UK F-35B Lost
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Narfalk
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Open and just reporting culture would have this out in the open. Beware Royal Navy Service Enquiry about to fire out a blame game? Was there a requirement to sign for the removal of blanks as an entry on a tech log, even an electronic one as I bet the 35 has? Is on many civvy operators.
I am outraged by this.
Seriously? The Sun posts it - Twatter follows it up - all based on (probably) THIS Forum and egoat.
Are you seriously saying that EICAS wouldn't have picked this up at Idle Power?
Even though it'll report the fact that you've left the port side ashtray lid open.
If so, I'm confused as to what the $100M price tag is paying for.
Seriously? The Sun posts it - Twatter follows it up - all based on (probably) THIS Forum and egoat.
Are you seriously saying that EICAS wouldn't have picked this up at Idle Power?
Even though it'll report the fact that you've left the port side ashtray lid open.
If so, I'm confused as to what the $100M price tag is paying for.
Last edited by Auxtank; 24th Nov 2021 at 20:16.
If true ["tell me it's not so!"] some Leading hand will get the blame. But what happened to the walk around? Is it back to "kick the tyres and light the fires?"
As a long serving taxpayer I expect that I have paid for a 35 in my lifetime, but not for some silly cheese hole line-up.
And now "they" cannot retrieve it.
Fortunately I am beyond being able to register shock.
The Weber needs its annual inspection and service, that should take my mind off the cockup.
As a long serving taxpayer I expect that I have paid for a 35 in my lifetime, but not for some silly cheese hole line-up.
And now "they" cannot retrieve it.
Fortunately I am beyond being able to register shock.
The Weber needs its annual inspection and service, that should take my mind off the cockup.
Definitely not my area of expertise as my experience of things that leap into the air at short notice is limited to one tour in Gutersloh in the Harrier Force days, but is it even possible to light the fires properly with a blank in, let alone wind it up and send it up the ski jump without noticing something is amiss?
Thread Starter
For what it's worth, someone posted this on ARRSE:
"Work mate of mine is ex sea harrier maintainer and still has a lot of contacts on the F35 circuit, apparently there are inner and outer intake blanks and its common for the blank to be used as a knee pad while inspecting the first stage compressor disc."
I couldn't see how a properly fitted intake blank could be missed by the aircraft start groundcrew, pilot on walk round, flight deck marshallers, Flight Deck Officer and those in FLYCO.
However, if the malpractice described has been going on, I can see how a folded blank laying in the intake might get missed, particularly if at night, and then not get sucked in until powered right up just prior to the take off roll. I'm still surprised anything laying folded in the intake wasn't sucked in immediately on start.
"Work mate of mine is ex sea harrier maintainer and still has a lot of contacts on the F35 circuit, apparently there are inner and outer intake blanks and its common for the blank to be used as a knee pad while inspecting the first stage compressor disc."
I couldn't see how a properly fitted intake blank could be missed by the aircraft start groundcrew, pilot on walk round, flight deck marshallers, Flight Deck Officer and those in FLYCO.
However, if the malpractice described has been going on, I can see how a folded blank laying in the intake might get missed, particularly if at night, and then not get sucked in until powered right up just prior to the take off roll. I'm still surprised anything laying folded in the intake wasn't sucked in immediately on start.
Genuine question.
You're the driver - and for whatever reason all engine temps and pressures look normal as you taxy to the departure point.
Do we know if this was a short rolling take off in STOVL mode or was it using the ski-jump?
How could you not see some sort of thrust anomaly as you powered up - just before rolling to take off?
You'd see it, hear it and feel it... wouldn't you?
You're the driver - and for whatever reason all engine temps and pressures look normal as you taxy to the departure point.
Do we know if this was a short rolling take off in STOVL mode or was it using the ski-jump?
How could you not see some sort of thrust anomaly as you powered up - just before rolling to take off?
You'd see it, hear it and feel it... wouldn't you?
Last edited by tartare; 25th Nov 2021 at 01:30.
Does 617 Squadron, 'The Dambusters', have RAF ground crew as well as RAF and RN pilots? It's a bit of a long shot to blame the Navy - yet. If it was a dark blue fault then I'm sure a very cold revenge will be sweet. 
This could have been so easily avoided, all it wanted was a strap from one blank under the ac to the other blank. Like a lot of twin intake ac had back in the day. Lessons learnt, yeh right 🙄
I thought that was a good idea. Then I thought, perhaps they don't want rub marks on the IR coat. From the strap, flapping in the wind?
Another question: if the blank were ingested into the engine, how could it then have been seen 'floating on the surface' in the aftermath of the crash? Surely, it would would been shredded to bits and then burned?
Looks like the first set of blades in front of the turbine is a fixed stator, so chomping would be more problematic.
