Forum: General F-35 Forum

Hey Spazsinbad.... was this you going for a swim? (This is what happens when stuff breaks on a carrier!) Not good!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WdnpHcQn3Y

F-16.net Sponsor

A recent discussion about catapulting the F-35C with another about arresting already highlighted earlier on this thread:

F-35C maximum takeoff weight question

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ght=50+000

Last edited by spazsinbad on Dec 16, 2011 - 03:28 AM; edited 3 times in total

alloycowboy, I was a bit reluctant to name the USN Exchange A4G pilot when the video was uploaded years ago now. However his name is public knowledge LCDR Kevin (Kev) Finan (Findog) USN. The actual cause of the wire breaking is a little complicated and I have read it being explained via e-mail a few times which always left me more confused. Something about the wrong kind of something or other fitted during refit inappropriately. MELBOURNE was just out of refit with these flying trials. The wire broke under the deck and paid out through the hook eye briefly but this is not obvious from the slow motion video part. Kev had no place to go but UP! and he done good. Fully story in the PDF in the Side No. 888 section of the A4G section.

The still photo from one film shows the aircraft dropping off the angle deck as seen from about the 'howdah' position near the catapult. Kev's head has dropped during the initial UP part of the rocket seat firing which by all accounts is quite violent and not smooth. Later sequenced cartridges for initial acceleration then rocket seats have proved more kind to those using them. The Douglas Escapac was one of the first zero / zero seats and it did well in RAN FAA service.

"Uploaded by bengello on Oct 15, 2008
23 May 1979 A-4G 888 is lost after the wire breaks during arrest on HMAS Melbourne. Pilot was a USN exchange pilot on VF-805 who ejects succesfully as shown in this video with many camera angles and slow motion replays. The pilot was rescued uninjured promptly by the rescue helicopter. One 'hook runner' of the pair managed to jump the whipping wire whilst the other was slightly injured by it. Flight operations were filmed by RAN Photographers with soundless greyscale cameras. The film was not developed unless necessary."

Thanks spazsinbad...... good to know the pilot was okay. Here is another question? What is the life expectency of a hook runner on an aircraft carrier deck? It can't be very long! Do they draw straws to see who gets to be hook runner?

This is the NAVY. Perhaps there is a possibility to volunteer and I would say that they do volunteer. The hook runners are very much appreciated for doing excellent work to keep the deck clear. Sometimes for whatever reason the aircraft (usually an A4G) would become snagged and then the entire deck crew would be summoned to push the aircraft out of the landing area ASAP perhaps (if engine shut down). Probably onboard the small carrier HMAS Melbourne the ops tempo was not the same as that today on a CVN. However the need to land ASAP is always paramount for reasons described recently (about sailing into the wind for too long being a hazard). The hook runner who jumped the wire was in e-mail contact to tell his story. He was amazed to be showered by a deluge of cardboard confetti - my guess from the pilot notes and such or from something in the Escapac. Then he was concerned about the canopy sailing down, I think it just went over the side.

A classic hazard that occured 3 times to my knowledge was the aircraft rolling to port onto the port wing tip and underwing fuel tank during arrest - usually when MELBOURNE was rolling in a quartering swell. One of those times was at night which must have been horrifying for all concerned. This is illustrated in the Side No. 871 section. The incident is on one of the larger greyscale Utube videos at:

A4G Skyhawk on HMAS Melbourne Deck Ops early 1970s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy0vWedm ... uqu5qanp8X

"Uploaded by bengello on Sep 10, 2008
Greyscale video with music by TOOL [sadly the UtubeNazis stopped the use of the music to substitute crap. Best watched with sound turned off]. The pilot closing the canopy at the beginning is the pilot who has a cold cat shot in 889 going over the side. The pilot expertly stays with the aircraft and comes to the surface safely once the ship propellors have passed overhead. He is picked up by the SAR Wessex 31B and returned to the deck. The other minor mishap shows an A4G rolling onto its port drop tank due to an off centre arrest caused by the wallowing motion of the deck in poor conditions. The deck crew put the Skyhawk back on its wheels with very minor damage to the tank and wingtip. The whole time the engine is running at idle so deck crew were careful. The catapult crew do not look down into the fuel and steam to watch the launch, it tastes awful. Smile

"

Better version with the TOOL music here:
http://www.gamefront.com/files/user/SpazSinbad
specifically:
http://www.gamefront.com/files/17362545 ... Q_TOOL_wmv (38Mb)

spazsinbad wrote:

This is the NAVY. ...

This is why they called them, scooters. Tip them over, skin it up, set it back up on it's wheels, and keep on flying. Smile

Thanks again for the education Spaz, learning lots about carry operations. Oh, I am not much of a tool fan, in fact I asked Lockheed Martin for a little Jazz instead of the usual heavy metal they play on their F-35 clips. So far no luck on that aspect! Still praying!

alloycowboy wrote:

Thanks again for the education Spaz, learning lots about carry operations. Oh, I am not much of a tool fan, in fact I asked Lockheed Martin for a little Jazz instead of the usual heavy metal they play on their F-35 clips. So far no luck on that aspect! Still praying!

Re: the musical scores on flight videos.

