F-35 runway vacated...faster than planned

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Reports coming in that an F-35 has trundled off the end of the runway at Marham. No one hurt but it looks to be pretty well stuck.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/921x1288/338158377_3338413113074695_6738023637731784156_n_1__0e679ef8 b33422686f195ffab5af04cff786e94f.jpg

[NutLoose]

Surely you just need to crank up the fan and lift it back out and then hover taxy back onto the hard stuff.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I think it is part of a trial. They are looking at putting a turfed edge around the carriers to catch them LOL

[dixi188]

At least there isn't a river at the end of the runway. At Yeovilton a Seaharrier ended up in the river YEO.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Indeed it did. The joke at the time was that it was a new ASW variant...
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/fa2intheriver_c1111cc52328e2f47343d41797873f6fd51fe9ba.jpg

[trim it out]

Missed opportunity to earn a tie there.

[chevvron]

Barrier ooops!
Looks like no barriers have been installed; not sure if they have hooks but RHAGs are notified for 06/24.
Airfield chart says:-
'2 Caution. Rwy 06/24 and Rwy 01/19 concrete ends only liable to be slippery when wet.'
'6 For normal ops, both cables down'.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I am not sure, but I don't think the f35b has a tailhook. I will try to find out.

Has it been cleared for barrier engagement? Not all aircraft were in the past.

[gravedigger666]

No hook on the B model

[NutLoose]

Missed opportunity to earn a tie there.

maybe he was after a winged boot for a home run?

[Sue Vêtements]

It's probably because he had to avoid that van and the two people in the hi-viz jackets

[SLXOwft]

Has the tweeter been arrested under section 1 of the Official Secets Act 1911? Given the size of the F-35 fleet communication a photograph of one stuck in the mud 'might be directly or indirectly useful to a potential enemy'. :E

[Easy Street]

Looks to have been photographed by a drone from outside the wire. As long as the drone was being operated with due regard for air traffic (of which there probably wasn't much on a Friday afternoon!) there is not a lot the MOD can do to stop such photos being taken by the public.

[Fortissimo]

Looks to have been photographed by a drone from outside the wire. As long as the drone was being operated with due regard for air traffic (of which there probably wasn't much on a Friday afternoon!) there is not a lot the MOD can do to stop such photos being taken by the public.

The area immediately round an airfield (or airport etc) is restricted, without permission you can't fly within 1km including the runway end extensions regardless of traffc levels - see the ENR 5.1 map (NATS airspace restrictions (https://nats-uk.ead-it.com/cms-nats/opencms/en/uas-restriction-zones/#Dronesafe_Map)). Since the airfield would have been BLACK at the time the pic was taken you would have a job arguing the drone was hazarding other aircraft - for which a 5 year prison term is available - but, barring stand-off via optical zoom etc, this drone flight would have been illegal.

Policing is a Civpol rather than MOD responsibilty (it's outside the wire) but policing is in any case difficult. That does not detract from the illegality of operating near an aerodrome covered by the restrictions, which does not deter those who regularly infringe in the Heathrow area.

[farefield]

The Civpol, or, failed Met Applicants, are usually hanging around Chalk Lane with their speed guns.

[Easy Street]

On second thoughts, looking at the view on Google Maps, it could well have been photographed from the A1122, and there is precisely nothing the police can do about that!

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/719x1278/screenshot_20230401_192815_maps_f71f167a106f3b08eed65c1cf9b3 9f89267e158d.jpg

[chevvron]

The area immediately round an airfield (or airport etc) is restricted, without permission you can't fly within 1km including the runway end extensions regardless of traffc levels - see the ENR 5.1 map (NATS airspace restrictions (https://nats-uk.ead-it.com/cms-nats/opencms/en/uas-restriction-zones/#Dronesafe_Map)). Since the airfield would have been BLACK at the time the pic was taken you would have a job arguing the drone was hazarding other aircraft - for which a 5 year prison term is available - but, barring stand-off via optical zoom etc, this drone flight would have been illegal.