There was a news report yesterday of some minister recommending that carriers be fitted with the gear required to recover jets that crash in the sea. I kid you not.
LB - I trust no Leading Hand is going to be made to carry the can; those placed in authority over him or her should take the blame. If (and until all investigations and SIs/BOIs are finished it's a big if) the loss was caused by negligence on the flightdeck, then I think most of us know where the buck stops. The MAA is pretty clear on the subject:
Transfer of Custody of Air Systems
2301(1) Custody of, and responsibility for, an Air System shall transfer to the Aircraft Commander from the time the acceptance certificate is signed until the after-flight declaration is completed.
Transfer of Custody of Air Systems (Acceptable Means of Compliance)
1. The Aircraft Commander should ensure that they are satisfied with the declared condition of the Air System when the acceptance certificate is signed. If they are not satisfied, they should declare the Air System unserviceable.
2. Once custody of the Air System has been accepted, the Aircraft Commander should authorize and monitor any subsequent Maintenance activity that may be required prior to, or during flight.
3. The Aircraft Commander should ensure that the technical log (MOD Form 700 or equivalent) has been updated to reflect the condition of the Air System when the after-flight declaration is completed and that the symptoms of any new Air System faults have been adequately briefed to the receiving Maintenance organization.
Transfer of Custody of Air Systems
2301(1) Custody of, and responsibility for, an Air System shall transfer to the Aircraft Commander from the time the acceptance certificate is signed until the after-flight declaration is completed.
Transfer of Custody of Air Systems (Acceptable Means of Compliance)
1. The Aircraft Commander should ensure that they are satisfied with the declared condition of the Air System when the acceptance certificate is signed. If they are not satisfied, they should declare the Air System unserviceable.
2. Once custody of the Air System has been accepted, the Aircraft Commander should authorize and monitor any subsequent Maintenance activity that may be required prior to, or during flight.
3. The Aircraft Commander should ensure that the technical log (MOD Form 700 or equivalent) has been updated to reflect the condition of the Air System when the after-flight declaration is completed and that the symptoms of any new Air System faults have been adequately briefed to the receiving Maintenance organization.
For what it's worth, someone posted this on ARRSE:
"Work mate of mine is ex sea harrier maintainer and still has a lot of contacts on the F35 circuit, apparently there are inner and outer intake blanks and its common for the blank to be used as a knee pad while inspecting the first stage compressor disc."
I couldn't see how a properly fitted intake blank could be missed by the aircraft start groundcrew, pilot on walk round, flight deck marshallers, Flight Deck Officer and those in FLYCO.
However, if the malpractice described has been going on, I can see how a folded blank laying in the intake might get missed, particularly if at night, and then not get sucked in until powered right up just prior to the take off roll. I'm still surprised anything laying folded in the intake wasn't sucked in immediately on start.
"Work mate of mine is ex sea harrier maintainer and still has a lot of contacts on the F35 circuit, apparently there are inner and outer intake blanks and its common for the blank to be used as a knee pad while inspecting the first stage compressor disc."
I couldn't see how a properly fitted intake blank could be missed by the aircraft start groundcrew, pilot on walk round, flight deck marshallers, Flight Deck Officer and those in FLYCO.
However, if the malpractice described has been going on, I can see how a folded blank laying in the intake might get missed, particularly if at night, and then not get sucked in until powered right up just prior to the take off roll. I'm still surprised anything laying folded in the intake wasn't sucked in immediately on start.
Despite the described commonality of the malpractice, and there'll be more to this story but given the cost of the loss, I suspect the ORG will arrive at 'reckless' in record time on this one.
In 1982, our maintainers came up with a great wheeze for stopping SHAR engine wear from windmilling engines on deck (inflatable blanks would blow out in the wind). They gently inserted a broom handle through the LP fan, which locked it very effectively. This was annotated in the F700 with an entry stating “Broom handle inserted to stop engine rotation” and was cleared with another one stating “Broom handle removed”, before flight.
On one occasion, I went to sign an aircraft out and found the following entry; “Intake inspected - no broom handle found. Uckers pieces removed from underneath cold nozzles”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uckers
Not only brilliant maintainers, also a great sense of humour!
Swing the lamp,
Mog
On one occasion, I went to sign an aircraft out and found the following entry; “Intake inspected - no broom handle found. Uckers pieces removed from underneath cold nozzles”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uckers
Not only brilliant maintainers, also a great sense of humour!
Swing the lamp,
Mog
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm struggling to see why you would need an 'inner and outer' intake blank - you only have 2 intakes so one either side on the front would achieve the desired result as it does with numerous other types of aircraft. I can see that you might have a blank for the top of the Lift Fan if you park up and leave the top door open but is that really normal practice?.
