| Author |
Message |
|
SGTICEMAN
|
Posted: Apr 05, 2009 - 02:34 PM
|
|
|
Newbie

Joined: Jan 19, 2008 - 02:52 PM
Posts: 1
Status: Offline
|
ROKAF will resume KF-16 flights as of 6 April 2009.
KF16D #92-4048 (123FS, 20FW) was crashed in Yellow Sea at 31 March 2009.
This mishap a not cause of airframe trouble. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: May 21, 2013 - 8:27 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
darkvarkguy
|
Posted: Apr 05, 2009 - 06:11 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Mar 05, 2009 - 06:01 AM
Posts: 366
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
|
| Tough couple of weeks for ROKAF. I'm glad both guys got out safely. |
_________________ FB-111A Pease AFB 82-87
A-10A Suwon AB ROK 87-88
FB-111A/F-111G Pease AFB 88-90
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gamera
|
Posted: May 26, 2009 - 05:09 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 23, 2005 - 08:54 AM
Posts: 663
Status: Offline
|
] 31 March 2009:
] KF-16D Block 52N. 92-4048.
http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20090 ... 55-yonh-kr
On 22 May 2009, the ROKAF proclaimed the accident cause was human mistake. The accident occurred during a normal training flight to practise climbing at slow speed to lose lift, then recovering the plane just before it stalled.
During the accident, while climbing at slow speed, the trainee pilot in the front seat was late to initiate recovery. The instructor pilot in the back seat recognised their problem, took control, and tried to recover; but speed rapidly dropped, and stalled.
The plane was inverted and uncontrollable at 5,700 m ASL; and the pilots punched out at 1,740 m ASL.
Debris/wreck were salvaged for investigation. Front fuselage and rear wings were damaged, but both wings and fuselage seemed in excellent condition.
Mechanical cause/problem was improbable.
(Yahoo! South Korea News probably has articles, with more details, from the original source Yon Hap News.)
http://kr.news.yahoo.com/service/news/s ... wssetid=82
http://kr.news.yahoo.com/service/news/s ... wssetid=82
Illustrations of the accident/stall.
(Seeing is believing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gamera
|
Posted: Aug 24, 2009 - 04:48 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 23, 2005 - 08:54 AM
Posts: 663
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gamera
|
Posted: Dec 19, 2009 - 02:02 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 23, 2005 - 08:54 AM
Posts: 663
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
geogen
|
Posted: Dec 20, 2009 - 03:12 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Mar 11, 2008 - 03:28 PM
Posts: 2804
Location: 45 km offshore, New England
Status: Offline
|
Thanks again for your invaluable info to F16.net, Gamera. Interesting reading always.
edit: I apologize for the Off-Topic. Thanks for link. |
_________________ The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Last edited by geogen on Dec 20, 2009 - 05:12 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gamera
|
Posted: Dec 20, 2009 - 04:22 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 23, 2005 - 08:54 AM
Posts: 663
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
popcorn
|
Posted: Dec 20, 2009 - 03:58 PM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Sep 24, 2008 - 09:55 AM
Posts: 2033
Status: Offline
|
|
Gamera wrote:
] 31 March 2009:]
The plane was inverted and uncontrollable at 5,700 m ASL; and the pilots punched out at 1,740 m ASL.
I'm a layman and obviously can't appreciate the pickle the pilots found themselves in but they were more than 3 miles above sea level which strikes me as pretty high up and just maybe enough height to effect a recovery. Or is this situation something that test pilots never tried emulating during the development and testing of the Viper? Could the FCS be programmed to automatically recover from such a scenario? Just curious. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
LinkF16SimDude
|
Posted: Dec 21, 2009 - 05:31 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Jan 31, 2004 - 07:18 PM
Posts: 2365
Status: Offline
|
Not a whole lotta specifics there but it sounds like they tried to do a simple approach to a stall and got themselves into an upright deep stall. But in the process of rocking outta that, they may not have arrested the nose falling thru the vertical fast enough and it snapped into an inverted deep stall, which is even scarier than the upright 'cause of the negative G and that wicked spin. Generally the safety rules state that if you haven't recovered and regained control by a set altitude that you must eject. For USAF it used to be 10,000 ft. ASL and may still be. Those guys punched at just under 6000 ASL, so they cut it real close.
popcorn wrote:
...is this situation something that test pilots never tried emulating during the development and testing of the Viper?
Deep stalls have been known about for years and not just in the Viper world. Edwards had (and maybe still does) a program where line pilots went up in a spin chute-equipped jet and flew or were flown into a deep stall so they knew what to do. Not sure if the Eddie techs had to tweak the jet to facilitate the stall entry tho.
We trained both kinds of deep stall recoveries in the sims at Tucson by moving the fuel balance and CG around. We also had a preset that put you in it immediately and could make it recoverable or non-recoverable. Had to show 'em that even though they did all they could to rescue the jet, you have to know when it's time to part ways with it.
Check out what Obi Gums had to say about deep stalls in the Viper back in '04 here (second entry down). |
_________________ Why does "monosyllabic" have 5 syllables?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
popcorn
|
Posted: Dec 21, 2009 - 06:36 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Sep 24, 2008 - 09:55 AM
Posts: 2033
Status: Offline
|
| Thanks Link.. tried to absorb what you and Gums wrote. Lucky crew. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Gamera
|
Posted: Jun 13, 2010 - 08:41 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 23, 2005 - 08:54 AM
Posts: 663
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Boman
|
Posted: Jun 13, 2010 - 11:38 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Jul 08, 2004 - 08:22 PM
Posts: 1106
Status: Offline
|
CCIP is an improvement program, under which both Block 40's and Block 50's are brought up to the same technical standard. Search the site, and you will find quite a few articles and discussion on it.
PACAF Vipers were upgraded in Korea, hence the milestone marker |
_________________ Best regards
Niels
http://s587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/NC-Boman/
|
|
|
|
 |
|
AfterburnerDecalsScott
|
Posted: Jun 14, 2010 - 01:27 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: May 10, 2005 - 07:45 PM
Posts: 1246
Status: Offline
|
|
Gamera wrote:
http://kr.news.yahoo.com/service/news/shellview.htm?articleid=20100610152308671a3&linkid=4&newssetid=1352
http://kr.news.yahoo.com/service/news/s ... setid=1352
"The successful completion of USAF F-16 CCIP Program
9 Jun 2010
Korean Air
USAF"
In this case, what's this "CCIP"?
(The only CCIP that I knew is the "death dot" reticle in the HUD in air-to-ground mode...)
Man that's a weird looking picture...I'd swear that was a photoshop job with a model, except it has the JHMCS sensor that distinguishes a Block 40 CCIP jet.
I Still think it looks like a model though.... |
_________________ More people have died driving with Ted Kennedy than hunting with Dick Cheney.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Butcher
|
Posted: Jun 14, 2010 - 04:48 AM
|
|
|
Active Member

Joined: Jun 21, 2008 - 06:37 AM
Posts: 104
Location: Larnaca, Cyprus
Status: Offline
|
Check the root of the vertical tail, it has no antennae. Also the vertical tail is also missing that small thing at the middle top. Also no serial number. It could be photochopped.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
madrat
|
Posted: Jun 14, 2010 - 06:11 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Mar 03, 2010 - 03:12 AM
Posts: 986
Status: Offline
|
| You can normally spot a PS job by the file properties. The shadow on the airplane from it's canopy is a different angle than the shadows of the people. The airplane is in sharp focus; uncanny the lens would have such super capabilities. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|