Video: air-to-air refuelling Nato E-3 goes slightly wrong...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Video: air-to-air refuelling Nato E-3 goes slightly wrong...
...but only slightly...
Things get interesting from about 0.25 ...
More details through Close call: E-3 AWACS almost collides with KC-135 tanker mid-air « The Aviationist
EDIT: original clip got pulled, now see here:
Last edited by Stratofreighter; 24th Oct 2012 at 19:58. Reason: Original clip got pulled, replacement link...
WTF???
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Quite early in my AWACS career I sat in Seat 5 (the jump seat) for a landing in a NATO E-3A. The captain was Italian, as was the Flight Engineer and the Navigator: fortunately the co-pilot was USAF. On the landing roll, the captain suffered from "pilot induced oscillations" in pitch. Rather than hold, he started to chase it and things got rapidly worse until the American Co-pilot cooly called "I have control" and took charge of the cockpit.
I always refused seat 5 for landing again (about 7,000 hrs worth) having discovered why The Pope always kissed the tarmac on arrival having flown Alitalia.
I always refused seat 5 for landing again (about 7,000 hrs worth) having discovered why The Pope always kissed the tarmac on arrival having flown Alitalia.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could not make out the detail - did the 'dog's dick' break off inside the AWACS receptacle or is there an 'auto' panic disconnect on the boom - or did the operator clear the boom?
Reminds me very much of a Victor AAR training sortie when our new boss was being instructed by the senior squadron AARI. On a missed approach, instead of throttling back and trying again he decided to have a another quick stab at the drogue, which ended up in him rapidly approaching the underside of the other tanker. An abrupt nose down to avoid collison (as in the AWACS/KC135 incident) induced something like minus 2G and the interior of our aircraft became a shambles, with loose kit hitting the roof and falling back all over the place. I have a vivid picture of the squash in my cup heading vertically for the roof. Obviously we were all strapped in for AAR or there would have been injuries.
I recall our aircraft was declared Cat 3 and spent some time in the hangar before returning to service. Can't imagine the AWACS would have fared much better.
I recall our aircraft was declared Cat 3 and spent some time in the hangar before returning to service. Can't imagine the AWACS would have fared much better.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having only ever tanked from 20 feet of flailing hose and basket attached to the boom 
, here's another question (for the big round eyes in the pod) that I have often pondered. How much 'movement' is there on the boom/probe assembly when plugged in? Presumably if the receiver moves too far up/down/forwards there is a danger of breaking the boom?
, here's another question (for the big round eyes in the pod) that I have often pondered. How much 'movement' is there on the boom/probe assembly when plugged in? Presumably if the receiver moves too far up/down/forwards there is a danger of breaking the boom?
The 'solid' bit of the boom doesn't make contact with the receiver (or it shouldn't, anyway!). There is an extendable "sting" that comes out that actually makes contact, and moves in-out as required to allow for receiver movement whilst in contact. As the boom approaches the limits of its travel, this "sting" can be rapidly withdrawn to prevent the receiver dragging the boom outside of its safe range of movement. I'm not sure whether this emergency retraction happens automatically or is commanded by the operator, though.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy - what is the normal 'length' of the 'sting'? It always struck me that a forward and upward motion by the receiver stood an excellent change of either tipping the tanker on its nose or pushing the whole boom through the belly which is why I thought the HDU system was better although with a lower flow rate.
Some 'amusing' footage here
including a helo attempting circumcision
Some 'amusing' footage here
Reminds me of a trip at MPA in an Albert when we had a false trail. Sellected wind and the basket fell off, narrowly missing the Staish who was trying to sneak up behind us....The basketless hose came in at a great rate of knots and not only filled the cargo compartment with fuel but with bits of wire and rubber. The Loady MB managed to get into a very small space before me and TT managed to get to the stop switch. Staish legged it home so that he could land as we made a rapid approach took the fast turn off and left a fuel filled Albert in the middle of the dispersal......Talking to the Flight Safety Officer afterwards we mentioned the radio active beta lights......It was mid winter and the snow was deep on the ground.....He ordered the RIC out to try and recover the drogue we did not venture down anywhere near the NAAFI for a long while.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joking aside, I heard there may be injuries amongst the crew in the receiver. I hope everyone is okay.