Don't know where you got '1km' radius; around Marham there is an ATZ and within this, flights by UAVs are not permitted without permission.
In the case of Marham, the restriction is a circle 2.5nm radius centred on the centre of the main runway and from surface to 2,000ft agl and H24 operation.

[chevvron]

No hook on the B model
So assuming they have bowsprings installed I know it's only a matter of pressing one button to raise the overrun cable (did it many times at Farnborough) and had '35b's been fitted with a hook, even one which just drops down, it wouldn't have run off the end.
SUGGESTION to MOD: wouldn't it be a good idea if you retrofitted '35b's with hooks if you have a known 'slippery runway' problem?

[ExAscoteer2]

Or a Barrier...

[LateArmLive]

So assuming they have bowsprings installed I know it's only a matter of pressing one button to raise the overrun cable (did it many times at Farnborough) and had '35b's been fitted with a hook, even one which just drops down, it wouldn't have run off the end.
SUGGESTION to MOD: wouldn't it be a good idea if you retrofitted '35b's with hooks if you have a known 'slippery runway' problem?
Seriously? You think they can just "add a hook"?

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Marham, AFAIK, has mk1 RHAGs that use the old rubber grommets. Standard cable state is both down.

On checking, the F35B can't take a hook as there is a ton of gubbins in its rear end that make the windy bit point in all directions. (sorry to be over technical) ;-)

Given that these aircraft can automatically eject the pilot under certain circumstances, has it been cleared to use a barrier (where fitted)? My thought is it will not be cleared.

[Sevarg]

For God's sake resurface the runway!

[SpazSinbad]

For God's sake resurface the runway!
https://insidedio.blog.gov.uk/2018/01/22/looking-ahead-a-project-update-from-raf-marham/
22 Jan 2018 "...[RAF Marham] Runway Refurbishment - The biggest area of work in the project is the resurfacing of the station’s Air Operating Surfaces, including both runways and all the Airfield Ground Lighting. Work is progressing well and our contractors, a joint venture of Galliford Try and Lagan Construction (GTLC), have already completed the resurfacing of the runway intersection, which they managed in only three weeks. They are nearing completion on the first of the two runways...."

Infrastructure works well underway at RAF Marham

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJr3l-RdbaY

[chevvron]

Marham, AFAIK, has mk1 RHAGs that use the old rubber grommets. Standard cable state is both down.

On checking, the F35B can't take a hook as there is a ton of gubbins in its rear end that make the windy bit point in all directions. (sorry to be over technical) ;-)

Tried zooming in on satellite images and I can't make out the bowsprings so you're obviously right; I can make out the cables but there must be grommets stowed either side of the runway; these would take several minutes to position (if an un-premeditated engagement is necessary) whereas the bowsprings can be operated instantly. Even when we had bowsprings installed, we always operated with the overrun cable up while a hook equipped aircraft was flying.
No hook on the '35b but they must be installed on the '35c for carrier landings and maybe for the '35a too and it would take lots of the folding stuff to install new barriers even if they could be cleared for the F35b.
As for the ends of the runway being 'slippery when wet'; well this was well known years ago especially when you had white painted runway markings on the concrete bits too; our pilots often remarked about it even when we'd done a runway inspection to check.

[SpazSinbad]

https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/stations/raf-marham/documents/raf-marham-dam/ (PDF 6.4Mb) "The type of Air System Arresting System employed at RAF Marham is the Rotary Hydraulic Arresting Gear (RHAG) Mk1."

