PDA

View Full Version : US E-3


PPRuNeUser0139
30th Aug 2009, 18:07
From the Las Vegas Review-Journal (spam version of the Northern Scot)

32-member crew escapes

Plane damaged while landing at Nellis AFB

A plane was damaged while landing at Nellis Air Force Base late Friday, causing the plane to catch fire and forcing its 32-member crew to escape.

The E-3 Sentry warning and control system, also known as an AWACS, was being flown by the 552nd Air Control Wing out of Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma, according to a Nellis spokesman.

The crew was deployed to Nellis as part of the base's Red Flag exercises and was returning from a mission when the incident occurred. Officials did not say how the aircraft was damaged.

Emergency crews at the base quickly extinguished the flames and the plane was evacuated safely.

Investigators have not determined the cause of the accident.

Two's in
30th Aug 2009, 20:48
Looks like too many pies in the front for the landing...everyone out OK though.

http://www.vaq34.com/junk/nellisawacs001.jpg

Winco
31st Aug 2009, 08:50
Thats a hell of a crew - 32!!

How many hangers-on must there have been on board I wonder?

Pleased everyone got out OK

Winco

BEagle
31st Aug 2009, 08:55
How many hangers-on must there have been on board I wonder?

30 :E ?

OK, OK- I'll get me coat.....

Seriously though, thank heavens everyone was safe.

sonicstomp
31st Aug 2009, 09:49
I prefer to crash and burn on the strip :E

The B Word
31st Aug 2009, 23:19
In the immortal words of SR, "You say that Sonic...But if the FE had used the 'Johnson Bar', as he was taught, it would not have happened..." :=

The B Word :ok:

Flight Detent
1st Sep 2009, 02:26
Hey BEagle...does that mean the E-3 doesn't carry an FE?

Otherwise I don't agree with your deduction!

Cheers,

FD

GreenKnight121
1st Sep 2009, 04:21
The E-3C Sentry carries a crew of 20 consisting of pilot (aircraft commander), co-pilot, navigator, flight engineer and 16 AWACS mission specialists. The rear-cabin crew is under a mission crew commander, and includes weapon controllers, radar operators and communications specialists.

So... 12 "looky-Lou"s.

pigsinspace
1st Sep 2009, 04:55
You can teach a monkey how to ride a bike, but have you ever seen a monkey fix one?

You would not be a driver without groundcrew.....

Fortissimo
1st Sep 2009, 07:18
First, the crew of 32 means that it was probably a full-up qualification/training mission, ie there would instructors or evaluators on board - if those are 'looky-Lous", fine.

Second, if my information is correct, the nose-gear doors would not open. And if the doors won't open, it doesn't matter how big your Johnson is! :E

jez_s
1st Sep 2009, 11:03
Some T-cut and a respray and she'll be fine:}!

brickhistory
1st Sep 2009, 13:43
Second, if my information is correct, the nose-gear doors would not open.



Hmmm, so a known nose gear problem before landing and the decison was to take it in to Nellis and not Edwards?

Could be, but...

Winco
1st Sep 2009, 14:17
brickhistory, Why Edwards and NOT Nellis?

Nellis has 2 runways, instead of one thus ops, landings and departures can all continue with just a bit of reshuffling.
Take it to Edwards with a problem and the potential to black the runway and suddenly you loose 100% of your runways - not a good idea.

Presumably all of the groundcrew, kit etc were at Nellis, so if I was the Captain, Nellis would have been my first choice also. bags of room etc. etc.

And lets face it, after an incident like that, you all need to get down to the strip and party, aswell as do some gambling. Clearly it is your lucky day!!

Well done to all concerned again.

Winco

brickhistory
1st Sep 2009, 14:50
Winco,

I don't in any way criticize the actions of the crew and second the "well done to all" if that is the impression of my post.

I am a little leery of a known gear problem being handled at Nellis and not at one of several other alternatives. Such a known problem would involve many phone patches to Boeing, mother Tinker, etc, etc.

Any number of factors to which I am not privy could have resulted in the Nellis outcome which is why I hedged my post with a "Could be."

Doesn't change my gut feeling on it being a surprise to the crew when the nose came down much further than normal however.

The facts will come from the investigation, and I await those with interest.

PPRuNeUser0139
4th Sep 2009, 20:09
Doesn't look too clever this..

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/image001.jpg

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/photo.jpg

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/photo2.jpg

Al R
5th Sep 2009, 08:06
Out of interest, and just at face value, does that appear to be beyond economic repair? How valuable an asset is it and how would that consideration impact on the 'clench your buttocks and just sign the repair cheque' aspect of things? I suppose that if it were just a civvy airliner, it could be written off that much easier?

Buster Hyman
5th Sep 2009, 08:47
The E-3C Sentry carries a crew of 20 consisting of pilot (aircraft commander), co-pilot, navigator, flight engineer and 16 AWACS mission specialists. The rear-cabin crew is under a mission crew commander, and includes weapon controllers, radar operators and communications specialists.

What...no Political Officer?

FJJP
5th Sep 2009, 13:51
I think we would all be surprised just how little damage the frame has suffered, working on the premis that from experience it generally looks worse than it is. If you scrub off the soot, the skin is probably intact, with surprisingly little damage underneath. No doubt it was jacked up fairly sharpish, the nose gear lowered and towed into a shed in not too many hours.

Good job by the crew; glad no-one was hurt.

PPRuNeUser0139
13th Sep 2009, 17:55
Some clearer images of the Nellis E-3C here:

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/nellis-e3_2.jpg

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/nellis-e3_3.jpg

It will be interesting to see how long it takes to repair that little lot..
(and how many $$$)

Looks like the skin has more than a few holes in it.

sv

Pontius Navigator
13th Sep 2009, 18:10
Given the airframe age, probably about 30, and the lower utiliasation recently ( I guess) I wonder if they will bother?

PPRuNeUser0139
13th Sep 2009, 18:11
Close up:

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/nellis-e3_2zoom.jpg

http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp265/geoffpaysbasque/Flying/nellis-e3_3zoom.jpg

Madbob
14th Sep 2009, 08:35
Given that the USAF recognise the value of not throwing all their retired ac to the scrapman but instead send them off to Davis-Monthan in sunny Arizona, it is highly likely they will be able to find an entire nose for an E3 without having to spend $$$$ on repairs. Okay, the surgery of transplanting a new nose will still be expensive it will at least still be feasible and it will avoid the waste of what would otherwise have been an irreplacable asset.....

On the other hand, we seem never to appreciate the value of storing anything - in spite of many base closures with hangar space to spare - of keeping some of our prematurely retired "goodies".....ok, we don't have the same climate but in suitable "bags" with the humidity controlled they could still be stored successfully.

We could certainly have done with keeping a few more Hercs to spread the hours around a bigger fleet, and even perhaps keeping a few Andovers so that the paras could at least get their mandatory jumps in given the lack of C130's. And Nimrods, and VC10's, and Jags and .......:(

MB

PPRuNeUser0139
23rd Sep 2009, 17:39
nellis-e3 (http://www.aewa.org/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=5772)

Looking at this gallery of pics, at what cost does the repair become uneconomic..?

The cause of the accident is being attributed (so far) to a hard landing..

If it is scrapped, by my reckoning they'll have 31 left (+ TS-3).. 2 down out of the original 34. Wonder how that attrition rate compares with the forecast..?

sv

glad rag
23rd Sep 2009, 18:26
Did the nose leg snap/tear off? The resulting fluid fire engulfing bilge area to aft and feeding upwards to lower nose and fuselage being held at the cockpit pressure floor but damage allowing fire/ hot gasses to migrate aft and upwards?????? Supposition supported by the holes bashed by fire service (?) to dump foam/ fire suppressant into cavities.

Nasty type of fire to suppress. :D:D:D

West Coast
24th Sep 2009, 04:29
Curious, It doesn't look like the slides were used.

pigsinspace
24th Sep 2009, 04:47
I think we would all be surprised just how little damage the frame has suffered, working on the premis that from experience it generally looks worse than it is. If you scrub off the soot, the skin is probably intact, with surprisingly little damage underneath. No doubt it was jacked up fairly sharpish, the nose gear lowered and towed into a shed in not too many hours.

Guessing you are not a Techie?

Maybe Loadie? Supplier? Mover?

trap one
24th Sep 2009, 09:13
West Coast.
With the Smoke and Flames would not have used the forward slide but if you check post 15 pic 2 you can make out at least one of the rear slides.

Trap One

k3k3
25th Sep 2009, 14:19
Glad Rag:

There is no cockpit pressure floor, there are hatches in the main cabin down to the lower lobes and slightly forward of the Navs desk there's a grid that can be hinged up to access the lower nose area (If you haven't eaten too many pies).

The equipment bays are pressurised together with the cabin.

brickhistory
25th Sep 2009, 17:43
We set up the Kadena squadron (961st AWACS, now AACS) E-3 bar and christened it "The Lower Lobe."

It's gonna take a lot of unit bake sales to get this jet back in the air.

Besides the airframe damage and difficulties of finding 707 bits and pieces, replacement mission equipment isn't exactly just laying around.