Commander Naval Air Forces wants more F/A-18s

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 00:56

spazsinbad wrote:AFAIK hyperbaric chamber training for aircrew has been discontinued for some time. Why? Because it is dangerous. However training is done otherwise; whilst USN Hornet crews are trained specifically about hypoxia symptoms with special gear. This was covered in another forum thread and I have a bunch of info about it. I guess it could be posted here - if not again....

I understand your mention of the hyperbaric chamber to perhaps relieve symptoms however AFAIK we do not know about injuries suffered by the crew in this accident.

Hyberbaric Oxygen Chambers are still used to treat De-Compression Sickness (DCS). Still don't know if that was the actual condition that injured the crew.

Hypobaric (Altitude) Chambers were used to train aircrews in hypoxia awareness, and emergency procedures (e.g for U-2 crews) but with the exception of U-2 crew and some test pilots, they stopped requiring actual altitude chamber training. F-22 pilots may still be required to go in the altitude chamber. Part of the reason was the chambers got so old, as to become a major safety risk. Another reason is that sudden decompression in the chamber is still quite dangerous.

F/A-18 and most other fighter crews now use a Reduced Oxygen Breathing Device (RODB) for hypoxia awareness training. RODB training also helps crew identify toxic hypoxia, which isn't nearly as obvious as a sudden decompression.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 01:32

neurotech wrote:Hypobaric (Altitude) Chambers were used to train aircrews in hypoxia awareness, and emergency procedures (e.g for U-2 crews) but with the exception of U-2 crew and some test pilots, they stopped requiring actual altitude chamber training. F-22 pilots may still be required to go in the altitude chamber. Part of the reason was the chambers got so old, as to become a major safety risk. Another reason is that sudden decompression in the chamber is still quite dangerous.

Shouldn't that be "sudden recompression"? I don't see how a low pressure chamber would suddenly "decompress". That's the kind of thing that happens when a high pressure chamber fails.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 01:32

What 'neurotech' said - I'll get my PDF ready soonish. And 'count_to_ten' we knew what he meant.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

wolfpak

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 121
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 02:22

I should have posted this along with my comments.

http://www.travis.af.mil/About-Us/Fact- ... department
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 02:56

count_to_10 wrote:
neurotech wrote:Hypobaric (Altitude) Chambers were used to train aircrews in hypoxia awareness, and emergency procedures (e.g for U-2 crews) but with the exception of U-2 crew and some test pilots, they stopped requiring actual altitude chamber training. F-22 pilots may still be required to go in the altitude chamber. Part of the reason was the chambers got so old, as to become a major safety risk. Another reason is that sudden decompression in the chamber is still quite dangerous.

Shouldn't that be "sudden recompression"? I don't see how a low pressure chamber would suddenly "decompress". That's the kind of thing that happens when a high pressure chamber fails.

No. The chamber is "pressurized" to cabin altitude equivalent, then rapidly decreases pressure to simulate high altitude at ambient pressure.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 03:19

27 PDF pages attached about Tall Tales But True From The Legendary Past: Acceleration Atelectasis in the A-4 & F-22 +
HEAVENS TO MURGATROID, My Pilot has Decompression Sickness!
May-June 2013 LT. ADAM VANDENBOOGAARD; APPROACH - USN Flight Safety Magazine

"...Decompression sickness (DCS) — one of seven “land as soon as possible” emergencies in the EA-6B Prowler and arguably the least understood — was not something any of our four crew members had expected to encounter...."

Source: http://www.public.navy.mil/comnavsafece ... ay-Jun.pdf
Attachments
Hypoxia USN shornets+acceleration atelectasisPP27.pdf
(5.58 MiB) Downloaded 631 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post22 Dec 2016, 05:16

neurotech wrote:
Hypobaric (Altitude) Chambers were used to train aircrews in hypoxia awareness, and emergency procedures (e.g for U-2 crews) but with the exception of U-2 crew and some test pilots, they stopped requiring actual altitude chamber training. F-22 pilots may still be required to go in the altitude chamber. Part of the reason was the chambers got so old, as to become a major safety risk. Another reason is that sudden decompression in the chamber is still quite dangerous.

F/A-18 and most other fighter crews now use a Reduced Oxygen Breathing Device (RODB) for hypoxia awareness training. RODB training also helps crew identify toxic hypoxia, which isn't nearly as obvious as a sudden decompression.


Sounds like things may have changed, but when I went through API/Pensacola, we still had to do the chamber ride. IIRC they only depressurized you to 18,000 ft, which is where the risk factor for DCS exponentially increases above. Have done ROBD during recurring physiology/swim survival training though. Not sure about the toxic hypoxia part, as they don't introduce toxins into the O2 flow, they just reduce the O2 concentration over time. I suppose the symptoms would be similar in any case though. From multiple ROBD rides, I know that I personally have very minimal symptoms until my blood-oxygen level is very low and I am near clinical incapacitation.

