PDA

View Full Version : B-1 crash in Montana



imnohero
08-20-2013, 01:15 PM
Wasn't sure whether to post here or "in the news"...but since it's an AF aircraft:

B-1B crashed during a routine training mission in Montana, all four crew ejected, lived.

Link to local story. http://www.ktvq.com/news/ellsworth-air-force-base-comments-on-b-1-bomber-crash/#_

This just happened yesterday morning, doesn't seem to be a lot of details in the press yet.

imnohero
08-20-2013, 01:57 PM
AP has a story up, with a few more details about the crash site, location, and some aerial pics of the crash site:

http://news.yahoo.com/b-1b-bomber-crashes-montana-crew-ejects-210005183.html

The crew were taken by ambulance to hospital, no life threatening injuries.

akruse
08-20-2013, 02:17 PM
Another 4 satisfied Aces II customers

technomage1
08-20-2013, 02:32 PM
How much you want to bet it was a mx issue? If they had time to eject I'm guessing it wasn't pilot error. Speculation on my part, admittedly.

SomeRandomGuy
08-20-2013, 02:39 PM
Serious question from a nonner here: Why does it seem like there is a disproportionate number of military aircraft mishaps compared to civilian aircraft (talking about commercial airliners here)? I realize the requirements for the aircraft are vastly different. Are commercial airliners that much better at maintaining their aircraft? It seems like we hear about at least 3-4 crashes every year whereas it is very rare to hear about a civilian airliner crashing. When you factor in the number of civilian flights versus military flights it seems like we crash a lot more than they do. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-20-2013, 02:50 PM
Serious question from a nonner here: Why does it seem like there is a disproportionate number of military aircraft mishaps compared to civilian aircraft (talking about commercial airliners here)? I realize the requirements for the aircraft are vastly different. Are commercial airliners that much better at maintaining their aircraft? It seems like we hear about at least 3-4 crashes every year whereas it is very rare to hear about a civilian airliner crashing. When you factor in the number of civilian flights versus military flights it seems like we crash a lot more than they do. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I am much more inclined to blame this on CE because those guys have a reputation of going out to the ramp late at night to drink beer on the aircraft after they have been tossed out of the bars.

I bet the investigation finds a Miller Lite can jammed into the avionics.

imnohero
08-20-2013, 02:50 PM
Maybe partly our perception, Guy. I think we pay more attention to the military crashes. Civilian airliner crashes happen several times a year. I guess we'd have to look at stats to really answer your question. Something like accidents/miles (or hours)? I don't know where to find them, though.

akruse
08-20-2013, 02:57 PM
There is a big difference between a 737 taking off, leveling off at cruise and then descending to land than a B-1 (insert military a/c) going through its flight profile.

TSgt"M"
08-20-2013, 03:04 PM
There is a big difference between a 737 taking off, leveling off at cruise and then descending to land than a B-1 (insert military a/c) going through its flight profile.

I was going to mention this also, the "yank and bank" cycles on military ac have to stress the airframe a lot more than civ acft.

SomeRandomGuy
08-20-2013, 03:08 PM
There is a big difference between a 737 taking off, leveling off at cruise and then descending to land than a B-1 (insert military a/c) going through its flight profile.

So the answer to my question is that we place much more stress on our aircraft? I assumed that was the case but kind of wanted to confirm.

akruse
08-20-2013, 03:13 PM
So the answer to my question is that we place much more stress on our aircraft? I assumed that was the case but kind of wanted to confirm.

Yes. Also, much more demanding flight profiles which places stress on the crews. I have no idea what profile these guys were in and there are a thousand different ways that could cause them to punch out.

BOSS302
08-20-2013, 03:24 PM
Serious question from a nonner here: Why does it seem like there is a disproportionate number of military aircraft mishaps compared to civilian aircraft (talking about commercial airliners here)? I realize the requirements for the aircraft are vastly different. Are commercial airliners that much better at maintaining their aircraft? It seems like we hear about at least 3-4 crashes every year whereas it is very rare to hear about a civilian airliner crashing. When you factor in the number of civilian flights versus military flights it seems like we crash a lot more than they do. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

UPS just had an Airbus crash recently in Alabama, killing it's crew. A Southwest Airlines Boeing not too long ago landed with its nosegear retracted. The Asiana Airlines flight that performed a somersault upon hitting the EOR while landing in San Francisco. The several onboard fires that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner/Nightmare has been having. The civilian cargo 747 in Afghanistan that sadly belly-flopped into flames.

Given the extremes to which military aircraft fly, I am very impressed with the Air Force's safety record in comparison to civilian aircraft.

imnohero
08-20-2013, 04:13 PM
OK, so I tried to find some stats that might indicate a difference between military and civilian aviation. The latest year I could find data for both was 2001.

Military fatal accidents: 1.28 per 100,000 flight hours
Civilian fatal accidents: 1.28 per 100,000 flight hours

(not a typo, they were the same that year)

The civilian records are much easier to find, the FAA and other websites have them compiled. Doesn't really answer the question though, and I'm back to wondering where to find safety/crash stats for the military.

Venus
08-20-2013, 05:33 PM
The B-1 is a very temperamental aircraft, it has things on it that your standard Boeing does not have like a 8000 PSI hydraulic system which most planes have only a 3000 PSI. If you look at past B-1 incidents its always hydraulic problems, brakes or engines.

imported_chipotleboy
08-20-2013, 06:17 PM
How much you want to bet it was a mx issue? If they had time to eject I'm guessing it wasn't pilot error. Speculation on my part, admittedly.

