Forum: F-35 milestones

Last edited by spazsinbad on Jan 17, 2012 - 05:01 AM; edited 1 time in total

Checkout the TAPE DRAGON: (I received only a card - seen below) Twisted Evil

CheePPatards! Very Happy

tapedragon.wmv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYGvmnGY ... re=related

"Uploaded by ravenarrestor on May 16, 2011
With successful development of the Barrier Arrestor Kit, and in culmination to a bit of crafty public relations, E.W. Bliss ADEC established the Grand Order of Tape Dragons in 1962. Nobody wants to crash and burn and a hook and cable didn't rest well with a weary pilot during these early years of land-based arresting systems. But then came along the BAK (Barrier Arresting Kit) and the need for some good PR to change the norm and reverse the fear.

Many articles discussing aircraft arresting, safety and awareness appeared in both mainstream media in magazines such as Aviation Week, and a buzz was created around military installations across the world about the "Bliss Barrier." If an installation had one of these systems that pilots could depend upon; and Heaven forbid, if an emergency occurred, the pilots felt much more comfortable sticking it out (not ejecting) and bringing the aircraft down to the ground and hitting the barrier. The barrier saved aircraft and it saved lives. This wasn't always the case!

Aircrew safety program initiated through Bliss PR campaign.
The Grand Order was a unique appreciation of an air safety problem. Membership to the club was restricted to pilots and passengers of aircraft which engaged on land-based runway overrun arrestment equipment under emergency conditions. If someone qualified, Bliss conveniently sent out application cards to major installations across the globe, along with posters announcing the club. Applicants only needed to fill out the card which asked for dates and installations where the engagement occurred. Bliss would send a plaque, medallion clip and wallet card free of charge, of course. Within ten years; Bliss had compiled a list of about 3000 names of aircrew that had successfully engaged an arresting barrier..that is good PR! Many pilots wrote of the details of their engagement and sent their stories into the company.

Tape Dragon Oath:
"I believe in the Grand Order of Tape Dragons as an excellent way to call attention of all airman to the great value of arresting equipment. By virtue of my experience, I am an enthusiastic salesman for this kind of safety equipment. I faithfully pledge that I will make loud, highly effective, disapproving noises if I see any barrier being misused, mistreated or improperly maintained. I further pledge that I will actively advocate that all aircraft be protected from the primordial ooze of overruns by suitable arresting equipment and that all arresting equipment be steadily improved to the greater safety of all airman". -- Veryl Vary
Article courtesy of Gary Ell"

F-16.net Sponsor

ARRESTING SYSTEMS.wmv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsSzP40R ... re=related

"Uploaded by ravenarrestor on Jun 28, 2011
Engineered Arresting Systems (ESCO), a division of Zodiac Aerospace is the manufacturer of aircraft arresting systems and energy absorption products. ESCO's headquarters and main production facility are located in Aston, Pennsylvania immediately adjacent to Interstate 95, approximately 15 miles south of the Philadelphia International Airport. For more than 50 years, Engineered Arresting Systems Corporation, the cornerstone of Zodiac's Emergency Arresting Systems Divisions (EASD), has harnessed mechanical energy to provide customized arrestment and containment solutions for aircraft and transport vehicles. To learn more visit, www.esco.zodiacaerospace.com

Youse prolly wondered why the solution to the F-35C hook problem looked familiar? No? Compare the A-4 hook with that of proposed solution (A-4 hook also seen more betta on page 7 of this thread: Rolling Eyes

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... rt-90.html

spazsinbad wrote:

Youse prolly wondered why the solution to the F-35C hook problem looked familiar? No? Compare the A-4 hook with that of proposed solution (A-4 hook also seen more betta on page 7 of this thread: Rolling Eyes

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... rt-90.html

Would it be possible to lower the apex point of the hook even closer to the deck?

I dont think you could without risk of sharpening it to the point of a safety issue or degradation of the leading edge.

There has to be a blunt radius at the sharp end otherwise if the 'axe' hits the wire either a big chunk will be taken out or wire break. Elsewhere an A4G maintainer describes 'blunting the axe' with a file because too many deck strikes tends to sharpen it (depending on many other factors also).

“...reproduce a radius on the toe of the hook with a 'rasp' after frequent contact with the deck wore it to a knife edge which, to the consternation of the 'Stokers' [Navy slang for old coal fired boiler stokers now deck machinery workers] responsible for the 'trap' [arrestor wires], were required to replace arrestor wires which had been cut.”

Salute!

Great discussion, Spaz.

Hard for me to believe that the shoe design wasn't more carefully engineered.

OTOH, I fully appreciate the angles after having skipped a wire on the departure end one night with a slick runway - an A-7D, which had the identical design to the USN version ( A-7E). I put the hook down and eased off the brakes, which weren't working all that well due to the anti-skid. Ground crew said they could see sparks for 1,000 feet before I had the dreaded "hook skip". So still at 70 knots or so, pull hard on stick to get nose up a bit and grab the no sierra tape dragon on the overrun. Whew!!

So I appreciate the discussion of the angles - approach. contact and the hook shoe itself.

Next time was hydraulic failure and I engaged the approach end cable with no problems.

Finally, lest anyone think those "wires" are made of "unobtaniium", they are not and can be cut with a certain landing technique/sharp hook/or my frozen wheel. Brakes locked up due to bad control valve and then ground down right wheel and had an inadvertant engagement at the mid-field barrier ( Korat RTAB). After a few hundred feet the frozen wheel rim cut the wire loose and I continued to slither down the rwy with sparks flying and an eventual fire, Whew!

