A-6 crash after launch?

John C.,

My reverse (perverse) logic:

When each of you can see what the other is (or is not) doing as thoroughly as one could in the A-6 cockpit, there is less call for command ejection, IMHO.

I also believe that good crew coordination had much to do with this attitude. You either learned to work well as a crew, or your squadronmates began sniveling to the Ops Officer.

--
Mike Kanze

"It's scary when you start making the same noises as your coffeemaker."

- Anonymous



"John Carrier" wrote in message ...
One of the peculiarities of the A-6 was its lack of a command ejection
system. There was some kind of reverse (perverse) logic in the community
that had sufficient following to keep it that way (IIRC) for the life of the
aircraft.

R / John

----------
In article , "John Carrier"
wrote:

Probably engine failure on the stroke. Possibly wrong weight setting on the
cat. The older catapults would use a given steam pressure to achieve a

A fully-loaded A-6 didn't have very good single-engine fly away capability.
The "something" was probably all the underwing stores. Pilot pushed the
emergency jettison and the pylons were cleaned off.

Yeah, I figured it was the stores, although I only saw one big thing falling
from one side of the plane.

The plane wasn't fully loaded, at least that much was evident. In fact, it
looked clean, which is why the big thing falling off was so odd.



D

On 5/27/06 6:58 AM, in article , "John
Carrier" wrote:


"DDAY" wrote in message
. net...
I was watching a documentary called "Top Gun" on the Military Channel.

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

Probably engine failure on the stroke. Possibly wrong weight setting on the
cat. The older catapults would use a given steam pressure to achieve a
particular end-speed for a particular gross weight. These would malfunction
on rare occasions. The newer cats use a rotary valve that allows full
pressure (600psi IIRC) for a particular duration and are just about fool
proof (unless its set for the wrong weight).

A fully-loaded A-6 didn't have very good single-engine fly away capability.
The "something" was probably all the underwing stores. Pilot pushed the
emergency jettison and the pylons were cleaned off.


You're right, John. It was a single engine failure on the stroke. Pilot
gets a full chute. B/N skips off the water. Both live.

Max thrust
Gear up
Stores jettison
Bleed Air Gang Bar - OFF
Establish 19 unit climb in balanced flight...

First five steps of the engine failure procedure from memory after a 10 year
hiatus.

If you didn't get those steps done IMMEDIATELY, you didn't stand much of a
chance of bringing the jet back. Later, an east coast squadron discovered
in Fallon in a tanker that even if you DID get those steps done, they jet
could be un-flyable single engine. The engines had de-tuned over time
making the single-engine performance charts incorrect. Pax re-vamped them
in about 1994-5.

--Woody

Woody,

If this occurred late in the A-6's service (i.e., after 1990) and both souls survived, it was likely the following, per Morgan & Morgan:

BuNo 154148/A-6E, VA-85, 09/18/91, Mediterranean, CV-66, Lost engine on cat shot.

******

The engines had de-tuned over time making the single-engine performance charts incorrect. Pax re-vamped them in about 1994-5.

....just in time for that last flight to the boneyard, or to "NAS Barrier Reef." g

Any number of gremlins begin popping up in elderly aircraft after many years of otherwise uneventful service. Witness B/N Keith Gallagher's partial ejection, caused by aging components. In his case, the ejection seat components were ~28 years old:

http://www.gallagher.com/ejection_se...al_aspects.htm

--
Mike Kanze

"It's scary when you start making the same noises as your coffeemaker."

- Anonymous


"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ...
On 5/27/06 6:58 AM, in article , "John
Carrier" wrote:


"DDAY" wrote in message
. net...
I was watching a documentary called "Top Gun" on the Military Channel.

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

Probably engine failure on the stroke. Possibly wrong weight setting on the
cat. The older catapults would use a given steam pressure to achieve a
particular end-speed for a particular gross weight. These would malfunction
on rare occasions. The newer cats use a rotary valve that allows full
pressure (600psi IIRC) for a particular duration and are just about fool
proof (unless its set for the wrong weight).

A fully-loaded A-6 didn't have very good single-engine fly away capability.
The "something" was probably all the underwing stores. Pilot pushed the
emergency jettison and the pylons were cleaned off.


You're right, John. It was a single engine failure on the stroke. Pilot
gets a full chute. B/N skips off the water. Both live.