I'll bet it's because somebody wasn't current on their CBTs.

technomage1
08-20-2013, 07:13 PM
I'll bet it's because somebody wasn't current on their CBTs.

True. I'm not trying to dog mx on this, it's just that pilot error a) doesn't usually occur in bombers since they're not agile and b) pilot error is usually fatal. If they had time to eject, and thankfully they did, it sounds like something malfunctioned. Again, we'll see but that's my initial reaction.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-20-2013, 07:26 PM
True. I'm not trying to dog mx on this, it's just that pilot error a) doesn't usually occur in bombers since they're not agile and b) pilot error is usually fatal. If they had time to eject, and thankfully they did, it sounds like something malfunctioned. Again, we'll see but that's my initial reaction.

I still think it has something to do with CE troops drinking too much. ;-)

technomage1
08-20-2013, 07:37 PM
I still think it has something to do with CE troops drinking too much. ;-)

How could we get out on the flightline w/mx working 24 hours a day? Unless they were drinking with us. lol

SomeRandomGuy
08-20-2013, 07:51 PM
I still think it has something to do with CE troops drinking too much. ;-)

Fun Fact: The acronym CE actually stands for Case Equivalent. When someone in CE says they have attained their 5 level it means they are able to drink the equivalent of 5 cases of beer in one week.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-20-2013, 08:17 PM
How could we get out on the flightline w/mx working 24 hours a day? Unless they were drinking with us. lol

I am afraid that is going to be my running gag with you for the foreseeable future.

I am still chuckling over that thread a couple of weeks ago when you were talking about CE leadership getting drunk at parties.

technomage1
08-20-2013, 08:43 PM
I am afraid that is going to be my running gag with you for the foreseeable future.

I am still chuckling over that thread a couple of weeks ago when you were talking about CE leadership getting drunk at parties.

I'm not the one that got my undies twisted in a knot over it...so I could care less. Matter of fact I'm sipping a cold beer right now. Fat Tire.

imported_KnuckleDragger
08-20-2013, 09:46 PM
True. I'm not trying to dog mx on this, it's just that pilot error a) doesn't usually occur in bombers since they're not agile and b) pilot error is usually fatal. If they had time to eject, and thankfully they did, it sounds like something malfunctioned. Again, we'll see but that's my initial reaction.

If you are truly not dogging mx...you are doing a piss poor job of conveying your ideas. If you are trolling, then I award you 1000 internetz.

Many things can bring a plane down. The B-1 is a unique aircraft, it will be interesting to see what happened here.

Coworkers said they hated working B-1s, because the computers were always going down.

technomage1
08-20-2013, 10:38 PM
If you are truly not dogging mx...you are doing a piss poor job of conveying your ideas. If you are trolling, then I award you 1000 internetz.

Many things can bring a plane down. The B-1 is a unique aircraft, it will be interesting to see what happened here.

Coworkers said they hated working B-1s, because the computers were always going down.

No trolling, no secret agenda. Just idle speculation on my part.

Most crashes occur due to mx or pilot error. Not all, of course, heck the plane could have been struck by lightening or hit a downdraft, for example. But if you have to bet, bet on mx or pilot error. As I noted, since they lived and were flying a bomber, my money is on mx at this point. But we'll see. As you note, it will be interesting to find out the cause.

I just hope there isn't a witch hunt. That does no one any good. Find the cause, fix the cause, punish if negligence did occur, but don't go searching for a scapegoat. Downrange CE shut down a runway for repair once. There was a big gaping hole in it, a NOTAM was published, all proper channels were taken, but a cargo aircraft landed on it during the day with clear visibility, damaging the aircraft but luckily only minor injuries. Guess who took the fall for that one? Not the pilot, not the tower, but CE. And I know mx gets that sort of thing 1000X more than anyone else. Heaven forbid a pilot take the blame.

Silverback
08-20-2013, 10:39 PM
True. I'm not trying to dog mx on this, it's just that pilot error a) doesn't usually occur in bombers since they're not agile and b) pilot error is usually fatal. If they had time to eject, and thankfully they did, it sounds like something malfunctioned. Again, we'll see but that's my initial reaction.

I have heard that the investigation goes back pretty far. Anyone that worked on the plane is questioned. Does anyone know how far into the past investigations go typically?

imnohero
08-20-2013, 10:48 PM
I don't know that there is a "typical"...having been involved in some accident investigations, I know that go back to the preflight for that flight, and a review of the maintenance history and inspection history. If they find something, they tend to start digging. A missed phase inspection, missed preflight item, etc. They look at pilot's training, currency, last check-ride, pre-flight crew rest, etc. If you are asking whether they go back over the whole history, I don't think so...they go back however far they need to, not a set amount.

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 01:11 AM
How much you want to bet it was a mx issue? If they had time to eject I'm guessing it wasn't pilot error. Speculation on my part, admittedly.

Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

Venus
08-21-2013, 01:21 AM
He could have flown through a flock of geese, they have been known to bring down a jet. As far as investigations go I just hope it doesn't goes to the witchhunt that happened in Spangdahlem back in the 90's when it ended with a mx troop committing suicide.

bcoco14
08-21-2013, 02:41 AM
No trolling, no secret agenda. Just idle speculation on my part.

I would like to take a moment to caution anyone from speculating anything. The fact is we have no idea what happened at this point.


Most crashes occur due to mx or pilot error. But if you have to bet, bet on mx or pilot error.

Over 75% of airplane crashes are caused by pilot error. A small percent are caused because of MX.


Guess who took the fall for that one? Not the pilot, not the tower, but CE. Heaven forbid a pilot take the blame.

Are you sure about that? I would be willing to put up a years pay to say that it didn't go down how you may think it did.... edit out the rest of this seeing as how loadsmith put more facts into play.


Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

False.

Vrake
08-21-2013, 02:53 AM
Its never maintenance.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

Kind of a bold statement... So if someone left a tool in a cockpit and it bound a throttle or the stick after shifting inflight it would be found how? If a screw was left loose forward of the intake and bounced down a motor inflight even though it was flush on startup?

More often then not it is not maintenance. But they may just be the first hole in the "Swiss Cheese" of an accident.

loadsmith
08-21-2013, 03:37 AM
Downrange CE shut down a runway for repair once. There was a big gaping hole in it, a NOTAM was published, all proper channels were taken, but a cargo aircraft landed on it during the day with clear visibility, damaging the aircraft but luckily only minor injuries. Guess who took the fall for that one? Not the pilot, not the tower, but CE. And I know mx gets that sort of thing 1000X more than anyone else. Heaven forbid a pilot take the blame.

If you are going to use examples, you should try and use ones that are accurate. "During the day with clear visibility," not so much and please read who took the blame, looks to me like the Army, not USAF CE.

From the Aviation Safety Network:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The Board President determined the causes of the accident are: 1) A failure on the part of the mishap site Assistant S-3 (Battle Captain[s]) to disseminate timely Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) information via the appropriate channels, 2) the failure of the Army project manager for construction at the mishap site to ensure the construction was properly marked and 3) a failure of the NOTAM reporting system to include oversight and supervision of the NOTAM processes, within the area of responsibility (AOR). Contributing factors in this mishap include: 1) a lack of training on the part of the U.S. Army to effectively prepare their personnel for combat zone airfield management and operations, and 2 the failure of the Garrison Commander at the mishap location to assume responsibility for ensuring safe flight operations at the airfield. The Board President also determined there were numerous opportunities for airfield construction information to flow to the aircrew, but in each case the information was not properly disseminated prior to the aircrew departing for their scheduled mission.

akruse
08-21-2013, 05:25 AM
Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

Bold statement. Go take a look at F-16 crashes. Quite a few MX errors in a bunch of those.

akruse
08-21-2013, 05:27 AM
If you are going to use examples, you should try and use ones that are accurate. "During the day with clear visibility," not so much and please read who took the blame, looks to me like the Army, not USAF CE.

From the Aviation Safety Network:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The Board President determined the causes of the accident are: 1) A failure on the part of the mishap site Assistant S-3 (Battle Captain[s]) to disseminate timely Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) information via the appropriate channels, 2) the failure of the Army project manager for construction at the mishap site to ensure the construction was properly marked and 3) a failure of the NOTAM reporting system to include oversight and supervision of the NOTAM processes, within the area of responsibility (AOR). Contributing factors in this mishap include: 1) a lack of training on the part of the U.S. Army to effectively prepare their personnel for combat zone airfield management and operations, and 2 the failure of the Garrison Commander at the mishap location to assume responsibility for ensuring safe flight operations at the airfield. The Board President also determined there were numerous opportunities for airfield construction information to flow to the aircrew, but in each case the information was not properly disseminated prior to the aircrew departing for their scheduled mission.

Who needs facts?

Venus
08-21-2013, 06:45 AM
If you are going to use examples, you should try and use ones that are accurate. "During the day with clear visibility," not so much and please read who took the blame, looks to me like the Army, not USAF CE.

From the Aviation Safety Network:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

NOTAM reporting system to include oversight and supervision of the NOTAM processes, within the area of responsibility (AOR). Contributing factors in this mishap include: 1) a lack of training on the part of the U.S. Army to effectively prepare their personnel for combat zone airfield management and operations, and 2 the failure of the Garrison Commander at the mishap location to assume responsibility for ensuring safe flight operations at the airfield. The Board President also determined there were numerous opportunities for airfield construction information to flow to the aircrew, but in each case the information was not properly disseminated prior to the aircrew departing for their scheduled mission.
Why do you think most Airfield Management and transit Alert are contracted out, I see what the Army has walking some of these bases and there is no way I would want them in charge of ATC or Airfield management. That MC-130 crash was the straw that broke the camels back.

technomage1
08-21-2013, 07:21 AM
If you are going to use examples, you should try and use ones that are accurate. "During the day with clear visibility," not so much and please read who took the blame, looks to me like the Army, not USAF CE.

From the Aviation Safety Network:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The Board President determined the causes of the accident are: 1) A failure on the part of the mishap site Assistant S-3 (Battle Captain[s]) to disseminate timely Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) information via the appropriate channels, 2) the failure of the Army project manager for construction at the mishap site to ensure the construction was properly marked and 3) a failure of the NOTAM reporting system to include oversight and supervision of the NOTAM processes, within the area of responsibility (AOR). Contributing factors in this mishap include: 1) a lack of training on the part of the U.S. Army to effectively prepare their personnel for combat zone airfield management and operations, and 2 the failure of the Garrison Commander at the mishap location to assume responsibility for ensuring safe flight operations at the airfield. The Board President also determined there were numerous opportunities for airfield construction information to flow to the aircrew, but in each case the information was not properly disseminated prior to the aircrew departing for their scheduled mission.