RHAG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuV_tPBvXow
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1381x873/donotloseyourrhag_5024f74f13230fc8d80d9f9199c26b22e9f95572.j pg

[SpazSinbad]

F-35C AHS Arresting Hook System on left with the F-35A Emergency Arrest Hook on the right. The F-35A hook is used as a 'tie down' for engine runs otherwise it must be inspected and perhaps replaced after use whereas the F-35C hook is designed to be reusable. The URL in graphic no longer works so I won't add it here.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1680x1050/f_35c_ahooks_afffd9892d676c64f2d702ca6ea0772e77252047.jpg

[chevvron]

So it's as I said; if the hook fitted to the '35a was also fitted to the '35b, it could have helped if the RHAG had been raised.

[OvertHawk]

So it's as I said; if the hook fitted to the '35a was also fitted to the '35b, it could have helped if the RHAG had been raised.

And it's also as the other poster said - you can't fit the hook to the B because of the configuration of the vectoring engine nozzle!!

[ACW342]

https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/stations/raf-marham/documents/raf-marham-dam/ (PDF 6.4Mb) "The type of Air System Arresting System employed at RAF Marham is the Rotary Hydraulic Arresting Gear (RHAG) Mk1."

RHAG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuV_tPBvXow
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1381x873/donotloseyourrhag_5024f74f13230fc8d80d9f9199c26b22e9f95572.j pg
All very well until the pilot tries to kill the Runway Controller in the Runway caravan by landing PERFECTLY on the numbers, thereby engaging the APPROACH end barrier in the hook.

[Fortissimo]

Don't know where you got '1km' radius; around Marham there is an ATZ and within this, flights by UAVs are not permitted without permission.
In the case of Marham, the restriction is a circle 2.5nm radius centred on the centre of the main runway and from surface to 2,000ft agl and H24 operation.

I didn’t use ‘radius’. The Marham ATZ is not the same as the restrictions shown in the ENR 5.1 at link, which is the bit applicable to UAVs.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Moot point though as the image was not taken with a drone.

Also worth bearing in mind that even though an aerodrome is BLACK, it can very quickly become operational again. Once the fire crews are no longer needed then normal crash cat is restored and operations to pads, rotary activity, and alternate runway ops (if available) can recommence in the time it takes to make a radio call.

The FRZ around Marham is the same as the ATZ with the addition of stubs. 1km wide extending 5km from the runway threshold - ( Why we still see fit to mix units of measure still confounds me)


name
EG RU228B MARHAM RWY 01
description
523538N 0003307E -
523543N 0003215E -
523626N 0003225E thence anti-clockwise by the arc of a circle radius 2.5 NM centred on 523854N 0003302E to
523625N 0003319E -
523538N 0003307E
Upper limit: 2000 FT SFC
Lower limit: SFC
Class: FRZ Active H24. Unmanned aircraft flight not permitted unless permission has been granted by the relevant Air Traffic Service unit or aerodrome operator. For contact details see AIP, Part 3 - Aerodromes, Section AD 2.2

[chevvron]

Fortissimo:
S.W.B. has spelt it out; if you still doubt what we say I suggest you google 'UAS Restriction Zones' for further details.

[chevvron]

All very well until the pilot tries to kill the Runway Controller in the Runway caravan by landing PERFECTLY on the numbers, thereby engaging the APPROACH end barrier in the hook.
As we've already said, there are no barriers at the ends of the runway at Marham although there are at other airfields, just the cables which are well displaced from the RCV.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

All very well until the pilot tries to kill the Runway Controller in the Runway caravan by landing PERFECTLY on the numbers, thereby engaging the APPROACH end barrier in the hook.

Not sure which runways you have used but landing on the "numbers" is a fair way down the concrete, after the piano keys, and no where near ANY down barriers (where fitted) roughly 80metres away. .
Are you confusing BARRIERS and CABLES ?
Part of ATC checks in the tower AND the caravan are that the approach is clear , nothing on the runway that should not be there and that the approach end barrier (where fitted) is correctly configured ie DOWN.
Under normal operations there is zero reason for the duty-runway approach-end barrier to ever be raised - Only during quiet period it may go UP for servicing access. ATC will be extra dilligent in checking its state beforee issuing any future clearances. Same with aircraft suddenly declaring they wish to use the non-duty runway - drilled into all ATCOs as part of their checks before issuing a clearance.