Max thrust
Gear up
Stores jettison
Bleed Air Gang Bar - OFF
Establish 19 unit climb in balanced flight...

First five steps of the engine failure procedure from memory after a 10 year
hiatus.

If you didn't get those steps done IMMEDIATELY, you didn't stand much of a
chance of bringing the jet back. Later, an east coast squadron discovered
in Fallon in a tanker that even if you DID get those steps done, they jet
could be un-flyable single engine. The engines had de-tuned over time
making the single-engine performance charts incorrect. Pax re-vamped them
in about 1994-5.

--Woody

Yep, Owl, it was the Buckeyes. Correctly identified.

On 5/29/06 4:56 PM, in article ,
"Mike Kanze" wrote:

Woody,

If this occurred late in the A-6's service (i.e., after 1990) and both souls
survived, it was likely the following, per Morgan & Morgan:

BuNo 154148/A-6E, VA-85, 09/18/91, Mediterranean, CV-66, Lost engine on cat
shot.

******

The engines had de-tuned over time making the single-engine performance
charts incorrect. Pax re-vamped them in about 1994-5.
...just in time for that last flight to the boneyard, or to "NAS Barrier
Reef." g

Any number of gremlins begin popping up in elderly aircraft after many years
of otherwise uneventful service. Witness B/N Keith Gallagher's partial
ejection, caused by aging components. In his case, the ejection seat
components were ~28 years old:

http://www.gallagher.com/ejection_se...al_aspects.htm

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

The pilot was Rick "Twig" LaBranche, who is now a CDR and has the
distinction of being the CO of the last operational Tomcat squadron (VF-31
flying F-14Ds at least until September).

_____________
José Herculano

On 5/27/06 5:27 PM, in article ,
"José Herculano" wrote:

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

The pilot was Rick "Twig" LaBranche, who is now a CDR and has the
distinction of being the CO of the last operational Tomcat squadron (VF-31
flying F-14Ds at least until September).

_____________
José Herculano



Twig's STILL CO? I would have thought that he was done by now.

--Woody

Essex class carriers had bow cats only.

Dick...

"DDAY" wrote in message
. net...
I was watching a documentary called "Top Gun" on the Military Channel.

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

Any idea what happened there? I remember hearing about some aircraft
launch
where the fuel in an external tank acted like a ram and caused some heavy
damage, but I'm not sure if these are the same events.

In another shot, a large prop plane, possibly an S-2F, took off the waist
catapult of a smaller Essex class carrier and immediately slammed into a
wave. Again, does anybody have any details?





D

On Sat, 27 May 2006 04:30:42 GMT, "DDAY"
wrote:

I was watching a documentary called "Top Gun" on the Military Channel.

They had some footage of some cat launches gone wrong. In one an A-6 took
off the waist catapult of a carrier and started losing altitude almost
immediately. Then something really big fell off the plane, it started to
roll, and the pilots ejected at very low altitude.

Any idea what happened there? I remember hearing about some aircraft launch
where the fuel in an external tank acted like a ram and caused some heavy
damage, but I'm not sure if these are the same events.

In another shot, a large prop plane, possibly an S-2F, took off the waist
catapult of a smaller Essex class carrier and immediately slammed into a
wave. Again, does anybody have any details?
The video you are referring to ( I believe) was the USS Ticonderoga.
In the video, you should be able to clearly see the "14" on the pointy
end. The squadron was VS-38 out of North Island. And it was not a
cat shot. As others have mentioned, no angle deck cats on Essex
class. The S-2 in question was not shot off the cat - it was a deck
run from the aft part of flight deck. The aircraft was partially
filled with salt water but the R1820's just kept on chuggin'.
Aircraft was put in the hanger bay for maintainers to dry out, which
was only partially successful. Corrosion set in (duh!!!) and the A/C
never flew again. Oh yea - no back seaters in the A/C at the time -
just 2 O's in the front.

Hope this helps.
Regards,






D

Charlie Wolf wrote:

The aircraft was partially
filled with salt water but the R1820's just kept on chuggin'.
Aircraft was put in the hanger bay for maintainers to dry out, which
was only partially successful. Corrosion set in (duh!!!) and the A/C
never flew again.

Now I'm wondering why the cleaning work was not done properly. Shurely
rinsing out the a/c would have been cheaper than replacing it.

Joachim