Embarrasing and Expensive for the USAF

[Bort]

The USAF can apparently build a gagillion $ fighter- whose canopy traps the pilot inside!
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2006/04/why_is_this_man.html
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/canopy3.jpg

[Kapitan]

If at first you dont sucsead use a bigger chain saw.

[Sea Demon]

This type of thing does happen. When I was at SUPT down at Laughlin, one of my friends got trapped in a T-38. The drive mechanism in the back jammed and wouldn't allow the canopy to rise enough to let him slip out. The civilian maintainers had to manually unlock the mechanism, and all of us in Lizards Flight had a good laugh at his expense.

For your info, canopy actuators do fail. So do locking mechanisms. If you think this only happens in the USAF you are mistaken. But what I find most comical about that pogo site, they seem to want the whole program terminated because this F-22 apparently had a faulty actuator or a stuck canopy locking drive assembly. :doh: While I like organizations that scrutinize how taxpayer dollars are spent, I don't think they should be too concerned about the F-22. It's well worth the money. ;)

[tycho102]

It happens from time to time. When it happens on a actual combat plane, the canopy cost alone is nearly $1 million.

[The Avon Lady]

It may still turn out that the canopy replacement will cost the USAF less than they paid for that chainsaw. :damn:

[XabbaRus]

Is it verified that this was a failure.

It could also be a mockup of the front end of the Raptor and this is an exercise to get the pilot out...

[Type941]

ironic how sometimes a penny cost component disables a million dollar machine.

[Godalmighty83]

if it was a mock up test i would have thought that it would have been done inside and they wouldnt have bothered locking someone inside.


anyway as it say on the side 'ejector seat' sounds like a simple way of getting out to me. ;)

[TLAM Strike]

if it was a mock up test i would have thought that it would have been done inside...Right because there is never an emergency outside so why bother training there… :roll:

[JSLTIGER]

It may still turn out that the canopy replacement will cost the USAF less than they paid for that chainsaw. :damn:

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Godalmighty83]

if it was a mock up test i would have thought that it would have been done inside...Right because there is never an emergency outside so why bother training there… :roll:

so not let people think that the 100 odd million dollar fighter that have just bought is not so faulty you cant get out of it, like the OP.

[TteFAboB]

You all see fault in this, but fail to realise it's a safety feature.

If the Pilot can't eject and has to crash-land on enemy territory, the enemies won't be able to take the pilot out for interrogation, unless they buy one of those expensive chainsaws, that still gives plenty of time for the pilot to destroy all the on-board computers and systems.

The fighter is so expensive and valuable you cannot allow a chicken Pilot to eject and land behind the enemy lines filled with technical and military info.

When you fly the F-22, you really do commit yourself 110% to it. You're in all the way, it's a whole new way of living, and no quitters are allowed.

[TLAM Strike]

if it was a mock up test i would have thought that it would have been done inside...Right because there is never an emergency outside so why bother training there… :roll:

so not let people think that the 100 odd million dollar fighter that have just bought is not so faulty you cant get out of it, like the OP. If the USAF didn't want people to know about this problem (if it is such) they could have just detained whoever took the picture (assuming they were not DoD personnel, in which case they only could release the pic with authorization) because there are big signs on the fences that say "Photography of base prohibited" or some such.

[scandium]

anyway as it say on the side 'ejector seat' sounds like a simple way of getting out to me. ;)

I vaguely recall an incident several years ago where a pilot ejected during an aborted takeoff (while the aircraft was still on the runway) and was pretty badly injured as a result of the parachute not being able to fully deploy in time. :nope:

[DeepSix]

...
anyway as it say on the side 'ejector seat' sounds like a simple way of getting out to me. ;)

It is, assuming the canopy comes off first so you don't get shredded by going through it. ;)

[Wim Libaers]

Most modern ejection seats can be used when on the ground. Also, the system that opens the canopy when ejecting is not the normal system, but uses explosives to remove it. That the normal system doesn't work doesn't mean the ejection will fail.

Depending on the type of cockpit and seat, ejecting straight through may also be an option. However, I guess it would be unwise to try that in this case. The one-piece plexiglass canopies tend to be made stronger than the ones for aircraft with a separate front windshield, and if the seat doesn't have the spiked top designed to hit the canopy before the helmet does, it'd probably break the pilot's neck.

