> fleet)
>>
>> Pugs
>
> Pugs,
>
> I thought all of the USMCR Hornets got ECP-583 A+ upgrades. Were the Hell's
> Angels the exception?
>
> By the way, the Hornet community's mishap rate this year seems to be in the
> toilet. Anybody got any comparative numbers?
>
> --Woody
>

Bad form replying to my own post, but it seems that the overall mishap rate
according to the Safety Center (Class A Flight) was 1.13... Better than the
last 5 years. Better than the goal, but behind next year's goal of .88.

--Woody

[Frijoles]

Jet was going to Quantico to become a popsicle. Short runway (approx 4 K')
was likely a contributing factor.

"Allen Epps" > wrote in message
et...
> In article >, Ogden Johnson
> III > wrote:
>
> > Greasy Rider > wrote:
> >
> > >"Thomas Schoene" > proclaimed:
> >
> > >>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046
> >
> > >If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
> > >serious damage to an aircraft.
> >
> > The aircraft ran off the runway into a marshy area, at least as
> > the article describes. By NavAir standards, that probably will
> > be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
> > amount required to repair the aircraft. What can be seen of the
> > fuselage/wings doesn't show extensive damage, and the nose end
> > /may/ not have much damage if it also impacted wet lands rather
> > than the embankment it is obscured by. It will certainly make a
> > trip to NARF [or whatever they're calling them these days],
> > before being returned to VMA-321.
>
> At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
> flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
> school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
> wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
> fleet)
>
> Pugs

[Allen Epps]

In article >, Doug \"Woody\" and
Erin Beal > wrote:

> On 10/1/04 4:28 PM, in article
> , "Allen Epps"
> > wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
> > flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
> > school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
> > wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
> > fleet)
> >
> > Pugs
>
> Pugs,
>
> I thought all of the USMCR Hornets got ECP-583 A+ upgrades. Were the Hell's
> Angels the exception?
>
> By the way, the Hornet community's mishap rate this year seems to be in the
> toilet. Anybody got any comparative numbers?
>
> --Woody
>

Woody,
You may well be right. I just saw next to the buno on their jets it
still had F/A-18A. Was the A+ a field mod or depot level work?
Pugs

[José Herculano]

> When the jet gets sideways, it has a tendency to flip over. Folks don't
> typically like to stick around in the cockpit to see what that's like.

Su-22 killer Hank Kleeman bought the farm just like that...
_____________
José Herculano

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 10/2/04 5:38 AM, in article
, "Allen Epps"
> wrote:


>>
>> Pugs,
>>
>> I thought all of the USMCR Hornets got ECP-583 A+ upgrades. Were the Hell's
>> Angels the exception?
>>
>> By the way, the Hornet community's mishap rate this year seems to be in the
>> toilet. Anybody got any comparative numbers?
>>
>> --Woody
>>
>
> Woody,
> You may well be right. I just saw next to the buno on their jets it
> still had F/A-18A. Was the A+ a field mod or depot level work?
> Pugs

The A+ comes in two flavors: ECP-560 and ECP-583. Both mods upgrade the
Mission Computers to XN-8's (i.e. C model MC's) and Embedded GPS/INS (EGI).
The result is an F/A-18C weapons system in an F/A-18A airframe--an F/A-18A+.
The ECP-583 also comes with an APG-73 (Radar Upgrade or RUG) radar and the
Combined Interrogator Transponder (CIT).

All this is done at depot level.

Long answer for a short question.

--Woody

[Greasy Rider]

On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 11:59:21 +0100, "José Herculano"
> proclaimed:
>> When the jet gets sideways, it has a tendency to flip over. Folks don't
>> typically like to stick around in the cockpit to see what that's like.
>
>Su-22 killer Hank Kleeman bought the farm just like that...
>_____________
>José Herculano
>

I am proud to have his autograph.
I bought him a drink at the O Club at Oceana when they returned from
that cruise. He gave me the only Shoot Down patch outside of the
squadron.

[Dr Doom]

"Doug "Woody" wrote in message ...

> There's no official "macho factor." I have no idea what you're talking
> about. Most pilots say: "Know when to go. Then GO."

Understood, thanks for the response.

Actually, reading another post answered the question in the anecdotal
form that some pilots would rather die than "look" bad in front of their
peers.

I suppose the question then becomes one of what exactly is considered
looking bad ? (that would make them ride it out to the end).

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 10/2/04 9:45 AM, in article , "Dr Doom" <Dr
> wrote:

>
> "Doug "Woody" wrote in message ...
>
>> There's no official "macho factor." I have no idea what you're talking
>> about. Most pilots say: "Know when to go. Then GO."
>
> Understood, thanks for the response.
>
> Actually, reading another post answered the question in the anecdotal
> form that some pilots would rather die than "look" bad in front of their
> peers.
>
> I suppose the question then becomes one of what exactly is considered
> looking bad ? (that would make them ride it out to the end).
>

No such thing.

"I'd rather die than look bad" is a "tongue in cheek" phrase. Nobody would
TRULY want to die rather than look bad... Unless they were mental. When
it's uttered during a brief, it's done so with a sense of humor.

--Woody

[Pechs1]

DrDoom-<< Not to second guess the driver, but if I had just
touched down on the deck, and on centerline, but not
able to stop - with a soft marsh at the end of the
strip..... I'd have just gone along for the ride &
NOT bailed out >><BR><BR>

Hank Kleeman made that decision and died after the A/C ended up inverted.
Jumping out was a good choice, IMO_
Can't be sure the A/C would end up 'sneakers down'.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Jim Calpin]

This is consistent with the fact that VMFA-321 has been decommed, and
their jets were off to the Boneyard or sticks.

-Jim C.

Frijoles wrote:
>
> Jet was going to Quantico to become a popsicle. Short runway (approx 4 K')
> was likely a contributing factor.
>
> "Allen Epps" > wrote in message
> et...
> > In article >, Ogden Johnson
> > III > wrote:
> >
> > > Greasy Rider > wrote:
> > >
> > > >"Thomas Schoene" > proclaimed:
> > >
> > > >>http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2004/092004/09202004/1095702046
> > >
> > > >If that is a photo of a "minor" incident then I'd hate to see some
> > > >serious damage to an aircraft.
> > >
> > > The aircraft ran off the runway into a marshy area, at least as
> > > the article describes. By NavAir standards, that probably will
> > > be classed as a "minor" mishap [not incident] based on the $$
> > > amount required to repair the aircraft. What can be seen of the
> > > fuselage/wings doesn't show extensive damage, and the nose end
> > > /may/ not have much damage if it also impacted wet lands rather
> > > than the embankment it is obscured by. It will certainly make a
> > > trip to NARF [or whatever they're calling them these days],
> > > before being returned to VMA-321.
> >
> > At least a year ago when I left VAQ-209 (we shared a hangar) , 321 was
> > flying A models so I would guess it just gets sent off to fire fighting
> > school or something and they pull another one from the boneyeard or
> > wherever A's went when the C's hit the fleet (and are now leaving the
> > fleet)
> >
> > Pugs