A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Thunderbird crash today



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 15th 03, 04:37 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Thunderbird crash today

Looks like one of the thunderbirds crashed today....pilot ejected.....




Ads
  #2  
Old September 15th 03, 11:13 AM
David Hartung
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Doe" wrote in message
link.net...
Looks like one of the thunderbirds crashed today....pilot ejected.....


At least the Pilot got out!


  #3  
Old September 15th 03, 11:24 AM
Aerophotos
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

another SINGLE engined regular crashing Viper bites the dust.. told ya
so... twins much safer...

heavens forbird the F-35 ever entering service...it will replicate the
F-16 in every way.. just be a more costly toy.



David Hartung wrote:

"John Doe" wrote in message
link.net...
Looks like one of the thunderbirds crashed today....pilot ejected.....


At least the Pilot got out!

  #4  
Old September 15th 03, 02:15 PM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Aerophotos" wrote in message
...
another SINGLE engined regular crashing Viper bites the dust.. told ya
so... twins much safer...

heavens forbird the F-35 ever entering service...it will replicate the
F-16 in every way.. just be a more costly toy.



Lets look at the actual Class A loss rates shall we
http://safety.kirtland.af.mil/AFSC/R...aft_stats.html

F-4 4.64
F-5 8.82
F-15 2.47
F-16 4.19
F-16 (Engine mishaps) 1.53
F-102 13.69
F-104 30.63
F-106 9.47
F-111 6.13
F-117 4.62



Seems like the F-16 is a pretty safe airplane in fact, only the
F-15 has bettered it in safety terms

Keith


  #5  
Old September 15th 03, 10:47 PM
Bil Reese
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Usually the problem with a two engine A/C loosing an engine very suddenly
is... Loosing one engine suddenly causes a yaw which to great to save the
plane still using the other engine and application of a LOT of opposite
rudder to avoid a fatal spin condition... From what I seem to remember
regarding general aviation, the crash rates of dual engine planes is about
1/2x higher than in single engine planes, BUT those dual engine planes that
fall out of the sky have a 3 times higher death rate per crash than single
engine planes.. so which one is more safe??? the plane that crashes a
little less, or the one that will kill you more quickly ??

BR



"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Aerophotos" wrote in message
...
another SINGLE engined regular crashing Viper bites the dust.. told ya
so... twins much safer...

heavens forbird the F-35 ever entering service...it will replicate the
F-16 in every way.. just be a more costly toy.



Lets look at the actual Class A loss rates shall we
http://safety.kirtland.af.mil/AFSC/R...aft_stats.html

F-4 4.64
F-5 8.82
F-15 2.47
F-16 4.19
F-16 (Engine mishaps) 1.53
F-102 13.69
F-104 30.63
F-106 9.47
F-111 6.13
F-117 4.62



Seems like the F-16 is a pretty safe airplane in fact, only the
F-15 has bettered it in safety terms

Keith




  #6  
Old September 15th 03, 11:34 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bil Reese" wrote:

Usually the problem with a two engine A/C loosing an engine very suddenly
is... Loosing one engine suddenly causes a yaw which to great to save the
plane still using the other engine and application of a LOT of opposite
rudder to avoid a fatal spin condition... From what I seem to remember
regarding general aviation, the crash rates of dual engine planes is about
1/2x higher than in single engine planes, BUT those dual engine planes that
fall out of the sky have a 3 times higher death rate per crash than single
engine planes.. so which one is more safe??? the plane that crashes a
little less, or the one that will kill you more quickly ??

BR


There are stats and then there are stats. Which is right usually
relates to what you want to prove at the moment.

While what you say may be true with regard to general aviation, most
tactical military aircraft are center-line thrust, so the engine out
yaw is really insignificant. Not too many problems losing an engine
even in critical flight regimes as long as you're above min control
speeds.

OTOH, my experience with regard to combat engine losses was that there
was no significant difference between single engine and multi engine.
Certainly if the loss is a pure mechanical failure, a second engine is
nice, but if the first engine is lost due to battle damage, there's a
good chance the second engine will follow shortly thereafter.

Now, all that being said, I've got a good friend flogging heavies for
American Airlines who recently transitioned to 777s. I asked him about
what you do with a fully loaded crowd-killer that losses one of those
behemoth engines on the wing right at Vmc or shortly after lift-off.
His answer was that it's all computer controlled. Engine is pushed up,
engine is shut down, rudder is input, controls respond as required to
provide neutral control impressions to the driver. Neat stuff. Takes a
lot of the thrill out of the business.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038
  #7  
Old September 15th 03, 11:55 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...

snip
Now, all that being said, I've got a good friend flogging heavies for
American Airlines who recently transitioned to 777s. I asked him about
what you do with a fully loaded crowd-killer that losses one of those
behemoth engines on the wing right at Vmc or shortly after lift-off.
His answer was that it's all computer controlled. Engine is pushed up,
engine is shut down, rudder is input, controls respond as required to
provide neutral control impressions to the driver. Neat stuff. Takes a
lot of the thrill out of the business.


The 777 flight control computer provides "normal airplane" feel at all
times. Even though the control surfaces are not of a type that would provie
a push back on the yoke on approach, the pilot experiances the same feel as
if the airplane were "normal".


  #8  
Old September 16th 03, 04:22 AM
Walt BJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
SNIP:

The other 'secret' about airline flying is that the maximum allowable
takeoff gross weight for each flight is always calculated on the
ability of the airplane to make the FAA-mandated climb profile after
losing an engine at V1 speed and safely clear all the obstacles on the
way. In Denver in the summer the 727s usually had some seats blocked
off due to this weight restriction. None of those hairy KC135 max
gross 'wartime' weight takeoffs!
Walt BJ
  #9  
Old September 16th 03, 04:37 AM
MLenoch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



wrote: In Denver in the summer the 727s usually had some seats blocked
off due to this weight restriction.


Would those have been early model 727-200s out of Stapelton?
VL
  #10  
Old September 16th 03, 05:01 AM
Wingedhoof
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

another SINGLE engined regular crashing Viper bites the dust.. told ya
so... twins much safer...



Gee, I must have missed the outcome of the Safety Investigation Board when they
said there was an engine problem.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Airplane Crash Harry O Home Built 1 November 15th 04 03:40 AM
Four Winds 192 Crash into the Miami Federal Reserve Building, a year ago today Billgran Home Built 3 December 6th 03 03:22 PM
Homemade plane crash Big John Home Built 9 October 17th 03 06:45 PM
"Target for Today" & "Thunderbolt" WWII Double Feature at Zeno'sDrive-In Zeno Aerobatics 0 August 2nd 03 07:31 PM
"Target for Today" & "Thunderbolt": An Awesome WWII DoubleFeature at Zeno's Drive-In zeno Military Aviation 0 July 14th 03 07:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.