[Sea Demon]

It is, assuming the canopy comes off first so you don't get shredded by going through it. ;)

This is impossible on an ACES-II seat. The seat just will not fire until the canopy is clear. That's just how they're built. The seat won't fire until the canopy clears enough for the canopy lanyards to fire the explosives on the bottom of the seat. Don't ask me exactly how it works as I haven't seen the good ole' ACES-II in over 8 years. But I remember the basics.

I seriously doubt there is one instance of this happening with an ACES-II. Older Martin Baker seat...maybe. Maybe even one of the old Northrop seats from the 1970's.


...
anyway as it say on the side 'ejector seat' sounds like a simple way of getting out to me. ;)

That's a real good way to cause more damage than necessary for this type of incident. Also, the canopy can be jettisoned without firing the seat. That's a nifty little capability to ACES-II systems. It looks like they chose a method that wouldn't destroy cockpit components to get that pilot out. Sounds smart to me. And probably only took 15 minutes maximum.

Anyway, this is no big deal. Like I said, canopy actuators and locking mechanisms fail. It wouldn't matter if it's the F-4, F-16, Su-33, Su-27, F-22, Rafale, Typhoon, etc. It says nothing about the real capabilities of the aircraft itself. :up:

I vaguely recall an incident several years ago where a pilot ejected during an aborted takeoff (while the aircraft was still on the runway) and was pretty badly injured as a result of the parachute not being able to fully deploy in time.

That wasn't in any modern jet with ACES-II. ACES-II is "zero-zero", which means you can eject at zero altitude with zero airspeed in any weather conditions. I'm not doubting what you say, but it wasn't an F-16, F-15, F-22, F-117 or A-10. I even doubt if it was the current Martin Bakers in Hornets or Tomcats. Do you remember if it was even American? :hmm:

[scandium]

I vaguely recall an incident several years ago where a pilot ejected during an aborted takeoff (while the aircraft was still on the runway) and was pretty badly injured as a result of the parachute not being able to fully deploy in time.

That wasn't in any modern jet with ACES-II. ACES-II is "zero-zero", which means you can eject at zero altitude with zero airspeed in any weather conditions. I'm not doubting what you say, but it wasn't an F-16, F-15, F-22, F-117 or A-10. I even doubt if it was the current Martin Bakers in Hornets or Tomcats. Do you remember if it was even American? :hmm:


The base it occured on was one that is owned by Canada but used also by the German and Dutch airforces for lowlevel flight training. I remember F-16s were flown there, but also other fighter aircraft, and I don't recall which airforce was involved. It wouldn't have been the USAF though, and I know it wasn't a Canadian pilot (I've only ever seen Canadian F-18s there, and then only rarely, and it wasn't an F-18). This was about 8-10 years ago so memory is a little hazy and I had no luck when I tried to Google for the incident. I recall only that there was no damage to the plane, other than from the ejection, while the pilot wasn't so lucky and had been hurt pretty badly.

[NeonSamurai]

Lets not forget things dont always operate properly 100% of the time. If they did canopies wouldnt get stuck in the first place, and pilots would rarely need to eject ;)

As for ejecting because of a stuck canopy, dont be rediculous. 1 Any ejection is a risky move to the pilot and quite often painfull (due to the sudden g forces and being slamed around in the seat). 2 the seats and the damage they can cause to the plane by being fired are pretty much garanteed to be more costly then the canopy.

As for the photos im not convinced that it is anything but a mockup practice drill. The pilot doesnt quite look right, the airframe looks pretty roughly made for a "stealthy" fighter. Plus alot of the cockpit buttons look painted on. Of course this could just be bad photography Also i noticed they taped the canaopy where they were going to cut while inside what looks like a hanger. Then aparently pulled it outdoors before starting to cut it open.

Maybe its real, maybe its not, but at this day and age you cant trust anything you read or anything you dont directly witness for yourself (and even then you perhaps should still be suspicious) :)

[tycho102]

Canopies have "retro rockets" on them. The rocket is pointed toward the aft end of the plane, and it slides back and up. At least, that is the way it works on the F/A-18.

