If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
RTB
Returned home late last night from a trip to the Dayton airshow. One
seemingly minor incident raised my curiousity. A two plane detachment of F-117s were sent to the show. As is quite typical one aircraft departed intending to provide flybys at other regional shows before returning to Dayton for a final flyby and landing. Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. With this aircraft considered to be a high value asset wouldn't the increased security of a major military airfield have made more sense? So a question for all is what criteria would have been applied here? Ed, being USAF do you have any comments. Should note here that monitoring the frequencies there were no other systems failures mentioned. ACC USN ret. NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85 & 74-77 Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote:
Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. I'm betting he returned to the airfield that already had personnel trained to generate and recover F-117s there. -- -Jeff B. (who's only guessing) zoomie at fastmail fm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Hey Jim,
I had so so time on Saturday. With the lack of flying and the weather, it was medicore. I thought the Thunderbirds did ok, they were kinda sloppy on few demos though. I had a cool experince though. I shook a hand of a Tuskegee Airman. I also thanked him for his service. I couldn't talk to him though, their tent was full of people that wanted to talk to them. It was cool though. Did the weather improved any on Sunday Jim? Erik |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:19:31 GMT, Yeff wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote: Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. I'm betting he returned to the airfield that already had personnel trained to generate and recover F-117s there. Sounds like the answer to me. Limited number special purpose aircraft have some peculiar support requirements and might need some specially trained support personnel. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:11:47 GMT, "Erik \"Falcon\" Glascoe"
wrote: Hey Jim, I had so so time on Saturday. With the lack of flying and the weather, it was medicore. I thought the Thunderbirds did ok, they were kinda sloppy on few demos though. I had a cool experince though. I shook a hand of a Tuskegee Airman. I also thanked him for his service. I couldn't talk to him though, their tent was full of people that wanted to talk to them. It was cool though. Did the weather improved any on Sunday Jim? Erik While I was serving on the Board of Trustees of the Pikes Peak Library District, I often had occasion to meet Lt. Col (ret) Clarence Shivers, one of the Tuskegee Airmen. He and his wife, Peggy were great supporters of the library and quite successful in business as well. They established a foundation to support the library and the arts in the Colorado Springs area. Great folks who give back to their community in a big way. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:19:31 GMT, Yeff wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote: Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. I'm betting he returned to the airfield that already had personnel trained to generate and recover F-117s there. Sounds like the answer to me. Limited number special purpose aircraft have some peculiar support requirements and might need some specially trained support personnel. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com True but those people were but 10-20 miles away. Working at an AF hangar with AF tools and support would seem to me the wiser option. After all if an engine change out were required would that not be easier all around at an AF facility compared to a borrowed civilian one? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Erik "Falcon" Glascoe wrote:
Hey Jim, I had so so time on Saturday. With the lack of flying and the weather, it was medicore. I thought the Thunderbirds did ok, they were kinda sloppy on few demos though. I had a cool experince though. I shook a hand of a Tuskegee Airman. I also thanked him for his service. I couldn't talk to him though, their tent was full of people that wanted to talk to them. It was cool though. Did the weather improved any on Sunday Jim? Erik I left before the T-Birds started. Low show isn't my fort'e. Considering the iffy forecast for Sunday I opted to drive home. 708 miles in 14 hours not too shabby, eh? Oh yeah, two food and fuel stops. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Jim wrote:
Ed Rasimus wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:19:31 GMT, Yeff wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote: Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. I'm betting he returned to the airfield that already had personnel trained to generate and recover F-117s there. Sounds like the answer to me. Limited number special purpose aircraft have some peculiar support requirements and might need some specially trained support personnel. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com True but those people were but 10-20 miles away. Working at an AF hangar with AF tools and support would seem to me the wiser option. After all if an engine change out were required would that not be easier all around at an AF facility compared to a borrowed civilian one? I bet his field selection was at least partly based on whatever caused the engine failure (oil related, fuel related, fod, other, unknown?), what was in between him and each facility (ie, populated areas), historical experience of F-117 engine failures, he was already at Dayton anyway so he stuck with a workable "plan A," command climate (written directives and unwritten preferences of the squadron CO and chain of command)... etc. PIC decision making stuff - I know, pretty general answer (I'm not trying to sound sarcastic). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote:
So a question for all is what criteria would have been applied here? Ed, being USAF do you have any comments. Should note here that monitoring the frequencies there were no other systems failures mentioned. In my experience you are better off to put a twin with a failure on the ground ASAP. Afterall, you have just lost 50% of your power and 100% of your "J" factor. This is not the time to "fool around." If you are in a many-motor (P-3, KC-135, etc.) then maybe you can "fudge" a short flight to a facility with better maintenance. The P-3 NATOPS specifically addresses "three engine ferry" flights (I don't know about Air Force policy and proceedure). But I don't know of anyone who ever did one who was really comfortable. Sure, it might be a "pain in the butt" to mount up a maintenance det, but I'd rather see that than a "smoking hole." Bill Kambic Most of his time and 100% of his engine failures in S-2, P-3, and T-44. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Might have been a simple safety plus prudence-driven decision.
Perhaps DAY was the best field available versus schlepping a sick bird across the northern Dayton suburbs to FFO. With as high a profile as the Dayton airshow is, you are smart not to risk a prang on the way over all the playgrounds and residences. This is like choosing to fly a lonely route when with hung ordnance. Suburbanites mourn their dead, seek compensation for their losses, and vote. Fishes in the sea and lizards in the desert do not. Support availability is nice, but if my choice is avoiding a high-visibility mishap by taking the nearest capable runway versus landing at a field with all the whistles and bells, I'll let the techs and the yellow gear follow me wherever I go. -- Mike Kanze "Large increases in cost with questionable increases in performance can be tolerated only in race horses and women." - Lord Kelvin "Jim" wrote in message ... Returned home late last night from a trip to the Dayton airshow. One seemingly minor incident raised my curiousity. A two plane detachment of F-117s were sent to the show. As is quite typical one aircraft departed intending to provide flybys at other regional shows before returning to Dayton for a final flyby and landing. Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine. Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian field when WRI-PAT is so near. With this aircraft considered to be a high value asset wouldn't the increased security of a major military airfield have made more sense? So a question for all is what criteria would have been applied here? Ed, being USAF do you have any comments. Should note here that monitoring the frequencies there were no other systems failures mentioned. ACC USN ret. NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85 & 74-77 Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|