Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DaYooper on August 04, 2005, 07:31:17 PM
-
It's a newer plane than we fly, but hey, it's still a fighter.
Check out this film. (http://www.ugoto.com/videos/go/birdcausesthisplanetocrash)
-
That sucks badly! Where was the airport hawk?
-
That bird sure did come in fast! Doesnt take long from time its hit till it hits ground. You could here the fear in one of the guy's voice. He wasnt looking forward to bailin.
-
Ouch.
-
Those guys handeled that like pros. Anyone know what plane it was? Surprised things like that don't happen more often on tkaeoffs/landings.
-
From the pitot on the nose, looked like a 2 seat F16.
-
Wow... birds are obviously under modeled in AH. Good work on the team getting the plane to an empty field.
-
I think that may have been a British Jaguar
-
Hey DaYooper I see you are in Alaska but use the name DaYooper.
Where are you from in the U.P?
Escanaba here!
-
I grew up in Houghton. Graduated in '82.
-
Heck, I have friends in Grayling. Small world, ain't it?
-
What puzzled me was that while all the "live" voices I heard were transatlantic (I have a hard time telling some Canadian and some American accents apart); the AI warning recording of "Gear not down!" was very clearly British.
That would rule out any F16 or F18; and what would a Yank be doing in a Jaguar??
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
From the pitot on the nose, looked like a 2 seat F16.
I think it was a Navy T-45 Goshawk.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Really? Who I probably know them. That or my wife does she knows everyone in this small town. I'm refered to as "Shannon's Husband".
-
Pyroman,
E-mail me at ajw308ATyahooDOTcom
AT=@
DOT=.
Simple fix for a human, tough for a bot searching for e-mails.
-
Likely a Bae Hawk at the NATO training facility in NewFoundland.
asw
-
This is just a guess, but I believe computer voices are usually Females or Voices with accents because people pay more attention than they would if it was an ordinary voice. When they originally designed the voices for these planes they used Females voices because the men flying the planes responded to them better. Also, at the time it was unusual to hear a woman’s voice over the radio, so when you heard it, you paid attention. I imagine now that women are common place in communications they use a British voice because it is not common place.
Oh and if im totally wrong and someone knows the real reason, feel free to flame me.
-
I heard the same explanation, BigR.
PETA would say that the plane caused this crash. I'm sure the investigation is underway...
-
Nope - Hawks are made by British Aerospace - that's why the voice alarm has a British accent ;)
It sounds like the actor Patrick Allen, who is (in)famous for his TV appearances and voice-overs (IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0020876/)). Many Brits will recall Allen from the original Barratt Homes advert when "he" parachutes from the corporate helicopter. He also did the apocalyptic voice-over in Frankie Goes to Hollywood's single "Two Tribes" during the 1980s. Fitting.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I think it was a Navy T-45 Goshawk.
My regards,
Widewing
Canadian Air Force Hawk trainer.
ack-ack
-
The plane here is a BA Hawk T1 - this happened over a year ago they were practicing touch and gos at cold lake, alberta when the bird hit - the pilot ended up with broken legs a broken pelvis and damaged vertibrae.
-
Definately falls into the catagory of 'Coulda been worse'.
I wish my instructor from 147 school was still at said school. He had a video of what an Osprey (the bird, not the helicopter with an indentity crisis) can do to a Cessna's windshield.
Lets just say, salsa on the passenger's seat, and no need for air conditioning for the remainder of the flight. Birds are nasty thing when they get into a fight with a plane going several orders faster than them.
-
I had a personal meeting with a Seagull over the statue of liberty back around Easter with my dad in the right seat. We were in a Mooney 201J doing about 160 down the hudson. Only saw it for a brief moment like in the video. Poor bastard impacted the left wing just above the stall fence. Left a nice greese stain, but there was no impact damage or even so much as a dent.
Might as well be Mooney iron works far as i'm concerned.
Wolf
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Might as well be Mooney iron works far as i'm concerned.
Wolf
:lol
I'm sure the bird would agree.
