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
The extreme pitch PIO will undoubtedly have caused damage and injury to the E-3 and its crew....
Scramble Messageboard • Information
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squirrel makes a good point - the 135 is notorious for its AP disconnecting if a large receiver moves too quickly in close proximity to the tanker's tail. The interaction of the aerodynamic forces can cause the AP to disconnect, almost always leaving the tanker with a nose-down pitching moment.
The incident probably started quite early-on when, as Beags points-out, the receiver didn't stabilize before the contact. He then went high in the envelope, boom initiated a disconnect, receiver moved quickly, AP disconnected, brown trousers all round.
The incident probably started quite early-on when, as Beags points-out, the receiver didn't stabilize before the contact. He then went high in the envelope, boom initiated a disconnect, receiver moved quickly, AP disconnected, brown trousers all round.
Squirrel makes a good point - the 135 is notorious for its AP disconnecting if a large receiver moves too quickly in close proximity to the tanker's tail.
And at least the boom didn't fall off though, eh D-IFF......
Last edited by BEagle; 22nd Oct 2012 at 10:45.
The extreme pitch PIO will undoubtedly have caused damage and injury to the E-3 and its crew....
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Sentry SOPs involved strapping in, gloves on, securing all loose items etc (although often still working down back although some kit switched off so books and sortie paperwork often still on desk tops). Once stable behind tanker, Captain's discretion to allow "minimum" movement through the aircraft to achieve tasks (not for cooking). Often allowed passengers (one at a time, escorted by a crew member) to have a look at tanker through doorway for a few seconds - again, once stable behind the tanker.
Mind you, whenever we had an SOP then the AEOps would break it because they knew better...... Watch how quickly they unstrap after landing despite the FRCs! (and they knew better because "thats what we did on Nimrods").
Mind you, whenever we had an SOP then the AEOps would break it because they knew better...... Watch how quickly they unstrap after landing despite the FRCs! (and they knew better because "thats what we did on Nimrods").
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Sunny Aberdeen
Age: 60
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't remember the rear crew strapping in as SOP during Nimrod MR2 AAR. You could get a great view of the tanker by crouching on the floor just behind the eng.
PN,
The length of the 'sting' is 18.5 feet. That, and everything else you could wish to know about boom refuelling from a KC-135, can be found here in ATP56B. Turns out that the disconnect is automatic!
The length of the 'sting' is 18.5 feet. That, and everything else you could wish to know about boom refuelling from a KC-135, can be found here in ATP56B. Turns out that the disconnect is automatic!
Reminds me of when I got rear ended by a B52. My ruddervators (the v shaped control surfaces on the boom) left notches in his slipway doors. Other than that no damage except to the B52 pilot who was getting a check ride from SAC StanEval. As a tanker pilot you can feel the movement of the receiver even with the auto pilot on. I had the throttles on the firewall before he hit us.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My thoughts on this is..
How did this footage get into the public domain?
Sould the military allow its personnel to carry unauthorised cameras either video or still when on operations be that land, sea or sky?
If this footage has been 'leaked' then will disciplinary action be taken as the author of this footage must be known.
How did this footage get into the public domain?
Sould the military allow its personnel to carry unauthorised cameras either video or still when on operations be that land, sea or sky?
If this footage has been 'leaked' then will disciplinary action be taken as the author of this footage must be known.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Sussex
Age: 86
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle,
If you thought it was interesting to have the AEW Nimrod prodding you you should have been in the one behind. The bow wave from the nose radome always tried to push the drogue aside. I think I only made contact two or three times during the trials and I believe I was the only one to do so. Not boasting; it's just that I had many more attempts than any one else. Incidentally the AEW, despite it's obvious failings, actually handled pretty well.
If you thought it was interesting to have the AEW Nimrod prodding you you should have been in the one behind. The bow wave from the nose radome always tried to push the drogue aside. I think I only made contact two or three times during the trials and I believe I was the only one to do so. Not boasting; it's just that I had many more attempts than any one else. Incidentally the AEW, despite it's obvious failings, actually handled pretty well.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many moons ago a Victor captain was selected to train up as an Air to Air Refuelling Instructor, He was already qualified, of course, to receive fuel whilst sitting in the left hand seat. Now was to was the time to see how he got on in the right hand seat, He joined and moved astern smoothly so was cleared for contact. He approached rather fast and high, his instructor told him to drop back. Unfortunately he reverted to his left hand seat procedures, attempting to lower the nose by pushing forward the centre position throttles and pulling back on the stick thinking he was throttling back. The susequent bunt to recover found three rear crew members attached to the cabin roof and understandingly somewhat upset. The weather at base had gone nasty so the aircraft was gently flown to a diversion airfield where the rear crew were at least partialy recompensed in the bar. The pilot did not become an AARI.
He approached rather fast and high, his instructor told him to drop back.
Was said instructor a QFI? If so, surely the instinct would have been "I have control", followed by a re-demo?
During my AARI training, the instructor (whilst pretending to be the student) made such a ridiculously fast approach to contact that I only just had time to take control and abort the approach. After getting my breath back, I didn't need to debrief anything at the time, as the Air Engineer said it all for me.....
"You daft c**t, what the f**k were you playing at?"
Yes the 'd-word' is frowned upon in the CRM universe; everything else looked ok in the FE debrief so no doubt he was an instructor in his own right.
CRM line from the past…. still sitting in a very quiet cockpit with aircraft at random angle some distance from runway whilst warm engines turned wet grass into steam.
'Well as a plus point I like the way you appreciated the wind when capturing the localizer'.
CRM line from the past…. still sitting in a very quiet cockpit with aircraft at random angle some distance from runway whilst warm engines turned wet grass into steam.
'Well as a plus point I like the way you appreciated the wind when capturing the localizer'.