| Author |
Message |
|
Meathook
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 12:37 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: May 14, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
|
Now I understand this might be old information to some of you, if so, I'm sorry to repeat it but for those of you that it is new information too (like me), then I am sure you will be as surprised as me to hear, if the computer fails, the pilot cant let himself out.
That sucks royal in my opinion, what a design flaw that is, I find it hard to believe no one thought of that, what a damn shame if they did and choose not to have one anyway.
All that money and time spent designing and no one thought of this pilot letting himself out...amazing (shameful too in my opinion).
This is a good one. I suppose there were thousands of engineers and managers at the Requirements, Preliminary & Critical Design Reviews, not to mention years of tests on the ground and in the air, plus the Production Readiness Reviews, but no one noticed there isn't a manual door handle inside?
Trapped in an F-22
"You've got to be kidding me….
there must be a handle in here somewhere!"
Quote:
The Self-Locking F-22
By Robert Bryce
Last week, Lockheed Martin announced that its profits were up a hefty 60 percent in the first quarter. The company earned $591 million in profit on revenues of $9.2 billion. Now, if the company could just figure out how to put a door handle on its new $361 million F-22 fighter, its prospects would really soar.
On April 10, at Langley Air Force Base, an F-22 pilot, Capt. Brad Spears, was locked inside the cockpit of his aircraft for five hours. No one in the U.S. Air Force or from Lockheed Martin could figure out how to open the aircraft's canopy. At about 1:15 pm , chainsaw-wielding firefighters from the 1st Fighter Wing finally extracted Spears after they cut through the F-22's three-quarter inch-thick polycarbonate canopy.
Total damage to the airplane, according to sources inside the Pentagon: $1.28 million. Not only did the firefighters ruin the canopy, which cost $286,000, they also scuffed the coating on the airplane's skin which will cost about $1 million to replace.
The Pentagon currently plans to buy 181 copies of the F-22 from Lockheed Martin, the world's biggest weapons vendor. The total price tag : $65.4 billion.
The incident at Langley has many Pentagon watchers shaking their heads. Tom Christie, the former director of testing and evaluation for the DOD, calls the F-22 incident at Langley "incredible." "God knows what'll happen next," said Christie, who points out that the F-22 has about two million lines of code in its software system. "This thing is so software intensive. You can't check out every line of code."
Now, just for the sake of comparison, Windows XP, one of the most common computer operating systems, contains about 45 million lines of code. But if any of that code fails, then the computer that's running it simply stops working. It won't cause that computer to fall out of the sky. If any of the F-22's two million lines of computer code go bad, then the pilot can die, or, perhaps, just get trapped in the cockpit.
One analyst inside the Pentagon who has followed the F-22 for years said that "Everyone's incredulous. They're asking can this really have happened?" As for Lockheed Martin, the source said, "Whatever the problem was, the people who built it should know how to open the canopy."
Given that the U.S. military is Lockheed Martin's biggest client, perhaps the company could provide the Air Force with a supply of slim jims or coat hangers, just in case another F-22 pilot gets stuck at the controls.
As if the latest canopy shenanigans weren't bad enough, on May 1, Defense News reported that there are serious structural problems with the F-22. Seems the titanium hull of the aircraft isn't meshing as well as it should. Naturally, taxpayers have to foot the bill for the mistake (improper heat-treating of the titanium) which is found on 90 aircraft. The cost of repairing those wrinkles? Another $1 billion or so.
Lockheed Martin's F-22 spokesman, Joe Quimby, did not return telephone calls.
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
156.62 KB |
| Viewed: |
11525 Time(s) |

|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: Nov 18, 2008 - 6:01 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Meathook
|
Posted: May 21, 2007 - 11:09 PM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
|
RoAF - I just found your article depicting this problem from last year, amazing this happen back in Feb 2006.
Sorry I posted it here too, I did not go back far enough to see if this had been discussed before but you nailed this issue over a year ago - good on ya but I hear the problem still exists today...sadly (I would not have posted it if I knew you had already covered it)...I apologize, your story first my man and a damn good one
Sorry if I resurfaced your old trend but what an amazingly sad story |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
checksixx
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 02:40 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 1035
Status: Offline
|
Reposted with incorrect information still...thats the shame here. The canopy was $80,000.00......total damage was under $140,000.00
The mechanism that secures/locks the canopy in place would not unlock from the securing points which are visible in the photo. |
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
200.18 KB |
| Viewed: |
11232 Time(s) |

|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Meathook
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 03:00 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
|
| Is there an an internal unlocking mechanism? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
parrothead
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 02:50 PM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: May 10, 2004
Posts: 3098
Status: Offline
|
Meathook,
Not sure about whether or not there's an internal unlocking mechanism, but the seat is zero/zero for those aircraft on fire incidents . Of course, I'd want to make sure my Raptor's outside the hangar when I mount up just in case...
Even if there had been in internal handle, it would not have mattered in the incident above where the canopy was cut. The Air Force worked for about five hours with Lockheed Martin trying everything from everywhere to no avail. The investigation following the incident found that several screws had backed out of their holes slightly, blocking the mechanism. |
_________________ No plane on Sunday, maybe be one come Monday...
www.parrotheadjeff.com
|
|
|
|
 |
|
checksixx
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 08:10 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 1035
Status: Offline
|
| Thanks parrothead...I forgot what the actual cause was when I replied earlier. Either way, the pilot was not in an emergency situation, so using the canopy jettison or ejecting would have caused WAAAAY more damage than just cutting him out. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Meathook
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 08:58 PM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
|
| Cool...things happen, I guess that is why they made that bumper sticker - thanks guys |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Lieven
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 10:06 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Webmaster