[Dominator2]

SATCOS WHIPPING,

You miss the point that ACW342 was trying to make. On the average airfield the approach cable is set 1200 to 1500 feet in from the runway threshold. On the average fighter aircraft the angle of attack on approach is such that the hook hangs well below the height of the main landing gear..

The result of this is that the hook hits the ground some 300 to 400 feet prior to the main gear.

The average pilot will try to land well prior to a cable to ensure a good engagement and reduce the risk of "hook skip".

At an airfield that has both cables and barriers the barriers are placed within the prepared over-run just short of the threshold.

It is possible for a pilot, in his/her keenness to land well short of the cable, to allow the hook to hit the ground prior to a lowered barrier! The result is normally that the barrier is ripped out of the ground. This feat has been achieved a number of times by F4s, Lightnings and I'm sure many other types.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I have not misunderstood ACW at all.
A "perfect" landing on the numbers will not result in a down hook engaging a down barrier.

However, landing short on the piano keys might.

[chevvron]

I have not misunderstood ACW at all.
A "perfect" landing on the numbers will not result in a down hook engaging a down barrier.

However, landing short on the piano keys might.
Even if (when?) the landing aircraft does inadvertantly engage the downwind (approach end) barrier, there is no way that barrier will take out the RCV if it is parked in the correct position because the stanchions will restrict it's width when pulled out; the pullout of a RHAG is similarly limited by the position of sheaves on the runway edge.

[Just This Once...]

For aircraft with only a spindly emergency hook you don't drop them whilst airborne unless you are attempting to engage the approach end. If you dragged such a hook down the runway length to the departure end you would have very little of it left!

[57mm]

The arrestor hook on our F4K/Ms was 400 pounds of Detroit pig iron. Worked a treat and was even used as a silent signal on intercepts.

[Dominator2]

SATCOS WHIPPING,

Sorry but you are wrong. With over 6000 hrs on F4s and Tornado F3 I think that I know this subject quite well.

If a pilot over an F4, Tornado or similar Fast Jet lands “On the Numbers”, but not short of the runway, their hook (if down) will hit the ground in the undershoot and “May” take a barrier in the down position.

[chevvron]

SATCOS WHIPPING,

Sorry but you are wrong. With over 6000 hrs on F4s and Tornado F3 I think that I know this subject quite well.

If a pilot over an F4, Tornado or similar Fast Jet lands “On the Numbers”, but not short of the runway, their hook (if down) will hit the ground in the undershoot and “May” take a barrier in the down position.
Most RHAG engagements I witnessed were with Buccaneers; the pilot would, as you say, aim to touch down before the threshold markings to ensure the hook was on the ground; this was not helped by the fact we had a displaced threshold and the hook would strike three of the last centreline approach light fittings before the green threshold lights and risk the hook 'bouncing' as you said.

[Krystal n chips]

Reports coming in that an F-35 has trundled off the end of the runway at Marham. No one hurt but it looks to be pretty well stuck.

Hmm, well it's stuck certainly, but hardly " well stuck" given it's barely left the runway and most of the wheels are shown clear of the grass / mud.

Far more interesting will be to find out, why.

[Ninthace]

Hmm, well it's stuck certainly, but hardly " well stuck" given it's barely left the runway and most of the wheels are shown clear of the grass / mud.

Far more interesting will be to find out, why.
Perhaps the driver was on a promise and was trying to get home quick?

[sandiego89]

Can the B do a "braking nozzles" setting like the Harrier/Sea Harrier could to reduce ground roll? or would that take too much weight off the wheels, reducing braking effectiveness?

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

Hmm, well it's stuck certainly, but hardly " well stuck" given it's barely left the runway and most of the wheels are shown clear of the grass / mud.

Far more interesting will be to find out, why.

Why? That's easy. The runway was about 100feet too short. :O

As for well stuck.. It took a big FO crane to hoik it out, not just lashed up to ATC Landrover and pulled backwards.

Dominator2 I bow to your 6000 hrs on fast and pointy things. I won't mention my XX,000+ hours as ATC Supervisor and thankfully never seeing a pilot mess up to the extent of snagging the down approach-end barrier ! . I would be genuinely interested to see a report on one of those. LOL I am not saying it has never happened, I am saying that putting your wheels on the numbers isn't going to result in snagging a down barrier. If it were likely then SATCO would be having a stand up chat with with the Staish as to why the clear approach parameters were not met. That said, I did see a Sea Harrier leave hi sundercarriage at the concrete lip of the runway...oh, hang on...he landed short. ;-)

Generally it is the over-run Cable UP. intention is to snag the upwind wire and prevent an over-run. There is no need in that scenario to slam the hook early and "risk" hitting the numbers and taking the lying-flat-on-the -gorund barrier.

MARHAM standard config is both cables down
LEEMING standard config is both cables down
CONINGSBY standard config is approach down overun up
WADDINGTON standard config is approach derigged overun up

All point at over-run being the favoured UK option. The Americans like approach end engagements though, Plenty of vids on YouBook and FaceTube .

I've seen quite few proper approach end engagements. Never seen the hook get anywher close to a flat barrier (perhaps thankfully) . Saw a Tornado come back to Boscombe trailing effectivley a 50metre hook. It came no where near the fence,

Anyhoo, back on thread. Pilots landing short, or too long is for another day.

[Dominator2]

SATCOS WHIPPING,

As regards an Accident Report concerning accidental barrier engagement look for RAF Gutersloh, German F4F from Hopstein AB late 70s, early 80s.

As regards the cable positions I think that “The Americans like approach end engagements” is a rather naive comment. The correct cable to take depends on each aircraft type and the type of emergency, not national preference.

Certainly, the over-run cable is more likely to be required at no notice and so at appropriate Fast Jet bases it is permanently rigged. The approach cable would be required with certain emergencies and normally 10 minutes prior notice is possible. At all competent Fast Jet bases the 10 minute agreement has been standard for years.

Of course, the Americans have had to benefit of the BAK14 for years which can be raised and lowered from the tower. Why was RAF Valley the only Station that had a RHAG with the same capability.

SATCOS WHIPPING, For your interest, but I’m sure that you are aware, not all airfields are quite standard. At RAF Wattisham in the 70s the base operated the Lightning then Phantom ac. Due to the runway being slightly short of 7500 feet (not great for either type) the airfield was equipped with Non standard Type 2 VASIs for a Pilot Eye Height of 13ft 10 ins. The Instrument Touchdown Point was only 1000ft in and the RHAG was only 1200ft in. All of this conspired to encourage pilots to land “On the Numbers”. I believe the Wattisham also had one accident concerning an F4 with the Approach Barrier.

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

SATCOS WHIPPING,

As regards an Accident Report concerning accidental barrier engagement look for RAF Gutersloh, German F4F from Hopstein AB late 70s, early 80s.

As regards the cable positions I think that “The Americans like approach end engagements” is a rather naive comment. The correct cable to take depends on each aircraft type and the type of emergency, not national preference.

Certainly, the over-run cable is more likely to be required at no notice and so at appropriate Fast Jet bases it is permanently rigged. The approach cable would be required with certain emergencies and normally 10 minutes prior notice is possible. At all competent Fast Jet bases the 10 minute agreement has been standard for years.

Of course, the Americans have had to benefit of the BAK14 for years which can be raised and lowered from the tower. Why was RAF Valley the only Station that had a RHAG with the same capability.

