Aircraft destroyed in Afghanistan (USAF E-11A (BACN))

[DCThumb]

My understanding was that the manned option was cheaper. GH requires multiple operators, satellite time, long transits and is also weather limited. Putting the kit on a Global XRS was simple and cheap by comparison.

[atakacs]

Originally Posted by tiddles52

I suspect the E-11 contains first generation equipment which is too large for a drone, and requires personnel sat there to operate it. Generation II then miniaturises the equipment and makes it so the operator can be sat on the ground doing his/her stuff via satcom.

I guess there are pro and cons for each. But it any case it is surprising that the crew was limited to 2 persons if this was an operational flight.

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by tiddles52

I suspect the E-11 contains first generation equipment which is too large for a drone, and requires personnel sat there to operate it. Generation II then miniaturises the equipment and makes it so the operator can be sat on the ground doing his/her stuff via satcom.

He does say

Lt Col Helfrich: I don’t want to get in exact specifics, but the flight time for the Global Hawks is significantly longer than the Global Expresses, which allows you more on-orbit time with the Global Hawks. Additionally, the Global Hawks fly their orbits at higher altitudes.The E-11s still fly at very high altitude as well. Now, that’s really the differences in the airframe. The interesting thing to note is when it comes to the payload, they’re almost identical between the two platforms.

Originally Posted by DCThumb

My understanding was that the manned option was cheaper. GH requires multiple operators, satellite time, long transits and is also weather limited. Putting the kit on a Global XRS was simple and cheap by comparison.

Makes sense - the 'manned aircraft as drone' model, similar to the reason so many Beech 350s have appeared in ISTAR roles

[Airbubba]

Crew names released by the DOD:

Immediate Release

DOD Identifies Air Force Casualties

Jan. 29, 2020

The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of two Airmen who were supporting Operation Freedom's Sentinel. They died January 27 in the crash of a Bombardier E-11A aircraft in Ghazni Province, Afghanistan. The cause of the crash is under investigation.

Killed were:

Lt. Col. Paul K. Voss, 46, of Yigo, Guam. He was assigned to Headquarters Air Combat Command at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia. For more information, media may contact the Air Combat Command public affairs office at [phone].

Capt. Ryan S. Phaneuf, 30, of Hudson, New Hampshire. He was assigned to the 37th Bomb Squadron at Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota. For more information, media may contact the 28th Bomb Wing public affairs office at [phone].

[megan]

The only other plausible reason that I can think of is multiple engine failure. This can only reasonably occur due to a multiple bird strike, fuel contamination or a bingo fuel miscalculation.

Another possibility is ice crystal build up or core lock after loss of power preventing restart.

[jolihokistix]

Originally Posted by andrasz

Comment on AVH: Originally Posted by Pilot in same frequency
We were in same frequency when they declared Mayday to Kabul control. They declared mayday due to both engines faillure, and descended fl320 initially, and told proceeding Kandahar Airport. Their callsign was something like Lot01. Atc asked them pob and distance they can glide , couldnt get answer.

This post on page #2 of this thread helps answer some of the speculation in the last few posts.

[megan]

But is the experience today that this condition has taken aircraft out of the sky with fatal consequences

Would need to search, but seem to recall airliners have had ice crystal issues, can recall some biz jet instances including a dead stick to a safe runway landing of a Citation, no fatalities that I'm aware of.

https://www.boeing.com/commercial/ae...icle_03_2.html

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/a...igid_heat.html

[racedo]

Originally Posted by Airbubba

Crew names released by the DOD:

It specifically reads "

DOD Identifies Air Force Casualties"

Which tells you there were more but details will not be released.

[CargoOne]

I don’t think Afghan military, let alone Taliban, have means of shooting down an aircraft at FL400+. Since technically it is a civil platform and shares many commonalities with CRJ family, the proper investigation would benefit everyone, unless the crash was caused by payload...

