Pilot trapped for 5h in cockpit of USAF's new $135m F-22A Raptor after canopy jams

[Mac the Knife]

With pictures.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/04/25/Navigation/177/204883/Pictures+Pilot+trapped+for+5h+in+cockpit+of+USAF's+new+$135m +F-22A+Raptor+after+canopy.html

Had to be chainsawed out.

[SASless]

I have to scoff at the wisdom some bright fellows have to offer in things related to aviation. "Max Kingly Whatever" in the link, suggested the Americans at Lockheed needed to re-learn lessons from Battle of Britain days where Spit/Hurri pilots wound the canopy back prior to engaging in combat.

Timely advice I would suggest as you whiz about at Mach 2.

He neglected to note the "wise" men, who built simple canopy opening systems, of that day ignored the fuel tank conveniently sat in front of the pilot in those aircraft that way too frequently became the method of the pilot's demise in a most horrific manner.

Folks like that probably support Fighter aircraft without guns and no live fire training.

[frodo_monkey]

Yeah, what sort of idiot country would buy a fighter without a gun?!











Oh yes... :(

[Ignition Override]

The Pentagon "experts" historically have required very complex systems which tend to involve even unseen parts being machined until smooth. That is one reason why the Mig-25 (which was "borrowed" by Soviet Lt. Belenko) had internal rivets-this had no effect on the airflow. This truly shocked the experts in the US, before they put it back together and returned it to the Soviets in Hakodote, Japan.
Incidentally, you would not believe where they hid Belenko for months...he was on water.

The 'brilliant' lack of guns on some Vietnam-era fighters required the creation of the Navy "Top Gun" school at NAS Miramar, San Diego, CA. Those Pentagon commanders, or at least some, were so enamored with missiles that they forgot about basic combat, having gone through the paranoia that a high-altitude bomber might penetrate US airspace. The B-70's appearance resulted in the Mig-25, and a Soviet plane (the "Backfire"?) resulted in the F-15, which had cannon and missiles.

Another symptom of the former "we are all fighter pilots...." mentality in the Air Force resulted in one training pipeline-except for those who volunteered a for helicopter s at the very beginning. Until several years ago or so, when some training between the USAF and Navy was combined, all graduates of US Air Force (UPT) Undergraduate Pilot Training received their wings, but with the "centerline thrust" restriction. Put in a twin-engine Piper Aztec or Cessna 402 (i.e., a Navy Training Command T-44 'King Air'...), few would have had any idea what to do with an engine failure. This might have somehow contributed to the fact that the top graduate of Vance AFB class 80-02 died in a Cessna 172 with passengers somewhere in Montana (how?) ...and he was a current, successful F-16 pilot. He was trained for very high performance fighters with 'zero-zero' ejection seats.

Maybe this is unrelated, but a former Navy F-4 pilot, who had flown about 20 years with US airlines, died with his wife and two young daughters in a borrowed single-engine Piper in the Florida panhandle, where they glided into trees. There are lots of woods there-weather there very often produces quite hazy, limited vis.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Yeah, what sort of idiot country would buy a fighter without a gun?!
Oh yes... :(

Didn't the Phantom originally come without a gun, in the days when air-to-air missiles were primarily guided by faith?

[Dark Helmet]

Let us not forget that the Tornado suffered from sticking canopy syndrome in the early days. I recall the firemen having to cut through a canopy at TWCU after it refused to open. The cause was traced to dissimilar metal expansion on the locking bolts, if I remember correctly.

[Washington_Irving]

$135m?:}

Not according to the GAO's Testimony to the House Armed Services Committee on 06Apr06.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06585t.pdf

Project cost $65,400,000,000 (estimated)
181 aircraft Ordered.
(See page 5)

To save everyone from getting their calculators out, that's a little over $361.3 million a copy- 188% over the initial estimated cost per unit.

From now on, fire sections have been ordered to place a "duty chav" on standby with a wire coathanger and a jimmy bar for such eventualities. They can be drawn from stn MT Sections or Police Flts.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

I think you will find that tales of Battle of Britain pilots winding canopies back for combat are mere fantasy. If it happened at all it was extremely rare and I am not aware of a single tale of such an event.

Regarding the expense of the FA-22 Raptor, it may indeed seem expensive - when it takes on some as yet unidentified enemy in a few years time it may seem quite cheap at the price. If you think building modern fighters that can win battles is expensive, just think of the cost of building fighters that can't. My own nation has been using a desperate aircraft, the Tornado F3, for many years and has mercifully never had to take on another fighter for real. It was probably better than the Phantom but when everyone else has F15s, F-16s, F-18s, Mig 29s, Su30s etc, then it sadly does not cut it among the big boys. We are the country that despises all things American and therefore knew better and took the gun out the Eurofighter - what do the yanks know about air combat after all? Fortunately the Eurofighter is a genuine fighter that will be able to take on the previous generation of fighters which is more than its predecessor could do. Needless to say, over the same period we were developing the Eurofigher, the Americans produced the Raptor which made the Eurofighter obsolete before it reached front line service. One can only hope that the Chinese are not producing some stealthy fighter like the Raptor - but then why worry as we will never have to fight them because they really are very nice chaps.

[SASless]

The Phantom indeed was purchased without a gun. Missles were king. We found ourselves getting our asses kicked because of the lack of a gun (and some completely stupid ROE's). A centerline gun pod was introduced then later models had the internal gun and advanced training (Top Gun and the Air Force equivalent). Every fighter since then has had the gun as standard equipment.

We learned our lesson the hard way. Guess who is next?

Pride does in fact go before a fall.

[ORAC]

over the same period we were developing the Eurofigher, the Americans produced the Raptor which made the Eurofighter obsolete before it reached front line service

Only if we were stupid enough to go to war with the USA. :hmm: The Eurofighter is more than a match for any other opponent, either in service or in development, and, based on the above figures, only about a quarter of the price. It will also, eventually, have a more than adequate GA capability whilst the F-22 is a pure AD aircraft.

[SASless]

All 55 of them?

[ORAC]

Remind me, did the Sea Harrier have a gun in the Falklands War? The AIM-9L did more than adequately I believe. Just how many Israeli kills were gun kills, and how many GW kills were gun kills? It can be argued that the need for a gun in Vietnam was more a result of the ROE which didn´t allow the enemy airfields to be attacked or BVR to used effectively combined with the poor performance of early AAM, particularly the appalling HMI of the AAM-4 Falcon.

Not saying a gun isn´t useful, just that using Vietnam is a justification lays you open to having the rug pulled from under you.

[Polikarpov]

Remind me, did the Sea Harrier have a gun in the Falklands War?

Yes, and it brought down several aircraft (Pucara? C130? More than one Puma?) with it.

I'm sure WEBF will be along shortly to give you the actual tally.

[ORAC]

Optional external ventral pods, not an internal gun. Very much the same arrangement as on the F-35B/C which has a dedicated ventral station for an optional gun, only the CTOL A model having an internal gun. It will be interesting to see if it used as a standard fit or just on AD missions.

[SASless]

Orac,

Why do modern air forces practice Air-Air combat maneuvering if all the engagements are going to be punching off missiles at radar images and hollering "Fox something" over the radio while beating a hasty retreat for Tea and Stickies in the Mess?

If you have no gun....there is no reason for our young ones to get out and jolly around playing tail chase games. That is a waste of taxpayers money.

Exactly a 1960's American concept done up in Oxford English and Crab Blue.

[ORAC]

And who's going into a fight with a weapon needing a tracking solution when the other guy might have an over the shoulder Mx like Archer, ASRAAM or IRIS-T? A gun can be usefull if you get a target of opportunity like a helo, but it means going down into indian country below 10-15K and that can be a baaad idea.

[RonO]

Flight is correct, F-22 sticker is around $135m. GAO number above is an accountants calculation that amortises R&D across orders.

[West Coast]

"whilst the F-22 is a pure AD aircraft"

For how long?

Bombcat and E model come to mind.

[SASless]

Why is it called the F/A 22?

Seems it can do the mission of the F-117 along with the Air to Air deal too.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-weapons.htm

[hoodie]

Optional external ventral pods, not an internal gun.

That's not the question you asked.

Are you a Government minister? :}

[ORAC]

Why is it called the F/A 22?
Errr, its not. That was flown as a kite for a while to protect the numbers, then rapidly dropped about 6 months ago, its now firmly just the F-22 and all budget proposals for AG development have been dropped. Probably because they threaten the new idea of a new bomber for about 2018 instead of 2038.

So it is definitely just an AD aircraft....till the next change.

[ORAC]

Yeah, but be fair, this was about the need for an internal gun instead of the add on guns such as used on the early F-4s. Know I know the SUU-23 etc wobbled about about, but the Harrier and F-25 have far more stable mounts, and give the option of dropping it and uploading something else instead. :rolleyes:

[Ignition Override]

ORAC: those were good reminders of the insane 'rules of engagement' in Southeast Asia, a few of which consisted of very clearly defined approach routes to some critical target areas could have been charted as STARs (standard...routes), as with major airports.

A F-105 "Thud" pilot was kicked out of the US Air Force after he identified a Soviet civilian merchant ship in or near Haiphong harbor: the type which carried SAM-2 missiles. He blasted the ship, but this was off-limits, due to the arrogant coneheads at the White House, and their brown-nosed 'yes!' men in the Pentagon. :8

[Gainesy]

Just finished reading a book* by an F-105 pilot which mentions that incident (author was room mate of the pairs lead involved). Said Soviet ship, the Turkmenistan had opened fire with 20mm AAA on the pair of Thuds, who returned the compliment. The two pilots and their CO, Col Jack Broughton, were court martialed, the CO for destroying the gun camera film before the blunties got their hands on it.

*100 Missions North, Brig Gen Ken Bell, USAF(Ret)
ISBN1-57488-639-8

[ORAC]

Ahhh, Jack Broughton. I recommend you read his books, "Thud Ridge" and "Going Downtown". :ok:

[ARINC]

Remind me, did the Sea Harrier have a gun in the Falklands War? The AIM-9L did more than adequately I believe. Just how many Israeli kills were gun kills, and how many GW kills were gun kills? It can be argued that the need for a gun in Vietnam was more a result of the ROE which didn´t allow the enemy airfields to be attacked or BVR to used effectively combined with the poor performance of early AAM, particularly the appalling HMI of the AAM-4 Falcon.
Not saying a gun isn´t useful, just that using Vietnam is a justification lays you open to having the rug pulled from under you.

No......

But the GR3 did and it used them, 30mm Aden, makes an awful mess of the underside !

Heard a nice quote from I think Sqn Ldr Iveson at an RAeS lecture who when asked by FAC if he had any ordnance left, he said he still had guns. He could feel the heat of his wingmans gaze on the back of his neck, as they turned back into Stanley. Not an altogether popular suggestion he concluded !

As it turned out he got shot down and evaded capture shortly afterwards..

[the_flying_cop]

quote

"From now on, fire sections have been ordered to place a "duty chav" on standby with a wire coathanger and a jimmy bar for such eventualities. They can be drawn from stn MT Sections or Police Flts"

i just love it.

[Washington_Irving]

Why is it called the F/A 22?
Seems it can do the mission of the F-117 along with the Air to Air deal too.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-weapons.htm

It picked up an "A" when the USAF fighter mafia was worried that the program was heading for the chopping block (like the Army's RAH-66 Comanche). All it meant was that the engineers were scuttling around trying to figure our how to stuff a couple of JDAMS in the weapons bays- I don't think it ever got as far as the trial stage. They were too busy trying to figure out how stop things like the tail plane disintegrating and the avionics suite overheating and shutting down at the time.

It magically (and quietly) lost the "A" about 2 weeks after the Quadrennial Defense Review was published and funding was secured. What a coincidence. :hmm:

As regards the difference between the $135 "sticker price" the GAO figure actually reflects the total cost to the US taxpayer. I would argue that it's the $135m figure that represents the "spin".

The USAF is famous in Washington for cooking the books and faking data on its new programs to make sure they get funded- all services do it, but for some reason the USAF really knows how to take the piss. Indeed, it was the B-1B program which led Congress to institute a whole knew framework for defence appropriations- the Goldwater-Nicholls Act.

[RonO]

so if the chain sawed airframe is scrapped, how much would it cost to buy a replacement?

IOW by all means bitch about the umpty 10's of billions spent to develop the darn thing but pleeze don't go along with some accountant's (yuk spit) fabrication that just leads to the kind of bovine poop we see round here: "yankee rip off - JSF prices wild - $28m jet now over $100m"

my current fave is a bunch of down under agenda laden types that with this kind of bogus math reckons Raptor at $135m a copy is a better buy than JSF at $100m plus. Silly tossers even got their pet politico all orgasmic about it.

Loosers in all this? You folks & your peers. Any chance of reasoned debate is the first to the leave the building.

[Flash2001]

Well...
Those who flew or serviced the F101 might remember that, if you grabbed the canopy jack with the canopy closed, it locked irretievably. The solution was to gather everyone who had never seen a canopy blown and say "Hey fellas, come and look at this!"
After an excellent landing you can use the airplane again!

[sprucemoose]

RonO:

The USAF just gave LM a contract for an additional F-22, which I believe is to replace the test aircraft which crashed at Nellis. Theirs for a cool $143.1 million! :eek:

[JG1]

When it comes down to it, and I was running a country having a scrap with the US, for equal cash outlay I'd rather have 100 MiG-21's or 50 MiG-23's to each 1 Raptor. Raptor might be good but it can't be everywhere at once.

[RonO]

SG, read that myself last night in AWST, $143m it is. You gonna break it to the ozzies?

100 Mig-21's - why stop there? How 'bout 500 Spitfires? 10,000 Sopwiths? Million bows n'arrers? Zillion rocks?

[JG1]

Even one Spit will be enough when the man is stuck in the Raptor with the canopy jammed!

[Zoom]

During the Cold War - aah, those were the days - a friend of mine reckoned that we should scrap all of the fancy jets and buy xxx thousand Grumman Agcats, armed with SNEB rockets and flown by youngsters with PPLs. He had a point: if you were a commie trooper, would you rather see one Harrier or 1000 Agcats coming at you?

[hotshots!]

My own nation has been using a desperate aircraft, the Tornado F3, for many years and has mercifully never had to take on another fighter for real. It was probably better than the Phantom but when everyone else has F15s, F-16s, F-18s, Mig 29s, Su30s etc, then it sadly does not cut it among the big boys.

Norman Stanley Fletcher, the day you are CR on the F3 you can comment, until then, zip it. :)

[SASless]

The F3 ever fire a missile in anger?

[Almost_done]

The F3 ever fire a missile in anger?
Maybe in operations, but never in anger. :)

[barit1]

The word (http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,97576,00.html) now is that it was a software jamup. :ooh: