I listened to the audio on the link provided by Green Flash. My experience with LA centre is that they are great but the last request by the controller was a bit off. "Can I give you the number for LA centre so you can call them on the ground?" Are you kidding? He's down to 2 engines and isn't sure about a fire. Leave him alone. My 2 cents.

I haven't flown a Herc but I have flown an Orion with virtually the same engines. Flying with 2 out on the same side is very possible. We practised it at least once per quarter (with Standards pilots only) to both a GA from Land (Full) flap and then next circuit to the touchdown. Those were pilot training weights (much lighter) but we would do it in the sim as well with a full bag of fuel. Not sure about the Herc but obviously it worked out.

As we can't hear Raider 50 I am speculating that the controller knows the situation better than most and would like a call on the ground to confirm all is well.

Actually, it does make sense. In one of the recordings you can hear (the ATC side anyway), that there is solid two-way communications most of the way down, so the crew had obviously had spare capacity to deal with ATC, as well as fly down. They might not be able to contact ATC on the radio once on the ground, either due loss of signal, or aircraft damage prohibiting its use, and so a phone number would allow the crew to contact ATC and apprise them of their status once on the ground, to allow for further assistance to be dispatched as needed.

Yes, at very light weight, at least that's what a couple of drivers tell me.

being able to fly on one or two when in one piece is one thing; flying around with bits hanging in the breeze is another. After the F35B got rudely outmaneuvered by the frisky herk, all bets are off. Good job to be able to use the people again.

VMCA2 would have been increased considerably...

stuff happens.

Why wouldn't you use the international call of MAYDAY instead of saying you are declaring an emergency? It gets everyone's attention and there is no confusion that you are in a serious situation.

Now that we know everyone got out safely, is it too early to ask if the Herc crew can claim the first verified air-to-air F35 kill?

:}

JAS

Mayday and Pan
 

I have noticed a reticence in N America to use either word. I never worked out why.

BV

I was on freq when the then Lt Col Goldfein (just retired as Chief of Staff) was shot down in his F16CJ during the Kosovo thing. He declared that he'd been hit, had lost his engine and was gliding. The USAF controller promptly asked if he was declaring an emergency. One of his wingmen simply announced he had ejected but I don't remember anyone using MAYDAY or actually 'declaring an emergency'. However, I do remember following 'Bammer' and 'Jammer' when one called 'come up 12345'. Sure enough, they were on 123.45 and talking in clear with coordinates etc. A Beadwindow call had no effect. The length of transmissions were probably enough for a home-on-jam missile to have had a realistic chance of success. Great CSAR though!

Sorry, minor thread drift. BV is right, they need to use the words which attract attention everywhere else in the world.

Absolutely agree. The word MAYDAY immediately informs everyone on freq that an aircraft is in an emergency situation and to shut up unless being directly able to assist. Giving out phone numbers isn't! A direct result of MAYDAY not being used?

Remember flying from Changi to HK with Vietnam in full chat off the left wing tip. Our Violet Picture indicator (localiser type gauge monitoring Guard freq) was welded to the LH stop. If you listened in, it was being used as a chat freq! Not impressed.

As others have said, feather in their cap for the Herc pilot (though no doubt even now someone is lining him/her up for a black eye!) :ok:

I would not assume it got clobbered from the front. Too much overtake by an F-35 coming in for refueling, or getting too close while on the hose could have the F-35 coming in from behind and hitting the pod/engines on the KC-130.

The occupational hazard of being a tanker is the possibility of being indecently assaulted from behind by the R/X a/c. Never happened to me but have had a couple of 'interesting' situations that could have ended differently. A tendency for the RX a/c to rush things ,miss the basket and then chase it usually results in these close calls. Not suggesting that was the case here but no doubt the USMC will find out in due course.

Besides the MAYDAY/PAN thing, another difference I have noted between the US and other nations is the stage at which tanker crews issue the clearance astern. The old and bold AAR mafia on here will be gratified to know that European tanker crews are still uniformly rigorous in waiting for joiners to be stabilised in the echelon position before issuing clearance astern. US tanker crews, not so much... my personal record (set within the last couple of years) is being cleared astern a KC-135 on first radio contact at 70 miles, with the crew seeming surprised when I asked whether I could join through echelon instead. Time and the investigation will tell whether the custom may have contributed in this case (noting the greater risk of misjudging closure on the slow KC-130) but regardless, it’s a cheese-hole that should be closed.

However the collision occured,if it had been an older -130 ,with metal blades ,i doubt it would have turned out as it did,as the blades have broken cleanly,and the engines are on the wing....
It would be interesting to see the stbd side of the aircraft...
Don`t think it would have been able to get a 2-engine stabilising height in Californian temperatures,unless he was below about 110k AUW,(C-130K ODM),so it was well flown after the collision.....
Just change the engines,drop the gear,rough field t/o.....away we go.....

I suspect it's good old "not invented here", like insisting on using inHg instead of those cissy cheese-eating hPa.

Don't remind me OL. HP had to call for power to the engineer on approach in a Hastings. No problem, you soon got used to "-2, -4, -6, -4", and back to the first number you thought of. Then some suit decided that all UK mil boost gauges be changed from lbs to "Hg. Now you had to convert what you wanted, eg -4, double it, take the result away from 32, and then call for 24, etc. Nice steady 3 degree slopes suddenly turned into diverging sinusoidal excursions until we all learnt the new numbers by heart. Great for STANAG though!

Easy,thought everyone had/used the same `hymn sheet`,ATP-...??

Out of interest and having a vague recollection that UK modified C130 tankers had to deliver fuel in a shallow dive due to differences in stall speeds of tanker and receiver, is there a narrow margin where the receiver overtaking the tanker is a possibility?

Gliding Bronze Badge for Herc Pilot
 

Hopefully the local glider community can arrange a presentation for his first out landing:ok:​​​​​

Dipsticks
 

Can't get any better than the fuel dipsticks on the iron duck measuring inches of kerosene.
"here John I'd like forty seven and three quarters please and keep the greenshield stamps".

From this close up it certainly looks like the F-35B had an overtake and may have gone between the #3 and #4 engines - look at the damaged underwing tank hanging off that appears to have been sliced !

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....9b31b52d9a.png

Yes, just not very far!

Because in the US, the word EMERGENCY means the same thing. Guess that is hard for you other English speaking folks to understand. We are taught from childhood to use the word EMERGENCY, simple as that.

Sycamore-from my short time in AAR I remember that ATP56 (or whatever it is called these days) allows boom receivers to join direct astern (although not from 70 miles!) It also strongly advises against such a procedure for probe and drogue. If the USMC don't follow said document, now might be a good time to start!

Also imagine the Marines will need to "buy the farm". Bet the (strawberry?) farmer gets a nice check to cover the crop loss associated with the incident, investigation and eventual recovery. Wonder how JP-5 tastes on strawberries.....

It is impossible to say that, even from the photo. The underwing could have been hit by hose whiplash, prop blade or associated shrapnel, internal mechanical failure or indeed by an impact from the receiver aircraft. Same goes for the prop damage - when you start to shed a prop then anything around it is fair game. The metal-bladed Herc demonstrated a number of times the ease in which a shed blade from one side could take out an engine on the opposite side of the airframe. Prop blades don't find fuselage structure as an impediment to their energetic travels.

I think us English speaking folk understand completely. Thankfully young children do not get to fly aircraft or pick their own RT procedures:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_3.html
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_1.html
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_3.html

Joe Smith
 

What a great post. Smug and wrong all at the same time. Bravo.

BV

H-Q,and Vasco, it all depended on the relative weights and heights of both tanker and receiver,not so much on stallspeed for `tobobogggganning`,or if there was weather ahead on the route,or `lo-speed/high speed` drogues...
We could t/o at 188k ,op .necessity,but it was a painful climb`,darn Sarf,limited by Vno3 and internal fuel transfer/usage.Only used it once for tanking from `IceStation Kilo` to refuel a `brown weather balloon`somewhere N of ` a North place`....Not so much of a problem for fast jets....
To this incident,intrigues me how you get a F-35 under/through the props/tanks without hitting the tailplane,or did it go over the wing ,hit the props,and they took out the stbd tank,but the stbd refuelling pod appears undamaged......maybe an ex-Blue Angel...?

The airplane is about 1000 meters from the end of runway 35 at Thermal airport.

Why would this be an issue? Like any other rejoin to any position, astern or to the wing, you always put your flight path marker below, beside or behind to aircraft you are joining, until very close and close to co-speed. If you hit it while on your way to the astern position, you would probably also hit it if cleared to the inside wing during a turning rejoin....

Distress Calls
 

In the 70s, as an ATCO at Eastern Radar, I was tasked with giving lectures to new USAF crews in the UK at LKH, BTW and UPH. I thing I still have the slides! Part of the emphasis was on using the proper terms (MAYDAY or PAN), explaining the UK D&D organisation and reassuring them there was no fee. Interesting to see that 50 years later US Mil continues to plough its own furrow (literally), regardless. :ugh:

Perhaps my best/worst case was in ‘68, with a TF-100 pilot who had ejected ... and while floating down into the North Sea east of Strubby used his PLB to transmit on 243.0 and say “This is Wiggins, anybody there?”. He was triangulated and recovered by SAR from Coltishall ... sadly his colleague was never found.

The C130 is a tactical tanker in the Marine Corp. As such the tanking is done under quite different conditions than strategic tanking. As a example tanking is often done as low as 500 feet AGL and often EMCON so no radio use is allowed.
It may also turn out that this accident is not pilot error. A bad basket or ruptured hose could sends hundreds of lbs of fuel down the intake. I have no idea how a F35 engine would react to that but it has created serious issues in other aircraft types. The probe on the F35 is in a bad location relative to the intake.

Bob Viking - ROFL:ok::)

I agree Bob V, funny and spot on.

typical Bob V humour - brilliant!

Ah thankyou.
 

I’m here all week.

BV

Don't leave the room yet then Bob!

So, the argument here is if it's better to declare an emergency by saying:
a) Mayday!
or
b) Emergency!

Seriously? :ugh:

Afraid so TD, there are emergencies, and then there are emergencies, to differentiate there are two distinct words to inform the world of your state, MAYDAY and PAN. The first is self evident, PAN calls take priority over every other calls on the radio except MAYDAY calls and should be used when someone is not in grave an imminent danger and does not require immediate assistance, but has an urgent situation. The urgent situation may be the result of degradation of aircraft systems , you spot a boat, vehicle or aircraft needing urgent assistance, you get lost or need navigation assistance, when you need to break rules to stay safe etc etc. In the civil world ICAO doesn't recognise the word "Emergency", cases of pilots using "Emergency" or other phrases other than "pan-pan" and "mayday" have caused confusion and errors in aircraft handling by ATC.

https://www.hkatc.gov.hk/HK_AIP/aic/AIC21-12.pdf