The actual seats have an extension on them that will pierce the canopy on it's way through. However, the pilots will get some lacerations to their arms/legs, which is why it's always best to throw the canopy off before punching out.

As for ground ejects, you won't survive an F/A-18 ground jett. The chair will hit about 200 feet in height, but the canopy doesn't have time to slow you down, even though it will fully open about 20 feet before impact. If you happen to jett on a carrier deck, then you've got another ~80 feet of clearance before you hit the water, and people have generally survived.





I have heard of some ejet systems that have some sort of nitrogen tablet in the parachute, to open it much faster than by slipstream alone. These might very well be survivable.

[Oberon]

Yeah, I was wondering when I first (briefly) saw this pic a couple of days ago why they didn't fire the canopy open. It'd probably cause less damage to it than hacking it open with a chainsaw.
Then again...if the firing mechanism failed...then...damn... :oops:

[The Avon Lady]

I wonder if StarForce was installed in the jet's computerized system. :hmm:

[Bort]

Another story about the incident with more info and pics:
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2002/02/24/Navigation/177/204883/Pictures+Pilot+trapped+for+5h+in+cockpit+of+USAF's +new+%24135m+F-22A+Raptor+after+canopy.html
The guy was trapped for five hours! Looks like the cutting damaged the RAM too.

[Bort]

Hmm can't get the link to work right :hmm:

[Wim Libaers]

Yeah, I was wondering when I first (briefly) saw this pic a couple of days ago why they didn't fire the canopy open. It'd probably cause less damage to it than hacking it open with a chainsaw.
Then again...if the firing mechanism failed...then...damn... :oops:

It would destroy the points where the canopy attaches to the cockpit, and probably some other damage. And it would be destroyed anyway when it hit the ground.

If there is no emergency situation, just cutting it open is probably the most reasonable and safest thing to do.

[NeonSamurai]

Yep most ejection seats are quite capable of punching throught the canopy, but generaly this is the least desired form and done only in extreme emergencies (like say your plane is seconds away from becoming a fireball) as there have been numerous injuries and several fatalities from those kinds of ejections.

Also the method used to clear the canopy out of the way varries dramaticly depending entriely on the model of plane. Which ever method used though the canopy is either ejected off to the side, or to the rear and never straight up or forward (or you risk having the pilot slam into the canopy after ejection).

An ejection also usualy does a bunch of damage inside the cockpit and sometimes even structural damage to the frame of the plane (remember we are talking about a fairly powerfull solid rocket firing in a mostly enclosed area)

Also again, most modern ejection seats are quite capable of a zero/zero ejection (on the ground and not moving), but they are even more risky to the pilot as there is less time for the parachute canopy to stabalize and decelerate the pilot enough, even with assisted parachute deployment. Sprains, cuts, bruises and broken bones are not uncomon.

As for the f/a 18, i dont know what the navy is using, but the airforce jets are definatly capable of survivable zero/zero ejects. But as i said, ejecting is pretty much the very last thing you ever want to do.

[TLAM Strike]

...never straight up or forward (or you risk having the pilot slam into the canopy after ejection). Like Goose… ;)

[Sea Demon]

1. Yep most ejection seats are quite capable of punching throught the canopy, but generaly this is the least desired form and done only in extreme emergencies (like say your plane is seconds away from becoming a fireball)

2. As for the f/a 18, i dont know what the navy is using, but the airforce jets are definatly capable of survivable zero/zero ejects. But as i said, ejecting is pretty much the very last thing you ever want to do.

1. Like I tell you guys, this is impossible on aircraft equipped with ACES-II seats. There is not one scenario where you will blast through the canopy. The canopy has lanyards attached on the rear that need to pull far enough to fire the explosives on the bottom of the seat. By the time the seat fires, the canopy is long gone. Even with no slipstream to move it. I know this seat quite well. I sat on one for 3.5 years. :know:

2. I think the FA-18 still uses Martin Baker seats. I personally don't know how they work, but I'm pretty sure the latest version works similar to their Air Force counterparts.

If there is no emergency situation, just cutting it open is probably the most reasonable and safest thing to do.

Yup. :yep: