Author Topic: AWACS Refueling Close Call  (Read 2730 times)

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6795
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2012, 05:57:23 PM »
The tanker pitched up first before the drastic pitch down.
Ahhhh, no. It was in stable, level flight, as is the norm.
The boom disconnected when it ran out of telescoping range of motion.
It was at or near the inner distance limit and at the lateral limit, causing a disconnect.
Yes, the awacs got too close but tanker moved long after any connection was broken.
After the disconnect, whoever was flying the AWACS, over controlled the pitch correction, and then a breakaway maneuver (reduce power and nose down) was performed to gain separation from the tanker that was also gaining separation by increasing power.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 06:51:38 PM by Puma44 »



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline ACE

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5569
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #46 on: October 21, 2012, 07:30:05 PM »
Lets give up.  Puma was clearly the pilot of one of the planes.
Sixth Tri-Annual Dueling Bracket Champion

The Few

-Spek

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6795
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #47 on: October 21, 2012, 08:17:45 PM »
Nope, not anything with that many motors.   ;)   Just attempting to describe the reality of what the video demonstrates.   One can only imagine what it was like for the back enders in the AWACS, sitting in a tube with no windows, positive g, unloaded g, and acceleration all in a short time period.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 08:49:22 PM by Puma44 »



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline Shifty

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9377
      • 307th FS
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #48 on: October 21, 2012, 09:46:01 PM »
Lets give up.  Puma was clearly the pilot of one of the planes.

Puma is one of the very few people on this board that has experiance with air to air refueling. He's a retired USAF F-106 and F-4 jock as well as a current airline pilot.
So he's been on the recieving end of the operation before and familiar with the process. How about you? You got anytime refueling inflight?

JG-11"Black Hearts"...nur die Stolzen, nur die Starken

"Haji may have blown my legs off but I'm still a stud"~ SPC Thomas Vandeventer Delta1/5 1st CAV

Offline Cobra516

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 259
      • Virtual Thunderbirds
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #49 on: October 22, 2012, 12:38:32 AM »
Posts by fish314 on jetcareers.com forums regarding refueling and the -135 in this thread about the video http://forums.jetcareers.com/threads/bad-day-for-the-awacs.155673/page-2

"You can get autopilot disconnects that result in out of trim conditions in either direction, and even an autopilot disconnect where the airplane is perfectly trimmed... depends on how the autopilot disconnect occurred.

Here's how that works: As receivers approach the tanker, the autopilot or the tanker pilot flying autopilot off A/R needs to put in nose up trim. This is because the "bow wave" off of the receiver reduces the downwash on the tail of tanker, reducing the angle of attack of the horizontal stabilizer and hence reducing the tail-down/nose up force from the tail. I haven't seen any math on the subject, but I believe the effect goes something like the square of the distance from receiver to tanker, because the change from 50' ('pre-contact' or 'astern' position) to 40' feels much less than the difference from 10' to 'contact'. And once in contact, when the receiver is high or forward in the envelope, that typically requires an additional click of trim (autopilot off) compared to a receiver in the perfect position (30 degrees elevation and 12' boom extension). With the autopilot on, the autopilot puts in, or takes out that trim as required.

The tanker autopilot applies trim at approximately 1/7th the speed of the pilot's trim switch. So if the receiver closes too fast, the autopilot will be unable to trim nose up fast enough to keep up with the change, and when it gets out of trim it gives up and clicks off. This leaves the tanker pilot with a yoke that's about 30lbs. out of trim in the nose down direction.

If on the other hand, the receiver was in position and quickly moves either AFT or DOWN in the envelope, then they will quickly reduce the bow wave effect and the airplane will be out of trim in the nose up position. If that happens quick enough, the autopilot gives up and leaves the pilot with about a 30lbs. yoke force in the nose up direction. This typically occurs during a break away, especially with a heavy receiver. The autopilot clicks off and the tanker climbs.

The last possibility is that the autopilot has been keeping up just fine, but has some kind of an internal data malfunction or issue and clicks off with the airplane in trim. I've had lots of the other two versions, mostly disconnects in the nose up direction, but I've only had this one once. Our book reads that at any autopilot malfunction when the receiver is closer than 'precontact,' the pilot should 'consider initiating a break-away.' Most guys read this to mean that a break-away is not absolutely required on every autopilot disconnect, so if the autopilot kicks off but everything is perfectly trimmed, guys will instead tell the boom to do a disconnect and back out the receiver, rather than saying the b-word.


The last effect that I haven't yet mentioned is the boom itself. The boom acts like a control surface, except that the boom operator moves is all over the place without telling the tanker pilot. In general, the perfect position is 30 degrees down elevation, and 0 degrees left and right. In that position, I basically set the throttles and have the plane trimmed up and feel really little to nothing from the boom itself (but of course feel the receiver bow wave if he's present). This position requires the boom operator to hold some weight in his hands because the boom does not trim off completely. If the boom operator is lazy and lets the boom hang at near the bottom elevation limit (40 degrees down elevation), then there is more drag on the airplane and it will gradually slow down. If the boom operator raises the boom to near the upper limit (20 degrees) then the airplane will have less drag on it and gradually speed up. Both of these effects require a trim change as well, but the rate of change is typically a little slower than the change required by the receiver. And if the boom should move from the center to the side, then that acts like a rudder left or rudder right input on the tanker, and the autopilot typically responds with a coordinated and opposite rudder and yoke input in the other direction. A tanker pilot flying autopilot off, however, probably just puts in yoke to keep the wings level (i.e. opposite the deflection of the boom).

Autopilot off A/R is kind of like flying along with someone at the other set of controls constantly putting in random trim inputs and stepping on the rudder without telling you. Which can make it difficult to fly a nice stable platform. So if the receiver pilot sucks, the tanker pilot's job gets harder and he will fly worse. And of course, if the tanker pilot sucks, the receiver pilot's job will get harder and he will fly worse. So it can sometimes be tough to assign blame on autopilot off AR, because it's a game of 'screw your buddy.' Autopilot ON, however, blame automatically goes to the receiver pilot or perhaps the boom operator (at least in my eyes, but of course I'm biased), because all the tanker pilot controls is the thrust setting. Provided he's not moving the throttles during the closure from precontact to contact, and provided he only moves them very small amounts very slowly at other times, the receiver should not see any major movements from the tanker.

Oh, one last word about the tanker autopilot for the few guys out there who are receivers: for turns, we have a roll knob that commands a bank angle on the autopilot, but the knob has a detent at 0 degrees of bank. In order to command a turn, you have to get the roll knob out of the detent and then move the knob to the desired bank angle (which we typically try to limit to 15 degrees with heavy receivers). We'll sometimes take fighters to 30 degrees of bank if we have to, but usually we try to keep them at 15 also. Anyways, we try to put in that bank slowly and smoothly by turning the knob slowly... unfortunately, right as the knob leaves the detent, the autopilot puts in the first 3 degrees of bank or so pretty rapidly. So if you are in the back tanking, you will probably see a "head-fake" to the left and then the left turn come in nice and slow. Same thing in reverse as we roll out of the turn: nice and slow to about 3 degrees of bank or so and then a quick whip back to 0, with possibly an overcorrection to 1-2 degrees of the opposite direction bank that quickly disappears. I wish there were some way to prevent that, but unfortunately that's the crappy 1970's technology that we're stuck with."

Slipping the surly bonds.

"Ray" #3 Right Wing
Virtual Thunderbirds, LLC

Offline Cobra516

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 259
      • Virtual Thunderbirds
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #50 on: October 22, 2012, 12:39:07 AM »
"Mike, from my eyes, it looked like the video began with the receiver at about 40 feet (from contact) with slight closure... so my guess is perhaps the video began after the precontact call. Most of the closure looked about right, i.e. from 40 feet to contact the speed looked good... but you are correct that he never arrested the closure rate as he hit approximately the contact position. So in general your diagnosis was pretty spot on, except for maybe the radio call piece. But I've seen a lot of AR from the back (any time I'm a spare pilot and the other 2 guys are flying), and from 40 feet to 5 feet short of contact (when you can see the shadow of the boom on the receptacle) they pretty much all look like that. In fact it is really common to hear a position correction call (forward 4 or back 2) immediately after contact because as guys try to stop their forward motion during the closure phase the airplane usually stops a couple of feet out of position either forward or back. I don't think that most boomers would have picked up anything wrong as they were making the contact, until just as the contact was made. Which was of course where these guys picked it up.

I think what probably caused the disconnect issue was the rapid raise of the boom (would have caused a slight increase in speed and a small but perceptible change in drag.. both producing a nose down force requiring more nose up trim) coupled by the correction from the E-3 after disconnect. I can't tell from the video if the E-3 pitched down at the disconnect and began a return to precontact, but that's what it looked like to me. From a forward position the autopilot would have had a lot of nose up trim, and as the receiver moved down it would have required much less nose up pretty quickly. So the first dip you see the receiver make was probably mostly receiver and probably the autopilot was still connected. As the autopilot disconnected, it probably did so in the nose up direction- remember nose up is the same as tail down. As that happens, the tanker's tail would have dropped pretty quickly, and that was probably where you saw the E-3 get high in the window. Right after that, the tanker pilot would have had his "oh " moment and begun pushing forward on the yoke to keep the large altitude deviation from happening, and now both receiver and tanker pilots would probably be overcontrolling significantly... which would have been the up/down oscillations that followed. "

"    No. The receiver pilot is always hand flying. As for the tanker, the tanker pilot can either hand fly, or fly with the autopilot connected with altitude hold mode ON and all navigation modes OFF (i.e., heading select mode and 'navigation' mode, OFF). In this case, it appears that the autopilot was connected until shortly after disconnect. Basically, in this autopilot mode, the autopilot controls up/down completely, and holds 0 degrees of bank. The tanker pilot is still responsible for setting the throttles and making small throttle corrections when the tanker gets off speed. Generally guys don't make much correction at all until they are 7-10 knots off speed, since every correction the tanker makes requires the receiver to make about 3 corrections. You also try to wait until after the contact or before the precontact call to make your speed corrections. The book says that speed corrections should not be made while the receiver is closing to the contact position, and should be delayed until the receiver has stabilized at contact (for all you receivers who wonder why the tanker guy changes his throttles as soon as you've gotten stabilized, that's why). Personally, if I've gotten off speed during the closure, which happens a lot as the boom operator moves the boom up and down and the trim has changed all over the place, I won't really do anything until after I'm 10 knots off, and then I move 2 of the throttles .5% N1 at a time and let that take effect.

    If a turn is required, you have to rotate the turn knob to the appropriate bank angle. See my post 2 above for the gripes about the silly roll knob."
Slipping the surly bonds.

"Ray" #3 Right Wing
Virtual Thunderbirds, LLC

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12798
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #51 on: October 22, 2012, 02:45:28 AM »
I thought for a second there you would say something like "be a victim  or be a survivor".


semp
Moronic post #3 out of you. Keep at it :aok

Offline deSelys

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2512
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #52 on: October 22, 2012, 05:16:27 AM »
From PPrune forums, military section:

Quote
...the 135 is notorious for its AP disconnecting if a large receiver moves too quickly in close proximity to the tanker's tail. The interaction of the aerodynamic forces can cause the AP to disconnect, almost always leaving the tanker with a nose-down pitching moment.

The incident probably started quite early-on when, as Beags points-out, the receiver didn't stabilize before the contact. He then went high in the envelope, boom initiated a disconnect, receiver moved quickly, AP disconnected, brown trousers all round.

So yes, the KC-135 did picth down but it was caused by the large receiver (E3) 'fast' relative movement.

Another website (http://theaviationist.com/2012/10/19/close-call-e3/) states that the E3 was damaged by the neg Gs violent pitch-down, with several casualties on board.

 :salute to people doing a job which doesn't tolerate mistakes much.
Current ID: Romanov

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

'I AM DID NOTHING WRONG' - Famous last forum words by legoman

Offline B4Buster

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4816
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #53 on: October 22, 2012, 07:04:59 AM »
As an avionics technician, your friend was most likely not a qualified tanker air crew member and may not have a complete understanding of how it actually transpires.  Please give him a hearty thanks for his service.   :salute

The receiver is not "pushing" on the tanker, unless the receiver exceeds physical boom limits in which case the tanker pilot may feel it.  The receiver is flying formation with tanker, approaches the pre-contact position, stabilizes, and is then cleared to the contact position by the boomer.  The boomer then flys the boom to the reciever's AR receptical and plugs in.  As long as the receiver pilot maintains the sweet spot in the boom envelope (splitting the green apple) there is no push on the tanker because the two aircraft are simply flying a stable formation with each other and connected by a somewhat flexible boom.  In the original thread video, the AWACS pilot appears to have exceeded the lateral boom limit, causing a brute force disconnect.

