Guest Cap-10 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Deleted You need to be careful there UW..... Since you are mentioning your PAS, I'm assuming you are still in ROTC, or very early in your career as a 2Lt. I'll base my response on that. I'm going to guess that your PAS is in no way actually on the Safety Investigation Board. Is he even a B-2 guy? Regardless, anything he is saying is just his personal opinion, a guess, unless....... as a prior WG/CC at Anderson, he may "know a guy" who is involved with the Safety Investigation Board. If this is the source of his info, then shame on him for opening his pie hole (he should know better), and you should not be spreading that info on the web. Any info that is important to get out to the flying world, to prevent another similiar incident, will come out thru official safety channels and wil get briefed as such in the squadron. When you do get briefed on safety priviledged info, you don't go talking about it over lunch, or at home with the wife, trying to impress her with the inside info you have. Neither cadets in ROTC nor 2Lt's that haven't started UPT have the 'need to know' the safety priviledged info out of this incident. Cap-10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butters Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 One thing that strikes me is that fact that this is the first ever crash of a B2. ...... That it was accomplished in the B2 with no crashes (and going on 20 years now the thing has been flying), its pretty cool. Any other airframes have similar records? This is the fist crash we heard about. Let's remember the development of the B-2 was accomplished in secret.. just like the F-117 and many other airframes. They could have crashed 9 of these things in the 80's and we would not have ever known about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Brogan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 You need to be careful there UW..... Since you are mentioning your PAS, I'm assuming you are still in ROTC, or very early in your career as a 2Lt. I'll base my response on that. I'm going to guess that your PAS is in no way actually on the Safety Investigation Board. Is he even a B-2 guy? Regardless, anything he is saying is just his personal opinion, a guess, unless....... as a prior WG/CC at Anderson, he may "know a guy" who is involved with the Safety Investigation Board. If this is the source of his info, then shame on him for opening his pie hole (he should know better), and you should not be spreading that info on the web. Any info that is important to get out to the flying world, to prevent another similiar incident, will come out thru official safety channels and wil get briefed as such in the squadron. When you do get briefed on safety priviledged info, you don't go talking about it over lunch, or at home with the wife, trying to impress her with the inside info you have. Neither cadets in ROTC nor 2Lt's that haven't started UPT do not have the 'need to know' the safety priviledged info out of this incident. Cap-10 Based on what he posted, I don't think UW or his PAS are getting privileged information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest awalkertx Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Looks like it was fixed and is still flying out of Barksdale http://www.barksdale.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123024862 snip snip snip Staff Sergeant Michael Rochette is the current crew chief for serial No. 61-023 and isn't shocked about the jet's past. "I am not surprised it is still able to fly," said Staff Sgt. Rochette. "It's too well built to go down." that's a totally cool story! so i guess they put another tail back on?? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mjk5401 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 You need to be careful there UW..... Since you are mentioning your PAS, I'm assuming you are still in ROTC, or very early in your career as a 2Lt. I'll base my response on that. I'm going to guess that your PAS is in no way actually on the Safety Investigation Board. Is he even a B-2 guy? Regardless, anything he is saying is just his personal opinion, a guess, unless....... as a prior WG/CC at Anderson, he may "know a guy" who is involved with the Safety Investigation Board. If this is the source of his info, then shame on him for opening his pie hole (he should know better), and you should not be spreading that info on the web. Any info that is important to get out to the flying world, to prevent another similiar incident, will come out thru official safety channels and wil get briefed as such in the squadron. When you do get briefed on safety priviledged info, you don't go talking about it over lunch, or at home with the wife, trying to impress her with the inside info you have. Neither cadets in ROTC nor 2Lt's that haven't started UPT do not have the 'need to know' the safety priviledged info out of this incident. Cap-10 I want to say "2" but that's to fighterish. DITTO seems better. Bottom line, it's hear say. Unless you were on Guam and saw what happened with your own eyes, you don't have any factual information to share in this thread. It was a tragic accident in which both pilots ejected safely. The accident board will come out with their conclusions in a year or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zrooster99 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 61-023 Kind of a tangent, but 1023's a blue tail, isn't it? I was in the 20th Jan 01-July02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Davies Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 This is the fist crash we heard about. Let's remember the development of the B-2 was accomplished in secret.. just like the F-117 and many other airframes. They could have crashed 9 of these things in the 80's and we would not have ever known about it. The design phase was certainly secret, but the flying developmental phase and subsequent contractor and customer test and eval was not. If they had crashed any then we certainly would have known about it. In this respect, the B-2 is completely different to the F-117. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clayton Bigsby Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Cadets shouldn't be quoting their cadre, regardless of background. Instead, find sources like this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Got this from AFA this morning... Cheers! M2 February 27, 2008 AFA Members, Congressional staffers, Civic leaders and DOCA members, as many of you heard last week, the Air Force lost a B-2. Thankfully, both crew members ejected safely. The Washington Post called AFA for comment ... and here is what we told them. - All airplanes occasionally crash. - The B-2 safety record is astonishing. It has been flying for nearly 20 years, has flown over 14,000 sorties and 75,000 flying hours to include both test and combat missions. - The B-2 has set a record for the best accident rate in Air Force History ... and it may have the best rate in all of aviation history. - But ... the B-2 is getting old. Its first flight was in 1989. This is one reason why the Air Force is seeking a replacement bomber ... to be fielded by 2018. The Air Force should be proud of the record of the B-2 - it is a tribute to the industrial team that designed and manufactured it ... as well as the men and women in the Air Force who support and maintain it. Secondly, today (Wed 27 Feb) - Secretary Wynne and Gen Moseley testify before the HASC at 1000 EST. You can catch the hearing live at: http://armedservices.house.gov/audiocast.shtml For your consideration. Mike Michael M. Dunn, Lt Gen (Ret) President/CEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 David A. Fulghum/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report One of the pilots of the B-2 stealth bomber that crashed Feb. 23 reported a fire at takeoff from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, which was followed quickly by loss of control of the bomber, according to a senior Air Combat Command (ACC) official. The stealth bomber rolled uncontrollably to the right and fell between the taxiway and the ramp at 10:45 a.m. Guam time just after passing the control tower. It was attempting a takeoff toward the seaward end of the runway. The two pilots ejected with one being hospitalized. A dark plume of smoke arose from the crash site and civilians outside the base reported a second explosion about 30 minutes after the initial impact. The aircraft can lose one or even two of its four General Electric F118-GE-100 17,300-pound thrust engines and still take off, so it’s unlikely that engine failure was to blame, says a retired U.S. Air Force pilot who has flown the B-2. Moreover, early suggestions that the aircraft struck birds or stalled in a steep takeoff climb also have been dismissed as unlikely. Also, the weather was reported as clear. The bomber Spirit of Kansas, tail no. 890127, was the second in a four-aircraft flight that was ending its deployment and taking off for return to home base at Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo. They were being replaced by six B-52s as a forward-based, heavy-bomber force in the Pacific. The loss cuts the number of combat-coded B-2s to 15 from 16 out of the total force of 21. The force has a minimum aircraft requirement of 19 airframes. The other three B-2s later returned to Whiteman, where the wing commander has declared a “safety pause” for the fleet, ACC officials say. During the pause, procedures are being reviewed with the pilots and training is at a standdown. However, if the stealthy bomber is needed for an operational mission it is cleared to fly. The aircraft that crashed rolled off Northrop Grumman’s line in 1989 and had accumulated 5,176 flying hours at the time of the crash. Early testing indicated that the aircraft would remain structurally intact for about 40,000 flying hours. Analyses also posited that the rudder attachment points would be the first structural failure item. This is the first B-2 crash, but another of the Air Force’s heavy bomber fleet, the B-1, has suffered a number of seemingly similar in-flight emergencies. A pelican-sized bird ripping through fuel and hydraulic lines downed the first, a fuel-fed fire on takeoff destroyed another, a fire in the instrument panel over Kentucky struck another and a fourth was abandoned by its crew about 100 miles short of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean while returning from a bombing mission in Afghanistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 How many redundant computers does the B-2 have for the flight controls? I would assume that the airplane would be nearly impossible to fly without them. Not saying this is my guess of the cause. I have a different uneducated guess... I'm just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 How many redundant computers does the B-2 have for the flight controls? I would assume that the airplane would be nearly impossible to fly without them. 1. Several. 2. It's a totally fly-by-wire airplane - it IS impossible to fly without the computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Min force of 19 my ass. If they suddenly only had 15, I don't think there's a chance in hell they'd just up and retire the aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hd5032 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 The aircraft that crashed rolled off Northrop Grumman’s line in 1989 and had accumulated 5,176 flying hours at the time of the crash. Early testing indicated that the aircraft would remain structurally intact for about 40,000 flying hours. Analyses also posited that the rudder attachment points would be the first structural failure item. Does the B-2 have a rudder? Pardon my ignorance, but I thought that was the whole point of the no-tail thing. Or is it just a non-traditional rudder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riddller Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I think they're referring to "the flight controls that act like rudders". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hd5032 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I think they're referring to "the flight controls that act like rudders". Got it. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jollygreen Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Friggin Windows Vista.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted March 27, 2008 Share Posted March 27, 2008 Just an update... Cheers! M2 B-2s Still Not Flying: The Air Force's fleet of B-2 bombers is still on a "safety pause" more than one month after the crash of one of the stealth bombers Feb. 23 on Guam. This means USAF's 20 B-2s aren't flying for now at the discretion of Brig. Gen. Garrett Harencak (Happiest bio pic I have ever seen! -- M2), the B-2 wing commander at Whiteman AFB, Mo. But neither have they been formally grounded by the commander of Air Combat Command. So they are available to fly if needed. ACC spokesman Josh Aycock confirmed to the Daily Report March 26 that the safety pause is still in effect and that the ACC-directed safety investigation board is still conducting its look into the mishap. Aycock wouldn't speculate on how long it will take until the SIB report will be completed and briefed to ACC Commander Gen. John Corley. The B-2 that crashed was one of four that deployed last October to Andersen AFB, Guam, for a four month stint there. The Kansas City Star reported March 25 that the three other B-2s are still on Guam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted March 28, 2008 Share Posted March 28, 2008 And more... Cheers! M2 B-2 Write-Off: The B-2 that crashed Feb. 23 in Guam "basically stalled" and is "absolutely a total write-off," Gen. John Corley, head of Air Combat Command, told defense reporters at a meeting March 27 in Washington, D.C. Corley said the pilots reported that the airplane "rotated early," meaning the nose came up sooner and faster than the pilots commanded, and they could not get it to come down again. The airplane stalled-meaning the pitch was too high for airflow over the wings to create lift-and, when the left wing started dragging against the ground, the two-man crew ejected. Corley made no mention of an onboard fire, which has been reported by some publications. He said there are two investigations underway: a safety and an accident probe. The former is due mid-April, the latter in mid-May. The 20 remaining B-2s are not technically grounded, Corley said, but are not flying while the 509th Bomb Wing at the B-2's home base of Whiteman AFB, Mo., reviews its training and inspection procedures. In the meantime, Corley said, crews are staying proficient by flying in the simulator and in the T-38 companion trainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I hope this doesn't come down to pilot error. This would probably be one of the most expensive "oopsies" ever if so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pogo Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 Link to photos from PPrune http://refugeforums.com/refuge/showthread.php?t=611939 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted April 10, 2008 Share Posted April 10, 2008 Link to photos from PPrune http://refugeforums.com/refuge/showthread.php?t=611939 Interesting... there's a lot more left of the airframe than I thought there'd be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACCBoomer Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 Someone has balls. Not only taking the pic out the aft hatch of a tanker. But posting them on the net. If big blue wanted pictures to be released, I am sure he would have done it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boom Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 Someone has balls. Not only taking the pic out the aft hatch of a tanker. But posting them on the net. If big blue wanted pictures to be released, I am sure he would have done it. Seymour Johnson Reserve Boom. Pretty easy to narrow down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now