USAF F-15 Fleet Grounded

[ORAC]

Air Force suspends some F-15 operations (http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123074547)

11/4/2007 - WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- The Air Force suspended non-mission critical F-15 flight operations on Nov. 3 following the crash of a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C aircraft Nov. 2.

The cause of that accident is still under investigation, however, preliminary findings indicate that a possible structural failure of the aircraft may have occurred. The suspension of flight operations is a precautionary measure.

The Air Force will ensure mission requirements are met for worldwide operations normally accomplished by the F-15. Current F-15 flying locations include bases in the continental United States, Alaska, England, Hawaii, Japan and the Middle East.

There are more than 700 F-15s in the Air Force inventory. The F-15 reached initial operational capability for the Air Force in September 1975..........

[spectre150]

Could make the forthcoming 48FW evaluation interesting.....

[Tarnished]

Japanese have grounded their F-15s too. And having already grounded their F-2s last week that leaves the Mighty Tomb to defend their airspace.

Life in the old dog yet.

T

[ORAC]

Air Force grounds F-15s in Afghanistan after Missouri crash (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/11/05/f15.grounding/index.html)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A mandatory grounding of Air Force F-15s has been expanded to cover those flying combat missions over Afghanistan after a crash in Missouri last week, Air Force officials said Monday.

The F-15Es in Afghanistan can fly only in emergency situations to protect U.S. and coalition troops in a battle, according to Maj. John Elolf, a spokesman for the U.S. Air Force Central Command.

Maj. Cristin Marposon, an Air Force spokeswoman, told The Associated Press the country's fleet of 676 F-15s, including mission critical jets, was grounded on November 3 for "airworthiness concerns" after the crash of an older model F-15C on Friday. The cause of the crash is still under investigation, but Air Force officials said it was a structural failure and the plane broke apart in flight.

A spokeswoman for Boeing, the aircraft's manufacturer, told AP the company was cooperating with the Air Force but could not provide additional comment because of the pending investigation.

Col. Robert Leeker, commander of the 131st Fighter Wing, said Friday the plane had been among four planes split into pairs and were engaging in one-on-one training flights in which speeds of 400 to 450 mph are typical, according to AP. A pilot, a 10-year veteran of the guard whose name and rank were not released, safely ejected from the aircraft when it crashed in Dent County, Missouri, AP reported. The pilot suffered a dislocated shoulder, a broken arm and minor cuts and bruises.

Now only "mission critical" F-15s will fly.

Pentagon officials said the U.S. Navy has had to move the only aircraft carrier in the region from the Persian Gulf to the North Arabian Sea to fill mission gaps for the F-15s. Several dozen F/A-18 fighters from the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise will fly missions with other Air Force aircraft to fill mission gaps..........

[ORAC]

......Air Force officials said the crash on Friday involved a Missouri Air National Guard F-15C on a training flight with other fighter jets doing combat simulations. After the pilot ejected, the aircraft crashed in a wooded rural area in Dent County, Mo........

Preliminary reports on the recent crash indicate that the jet broke apart just behind the cockpit while in flight, suggesting a major structural failure, according to two people familiar with the incident. The Air Force's Safety Investigation Board is on the scene of the crash and is expected to determine a cause within 60 days.

The Air Force said it is possible that the F-15s could be grounded for days or much longer if top officials decide that all the aircraft must be thoroughly inspected..........

[Jobza Guddun]

If this is as serious as it initially looks, the USAF are going to have a major capability shortfall. They might get their 381 F-22's after all then!

[D-IFF_ident]

Should we await with bated breath the deployment of the F-3?

Didn't think so.

[navibrator]

Should we await with bated breath the deployment of the F-3?

Didn't think so.

D-IFF - scarcasm isn't dead then.

[artyhug]

Well D-IFF Ident if you have anything to do with, well anything vaguely military or aviation related and think that the fact the F-3 can't replace the F-15Es in the Stan is news then we're in an even worse state than I thought.....

Idiot.

[brokenlink]

Thought it had been a bit quite around Lakenheath lately, even the tankers from Mildenhall have been notable by their absence, no traffic or away somewhere?

[D-IFF_ident]

Arty. Nope, didn't think it was news. Please qualify your reason for calling me names with some solid evidence to prove such.

No? Didn't think so.

:rolleyes:

[GreenKnight121]

arty-hug... navibrator got the fact D-IFF's post was sarcasm (check the dictionary), as did most everybody else.

Except you.

[Backwards PLT]

I think the point was that D-IFF's post just doesn't make sense (sarcasm or not). Although the aircraft that crashed was a F15C (hope the pilot recovers quickly, btw), the aircraft doing current ops are F15Es - so surely the post should have been "Should we await with bated breath the deployment of the GR4?" Or was it some joke about an air-to-air fighter covering an air-to-ground task that I just don't get?

I suspect that it is a misunderstanding on D-IFF's part that a) the F-15C is on ops (by which I mean Iraq/Afghan) and/or b) The F3 couldn't cover the QRA type "ops" job that the F-15C is doing. Please correct me if I am wrong/clarify for the idiot at the back (me). Alternatively it could have been some not-so-subtle fishing, in which case I think he just landed a couple!:ok:

Sorry if I am being a little thick here, but I hate it when I just don't get a whole thread (or thread drift/hijack!)

[artyhug]

Exactly, I'm all for banter and will gladly show you the hook in my mouth if it was an attempt at fishing but sarcasm?

I'd suggest you should be the ones to check the dictionary and not just for how it is spelt. As for my assessment of idiocy well you could always check the dictionary for a definition of that too.

[orgASMic]

Dull, I know, but getting back to the thread; 48FW has a full flypro today.
Panic over.

[D-IFF_ident]

Such a shame that a spot of banter requires clarification nowadays; I am loath to explain jokes to those who don't "get them". However, I forgot about the pedants that lurk herein, and the petulant, and the rash.

I suggested the F-3 both because it is the closest the RAF has to the F-15C, from which the F-15E was evolved, and because the F-3 has arguably the least impressive deployment record in the RAF's recent history. I hoped that would make it the most ironic comparison. Also, since F-18s have been covering many of the missions skipped by the grounded F-15s, a fighter like the F-3, arguably evolved from, if not with, a ground attack airframe, makes for an interesting comparison. The comparison in this instance being against mutli-role aircraft developed from a fighter and being so successful. I won't be drawn on opinions of the successes and failures of the F-3, I don't think it is relevant.

I could have chosen the GR-4, yes, but to be more precise I should have suggested both the GR-4 and the F-3, if I was actually hoping to get anywhere near the capability of the truly multi-role F-15E. I could, in fact, have chosen any aircraft of the RAF's inventory and I doubt any of them could replicate the mission profile of the F-15E.

Getting vaguely back to the thread, the lesson the RAF could learn here (I emphasise the could) is that the US had sufficient redundancy in their air power to continue operations, in this case by moving a carrier fleet closer to the AOR. If the RAF was to ground a fleet, lets say the Harrier for arguments sake - since they are known to operate in the same AOR as the F-15E, then would the RAF be able to continue to support the Operation at the same level? That is the same level today, now, not in a few months time. Taking this thought further, how would the RAF cope with the grounding of, say, the Nimrod fleet (might it be significant they were not grounded for long after recent incidents and accidents?), or the VC10 fleet, Pumas or Chinooks for an indefinite period. Would capability honestly be sustained? Do we/you/they have too many eggs in too few baskets?

And to get back to the thread proper, with apologies to those who only came here to read about the F-15 story, my sincerest thoughts to the injured pilot and wishes for a speedy return to the saddle. I hope the engineers work out the problem with haste and with due import; that the IPTs in the RAF would do the same....

As for arty - not relevant whether I am involved in aviation or anything vaguely military related, this forum is for the discussion of such by anyone interested, not specifically for those involved. If it were, then we'd lose half the members. Judging by your tone, however, I'm going to guess that you are in the RAF, probably a WSO in the back of an F-3 sometimes as often as once each week, and probably got an axe to grind since you failed pilot training, and far enough into the course to be really upset, maybe low level Nav?

:ugh:

[High_Expect]

I hope you like the taste of humble pie. :hmm: to say you were off the mark with Artyhug is a slight understatement... Get back to writing your column.

Oh and in case you were wondering the breakdown of the Military Aircrew Forum is (174 Viewing)
A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.

That would suggest to me Aircrew, Groundcrew and Military support services. Not spotters or Journos. May I suggest you try the Wannabes forum :ok:

[Jackonicko]

D-IFF's previous postings about JPA, LOA and the like would suggest to me that he's service (or recently ex-service) and not journo.

Some here are intelligent enough to judge their fellow PPRuNers according to what they write, rather than on what they do for a living, and by their support for military aviation and the services.

Some of us journos are undeniably to$$ers.

But then so are some of you! ;)

[artyhug]

Some here are intelligent enough to judge their fellow PpruNers according to what they write, rather than on what they do for a living, and by their support for military aviation and the services.

Well I thought that was what I did. No pedancy, petulancy or rashness involved. Every once in a while the inability of some people to judge banter from ill conceived, pointless and embarrassing comments riles me somewhat.

Sorry I'll get back to my smokes and pancakes and the mighty Viper.......

Besides I have a soft spot for F3 WSO's. ;)

[D-IFF_ident]

High, art and any other upset 'FJ aircrew' - let's not hijack the thread any longer with who has the biggest willy competitions - let it get back to the topic. It matters not my profession, I don't have the time for your petty playtime squabbles any more.

[airborne_artist]

D-IFF - My guess is that only the US have the capacity both in terms of numbers per type, and the diversity of aircraft model/type to remove one type and still maintain a realistic capability level. It's not so much a comment on UK defence planning and procurement, as the sheer cost of procuring and supporting multiple fleets covering the same role/requirement.

Even then, how would the US forces cope with the temporary removal of the AH-64, for example?

[colonel cluster]

By deploying USMC Cobras?

[GreenKnight121]

And people wonder why the USMC stuck with upgrading the Cobra (AH-1W, AH-1Z) instead of buying the AH-64.


[Yes, I know Wiki-waki... and some fan publications, claim the USMC wanted the "Sea Apache" but was denied funds by Congress in 1981 & 1996... but I was in the USMC in 1981, and the navalized AH-64 was considered overweight and with too little single-engine safety margin and was disliked by nearly the entire rotary-light-attack community... so while some elements may have been pushing it, many others were opposing it... which told Congress not to bother with funding. By 1996, the 4-blade rotor version of the Cobra was considered ~90% as good as the Apache at ~3/4 the cost, and was being strongly supported by the USMC leadership.]

[ORAC]

F-15Es Flying Again Over Afghanistan (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3184163&C=america)

F-15E Strike Eagles are flying again in the war zone, but nearly 500 A, B, C and D models remain grounded.

Air Combat Command is returning its 224 F-15Es to flight 10 days after the entire fleet was grounded for safety concerns following the Nov. 2 crash of an F-15C. There is no word when the other F-15 aircraft will return to flight, said ACC spokesman Maj. Tom Crosson.

U.S. Air Force Gen. John Corley, ACC commander, ordered the F-15Es back in the air Nov. 11 after each one passed a safety inspection, according to an ACC statement.

All of the F-15Es deployed to Afghanistan with the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing are now back in flying status, said wing spokesman Capt. Michael Meridith. The last aircraft at Bagram Air Base was cleared for flight Tuesday, he said.

Crosson said the inspections will check the aircraft’s hydraulic system lines; longerons, which are molded metal strips running from front to rear of the aircraft fuselage; and straps and skin panels in and around the environmental control system bay. The inspections are being conducted at all four F-15E bases: Seymour Johnson, N.C.; Eglin, Fla.; Langley, Va.; and Mountain Home, Idaho.

Similar inspections will be performed on the non-E model F-15s, Crosson said, but there is no timeline yet......

[ASRAAM]

Guys,

Why all this bickering when you are all wrong anyway. Everyone knows that Britains got a much better multi role jet than the F15E.

The Mighty Typhoon wil be deploying eastwards immediately to fill the gap!



What really, you mean it isn't. Oops sorry guys

[West Coast]

If you didn't kill it with that post, you certainly staggered it a bit. Seems a bit of logic you and the AF are sharing, better jets are out there. Now if its the Typhoon...thats another story.

I have to believe those politically savvy within the USAF are using the F15 grounding as their milk carton looking for lost F22'S

[ranger703]

The Lakenheath E's were back flying yesterday!

[ORAC]

U.S. Air Force Resumes F-15 Flights
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, WASHINGTON

The U.S. Air Force resumed authorizing flights of its F-15 fighter jets Nov. 23, two weeks after it grounded them following an accident, a military statement said.

“As of today, 219 of the 224 E-models and 294 of the 442 A-D models in the inventory have been inspected and cleared for flight,” said John Corley, a general in the Air Combat Command, in a statement on the force’s Web site.

“I have directed each F-15 aircraft be inspected and cleared before returning to operational status,” he added. “The cause of the mishap remains under investigation.”.......

[ORAC]

Starting to look very serious, all except the F-15Es are grounded again...

Most USAF F-15s in Stand-Down (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3214172&C=america)

Just days after the U.S. F-15 fleet returned to the air following a worldwide grounding, the commander of the U.S. Air Combat Command called for a stand-down of all F-15 A, B, C and D models due to concerns about “fleetwide airworthiness” and the potential for “a catastrophic failure” of the aircraft.

The E-model Eagles are not affected by the stand-down, which is a less severe restriction than grounding.

Gen. John Corley said in a Nov. 28 ACC statement that the investigation into the early November crash of an Air National Guard F-15C over Missouri has raised concerns about metal fatigue near the plane’s canopy, which could cause cracks and eventually the failure of the upper longerons, the metal rails that hold the fuselage of the aircraft together.

“Although the longeron area was covered in general by previous inspections as a result of the Nov. 2 mishap, technical experts with the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, assisting in the Accident Investigation Board, have recommended a specific inspection of the suspect area based on the recent findings,” Corley said. “Based on this most recent data, we believe it is prudent to stand down our F-15 A-D aircraft until such time as each aircraft can receive a more detailed and tailored inspection.”........

[MarkD]

Apparently CF-18s are being tasked into Alaska at the moment as there are not enough F-22s to cover the F-15s affected.

[CrowF15]

Thanks for kind words on a speedy recovery!:ok:

[ORAC]

F-15A-Ds Remain Grounded

12/10/2007 - LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE, Va. (AFPN) -- Air Force maintainers continue to perform methodical and time-intensive inspections on all F-15 Eagle A, B, C and D model aircraft which are revealing more cracks in the aircraft longerons.

The discovery of more structural damage in the F-15s prompted the Dec. 3 stand-down order from Air Combat Command Commander Gen. John Corley.

The decision follows additional information received from the ongoing investigation of the Nov. 2 F-15C mishap, which resulted in the loss of that aircraft. The Accident Investigation Board found defects which indicate potential structural damage in the rest of the fleet.

Maintainers at Langley have found no cracks or evidence of fatigue in F-15 longerons so far; however, throughout the Air Force, maintainers have found cracks in the upper longerons of eight F-15s (as of Dec. 10). Four of these aircraft are assigned to the Air National Guard's 173rd Fighter Wing, Kingsley Field, Ore.; two are assigned to the 18th Wing, Kadena Air Base, Japan; another is assigned to the 325th Fighter Wing, Tyndall AFB, Fla.; and one assigned to the ANG 131st Fighter Wing, St. Louis, Mo.

Every aircraft will undergo all previously published time compliance technical order (TCTO) inspections. However, unlike in recent weeks, the cleared aircraft will not immediately return to flight. Technical experts at Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, Ga., are developing new inspection techniques based on findings in parts of the mishap aircraft. These inspections will be performed as soon as the new TCTO is available for the affected F-15s.

As part of the previous TCTO, maintenance crews around the Air Force are stripping paint and performing non-destructive inspections in the F-15's upper longeron just aft of the canopies.

Maintainers are working around the clock to conduct these inspections, said Capt. Timothy Blasiman, the 71st Aircraft Maintenance Unit officer in charge.

Each of the 20 F-15s assigned to Langley require a minimum inspection time of 12.5 hours. Some F-15 models elsewhere require inspections that take more than 20 hours. The B and D models are more time consuming, said Captain Blasiman, because they have two seats. The rear seat requires removal to access the upper longerons.

Inspections are more than just a visual check, said Staff Sgt. Aaron Gammill. After the paint is stripped and bare metal is exposed, Airmen from the non-destructive inspection shop apply chemicals that reveal cracks under a black light. Other inspections in hard-to-see areas are done with a boar scope - a tool that uses a tiny camera and fits in tight areas.

Inspections must be meticulous because the nature of the problem could lead to loss of life or aircraft, said Bo Floyd, the Air Force F-15 Engineer Technical Services lead. Air Force officials are not willing to take risks in this matter, Mr. Floyd said. "Our mission is to generate sorties and maintain a combat-effective airplane here," said Captain Blasiman.

Inspection requirements are precise and demanding, said Ralph Farley, the ACC Engineering Technical Service representative. "Pieces of the crashed jet have been (retrieved) and sent to the Air Force research lab ... to see what may have caused the aircraft to disintegrate," he said. "That information is going down to (our engineers) where they will determine how to inspect, what will be inspected and the form in which it's done."....

-----------------------

Love the Boar Scope. :}

[baffy boy]

Pontius,
You said the D's were flying at Lakenheath, sure they weren't E's?
A thru D models are 'stood down' tfn.


The duration of the stand-down is pending. Aircraft will not be returned to operational status until the F-15 A-D model findings and data have been analyzed, required inspections have been accomplished and the necessary repair or mitigation actions have been completed.

Computer simulations have indicated a catastrophic structural failure could result from cracks in the longerons. To date, longeron cracks have been discovered in an additional four aircraft. These aircraft are awaiting further engineering instructions before they are returned to operational status.

Air Combat Command officials continue to work with those in the Air National Guard, the Air Force Reserve and sister major commands in Europe and the Pacific, as well as with joint and coalition partners, to ensure mission coverage.

The stand-down does not affect the F-15E Strike Eagle.

[Pontius Navigator]

Baffy, ty, you are right of course.

[Two's in]

Full story here;

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071226/ap_on_re_us/grounded_f15s


By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer
Wed Dec 26, 4:00 PM ET


FRESNO, Calif. - The grounding of hundreds of F-15s because of dangerous structural defects is straining the nation's air defense network, forcing some states to rely on their neighbors' fighter jets for protection, and Alaska to depend on the Canadian military.

The F-15 is the sole fighter at many of the 16 or so "alert" sites around the country, where planes and pilots stand ready to take off at a moment's notice to intercept hijacked airliners, Cessnas that wander into protected airspace, and other threats.

The Air Force grounded about 450 F-15s after one of the fighters began to break apart in the air and crashed Nov. 2 in Missouri. An Air Force investigation found "possible fleet-wide airworthiness problems" because of defects in the metal rails that hold the fuselage together. It is not clear when the F-15s will be allowed to fly again.

Compounding the problem created by the grounding, another fighter jet used for homeland defense, the F-16, is in high demand for Iraq operations. And the next-generation fighter, the F-22 Raptor, is only slowly replacing the aging F-15.

[Double Zero]

I'm with West Coast; this is just too heaven sent for USAF people who want more ( back to original numbers ) F-22's, and those who'd be quite chuffed to supply them !

That doesn't mean I don't think it would be a good idea though...

[ORAC]

Defense Industry Daily: Jan 9/08:

Air Combat Command officials clear 60% of the F-15A-D fleet for flying status, and recommends a limited return to flight for those planes that have cleared all inspections. The decision follows detailed information briefed on Jan 4/08 to Air Combat Command from the Air Force's F-15 systems program manager, senior engineers from Boeing and the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center; as well as a briefing received on Jan 9/08 from the Accident Investigation Board president.

The USAF report describes inspections as "more than 90% complete," with remaining inspections focusing primarily on the forward longerons. Thus far, 9 other F-15s have been found with longeron fatigue-cracks, and almost 40% of inspected aircraft have at least 1 longeron that is thinner than blueprint specifications. ACC believes each affected F-15 will have to be analyzed to determine if there is sufficient strength in the non-specification longeron, and this analysis will take place at the Warner-Robbins Air Logistics Center over the next 4 weeks. A number of F-15s are scheduled to be retired in 2009, and calculating the cost of fixes and airframe life of fixed aircraft could have a substantial bearing on the size of the USAF's future F-15 fleet.

Meanwhile, the 2-month grounding, which has been the longest of any USAF jet fighter, is a gift that keeps on giving. Fully 75% of US Air Force and Air National Guard F-15A-D pilots have lost their currency status for solo flight, and another week would have made it 100%. Instructor pilots have retained their currency and will begin flying F-15B/Ds with the other pilots, so the pilots can land the plane and regain their status. This will be followed by further pilot training, which is required to regain operational proficiency status.

[ORAC]

Defective Part Cited in Fighter Crash

WASHINGTON (AP) - An Air Force investigation of the crash last fall of an F-15C Eagle fighter jet concluded that a defective metal beam in the frame cracked, causing it to disintegrate during flight.

In a report being released Thursday, obtained in advance by The Associated Press, Air Force investigators said they had found that the sole reason for the accident was the faulty support beam, called a longeron, which failed to meet the manufacturer's specifications. The investigation was led by Air Force Col. William Wignall.

"The accident investigation board president (Wignall) found, by clear and convincing evidence, the cause of this accident was a failure of the upper right longeron, a critical support structure in the F-15C aircraft,'' the report says.

About 20 minutes after takeoff from an airfield near St. Louis on Nov. 2, the forward fuselage of Maj. Stephen Stilwell's $42 million F-15C Eagle shook violently and then broke apart 18,000 feet above the ground. Stilwell, his left shoulder dislocated and his left arm shattered, barely had time to safely eject as pieces of his aircraft tumbled from the sky over the Missouri countryside.

More troubling, however, are the results of a parallel examination finding as many as 163 of the workhorse aircraft also have flawed support beams, or longerons. The aircraft remain grounded as the Air Force continues to determine how serious the problem is and whether extensive, costly repairs are needed. Another 19 of the aircraft have yet to be inspected and also remain grounded................

The longeron helps support the cockpit and strengthen the jet as it moves through high-stress maneuvers while traveling hundreds of miles per hour. Analysis of recovered parts from Stilwell's jet identified a crack in the beam near the fuselage that investigators say grew over time and was not detected during regular maintenance of the aircraft. In the report, Wignall said that prior to Stilwell's flight "no inspection requirements existed for detecting a crack in the longeron.'' ............

Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said it may make more sense to retire the older F-15s rather than fix them. Due to their age, another part could fail even after the longerons are repaired. "This is an aircraft that was designed during the Nixon administration,'' Thompson said. ``It doesn't seem sensible to be making fixes so late in the game.''.........

[harrogate]

It's a conspiracy by Lockheed to bump up the F22 order.

[Wilfo]

CrowF15
Thanks for kind words on a speedy recovery!

Do you want to talk about it? :)

[TEEEJ]

Air Force Releases F-15 Crash Animation

http://video.nbc10.com/player/?id=203425

Some F-15Cs were active at Lakenheath on the 9th Jan.

[con-pilot]

Full accident report plus videos of breakup and HUD data.

http://www.acc.af.mil/aibreports/index.asp

[US Herk]

Interesting - so the aircraft was not built to spec.
Actually, top USAF Generals went in & replaced all the longerons with ones that didn't meet spec so that they could justify buying more F22! :}

[TEEEJ]

Another F-15 has crashed off Hawaii. Pilot is safe and well after being rescued.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080201/BREAKING01/80201002