I was just thinking the other day why they don't use Rap, because most kids (those under 35) are into that sh**, er, stuff.

In the early days of F-35C testing, weren't there reports of the aircraft notching up several successful arrestments in land-based testing? Were these reports accurate? If so, what was the reason for the redesign?

Mr Sweetman said on Dec 13, Aviation Week blog, "... of the "big five" issues that have already surfaced. (The fifth is classified, but dollars to doughnuts it has something to do with stealth.)"

The published JSF heat issues, pushing 40+thousand pounds of thrust, and trying to cool its vast array of computers/electronics logically creates a JSF heat signature isse. I'm guesstimating the stealth issue Mr. Sweetman eluded to would be heat. Outstanding I'm sure is the JSF's Radar stealth, but logic dictates the JSF must look like a streaking comet on IR. Then there's the JFS's well documented engine noise--I seem to recall the Brits used accoustic search and track before the days of Radar--that technology is old, but accoustics could possibly put the adversary's eyeballs in the ballpark for a tallyho...

popcorn, I am puzzled why the arrestor hook issue was not discovered much sooner. I would have thought that being able to use the carrier hook to make an emergency short / long field arrest would have been an initial requirement. I guess from events that is not the case. However the only short/long field arrest testing was done by the first F-35A AA-1 with a very different 'emergency hook' as indicated on the now long ago thread about such matters.

Last edited by spazsinbad on Dec 17, 2011 - 10:52 PM; edited 1 time in total

For comparison of hook dangle vertical distance below main wheels here is an F-14 side view over the deck about to arrest. A thin red horizontal line will be evident to show the lowest hook point if one zooms in on this photo.

In the extra TA-4J photo below one can see the hook tip just below the right wheel (on our left). My - What a big deck! Very Happy

Unable to attach a photo here now. The error message says:

"GENERAL ERROR:
Could not connect to FTP Server: 'attach.high-g.net'. Please check your FTP-Settings."

File Attachment Problem fixed now - thanks to the Mods Cheers

Yesterday and before - since joining this forum - I have never had a problem with any attachments. So I'll try PhotoBucket.... UhOh I have a problem with Photobucket now... Twisted Evil

Subsequently it sorted itself out without any intervention. Dunno.

Last edited by spazsinbad on Dec 17, 2011 - 11:12 PM; edited 4 times in total

A 4 minute Utube Video shows A4G Carrier Ops from a 'level with the flight deck' viewpoint here: [This is 'carqual' carrier qualification so the first two approaches are with hook up and the third is hook down for arrest - then first catapult] See:

A brief history of tailhook design
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-16571.html

A4G Skyhawk CarQual YOUTUBE VIDEO: http://youtu.be/sCo70B9sBdU

Video shows 'hook runners' at work and one incident when the A4G gets 'hung up in the wires' with a big rush of deck crew to get it fixed. Note how the A4G rolls back slightly - this is the chance to hit the brakes to allow the hook to disengage from the wire. However 'sprog' pilots are often so discombobulated by the arrest that they forget the niceties. Often they forget to put the speedbrakes in also.

Note that in this later era the PO in charge of the 'hook runners' checks the arrest wire at arrest point for damage.

spazinsbad - The carrier hook problem is truly odd. Presumably, the discovered the F-35C's hook problem this year when flight testing with that variant ramped up. But, one has to wonder, did anyone look at the diagrams / computer models back during the critical design review? Because, if those models were off, well..... (in other words, a lot of stuff could be wrong and just waiting to be found) Or, the JSF program has had massive fraud at the top (ie someone deliberately ignoring negative simulation results), though I highly doubt that this is the answer, in spite of the poor performance of previous program chiefs.

Best case scenario: the F-35C flight path approach works, but the hook was just poorly designed to for its role. The computer model failed to capture the wire being pinned down so the hook was built for a different wire position. With the wire in the right spot, it will work perfectly.

Worse case scenario: the entire F-35C load structure has to be redesigned... (which I don't think will happen, the Navy will just cancel it)

Finally, this tail hook problem is, for me at least, the first concrete case where the F-35B negatively affected another variant. Here, the F-35B need to have a rotating nozzle drove the structural design of the C, which strongly limited where the C's tail hook could be placed.

arkadyrenko, perhaps if you read the brief history of tailhook design: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... 653#210653 you may have more answers. I'm not an aircraft designer. I don't understand how your thoughts become so negative towards LM ['massive fraud at the top'?] but that is your business. Perhaps you know something others don't know.

And perhaps also if you read the 'How to Deck Land' PDF you will know more about the 'carrier approach flight path issues'. If you are reluctant to plough through that material then an oft quoted on this forum small 1Mb PDF will be very helpful:

The Influence of Ship Configuration on the Design of the Joint Strike Fighter

http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA399988

Searching the forum will reveal where this report has been cited earlier.

And I still don't get why the F-35B is cited as some kind of Judas to the F-35 but whatever. Irrationality & emotional hyperventilating hyperbole on the internet is the norm I guess. But guess away indeed. Some day some one will write the definitive book about how/why the F-35 was designed - not that it will make a bit of difference to some.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Concurrency QLR