SATCOS WHIPPING, For your interest, but I’m sure that you are aware, not all airfields are quite standard. At RAF Wattisham in the 70s the base operated the Lightning then Phantom ac. Due to the runway being slightly short of 7500 feet (not great for either type) the airfield was equipped with Non standard Type 2 VASIs for a Pilot Eye Height of 13ft 10 ins. The Instrument Touchdown Point was only 1000ft in and the RHAG was only 1200ft in. All of this conspired to encourage pilots to land “On the Numbers”. I believe the Wattisham also had one accident concerning an F4 with the Approach Barrier.


Ah, so we have to trawl back 40 years...I think things have changed quite a bit since then. Didn't the fire trucks have to be led by a man carry a red flag? ;-)
I cannot find the report you mention - but a pint of finest says the Phantom did not put his wheels on the numbers which, after all is said and done, is what started our discussion.

Take a look at more modern footage of cable engagements. F15 at lakenheath hook touches down about 10feet before the wheels do.

and this one is good example is here
https://www.military.com/video/f-15-makes-emergency-landing-using-arresting-cable-pdx

And one posted from SpazSinbad a while ago of a Typhoon. Hook hits the ground a millisecond before the wheels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyPXnOudydU&ab_channel=airshowvision


And yes, I am aware of the different cable engagement scenarios. Not much point shooting for an over-run cable with no nosewheel steering for example.
You are correct I should have been more specific and said "generally, or normally, or day-to-day", thinking that the four I listed hinted at a favourite layout depending probabilities and types deployed, rather than a set-in-stone absolute standard.


SWB

[Lima Juliet]

SATCOS WHIPPING BOY - there is every point in “shooting for an over-run cable with no nosewheel steering for example” - if you are too heavy to be able to take the approach end at the correct speed, and you need to use the rudder to keep the jet straight as you have no nose-wheel steering, thus you need to take the over run. I did this in a Tornado once heavy weight with a hyd leak and it was something that was practiced in the simulator quite a bit.

Also, I believe that a Tomb caught the approach barrier at Wildenwrath in 1980 with its hook. :ok:

[chevvron]

We had a Jaguar take the overrun cable one night; he had been out on an NVG trial and did a PAR and when the talkdown controller terminated he was rewarded with the reply 'cable cable'! I don't know why he took the cable but it could have been as you say, nosewheel steering.

[SpazSinbad]

Ah,....And one posted from SpazSinbad a while ago of a Typhoon. Hook hits the ground a millisecond before the wheels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyPXnOudydU&ab_channel=airshowvision
SWB
Spaz's SpazzinBad fave AF Arrest Video.... :} F-111 Arrest No Wheels 18 Jun 2006 RAAF Amberley

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM5E9yQVdcI

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

We had a Jaguar take the overrun cable one night; he had been out on an NVG trial and did a PAR and when the talkdown controller terminated he was rewarded with the reply 'cable cable'! I don't know why he took the cable but it could have been as you say, nosewheel steering.

Phantom at Yeovilton took the Approach end cable.
Burnt off fuel to get weight down first. Backseater smacked his face pretty hard as eviddenced later that afternoon in the Wardroom.

Not sure what the problem was with that one.

[Ninthace]

Saw an F4 take the cable at Gütersloh one night just as I was turning to for yet another call out. It was very sparkly as I recall and much better than the usual startex inject.

[NutLoose]

The arrestor hook on our F4K/Ms was 400 pounds of Detroit pig iron. Worked a treat and was even used as a silent signal on intercepts.

And of course as a reverse tow bar as in Pardo’s Push

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/pardos-push-how-an-f-4-pushed-a-crippled-f-4-to-safety/ (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/pardos-push-180962402/)

[chevvron]

Phantom at Yeovilton took the Approach end cable.
Burnt off fuel to get weight down first. Backseater smacked his face pretty hard as eviddenced later that afternoon in the Wardroom.

Not sure what the problem was with that one.
We had an RAF Phantom take 'our' approach end cable; short notice, hadn't booked us as div, he had been inbound to Bggin Hill but got a 'gear unsafe' indication prior to landing so div'd to Farnborough because we were the closest airfield with RHAGs; it was good practice for us because we were preparing for the Farnborough Airshow at the time.
Looking at these remarks, I wonder why more RAF FJ airfields weren't equipped with bowsprings. OK we had multiple types (Buccaneer, Lightning, Hunter T8, Jaguar) and whenever one of these was operating, SOP was approach cable down and overrun up but the fact you could raise the bowsprings instantly rather than call out the crew to run out the grommets was advantageous.
Looking at the AIP MIL, it looks like Valley, Wittering, Lossie and Leuchars have RHAGs apart from the 4 mentioned above (and USAF airfields) but places like Boscombe, Yeovilton and Wattisham no longer have them so apart from the cables at Brize which are kept de-rigged (20min PNR to rig), there are no RAF or RN cables anywhere in the south of England.

[nipva]

Also, I believe that a Tomb caught the approach barrier at Wildenwrath in 1980 with its hook

If it is the incident to which you refer this was the late Hylton Price who caught the approach end barrier with his undercarriage at night. The approach end barrier was, in error, up with the warning lights inop. He managed to get airborne again and subsequently landed safely. .

[Dominator2]

Nipva,

Yes, I remember it well. Wildenrath used to use both 27 and 09 for departures at the same time to reduce taxi time. A 92 Sqn ac had just departed from 09 prior to Hyltons approach to 27. It was just after dark and the barrier had accidently been left in the up position. Hilton knew nothing of what had happened but “Bolted” and got airborne with the barrier wrapped round his main gear.

I believe that they also damaged the approach end RHAG which was in the up position.

Hylton and his Flt Cdr nav were returning from an Ample Gain (BX run). The nav had a new stereo on his lap and so was most reluctant to eject. He would have lost the stereo and maybe his knees.

Hilton managed to land OK and only afterwards discover what had happened. Thank God that the F4 was such a robust aircraft.

[chevvron]

Spaz's SpazzinBad fave AF Arrest Video.... :} F-111 Arrest No Wheels 18 Jun 2006 RAAF Amberley

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VM5E9yQVdcI
'Bit low on the roundout Hoskins'

[NutLoose]

Has Gib still got its Chag?

More on Marham's RHAG

https://marshall-landsystems.com/our-stories/rhag-paag

[chevvron]

Yeovilton used to have 3 systems, RHAG, CHAG and PUAG.

[Ninthace]

Yeovilton used to have 3 systems, RHAG, CHAG and PUAG.
More AG than the Min of Ag & Fish!

[BEagle]

The RN also installed CHAG at Merryfield in around 1957 when the Sea Venoms were detached there during Yeovilton's runway extension for the forthcoming Sea Vixens.

I remember looking closely at them and wondering what on earth they were for!

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

CHAGs were lethal if the cable was attached to the wrong end of the run of chain. Instead of running out sequentially on an engagement, and gradually putting a braking load on the aircraft, the aeroplane suddenly acquired a ton of chain passenger in one hit :-)

[KPax]

Not sure which runways you have used but landing on the "numbers" is a fair way down the concrete, after the piano keys, and no where near ANY down barriers (where fitted) roughly 80metres away. .
Are you confusing BARRIERS and CABLES ?
Part of ATC checks in the tower AND the caravan are that the approach is clear , nothing on the runway that should not be there and that the approach end barrier (where fitted) is correctly configured ie DOWN.
Under normal operations there is zero reason for the duty-runway approach-end barrier to ever be raised - Only during quiet period it may go UP for servicing access. ATC will be extra dilligent in checking its state beforee issuing any future clearances. Same with aircraft suddenly declaring they wish to use the non-duty runway - drilled into all ATCOs as part of their checks before issuing a clearance.
At Shawbury the approach Barrier is isolated before flying commences.

[dmcg]

AIP has PAAG now at Gib. 10 days notice to fit.

[Mogwi]

Hunter had an accidental approach-end RHAG engagement at Yeovilton in the 80’s. We did chuckle!

Mog