Again. great thread.

Gums sends...

Thanks for your input Gums, are you now a TapeDragon? Very Happy

Korat does not sound too hot! Nice it turned out well I'll assume because you are still walking and talking? Cheers

Some Say that the Hornet hook/shoe design was used/adapted for the F-35C. I think THE STIG should have been involved from the beginning (courtesy of TOP GEAR). Devil

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos ... 45-679.jpg

HiRez example of the InstaPinch 'nosewheel? over wire' effect here:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 3-wire.jpg

spazsinbad wrote:

HiRez example of the InstaPinch 'nosewheel? over wire' effect here:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 3-wire.jpg

Spaz..

That instantaneous picture is amazing. I never really thought about the effects of the nosegear traversing the wire. That picture looks so odd seeing so much sag with the wire that there is excess laying on the deck, to the point of looking deformed (all of the lag within just a few feet of the strike point). I guess those riser thingys settled upon wheel impaction, causing laxation in the wire...but the picture would indicate those risers had already returned to their normal state..hmmm. What makes the wire taught again for the the tailhook, which is obviuosly only miliseconds away? Does the arrestor system snap back in place quickly enough? They only lose minimal steam psi intially and it reverts back to taught very quickly. This may be why you would want some certain distance (or Time) between the initial strike and the the tailhook.

Could they not just change the height of the riser thingys to allow for successful arrests for the C? Of course this opens up a can o' worms for other aircraft types ( Hornet C, Hornet E, C-2, E-2) or even the arrestor equipment itself (especially at the end points over the deck), but maybe an inch or two be probable that would allow all types sucess. Yet this may require re-cert of all types, but who knows.

Sorry, just thinking (or not) outloud. I cannot help but think about the time the transport truck was stuck under an overpass and the engineers could not figure out how to dislodge the truck (myth..I dont know) and it took someone to just tell them to let the air pressure out of the tires.
OK, I am now in official looney land.

The picture is probably necessarily cropped via zoom lens. Possibly in the instance seen the aircraft may have already caught a wire and be in the process of arresting. If so then extra weight is brought to bear on the nosewheel during that process. Without a bunch of supporting information in particular about that photo it is difficutl to say. I would not be too worried because Naval Aircraft Hook Designs have been catching arrestor wires for a very long time. Yes there may be hiccups at beginning but soon sorted. Critics make much ado about nothing methinks. But "What me Worry" as Alfred E. Neumann is wont to say. Very Happy

Perhaps and I stress perhaps the other non-issue about main wheels to hook point distance may become important. I say wait until hook redesign tested before having conniptions over it. Consider this: a lot of hurdles overcome in the F-35 design already. This is but a speed bump.

And I'll remake this point. The aircraft 'needs to want to change' and not any other supporting equipment including aircraft carriers and land based arrestor gear. OK? ;D

It will be fine - supa fine. How many LM engineers does it take to make this work? Very Happy

spazsinbad wrote:

The picture is probably necessarily cropped via zoom lens. Possibly in the instance seen the aircraft may have already caught a wire and be in the process of arresting. If so then extra weight is brought to bear on the nosewheel during that process. Without a bunch of supporting information in particular about that photo it is difficutl to say. I would not be too worried because Naval Aircraft Hook Designs have been catching arrestor wires for a very long time. Yes there may be hiccups at beginning but soon sorted. Critics make much ado about nothing methinks. But "What me Worry" as Alfred E. Neumann is wont to say. Very Happy

Perhaps and I stress perhaps the other non-issue about main wheels to hook point distance may become important. I say wait until hook redesign tested before having conniptions over it. Consider this: a lot of hurdles overcome in the F-35 design already. This is but a speed bump.

And I'll remake this point. The aircraft 'needs to want to change' and not any other supporting equipment including aircraft carriers and land based arrestor gear. OK? ;D

It will be fine - supa fine. How many LM engineers does it take to make this work? Very Happy

NM

Here is a news article from the NavyTimes:

Design blamed for F-35C tailhook issues

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/01/dn-design-blamed-for-f35c-tailhook-issues-011712/

Quote:

“The good news is that it’s fairly straight forward and isolated to the hook itself,” said Tom Burbage, Lockheed program manager for the F-35 program. “It doesn’t have secondary effects going into the rest of the airplane.”

Moreover, the rest of the design of the tailhook system, which include the doors and bay that conceal the device and other ancillary hardware, is sound, Burbage said.

Quote:

Tests with the newly modified tailhook should start at Lakehurst, N.J, in the second quarter of this year, Burbage said.

Quote:

Burbage dismisses claims that the F-35C will be unable to land on a carrier as falsehoods.

“That’s patently not true,” he said.

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va., said the claim that the F-35C could never land on a ship was always highly dubious.

“They turned the YF-17 into a carrier plane, why couldn’t they correct carrier-hook problems here?” he said. “This does not appear to be a killer problem.”

Thanks - good find - alloycowboy. Very Happy

spazsinbad wrote:

Some Say that the Hornet hook/shoe design was used/adapted for the F-35C. I think THE STIG should have been involved from the beginning (courtesy of TOP GEAR). Devil

Just for the record, the F-35 hook point looks nothing like a Hornet point. Cheers

Forum: F-35 milestones

F-35C Lands at Lakehurst For Testing