Joined: May 23, 2003
Posts: 2384
|
Just for additional reading, note that we have reported on this incident in:- <a href="news_article1768.html">Pilot trapped in F-22 cockpit after canopy failure</a> (April 25, 2006)
- <a href="news_article1815.html">Stuck F-22 canopy caused by loose screws</a> (May 26, 2006)
It has also been discussed in the thread:- <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-5251.html">Chainsaw and the Raptor</a>
Some of the associated photos were:
 The pilot of F-22 03-041 on April 10, 2006 awaiting rescue from the cockpit.
 Tape lines have been added to the canopy of F-22 03-041 to guide rescuers in cutting the canopy to free the trapped pilot.
 Debris littered the cockpit of F-22 Raptor 03-041 after maintence personnel were forced to cut the canopy to free the trapped pilot.
 Rescuers were forced to cut the canopy on F-22 03-041 to extract the pilot after the canopy failed to open by any other means.
 Rescuers extract the pilot of F-22A Raptor 03-4041 after cutting the canopy. The canopy was only cut as a last resort after all other options were exhausted.
 Debris littered the cockpit of F-22 Raptor 03-041 after maintenance personnel were forced to cut the canopy to free the trapped pilot.
 Debris littered the cockpit of F-22 Raptor 03-041 after maintence personnel were forced to cut the canopy to free the trapped pilot. |
Last edited by Lieven on May 23, 2007 - 07:23 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
 |
|
idesof
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 11:13 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 29, 2006
Posts: 640
Status: Offline
|
| Yep, yet more evidence of LM's tremendous engineering prowess. And still their profits shoot through the roof. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
checksixx
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 11:21 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 1035
Status: Offline
|
| For a new aircraft, its had relative few problems and only one crash. I'd still say its enjoying a good track record. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
idesof
|
Posted: May 22, 2007 - 11:36 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: May 29, 2006
Posts: 640
Status: Offline
|
Here's a dumb question: does the Pentagon ever buy weapons under warranty? One constantly reads about incidents like that above and various design flaws (such as with the Super Crapper, I mean Super Hornet) where it costs the Armed Forces millions if not billions of dollars to fix, with obviously the taxpayer footing the bill. Now, if in the case of the Super Bug and the above-mentioned incident, if it's an engineering issue or a manufacturing defect, why if it's a contractor's mess up do taxpayers have to pay for their incompetence and/or carelessness?
If military contractors are truly part of the private sector, and are not to be regarded as the beneficiaries of corporate welfare, why don't these companies play by private sector rules when it comes to the products they deliver to the end user, namely the Armed Forces?
:: Editted by moderator :: |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Meathook
|
Posted: May 23, 2007 - 12:02 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
|
Dont hold back...what's on your mind really  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Roscoe
|
Posted: May 23, 2007 - 12:02 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Jun 29, 2004
Posts: 988
Status: Offline
|
Officially, the government is self insured. Means we pay for accidents. As for warranty, (IIRC) if a design flaw is identified that somehow got past the myriads of design reviews, then there is often non-$$ compensation gleaned from the contractor. Example might be engineering drawings we did not originally pay for.
However, the key is that virtually no part of the airplane is designed without a government guy reviewing it and signing off on it. Makes it hard to blame the contractor. Now, does the guy know what he is approving? Usually, but not always... |
_________________ Roscoe
<b>"It's time to get medieval, I'm goin' in for guns"</b> - <i>Dos Gringos</i>
|
|
|
|
 |
|
habu2
|
Posted: May 23, 2007 - 12:06 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K

Joined: Sep 05, 2003
Posts: 2804
Location: ACES II
Status: Offline
|
Wow. Just wow. Idesof, you must think Lockheed is just be oozing corruption. Oh, wait....
You want your money back for FEMA's F-ups after Katrina?
You want your money back after KBR's waste in Iraq?
You want your money back from all those defaulted student loans? Fanny Mae foreclosures?
You want your federal bailout money back from American Airlines after they turned record profits last year?
I could go on..... |
_________________ Reality Is For People Who Can't Handle Simulation
|
|
|
|
 |
|
dwightlooi
|
Posted: May 23, 2007 - 02:51 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Aug 01, 2006
Posts: 1003
Status: Offline
|
| I would think that most ejection systems are 2-staged. That is it is usually possible to jettison the canopy explosively without actually firing the ejection seat subsequent to that. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|