| Author |
Message |
|
quicksilver
|
 Posted: Nov 19, 2011 - 04:24 AM
|
 
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Feb 16, 2011 - 01:30 AM
Posts: 605
Status: Offline
|
|
maus92 wrote:
Quote:
Wrong again shipmate -- to wit, "...BF-5 was the only STOVL variant scheduled to complete more vertical landings this year."
I guess i'm wrong - maybe. Was BF-5 originally scheduled to complete all these tests, or was it because the other aircraft were limited because of structural issues? You can only schedule aircraft that are up, and without squawks that preclude an evolution. .
Give up the denial dude. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: May 23, 2013 - 10:51 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
maus92
|
|
Posted: Nov 19, 2011 - 11:53 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: May 21, 2010 - 06:50 PM
Posts: 1187
Location: Annapolis, MD
Status: Offline
|
|
quicksilver wrote:
maus92 wrote:
Quote:
Wrong again shipmate -- to wit, "...BF-5 was the only STOVL variant scheduled to complete more vertical landings this year."
I guess i'm wrong - maybe. Was BF-5 originally scheduled to complete all these tests, or was it because the other aircraft were limited because of structural issues? You can only schedule aircraft that are up, and without squawks that preclude an evolution. .
Give up the denial dude.
One thing that can't be denied is BF-2 is under repair and BF-4 cannot perform VL's due to the cracks. These are the same two planes that landed on the Wasp in October.
"The cracks were discovered about a month after BF-2 and BF-4 completed a series of shipboard vertical landings on the USS Wasp, an LHD-class amphibious carrier.
"BF-4 has also developed "hairline" cracks in the same part, but is continuing to fly in conventional mode only until the part is modified, the programme said." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spazsinbad
|
|
Posted: Nov 20, 2011 - 12:10 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K
Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7855
Location: OZ
|
|
|
|
|
|
maus92
|
|
Posted: Nov 20, 2011 - 12:57 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: May 21, 2010 - 06:50 PM
Posts: 1187
Location: Annapolis, MD
Status: Offline
|
|
spazsinbad wrote:
maus92, is there an inference to be gained then? Or is it that these two WASP aircraft carried out something like 76 VLs between them aboard WASP in that 18 day period was somehow the cause? Seems like the problem is being addressed and was known beforehand. So?
What I'm getting at is there not a certain number of VL's that had to be accomplished to achieve a goal, whether it was monetary for Lockheed Martin, or a metric set to get the -B off probation? With only BF-3 available to continue VL's testing, would that not slow the process, or prevent LM from getting a bonus?
I found it ironic that the same aircraft that performed the VL's on the Wasp are now prevented from further VL's until they are repaired. I'm not implying that those landings caused the cracks - they would have occurred in any event. It does bring up an interesting question about the cracks - were they there prior to the trials? The article does say that they were discovered after the trials. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spazsinbad
|
|
Posted: Nov 20, 2011 - 01:35 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K
Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7855
Location: OZ
|
My speculation about 'crack' discovery would be this: Situation monitored a lot because it is well known issue (along with other items). Otherwise negligence would be evident.
A very long time ago - in a galaxy far removed from this one - I used to pre-flight (in handcuffs) led by the AEO (Air Engineering Officer) an ancient F.A.W. Mk.53 RAN FAA Sea Venom fitted with a Delmar Target gubbins. This caused enormous drag on port side deforming the twin tail booms and elevator, with cracks. AEO assessed state of cracks before flight. What did I know. Luckily (or not) I'm still here. 
Most strain caused by the drag of a very long wire paid out to allow the target to be shot at by big ship guns at a safe distance and speed. |
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
123.65 KB |
| Viewed: |
3743 Time(s) |
|
_________________
RAN FAA A4G: http://tinyurl.com/ctfwb3t http://tinyurl.com/ccmlenr http://www.youtube.com/user/bengello/videos
|
|
|
|
|
|
spazsinbad
|
|
Posted: Jan 09, 2012 - 08:40 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K
Joined: May 05, 2009 - 10:31 PM
Posts: 7855
Location: OZ
|
|
|
|
|
|
bjr1028
|
|
Posted: Jan 13, 2012 - 05:36 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Jul 07, 2009 - 04:34 AM
Posts: 503
Location: Dubuque, IA
Status: Offline
|
|
spazsinbad wrote:
During Vietnam War USMC operated A-4 Skyhawks from SATS airfields with a jet engined powered catapult with an arrested landing. Used to be a 'history' website about this now not available but there must be other info websites out there. I'll look. This was where they were - maybe they'll come back? http://sats-eaf.org/History.htm
It is a miracle....  They are here now: http://sats-eaf.com/
I could see a portable field version of EMALS in the future. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