-
You got lucky. I'm going to see if I cant 'liberate' a picture of a T-38 that set infront of our airfield ops building for some four months, due to a basketball-sized hole that a pigeon left :eek:
-
SEEKER,
Canadians for the most part don't sound like Brits. They sound much the same as Americans, only they constantly say "hey" which sounds like they are saying the letter A. Of course there are the French (cough) Canadians, but they don't count. I know lots of Canadians from all over Canada and I have only heard a Canadian with a British accent once (he was British before becoming a Canadian citizen). Live amoungst the Brits for a year, you'll be able to understand everything they say. Just don't laugh at them if ask if you want to go have a studmuffin with them or they tell you to put your rubbers on because it's raining outside. If you haven't guessed it or know it already, a studmuffin is a cigarette and rubbers are rain boots. They actually have differnt spelling for tire. A tire to us is what we put on our cars but to Brits, it means they are getting tired. They spell tire (wheels), tyre..
As for the "what would a yank be doing in a Jaguar", that's simple enough to answer. It's called the "Foreign Pilot Exchange Program". We have this with a few different countries, most notably Germany.
BigR,
Yes, fighter planes in the US use female voices. Still do. We call it *****ing Betty. They won't change anytime soon though do to cost. I don't recall how much was paid for just one recording of the voice, but you could buy a couple of houses for just a single recording. There's more that goes into it then just the voice, such as incorperation into the hardware. It wasn't a digital recording, but it may be in the future.
The warnings are straight forward and to the point. Such as "Altitude, Altiude" or "Pull up, Pull up" or "Bingo, Bingo". Nothing is drawn out like you heard in this footage. There are also alerts that are by an audible alarm and associated lights with no *****ing Betty, other then "Warning, Warning" which causes the pilot to take a look around the cockpit to find out what light is on and what system is faulty.
Oh, if you watch and listen to the video really close at the end, you can hear the pilot grunt in discomfort as the seat starts leaving the jet and you can see the flare from the motor as the seat completely leaves.
Dinan,
Which pilot ended up injured, the instructor of the student? Judging by the video, I'd have to say the student..
-
May 18, 2004
REGINA (SNN) -- The military jet trainer that crashed near Moose Jaw Friday afternoon might have been brought down by a bird, the commander of the Canadian Forces' 15 Wing said Monday.
"What's being looked at is a bird strike -- the ingestion by the engine of a bird," Col. Alain Boyer said. "That's what the No. 1 theory is right now. That would explain the loss of thrust from the engine."
Canadian Forces Capt. John Hutt, the instructor aboard the Hawk trainer, and the student, flight Lieut. Ed Morris of Britain's Royal Air Force, both ejected at about 300 meters.
Morris was unhurt and was back at the base Friday night, but Hutt is in Saskatoon's Royal University Hospital with a broken leg, Boyer said Monday. "He was operated on last night."
Investigating the crash is a team of about 10 people, including personnel from the Canadian Forces Directorate of Flight Safety, the Aerospace Engineering and Test Establishment at Cold Lake, Alta., and specialists in medicine and safety systems.
15 Wing's 19 remaining Hawk aircraft were briefly grounded, but were back in service Monday, said Boyer.
The loss of the Hawk jet will not affect the base's training schedule because losses through attrition were built into the original order for aircraft, he added.
The crash of the CT-155 Hawk occurred late Friday afternoon as the aircraft was doing "touch-and-go" landings. In these, a crew practises landings by lining up on a runway, reducing speed and altitude until it is just above the runway, then applying power, gaining altitude and climbing away.
The aircraft crashed about two kilometres northwest of the base, which itself is located south of Moose Jaw's southern city limits.
The Hawk is used for advanced jet pilot training under the NATO Flight Training in Canada program at 15 Wing, which trains pilots from the United Kingdom, Denmark, Italy, Hungary and Singapore as well as Canada.
The plane: http://ipmslondon.tripod.com/referencearticles/id33.html
-C+
-
Here Ya Go, Click! (http://www.airforce.dnd.ca/dfs/docs/Fti/CT155202_e.asp)
I saw this a few weeks ago. Enjoy
-
Dumb question from non pilot: Was there never a thought of ditching or even landing? If bird hit on approach, would think that would be first choice. If bird hit on go-around, maybe not.
It's just that on touch and go's, wouldn't the emphasis on landings make successful recovery from a bird strike more likely?
-
If the ITT exceeds limits, which at 660 * it was way over limits, there is a imminent fire danger. Magnesium once it starts burning you cannot put out - and by the time you land on the ground, usually the entire aircraft is engulfed. Punching out was the correct decision.
Wolf
-
Wolfa, only the brakes contain magnisium and the temperatures have to exceed 700 Deg F to even be concidered as 'HOT BRAKES'. In other words, the brakes will glow bright orange. No where in a turbine engine will you find a magnisium part.
What you call "ITT" is probably better known to US pilots as "FTIT" or Fan Turbine Inlet Temperture and all engines types have a specific limit. It is rare for an engine fire to start in this area of a turbine engine.
Halo, the reason they ejected vs ditching is based on altitude and airspeed. They had very little of both (3,000 ft as indicated on the HUD display, couldn't see airspeed). It would have been unsafe to attempt to ditch due to the lack of airspeed and a safe glidesloop, not to mention there was probably very little to no response to flight control inputs. The pilots also have to follow the flight manual. They did an outstanding job just getting the plane in an area so as to not threaten lives or property other then the aircraft itself. Your question was not dumb btw. Also realize that the approach is one of the most dangerous parts of landing. No room for error in the case of a bird strick that takes out the engine on a single engine fighter.
-
Repoman, I had to watch and listen to the footage again after reading the article. Something about the article sounded wrong. Naturally they heard a thump, which came from the damage the bird caused, not the bird itself. It's also the reason they would feel some vibrations as the engine was no longer balanced. At that point, the pitch change, which you can hear in the video, is the engine whinding down. I also clearly heard the crew attempt a restart of the engine, which failed.
If you watch the video, you can see that the pitch of the aircraft went nose high right after the bird went bye bye. This was not mentioned in the article. After that, the pilot didn't just sacrafice airspeed for altitude, he did what had to be done to eject at a survivable altitude. Any lower and both the student and the IP would have been in far worse condition then just the broken leg.
I doubt if I can get any indepth engine information for the engine which a Rolls-Royce Mk.871 Adour turbofan, but I'd love to find out what the area's are that the article mentioned (T6NL & ECA), but if I had to guess, T6 would be the combustion section of the engine and the NL stands for No lite. I'm not sure what ECA stands for. Pratt and Whittney engines use different terms and that's what I'm used to working on.
-
AW,
Magnesium is not in the engine, but in the sections around the tailpipe. I dunno if you've seen what happens when you have an uncontained engine failure and stuff starts burning - thankfully this one didn't blow itself apart. But a few months ago a guy here posted up a Mig29 on airshow practice back in May this year that threw a few blades. Despite going 200 kts, it took less then 45 seconds for the entire empenage to get engulfed. Point being - most SOP's call for punch out if there is any fire. Or goes something to the point "see if fire gets worse, if it does, leave." A 5lb bottle of C02 isn't gonna do much in that case.
Wolf
-
The bird is a vulcher right ?
-
Wolf, do you have experience working on turbine engines? Including this particular Rolls engine, because I'm curious to know what T6NL is. I took a guess, best I could do.
-
Originally posted by Enduro
I heard the same explanation, BigR.
PETA would say that the plane caused this crash. I'm sure the investigation is underway...
LOL...
In a past life I was a real pilot and sucked in a bird on approach to Rhinelander Wisconsin in a Saab 340. Lost the engine asap over the outer marker with a heavy crosswind....NOT fun
-
Originally posted by ~Pyroman~
Hey DaYooper I see you are in Alaska but use the name DaYooper.
Where are you from in the U.P?
Escanaba here!
mom was born and raised in gladstone, father escanaba.
was just there 2 weekends ago visiting mothers grave.
still have an aunt and uncle in esky.
other aunt / uncle and 2 cousins in neguanee.
-
AW,
I just pasted a link from another site where I saw the crash video. I know nothing of turbine engines except to keep my Cessna away from them on the ground and in the air. I have seen whet a bird can do to a prop so I can imagine what kinda mayhem it caused inside that engine. Sorry I am no more help.....
-
Originally posted by AWwsky
Wolf, do you have experience working on turbine engines? Including this particular Rolls engine, because I'm curious to know what T6NL is. I took a guess, best I could do.
I don't have experience on RR engines, short of an Allison V1710-35 on a P39D, but my uncle works for GE and troubleshoots their turbines (i.e. why they've gone through 4 hydro pumps in 700 hours - kinda thing). He knows RR pretty well from his time in the Navy - i'll drop him an email.
Wolf
-
What kinds of design specs do they have regarding birdstrikes on those things? I know that when my dad worked for GE Aircraft Engines, one of his tasks was to fire dead birds out of a pneumatic cannon into F-15 and B-1 engines to be sure they could take the impact. I'll show him this next time I see him and see what he's got to say.
Are those Hawk engines not rated for birdstrikes, or was this just a fluke?
-
Bird!!!!!
DUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Tarmac, it's all dependent on the size of the bird that goes up the intake then into the engine. Small birds might cause a few knicks in the blades, but large birds like Hawks, Eagles, Turkey Vultures or even chickens cause a lot of damage and in most cases will cause a compressor stall or flameout. The engines found in the F-15 (also in the F-16) are F100-PW series turbines. This includes the 200, 220, 220E, and 229, but there may be newer engines since the 229 came out. But unlike the F-15, the F-16 also uses the GE engines. These engines turn at higher RPM's then what commercial airliners engines do and are more likely to be damaged by a large bird impacting the blades. Not all the blades turn. There are rotar and stator blades in both the compresor and the exhaust sections and are usually refered to as stages (i.e. first set of blades would stage one). Engines are not gauged by RPM's, but by Percent. Idle engine power is between 68 - 72% while full military power is 100% (this includes after burner as well).
I'd love to go into more detail, but I don't know if you'd just get more confused or just bored from the reading, so I'll stop there. Also, note that I stated the F-15 has the PW engines. The F-15 was designed to use both the GE and PW, but cost and fuel consumption made the PW more ideal. The F-16 uses both.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
What kinds of design specs do they have regarding birdstrikes on those things? I know that when my dad worked for GE Aircraft Engines, one of his tasks was to fire dead birds out of a pneumatic cannon into F-15 and B-1 engines to be sure they could take the impact. I'll show him this next time I see him and see what he's got to say.
Are those Hawk engines not rated for birdstrikes, or was this just a fluke?
Its not so much a fluke as it is bad luck. Just because something is tolorent of a bird strike doesn't mean its going to keep on operating like there is nothing wrong. Also, keep in mind they were operating at a high power setting, right after rotation, and that wasn't a sparrow or a pidgeon, but a fairly good size seagull which weigh's a few kilos atleast. The RR doesn't have much if any bypass like the F100X on the F15 or even the motor on the B1. The other thing is the design of the engine - 1 axial and 1 centrifugal compressor. A pure axial design that you see on most airliners atleast affords some margin for the bird effluent to pass through. But a centfugal design gurantee's it goes through the entire thing.
When you take into account the significant amount of energy in K-joules imparted by the bird, and the small space the engine affords and the tolerences and clearences it has to operate within - it doesn't surprise me in the least bit.
On a different but similar note - many years ago while I was training we had a Kingair 200 come into Danbury connecticut. On short final it took out 21 geese, trashed both engines - and was generally miraculous it got down. If you had seen what happened to this bird, it looked like a massacar through a blood ridden hailstorm - literally it was shot to ****. If these guys were taking off, Danbury has no bailout areas to ditch. They were good as dead. So these guys are lucky they had Martin Baker on their side, even if it was only for 1 bird.