The tanker is typically on auto pilot at a constant airspeed and altitude in order to provide the most stable platform possible for the boomer and the receiver pilot to work with.


I was inclined to believe him as he spent many hours on a 135 and may not count for much, but is a very capable civilian pilot.
"I was a door gunner on the space shuttle Columbia" - Scott12B

Offline ACE

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5569
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #54 on: October 22, 2012, 07:08:37 AM »
Puma is one of the very few people on this board that has experiance with air to air refueling. He's a retired USAF F-106 and F-4 jock as well as a current airline pilot.
So he's been on the recieving end of the operation before and familiar with the process. How about you? You got anytime refueling inflight?
Nope.  As you can see I didn't voice my opinion about what happened. Just thought it was funny how Puma (me not knowing he had seat time doing this.) Was telling everyone they are wrong lol. 
Sixth Tri-Annual Dueling Bracket Champion

The Few

-Spek

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #55 on: October 22, 2012, 08:32:39 AM »
This discussion made me think of something I've always wondered about.

In the opening sequence of the movie Dr Strangelove, a B-52 is being refueled with a view out the boom window. The B-52 starts a side to side ocillation, then breaks away. It appears that the connection between the boom and the B-52 reached  a critical angle and "popped out". Can you guys tell if that was was happened or was that a "normal" disconnect?

63tb

Offline Shuffler

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27263
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #56 on: October 22, 2012, 09:16:44 AM »
Excellent info above!
« Last Edit: October 22, 2012, 09:31:23 AM by Shuffler »
80th FS "Headhunters"

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6795
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #57 on: October 22, 2012, 10:43:04 AM »
This discussion made me think of something I've always wondered about.

In the opening sequence of the movie Dr Strangelove, a B-52 is being refueled with a view out the boom window. The B-52 starts a side to side ocillation, then breaks away. It appears that the connection between the boom and the B-52 reached  a critical angle and "popped out". Can you guys tell if that was was happened or was that a "normal" disconnect?

63tb
What you describe is called a "brute force" disconnect.  In other words, neither the receiver pilot or the boomer initiated the disconnect, but the outer limits of the envelope were reached and the connection simply snapped apart.  Occasionally these happen in turbulent air but, most of the time are attributed to some ham fisting on the part of the receiver pilot.  During my F-106 tour, we had a pilot come back from AR sorties a couple of times with 3-4 feet of boom stuck in his refueling receptacle.  He happened to be our squadron cc.  Most of the guys were hesitant to go on AR sorties with him for fear of being part of the airshow.

Here's a BUF pilot showing what's possible while being hooked up.

The view from inside a heavy.

The view from a not so heavy.



« Last Edit: October 22, 2012, 11:06:21 AM by Puma44 »



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6795
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #58 on: October 22, 2012, 11:04:58 AM »
Was telling everyone they are wrong lol. 
I don't believe I told anyone they were wrong.  I was, however, attempting to describe what was most likely happening, based on experience. 

The autopilot disconnect is something I've not experienced.  From my experience, the tanker was always a rock solid platform, well except one hot August night on an Atlantic crossing with towering cumulonimbus clouds in our AR track.  But, that's a whole other story.....

Always nice to see that boomer's smiling face though.



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline B4Buster

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4816
Re: AWACS Refueling Close Call
« Reply #59 on: October 22, 2012, 12:12:19 PM »
I was, however, attempting to describe what was most likely happening, based on experience. 

The autopilot disconnect is something I've not experienced.  From my experience, the tanker was always a rock solid platform, well except one hot August night on an Atlantic crossing with towering cumulonimbus clouds in our AR track.  But, that's a whole other story.....

Always nice to see that boomer's smiling face though.

I thank you for the information, very interesting!

Those cumulus are towering for a reason; good idea to stay away from them if you're looking for a smooth ride.  :)
"I was a door gunner on the space shuttle Columbia" - Scott12B