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by Lord Farringdon

That's why we come here Megan. To learn something new. Thanks. Interesting phenomenon. I had to look that up and found a data sheet called Engine Power Loss in Ice Crystal Conditions. It's 2008 and mostly related to Boeing large jet transport aircraft so I'm guessing I'm alone in not knowing about this!!! in 2008 it seems they were asking for pilots to report events so that they could better understand the process that was going on. I imagine by now it is pretty well known and documented. As far as I understand from that albeit dated document I read, engine damage might occur but no hull losses had been attributed to the condition since the engine/s could all be manually restarted or kept going with auto ignition.

Disclaimer - I don't know anything more about what happened to the E-11A than what I've read here...
Ice Crystal Icing (ICI) I do know something about. For reasons that are not well understood, it's a relatively recent phenomena at least with respect to causing engine problems - first raising it's ugly head as an turbine engine problem in the early 1990s. While it's better understood now that it was 10 years ago, I'd wouldn't say it's 'pretty well known' or well documented. ICI is fundamentally different than conventional aircraft icing - supercooled water droplets that hit and freeze on unheated aircraft surfaces- ICI occurs at much lower ambient temperatures (too cold for supercooled droplets to exist) and is just what it sounds like - very small ice crystals that normally just bounce off of unheated surfaces (flight deck reports often compare it to the sound of rain). Heated surfaces - such as internal to an turbine engine compressor - are a different matter. In high concentrations, the crystals can hit a warm surface and melt, but more crystals impacted the liquid water causing it to re-freeze. As a result, ICI forms at surface temperatures where it's far too warm for conventional icing (sometimes as high as 30 deg. C). Large amounts of ice can form in warm parts of the compressor, then suddenly shed and quench the combustor flame - sometimes damaging compressor blades in the process. Some engines are far more susceptible to ICI (again for reasons that are not clearly understood) - the CF6-80C2/80E was particularly bad, as was the GEnx (in both cases it has been successfully addressed with FADEC software, although in the case of the CF6-80C2 it took multiple tries before they got it right). Compressor damage bad enough to prevent continued engine operation is rare, but it has happened...
I remember that there were a few biz jet engines that had big problems, but I don't recall which ones - sorry...
While ICI can happen anywhere, it's most common in the Pacific rim area. Enough so that the PW2000 went for a couple decades without ever having an ICI problem, until Delta started basing a few 757s in Japan, after which they had a few apparent ICI related flameouts .

[golder]

Originally Posted by racedo

It specifically reads "

DOD Identifies Air Force Casualties"

Which tells you there were more but details will not be released.

I read an article that reported 6 bodies at the scene. RIP

[TEEEJ]

Originally Posted by golder

I read an article that reported 6 bodies at the scene. RIP

The Taliban spokesman/journalist posted images of the deceased. These were widely shared on social media.There were only two bodies. If there were more bodies then they would have been reported and especially when the Iranians spun the CIA story so quickly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Ghazniwal

A journalist in the area, Tariq Ghazniwal, said Monday that he saw the burning aircraft. He told The Associated Press that he saw two bodies and that the front of the aircraft was badly burned but its body and tail were hardly damaged.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/122033...as-us-aircraft

Tariq Ghazniwal is a Taliban spokesman. It makes no sense that the Taliban wouldn't report the number of bodies.

You can see why the die-hard conspiracy types are off down the claims that others were on board. The Iranians were quick to go down the propaganda path and spin on the death of Soleimani.

A top CIA chief who orchestrated the assassination of an Iranian general was killed when a US military plane crashed in Taliban territory in Afghanistan, Tehran has claimed.The crashed plane in the east of Afghanistan was a Bombardier E-11A from the US Air Force.

De Andrea, who was responsible for the assassination of Iran’s top commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, was apparently among the officers on board the plane, the Veterans Today website reports, quoting Russian intelligence sources.

https://www.airlive.net/breaking-rus...sterday-crash/

The Iranians were quick to spin a story that a CIA boss was on board the aircraft.

Iranian TV used ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ screenshot to claim CIA boss was killed in Afghanistan plane crash. Michael D'Andrea

State TV in Iran has broadcast a screenshot from the movie Zero Dark Thirty to illustrate a report that a senior CIA officer had been killed in a plane crash.

The photo shows the actor that portrayed a character in the movie based on real life CIA operative Michael D'Andrea.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/iran-tv-us...182524165.html

[VinRouge]

Originally Posted by Lord Farringdon

Thanks for chiming in tdtracer. Your explanation has helped this old guy better understand this condition. So,basically the supercooled ice crystals have to warm up and melt before they can stick otherwise they just bounce off the aircraft, (unlike supercooled large droplets which cool down and stick when they come in contact with colder surfaces). So the ice crystals find the engine core and compressor blades comfy places to rest. I just read also that pitot tubes can also be affected by this which tends to lead to transient and spurious air data readings.

ICI is a phenomenon accounted with strong convective activity. It’s diagnosed typically (on my type at least) when the tat reads zero (due to a heavily iced up probe) in the vicinity of convective or CB

[falcon900]

A somewhat macabre question, but are we to believe that "special forces" were deployed to destroy "sensitive " equipment, and having done so departed leaving the bodies of their fallen comrades behind??

[ivor toolbox]

Originally Posted by CargoOne

I don’t think Afghan military, let alone Taliban, have means of shooting down an aircraft at FL400+. Since technically it is a civil platform and shares many commonalities with CRJ family, the proper investigation would benefit everyone, unless the crash was caused by payload...

Ahem, it shares no commonality with the CRJ family, other than it is a twin jet. Avionics, engines, electrical systems, fuel systems and hydraulic systems are all different, and the Global Express is a whole lot bigger too.

Ttfn

[DCThumb]

Image here shows the RAT deployed, which happens automatically in the event of dual engine failure on the Global..

[Herod]

A somewhat macabre question, but are we to believe that "special forces" were deployed to destroy "sensitive " equipment

I would think some sort of "self-destruct" mechanism more likely.

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by Lord Farringdon

I just read also that pitot tubes can also be affected by this which tends to lead to transient and spurious air data readings.

Total pressure pitot icing is less of a concern, although it does happen (AF447). With pitot tubes, it's pretty easy to address with proper design - more heat and/or moving the heat around (and pitot tubes use a lot of heat - typically 500-1000 watts each). TAT is a lot harder since you don't want the probe heat to interfere with the temp measurement. As VinRouge notes, TAT reading around zero C is a common symptom of ICI - ice forms around the TAT probe, with liquid near freezing water at the temp sensor. When investigation suspected ICI related engine events, TAT was pretty much the first thing we looked at.
Combination PT/TAT probes (commonly used in the inlet of EPR engines) are also problematic - again due to the requirement to keep the probe heat from affecting the temp measurement. Unheated TAT probes (normally used in the inlet of N1 engines) don't have issues with ICI, although conventional icing can cause issues.

[tcasblue]

Originally Posted by tdracer

Heated surfaces - such as internal to an turbine engine compressor - are a different matter. In high concentrations, the crystals can hit a warm surface and melt, but more crystals impacted the liquid water causing it to re-freeze. As a result, ICI forms at surface temperatures where it's far too warm for conventional icing (sometimes as high as 30 deg. C). Large amounts of ice can form in warm parts of the compressor, then suddenly shed and quench the combustor flame - sometimes damaging compressor blades in the process.

Just confirm the ice forms on a 30 degree Celsius surface. I find that difficult to believe. 30 degrees F perhaps?

[Asturias56]

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/...cts_on_Engines

https://www.boeing.com/commercial/ae...icle_03_2.htmlIce building up on the inlet, fan, or spinner would likely shed outward into the fan bypass duct without causing a power loss. Therefore, in these power-loss events, it is reasonable to conclude that ice must have been building up in the engine core.

It is now believed that ice crystal icing can occur deep in the engine where surfaces are warmer than freezing (see fig. 2). Both older generation jet engines and the new generation of jet engines (high bypass ratio engines with electronic engine controls) can be affected by ice crystal icing.