Regarding the mechanics of boom refuelling:
The KC-135 boom is controlled at all times by the boom operator. A telescope control is used to extend and retract the inner part of the boom while another control deflects the ruddervators, directly in pitch and roll and indirectly in azimuth (yaw). The boom operator manipulates the controls to lift the boom above the receiver, control the boom through the receiver's bow-wave and to 'put the pole in the hole'. After contact is made the boom operator maintains direct control over the boom and manipulates it to follow the receiver's movements in the refuelling envelope.
If the receiver moves towards the limits of the refuelling envelope then the boom operator commands the latches within the receiver's receptacle to release the boom. The same thing happens for a normal disconnect, a limit disconnect or if the receiver pilot commands the disconnect.
There is a contact envelope, within which the boom can enter the receptacle - NB that the nozzle angle is not controllable, so lateral angles are most limiting. After contact is made there is a bigger, disconnect envelope, within which the boom can safely remain in contact with the receiver's receptacle (the nozzle can bend by up to 60 degrees in all directions). Finally, there is a mechanical envelope, beyond which damage will probably occur.
Look up ATP-56 if you want to see what the overall boom limits are.
Look up STANAG 7191 if you want specifics of the envelope limits.
Modern booms work differently, with a lot of functions now automated. And there are plenty if examples of damage occurring by placing the receiver outside of the refuelling (disconnect) envelope.
Regarding the mechanics of boom refuelling:
The KC-135 boom is controlled at all times by the boom operator. A telescope control is used to extend and retract the inner part of the boom while another control deflects the ruddervators, directly in pitch and roll and indirectly in azimuth (yaw). The boom operator manipulates the controls to lift the boom above the receiver, control the boom through the receiver's bow-wave and to 'put the pole in the hole'. After contact is made the boom operator maintains direct control over the boom and manipulates it to follow the receiver's movements in the refuelling envelope.
If the receiver moves towards the limits of the refuelling envelope then the boom operator commands the latches within the receiver's receptacle to release the boom. The same thing happens for a normal disconnect, a limit disconnect or if the receiver pilot commands the disconnect.
There is a contact envelope, within which the boom can enter the receptacle - NB that the nozzle angle is not controllable, so lateral angles are most limiting. After contact is made there is a bigger, disconnect envelope, within which the boom can safely remain in contact with the receiver's receptacle (the nozzle can bend by up to 60 degrees in all directions). Finally, there is a mechanical envelope, beyond which damage will probably occur.
Look up ATP-56 if you want to see what the overall boom limits are.
Look up STANAG 7191 if you want specifics of the envelope limits.
Modern booms work differently, with a lot of functions now automated. And there are plenty if examples of damage occurring by placing the receiver outside of the refuelling (disconnect) envelope.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
This is a shot of an E-3D tanking correctly over Afghanistan in 2002. Photo courtesy of Combat Camera. I am sure that the co-pilot (probably AP?) will know whether this is 8 or 23 Sqn.
Although capable of both probe and drogue and boom tanking, the boom gets the fuel quicker and is usually the preferred option as US tankers tend to be more prolific in theatre. However,as ex-mission crew, I am sure that someone from the flight deck could explain things better than I.
Although capable of both probe and drogue and boom tanking, the boom gets the fuel quicker and is usually the preferred option as US tankers tend to be more prolific in theatre. However,as ex-mission crew, I am sure that someone from the flight deck could explain things better than I.
The E-3 never stabilised properly before the boom operator attempted to refuel it. It was in a climb when contact was made during (I think) a turn and continued climbing until the brute force disconnect.....
The whole sequence appears rushed and unstable.
The extreme pitch PIO will undoubtedly have caused damage and injury to the E-3 and its crew....
The whole sequence appears rushed and unstable.
The extreme pitch PIO will undoubtedly have caused damage and injury to the E-3 and its crew....