There isn't much here thats different from I remember from then as i worked for the USACE in iraq at the time. The final report hadn't come out when i left. Word on the ground at the time was (USA)CE filed the notam. Everyone at the time was pretty pissed since they felt the PM was being targeted unfairly. Guess it wasn't disseminated properly in the end, which is unfortunate.

I wonder what the board would have considered proper markings for runway construction.

I wound up having to do a ton of paperwork and slides at my AOR for the numerous airfield construction projects we had to satisfy both AF and Army leadership we weren't doing the same.

I should know better than to go off memory in this site as someone is always eager to call you on it....

TREYSLEDGE
08-21-2013, 07:32 AM
If you are going to use examples, you should try and use ones that are accurate. "During the day with clear visibility," not so much and please read who took the blame, looks to me like the Army, not USAF CE.

From the Aviation Safety Network:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The Board President determined the causes of the accident are: 1) A failure on the part of the mishap site Assistant S-3 (Battle Captain[s]) to disseminate timely Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) information via the appropriate channels, 2) the failure of the Army project manager for construction at the mishap site to ensure the construction was properly marked and 3) a failure of the NOTAM reporting system to include oversight and supervision of the NOTAM processes, within the area of responsibility (AOR). Contributing factors in this mishap include: 1) a lack of training on the part of the U.S. Army to effectively prepare their personnel for combat zone airfield management and operations, and 2 the failure of the Garrison Commander at the mishap location to assume responsibility for ensuring safe flight operations at the airfield. The Board President also determined there were numerous opportunities for airfield construction information to flow to the aircrew, but in each case the information was not properly disseminated prior to the aircrew departing for their scheduled mission.

There was a similar incident at Bagram in 2002 or 2003 where a C-130 hit the closed side of the runway where the concrete slabs had been demolished and removed in preparation for new concrete. This may be the incident technomage1 is referring to. The story I heard (TOTALLY UNOFFICIAL) was that they did blame CE for lack of proper construction markings and lights. But at the time Bagram was in blackout conditions and you can't put temporary barriers and lights that close to an active runway. The risk was explained and accepted by the Senior Airfield Authority (or else a NOTAM would not have been published) and the tower was supposed to warn crews landing of the issue.

After seeing technomage1's response I am editing to say that this is not what he was referring to, but is another example of a similar incident.

technomage1
08-21-2013, 07:45 AM
There was a similar incident at Bagram in 2002 or 2003 where a C-130 hit the closed side of the runway where the concrete slabs had been demolished and removed in preparation for new concrete. This may be the incident technomage1 is referring to. The story I heard (TOTALLY UNOFFICIAL) was that they did blame CE for lack of proper construction markings and lights. But at the time Bagram was in blackout conditions and you can't put temporary barriers and lights that close to an active runway. The risk was explained and accepted by the Senior Airfield Authority (or else a NOTAM would not have been published) and the tower was supposed to warn crews landing of the issue.

After seeing technomage1's response I am editing to say that this is not what he was referring to, but is another example of a similar incident.

I remember that one too. I heard the same thing you did, though as you note the story is unofficial.

BLUF on most incidents is that if a ground pounder can be blamed they are. If thy deserve the blame, that's one thing, but it sometimes happens that its to cover for the pilot.

Back to my original point - a witch hunt does no one any good so I hope that does not happen in this case.

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 09:44 AM
Bold statement. Go take a look at F-16 crashes. Quite a few MX errors in a bunch of those.

I dont need to. Ive worked on F-16s for almost 20 years. Please name the last F-16 crash caused by MX?

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 09:50 AM
Bcoco14
Which part of my statement is false?

Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

Name the last aircraft crash that was caused by MX?

Most people say the B-2 crash a few years ago. But the cause of the crash was logistics.

akruse
08-21-2013, 09:57 AM
Bcoco14
Which part of my statement is false?

Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.

If maintenance screwed up you will find it on start up.

Name the last aircraft crash that was caused by MX?

Most people say the B-2 crash a few years ago. But the cause of the crash was logistics.


Improper inspection techniques but I believe this one is under review as to the actual findings
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2012/F-16C%2C%20UTTR%2C%204%20May%2012%20Exec%20Sum.pdf

Incorrect stage 5 install
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2012/F-16CM%2C%20Osan%20AB%2C%2021%20Mar%2012%20Exec%20Su m.pdf

Improper install using improper tech data
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2009/F-16CM_Aviano_24Mar09.pdf

I only went back 4 years. Hopefully that will suffice.

akruse
08-21-2013, 09:59 AM
I'm bored

Improper Tire inflation...several missed inspections
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2007/F-16CJ_AOR_15Jul07.pdf

BRUWIN
08-21-2013, 10:23 AM
Its never maintenance. Its always Ops or Logistics. Name the last crash that was caused by maintenance? Early 80s with the pair of F-15 crashes.



Bitburg had a bad F-15E on T/O in the early 90s due to maintenance. F-16s have been lawn darts since they were introduced due to maintenance issues. Hell, I remeber a maintenance troop jumping chocks and crashing one during an engine run. Then there was the mainteance troops at Lakenheath that crashed an F-15E through the hush house doors during an engine run only 8-10 years ago.

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 10:33 AM
Bruwin
Youre getting Maintenance and Logistics confused. Poor design of an aircraft is not a maintenance fault.

The F-15 crash caused by flight controls. Was in May 95.

In May 1995 Major Grey Lowry was killed when his F-15 crashed at Spangdahlem AFB in Germany. Investigation showed that during routine maintenance, mechanics had crossed and mis-connected the control rods. One of the mechanics, TSgt. Thomas Mueller, was charged with negligent homicide and took his own life during his military trial.

A list of all F-15 crashes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F-15_losses

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 10:34 AM
Maintenance does screw up. But were talking about aircraft crashes.

akruse
08-21-2013, 10:36 AM
Maintenance does screw up. But were talking about aircraft crashes.

Yeah, I listed 4 in 4 years.

BOSS302
08-21-2013, 12:27 PM
Bitburg had a bad F-15E on T/O in the early 90s due to maintenance. F-16s have been lawn darts since they were introduced due to maintenance issues. Hell, I remeber a maintenance troop jumping chocks and crashing one during an engine run. Then there was the mainteance troops at Lakenheath that crashed an F-15E through the hush house doors during an engine run only 8-10 years ago.

Were you at Lakenheath for this?

http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Stories1/001-100/023_F-15%20crash/story023.htm

LFAWes
08-21-2013, 01:04 PM
Like I said, aircraft maintenance is a problem. But the first thing people think when an aircraft goes down is maintenance. When it is almost always certain to be pilot error.

Of the last 100 crashes in the Air Force. My guess would be 95 percent are Pilot error. 4 percent are Logistics. And One percent is aircraft maintenance.

Per your example. An engine fan blade made with a crack in it. And not found when the engine was built. Would be a logistics fail.

akruse
08-21-2013, 01:14 PM
Per your example. An engine fan blade made with a crack in it. And not found when the engine was built. Would be a logistics fail.

False, the investigation links were for cracks that should have been found during routine inspections.

Listen, I was a line maintainer for 10 years. I know the pressure of generating aircraft and I know of the shortcuts that are taken. I know that the smart ones take shortcuts that aren't dangerous but I also know that there are some less intelligent/lazy ones out there who take shortcuts with no regard for pilot/crew safety.

DWWSWWD
08-21-2013, 01:37 PM
it's just that pilot error a) doesn't usually occur in bombers since they're not agile There is no aircraft that isn't agile enough to do something stupid in. See Tex Johnson's barrel roll of a 707 prototype in 1955. Very cool. The idiot in Washington a few years ago and the one in Guam more recently, both flew perfectly good B-52s into the ground/water, while trying to impress someone. Not cool.

technomage1
08-21-2013, 06:23 PM
There is no aircraft that isn't agile enough to do something stupid in. See Tex Johnson's barrel roll of a 707 prototype in 1955. Very cool. The idiot in Washington a few years ago and the one in Guam more recently, both flew perfectly good B-52s into the ground/water, while trying to impress someone. Not cool.

Oh, people can always do something stupid. I completely agree with that, hence my qualifier of "not usually".

It's just harder in a big bomber vs. an F-16 (as someone else mentioned, the "lawn dart"). I also think the "hot dog" culture in the fighter world is worse.

I got curious about the Guam mission and looked up the official report. While it was impossible to be 100% certain since there were no flight recorders and little physical evidence, the report concluded the elevator stablizer trim malfunctioned. It talks about how the pilot should have been able to recover even if the setting was wrong to begin with. It also stated they tried to eject and could not so they knew they were going to die. Terrible.

http://www.acc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090213-173.pdf

BRUWIN
08-22-2013, 03:26 AM
Bruwin
Youre getting Maintenance and Logistics confused. Poor design of an aircraft is not a maintenance fault.

The F-15 crash caused by flight controls. Was in May 95.

In May 1995 Major Grey Lowry was killed when his F-15 crashed at Spangdahlem AFB in Germany. Investigation showed that during routine maintenance, mechanics had crossed and mis-connected the control rods. One of the mechanics, TSgt. Thomas Mueller, was charged with negligent homicide and took his own life during his military trial.

A list of all F-15 crashes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F-15_losses

The F-15 crash at Bitburg was a maintenance error. It had been repeated on several occasions before it finally became deadly. Yes...anybody could hook those control rods up backwards, but ops checks after the maintenance should have identified it as well as EOR checks. I was an F-15 engine troop in Europe at the time, their was a lot of blame to go around. It was not just on the guys that installed those rods. I believe they are color coded now so they can't be hooked up backwards. Such a simple fix for a problem that should have been implemented years prior to the incident. Everyone was aware they could be installed wrong unless you were new to the jet.

It was a shame how it all ended. I had some friends that personally knew the guy that took his life over the whole episode. From all accounts he was a stand up guy. He was a victim to Gen Fogleman's "accountability" measures that were put in place after the Black Hawk incident.

technomage1
08-22-2013, 11:43 AM
I believe they are color coded now so they can't be hooked up backwards. Such a simple fix for a problem that should have been implemented years prior to the incident. Everyone was aware they could be installed wrong unless you were new to the jet.

And that, right there, shows a systematic problem. A bit of paint could have prevented this mishap. That's not the fault of any one individual, but as you noted - the problem was known and could have easily been fixed years prior. How many ideas out there are floating around that never make it to the implementation stage due to bureaucracy?

DWWSWWD
08-22-2013, 05:16 PM
And that, right there, shows a systematic problem. A bit of paint could have prevented this mishap. That's not the fault of any one individual, but as you noted - the problem was known and could have easily been fixed years prior. Yeah, kinda. But it was an issue because of at least two maybe three fails. Failure to follow the tech data in the first place and failure to perform a flight controls check before flight by the Crew Chief. Not sure if pilots do a flight controls check or not. I fly small planes with yokes. You put your hands on the yoke with your thumbs up, turn the yoke and the aileron your thumb points to, moves up. Easy. There is a hole in the bottom of the yoke column that when parked, holds a metal plaquard thing that covers the keyhole. It goes through the yoke dealio to hold the yoke fast and keep the elevator and ailerons from banging around in the wind. Can't start the plane without removing it and you can't miss it anyway... Unless you lose your dealio and use a nail to secure the yoke. There was a case a few years ago where this happened. Dude didn't do his flight controls check before take-off, got to hauling ass, tried to rotate and couldn't pull the yoke back. Died. 2 fails, lazy. Now has plenty of time to rest.

STODR
08-22-2013, 07:58 PM
There was a similar incident at Bagram in 2002 or 2003 where a C-130 hit the closed side of the runway where the concrete slabs had been demolished and removed in preparation for new concrete. This may be the incident technomage1 is referring to. The story I heard (TOTALLY UNOFFICIAL) was that they did blame CE for lack of proper construction markings and lights. But at the time Bagram was in blackout conditions and you can't put temporary barriers and lights that close to an active runway. The risk was explained and accepted by the Senior Airfield Authority (or else a NOTAM would not have been published) and the tower was supposed to warn crews landing of the issue.

After seeing technomage1's response I am editing to say that this is not what he was referring to, but is another example of a similar incident.

I don't know of a C-130 in that time frame I think you mean the C-17. They did not blame CE they blamed the airfield manager for not properly marking the area, an inproper system for not notifying the AMC database, the airtraffic controller for not notifing the crew on check in since there was not atis and hold on to your hats they blamed the pilots for not checking the notams and for landing.

STODR
08-22-2013, 08:17 PM
Here is a link to Mishaps that are attributed to MX. You can see very few are attributed to MX but not zero like somebody was saying.

Right side MX mishaps stats FY 07-FY 13
https://www.my.af.mil/gcss-af/USAF/ep/globalTab.do?channelPageId=s6925EC13428D0FB5E04408 0020E329A9

BRUWIN
08-22-2013, 11:43 PM
Yeah, kinda. But it was an issue because of at least two maybe three fails. Failure to follow the tech data in the first place and failure to perform a flight controls check before flight by the Crew Chief. Not sure if pilots do a flight controls check or not.

The pilot was kind of at fault as well. Yes the pilot did a flight control check...but both him and the crew chief just made sure they moved. They didn't confirm stabilizer position in relation to what the pilot was actually doing.

Chief_KO
08-23-2013, 01:56 AM
The pilot was kind of at fault as well. Yes the pilot did a flight control check...but both him and the crew chief just made sure they moved. They didn't confirm stabilizer position in relation to what the pilot was actually doing.

That's what I always thought...but never being a flightline type I only knew by watching Top Gun.

FYI the B-1Bs are flying again at Ellsworth.

bcoco14
08-23-2013, 02:28 AM
I'm bored

Improper Tire inflation...several missed inspections
http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2007/F-16CJ_AOR_15Jul07.pdf

I was in this Sq and there when it happened, not on my shift though. I even saw the HUD tapes from his wingman that was right behind him on takeoff. The MP was the Fighter Sq CC. I also know who the crew chief was that changed the tire as well as the 7lvl involved. They both deviated from the TO. If memory serves me correctly they were supposed to check the tire pressure before lowering the jet off the jack and after. They never even checked out the tire pressure gauge and the 7 lvl pencil whipped the IPI. The Amn who changed the tire didn't even lose a stripe because he threatened to kill himself and the 7lvl was demoted and lost an assignment he had.

Fun fact: The Amn who changed the tire also found himself in the hospital that deployment for drinking so many Rockstar energy drinks in one day (an entire case) that he thought his heart was going to explode. He also PCSed to a base that I ended up at as well where he was later kicked out for doing something stupid.

Fun Fact #2: The pilot who ejected happened to land in the SERE parking lot where they were able to just put him in a van and bring him to the hospital. No injuries and he was flying again 3 days later. They kept the ejection seat just outside the front door of the ops section.

akruse
08-23-2013, 02:40 AM
I was in this Sq and there when it happened, not on my shift though. I even saw the HUD tapes from his wingman that was right behind him on takeoff. The MP was the Fighter Sq CC. I also know who the crew chief was that changed the tire as well as the 7lvl involved. They both deviated from the TO. If memory serves me correctly they were supposed to check the tire pressure before lowering the jet off the jack and after. They never even checked out the tire pressure gauge and the 7 lvl pencil whipped the IPI. The Amn who changed the tire didn't even lose a stripe because he threatened to kill himself and the 7lvl was demoted and lost an assignment he had.

Fun fact: The Amn who changed the tire also found himself in the hospital that deployment for drinking so many Rockstar energy drinks in one day (an entire case) that he thought his heart was going to explode. He also PCSed to a base that I ended up at as well where he was later kicked out for doing something stupid.

Fun Fact #2: The pilot who ejected happened to land in the SERE parking lot where they were able to just put him in a van and bring him to the hospital. No injuries and he was flying again 3 days later. They kept the ejection seat just outside the front door of the ops section.

Yup, its funny how the little things end up being the biggest factor sometimes. It's what happens when people think they know more than the book or are lazy.

bcoco14
08-23-2013, 03:21 AM
Yup, its funny how the little things end up being the biggest factor sometimes. It's what happens when people think they know more than the book or are lazy.

Here are another couple of gems from that deployment.

Specialists were getting write ups for chaff and flare mods not reading the correct numbers avaliable. They ask the weapons guys to download all the chaff and flare except one flare mod. When the weapons guys were telling them it should be all or none they insisted on one being left in. The 7 level came over and said they needed one in so they could make sure it was reading it right. It wouldn't be a problem because the safety pin would never be removed. It was left in and later in their troubleshooting process they installed a tester. This is where it gets good. During the test the same 7 level who said the safety pin wouldn't be removed went and pulled the circuit breaker bypassing the safety pin and they punched off about 5-6 flare inside a HAS. These things bounced off the floor and then off the ceiling landing on the stab and almost burned a hole through it. One of the weapons guys who was walking by grabbed the fire bottle and used the foam to push them into a corner to burn out.

Second great minds moment was when 2 weapons guys went out to a jet to hang a center line pylon. They do and then go to ops check it without dearming the jet. So here you have a fully loaded jet, missiles hooked up, loaded with bombs that had the explosive cartridges installed, and they are testing the voltage to the entire system. Well fortunately these 2 idiots didn't do the check right or all these bombs would have been laying on the ground along with some fuel tanks. End result here was an LOC and the guy who turned them in to the leadership being labeled a "rat".

TREYSLEDGE
08-23-2013, 08:32 AM
I don't know of a C-130 in that time frame I think you mean the C-17. They did not blame CE they blamed the airfield manager for not properly marking the area, an inproper system for not notifying the AMC database, the airtraffic controller for not notifing the crew on check in since there was not atis and hold on to your hats they blamed the pilots for not checking the notams and for landing.

You may be right. I remember seeing the damage on the airfield and the tire markings, but my recolection of the airframe is not clear. I arrived a few months after it happened, and the unofficial story I got was from my predecessor.

garhkal
08-23-2013, 06:51 PM
Serious question from a nonner here: Why does it seem like there is a disproportionate number of military aircraft mishaps compared to civilian aircraft (talking about commercial airliners here)? I realize the requirements for the aircraft are vastly different. Are commercial airliners that much better at maintaining their aircraft? It seems like we hear about at least 3-4 crashes every year whereas it is very rare to hear about a civilian airliner crashing. When you factor in the number of civilian flights versus military flights it seems like we crash a lot more than they do. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Very true. And not only more aircraft crash, but more damage seems to get done (that plane that went down in Va beach into that housing complex)..

But back to THIS crash. Have yet to see anything on any news channel showing if they yet know WHAT caused the crash.

BOSS302
08-23-2013, 07:21 PM
Very true. And not only more aircraft crash, but more damage seems to get done (that plane that went down in Va beach into that housing complex)..

But back to THIS crash. Have yet to see anything on any news channel showing if they yet know WHAT caused the crash.

Someone already posted stats on civilian vs military aircraft mishaps. They had the exact same stats; military aircraft do not crash more than civilian aircraft. Stop adding fire to a falsehood.

Venus
08-23-2013, 07:22 PM
[QUOTE=TREYSLEDGE;648434]You may be right. I remember seeing the damage on the airfield and the tire markings, but my recolection of the airframe is not clear. I arrived a few months after it happened, and the unofficial story I got was from my predecessor.[/Q
This is the one
http://www.gruntdoc.com/pics/c130_overview.jpghttp://www.gruntdoc.com/pics/c130_lside.jpghttp://www.gruntdoc.com/pics/c130_farback.jpg

technomage1
08-23-2013, 08:58 PM
This is the one


Wow. Thanks for posting those. I want to say this is the one where the crew failed to read the NOTAM at all.

imnohero
08-23-2013, 09:26 PM
Very true. And not only more aircraft crash, but more damage seems to get done (that plane that went down in Va beach into that housing complex)..

But back to THIS crash. Have yet to see anything on any news channel showing if they yet know WHAT caused the crash.

The immediately available stats ('90-'02) indicate that military and civilian crash rates are very similar. Crashes involving fatalities are almost identical. All mishaps (not categorized by severity) the military is slightly higher. Depending on the year, between 2 and 8 more per 100,000 flight hours.

CAVEAT: The most recent stats for military fleet I could find were 2002. As I noted in an earlier post, i don't know where to find more recent stats for the entire AF.

News:
Yesterday the crews names were released.
The wing had inspected all the aircraft during a stand-down (news didn't say what this meant). They resumed flight ops today.
No information on the cause of the crash seems to be readily available.

garhkal
08-24-2013, 02:26 AM
Someone already posted stats on civilian vs military aircraft mishaps. They had the exact same stats; military aircraft do not crash more than civilian aircraft. Stop adding fire to a falsehood.

That's based on an over a decade old stat..

imnohero
08-24-2013, 02:32 AM
That's based on an over a decade old stat..

If you have more recent data that supports your statement that: "not only more aircraft crash, but more damage seems to get done", you're welcome to share. I clearly stated when the data came from and that I couldn't find more recent data on military crashes.

I'd love to see more recent data if you have it.

Mr. Happy
08-24-2013, 02:33 AM
Then there was the mainteance troops at Lakenheath that crashed an F-15E through the hush house doors during an engine run only 8-10 years ago.

I was at Lakenheath when that happened; it was around the 2001 timeframe. The nose of that plane was sticking clean through the doors when I drove out there for a peek. I could only imagine what that crew chief in the seat was thinking when that bad boy launched forward.

In the 2 years I was at that place, we had at least 5 aircraft I know of that crashed or were seriously damaged. The ops tempo was insane there.

Mr. Happy
08-24-2013, 02:42 AM
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy;647776]Serious question from a nonner here: Why does it seem like there is a disproportionate number of military aircraft mishaps compared to civilian aircraft (talking about commercial airliners here)?QUOTE]

I believe it's because military aircraft are more complex in design (i.e., leads to more potential malfunctions which results in more mishaps). Plus, a commercial plane operates within the parameters of the airframe and a tame flight plan, whereas a military aircraft pushes the envelope with performance and maneuvers for training.

Venus
08-24-2013, 06:15 PM
I was at Lakenheath when that happened; it was around the 2001 timeframe. The nose of that plane was sticking clean through the doors when I drove out there for a peek. I could only imagine what that crew chief in the seat was thinking when that bad boy launched forward.

In the 2 years I was at that place, we had at least 5 aircraft I know of that crashed or were seriously damaged. The ops tempo was insane there.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/nanneya/Mvc-004f.jpghttp://luckypuppy.bravehost.com/MADDOGJET/mishaps/f15hush3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/nanneya/hhr-005f.jpg

garhkal
08-24-2013, 06:40 PM
If you have more recent data that supports your statement that: "not only more aircraft crash, but more damage seems to get done", you're welcome to share. I clearly stated when the data came from and that I couldn't find more recent data on military crashes.

I'd love to see more recent data if you have it.

I'm just going off what i remember from the news. Have heard of far more mil crashes (helos as well) than civilian. BUT normally when civilian ones crash its a lot more deaths, and therefore news worthy.

loadsmith
08-24-2013, 06:44 PM
Wow. Thanks for posting those. I want to say this is the one where the crew failed to read the NOTAM at all.

This is the one we talked about a few page back, report says Mosul but I remember it being Tal Afar:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The one where the crew failed to read the NOTAMS was in A-Stan, occurred on 21 Apr 03:

Board President opined the mishap resulted from the convergence of several factors, none ofwhich alone would be likely to cause a mishap. The simultaneous presence of all the factors resulted in a lack of situational awareness on the part of the aircrew, specifically the lack of knowledge that the west half of the runway was closed and under construction. The factors were as follows: the crew did not read the Notices to Airmen, the approach control and control tower did not advise the aircrew of the runway conditions, runway markings while appropriate were not sufficiently prominent to alert the aircrew on final approach, and the tactics briefing and associated materials given to the aircrew suggested that the full runway width was available.

technomage1
08-24-2013, 07:05 PM
This is the one we talked about a few page back, report says Mosul but I remember it being Tal Afar:

The MC-130H Hercules plane was on a nighttime logistics transport mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. US operated airfield in northern Iraq, possibly Mosul, a trench was being dug in the runway 33. The construction works, approx. 2700 feet from the southern end of the runway were not marked nor NOTAMed. On landing, at a speed of 80 knots, the Hercules plane ran into the construction works. The nose gear and forward undercarriage were sheared off and the left wing separated just outside the nr. 2 engine. The aircraft then caught fire. The crew members egressed safely, but the four passengers required assistance from ground personnel and aircrew.

The one where the crew failed to read the NOTAMS was in A-Stan, occurred on 21 Apr 03:

Board President opined the mishap resulted from the convergence of several factors, none ofwhich alone would be likely to cause a mishap. The simultaneous presence of all the factors resulted in a lack of situational awareness on the part of the aircrew, specifically the lack of knowledge that the west half of the runway was closed and under construction. The factors were as follows: the crew did not read the Notices to Airmen, the approach control and control tower did not advise the aircrew of the runway conditions, runway markings while appropriate were not sufficiently prominent to alert the aircrew on final approach, and the tactics briefing and associated materials given to the aircrew suggested that the full runway width was available.

It's sad I'm able to confuse the two since it happened twice. Really it should never happen. Thanks for clearing that up.

loadsmith
08-24-2013, 07:28 PM
It's sad I'm able to confuse the two since it happened twice. Really it should never happen. Thanks for clearing that up.

Both unfortunate incidents that happened somewhat early in each campaign. They both pointed out flaws in the notification system and we are hopefully better today because of it. Losing an MC-130H was a huge loss, not a plane that can come straight off the line and into the fight. The C-17 ended up being a little over a million dollars I think. If you are interested, Google "USAF AIB reports," not the full report(s) but a cliff notes version of every Class A since FY 2000. The site may be down now for MX but a good one to bookmark.

RobotChicken
08-25-2013, 06:32 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/nanneya/Mvc-004f.jpghttp://luckypuppy.bravehost.com/MADDOGJET/mishaps/f15hush3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/nanneya/hhr-005f.jpg

:spy "Sh*t happens!"