As for the rest of the discussion, HYPERbaric chambers are used to medically treat things like DCS, or for divers, the "bends". There are actually a lot of them around the country, and around the world, in major regional hospitals. HYPObaric chambers are much more uncommon, and are purely for exposing aircrew to the effects of decompression, as well as medical studies, and primarily govt or DoD operated in the US.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post04 Jan 2017, 17:47

:devil: One could say the 'CMDR NavAirForce' is TRUMP so that he is the 'TWITtererInChief' but I AM NOT THAT ONE! :doh:
2017 Forecast: Trump Is The Navy’s Best Friend
04 Jan 2017 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"...His [Trump] personal intervention in programs like Air Force One and the F-35 has alarmed the Air Force....

...The one time the Navy might have gotten caught in the Twitter crossfire, moreover, it came off unscathed. When Trump took aim at Lockheed’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Navy, Marines, and Air Force all had planes at stake. But the Navy’s F-35C variant is the one being introduced at the slowest pace, so any Trump-induced disruptions to the program will hurt the sea service less than Air Force or Marines.

What’s more, Trump’s suggested alternative to the F-35, the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, happens to a Navy plane. The Marines considered buying Super Hornets but decided not to, instead retaining their aging F-18A/B/C/D Hornets — which have since become a maintenance nightmare — until the arrival of the F-35B, whose jump-jet capabilities are critical to future Marine operations. The Air Force never even considered the Super Hornet and would fight it until their last legislative liaison died from overwork: The F/A-18 would require an all-new maintenance and supply chain, it’s optimized for carrier operations rather than land bases, and it lacks stealth. But the Navy has been buying Super Hornets for two decades, and many admirals would gladly take more, even at the price of delaying the F-35C. And it’s clear the President-Elect will be more than receptive to Navy requests for Super Hornets....

...It’s impossible to say whether Trump held his fire on the Ford and LCS because he didn’t know about their problems, didn’t care, or decided both ships were worth buying anyway. His silence may well end as Congress keeps the pressure on both programs and he feels compelled to chime in as Twitterer-in-Chief. But until Trump changes course — which he’s very capable of doing — his administration is blowing only fair winds for the US Navy.It’s impossible to say whether Trump held his fire on the Ford and LCS because he didn’t know about their problems, didn’t care, or decided both ships were worth buying anyway. His silence may well end as Congress keeps the pressure on both programs and he feels compelled to chime in as Twitterer-in-Chief. But until Trump changes course — which he’s very capable of doing — his administration is blowing only fair winds for the US Navy."

Source: http://breakingdefense.com/2017/01/2017 ... st-friend/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1361
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post09 Jan 2017, 16:32

It's not news, but I thought it was interesting given who it came from - Captain Scott Farr, the CO of the USN Pacific Fleet's Electronic Warfare Wing mentions in this interview that the F-35A has "significant" mission overlap and electronic warfare capabilities.

An excerpt of that interview (the statements come in the final 1/3 of the video):
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Jan 2017, 23:34

OVER on previous page this thread I mentioned FULL HOT in the A-4 Emergency - speak o' the devil and his chains rattle...

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=52254&p=358575&hilit=NATOPS#p358575
Too Hot to Handle
2016 LCDR DEREK ASHLOCK, VFC-111 Approach-MECH Vol.61, No. 3

"As a seasoned aviator, during Operation Desert Storm I had my fair share of emergencies. From losing an engine and performing a single-engine approach at the boat several times, to losing a leading edge flap inflight, I have an extensive experience dealing with situations outside the norm. Recently I encountered an event that quickly progressed from bad to worse.

I was leading a light division out of Key West (consisting of me in an F-5N and two Hawker Hunters on the 7 a.m. SFARP launch to act as red air strikers. Taking off from RW 32, power-up and wipe-out were normal and the ECS flow felt normal as did the temperature. After a normal acceleration and takeoff —promptly as the gear came up and locked— and upon turning to our assigned heading, the ECS went past what I would consider normal full flow.

With the amount and velocity of the air coming out of the diffusers, I couldn't hear the radios. It was even more concerning that the temperature was something akin to a blowtorch and as if one wasn’t enough, I immediately knew the combination of both was a serious situation. Initially trying to deflect the air blast coming from the right diffuser, the air was so hot that I could not hold my gloved hand over the airflow.

The outer control rings that meter airflow on the left canopy were literally too hot to touch so I could not turn them down or off, let alone divert their direction. I was amazed that flames were not accompanying the extraordinarily high temperature.

Mental note No. 1, "Golly, this is more serious than just hot air..."

Climbing through 1,500 feet armed with only my system knowledge because there is no procedure for this in NATOPS, I manually selected man cold to remove the auto temperature logic from the system. Knowing full well the advertised time required to effect change could be north of a minute, I gave it its due effort as much as I was able. After holding the toggle for 10 or 15 seconds with no change to flow or temperature, the heat building up in the cockpit was rapidly approaching unbearable. I abandoned this step and proceeded to my next course of action. Mental note No. 2, "If RAM/DUMP doesn't work quickly, I’m going to have to jettison the canopy very, very soon..."

After reducing power, leveling at 2,500 feet and selecting RAM/DUMP on the pressurization switch, the amount and velocity of air coming through the system began to reduce but the temperature remained extremely hot. I could now hear the radio and I asked my Hawker Hunter wingman to back me up with my thought process as he was also qualified in the F-5N. He came back immediately with the same procedures I already had completed and that I was not trailing smoke or on fire. It was reassuring that I had acted properly and hadn't caused this myself or, even worse, forgot some simple step along the way. As mentioned before, there is no procedure in the F-5 NATOPS about runaway cockpit airflow/ temperature. With the airflow reduced and the temperature still hot but bearable, I passed the lead to the Hawker Hunter to press to the area and complete the red air presentation while I declared an emergency and coordinated my return to base with approach. I then spoke to my squadron ODO on AUX frequency who was brand new and on his first time on the desk. Confirming there was nothing in NATOPS to aid in my situation, I told him my game plan and then returned my attention to tower to alert them of my situation. I informed them of my problem and that I had it under control and would adjust my gross weight 5 miles south of the field. As the Tiger does not have a fuel dump system, I did a few afterburner 360s and landed with a 4.0 on the fuel on a 7,000 foot runway without issues.

Post-flight maintenance inspection discovered the bleed air regulator valve had failed to fully open, so full bleed air was coming into the cockpit directly from the engine. The extreme temperature of several hundred degrees and overwhelming velocity ultimately made sense. So, what are my takeaways?

First, I have had my fair share of emergencies, but haven't had an emergency ramp up as fast to a near desperation level (consideration of jettisoning the canopy) in a matter of seconds before. The amount of airflow and heat was beyond my imagination. With no NATOPS procedures, only system knowledge that the RAM/DUMP switch would cease engine airflow to the cockpit and evacuate the extremely hot air aided me in handling this unique (to the F-5), situation.

Second, CRM was my friend. From communicating with my wingman for procedural backup and a visual inspection, to engaging our ODO to dig into NATOPS, to being directive with tower about my game plan, good crew resource management was a key factor in resolving this emergency in a safe, timely and efficient manner. Lastly, with the historically volatile weather in the Florida Keys, I caught a break with basic VFR conditions. Had the weather been less than optimum, the attention that was required in the cockpit to battle the extreme heat could have led to disastrous results. Often, as naval aviators we launch in less than ideal weather conditions, hardly pausing at the thought that bad things could happen let alone happen in a rapid manner. I have run the scenario through my head in bad weather or at night, and am thankful to have had this emergency during daylight and VFR conditions."

Source: http://www.public.navy.mil/NAVSAFECEN/D ... 61_No3.pdf (4.7Mb)
Attachments
USN F-5Ns.jpg
Last edited by spazsinbad on 10 Jan 2017, 00:53, edited 1 time in total.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Jan 2017, 00:10

2 Navy Growler Aircrew Members Injured in December Still in Hospital
06 Jan 2016 Hal Bernton

"Two Navy aircrew who suffered severe injuries Dec. 16 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island have not been released from Harborview Medical Center in Seattle.

The pilot and an electronic-warfare officer were preparing to take off on a training mission in an EA-18G Growler jet when the transparent enclosure over the cockpit -- known as the canopy -- separated from the aircraft.

The Navy has not released the names of the two crew, citing privacy reasons, according to Cmdr. Jeannie Groeneveld, a Naval Air Forces spokeswoman.

One of the crew is in satisfactory condition but "has a ways to go," while the other is serious and improving in intensive care, according to Susan Gregg, hospital spokeswoman....

...The incident occurred as the crew was preparing to take off. The canopy, which is supposed to seal over a pressurized cockpit, instead came off the aircraft.

The Naval Safety Center, in a brief report, said that canopy "exploded" but Groeneveld said the incident did not involve any fire or smoke.

The incident may have been related to a water wash that the aircraft had undergone during frigid temperatures, so washing procedures were reviewed during the operational pause by other flight crews.

Groeneveld said a Navy investigation of the incident is "ongoing."..."

Source: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... pital.html
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 07:32

Restoring Afloat Readiness is Top Navy Unfunded Priority
26 Jan 2017 RICHARD R. BURGESS

"...Next on the list is a need for 24 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike fighters ($2.32 billion), needed to bridge the readiness gap until the F-35C Lightning II strike fighter is in the fleet in significant numbers...."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/201 ... unded.html
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 08:11

$97M a pop per SH.
Good to know then that Boeing says the ASH will cost $80M at the most.. :mrgreen: must be one of those alternative facts' we keep hearing about.

"Additionally, Gillian said the Advanced Super Hornets would not cost much more than the current F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, which run around $70 million a piece. Even if that price rose $10 million, it would still be cheaper than the cheapest expected F-35s, which come in at $85 million...."
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 10:27

EA-18G Growler Crew Saved By Portland-Based PJs After Canopy Explosion
23 Jan 2016 UNK

"A WALL OF TEXT But interesting nevertheless...."

Source: http://hrana.org/articles/2017/01/ea-18 ... explosion/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 10:47

Good to know the fortuitous presence of PJs and that one crew member has been released from hospital and his buddy expected to join him in the coming weeks.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests