Having A Bad Day In An F-22

[Robbie Stuart]

From www.spaceref.com


Langley Air Force Base Briefing: F-22 03-041 Stuck Canopy

STATUS REPORT
Date Released: Monday, April 24, 2006
Source: Department of Defense

F-22 03-041 Stuck Canopy
TSgt Robinson 1st MXG/MXQ

• On 10 April 06 at approximately 0815 aircraft 03-041 had a Red Ball for a canopy unlock indication. Attempts to clear the problems by cycling the canopy failed. The final cycling of the canopy resulted in it being in the down and locked position. The canopy would not cycle up form this position trapping the pilot in the cockpit. The aircraft subsequently ground aborted.

• Attempts to manually open the canopy were unsuccessful

• 27th AMU consulted Lockheed Martin and the F-22A System Program Office to determine alternate methods to open the canopy and extract the pilot

• After all maintenance options were exhausted, the canopy was cut by fire department personnel and the pilot was extracted at approximately 1315

• Trouble-shooting of the aircraft is in work

• Canopy replacement cost is $182,205
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are pictures with the story & it ain't a pretty sight.
Robbie

[RareBear]

How long is the warranty on an F-22? Sounds like Lockheed-Martin might be on the hook for that one.

Walt

[RickH]

On top of that little glitch the Pentagon just released news that there may be a manufacturing defect that will shorten the estimated 8000 hr service life on the first 90 aircraft. The following from Military.com

The F-22A Raptor has been designed with a service life of 8,000 flying hours, but a faulty manufacturing process discovered four months ago may cause a key structural component in 90 of the new fighters to age prematurely, officials said Monday.

The "forward boom frames" in the 62-foot-long fighter are constructed of titanium, a lightweight but extremely strong metal, and are used to anchor the aircraft's wings to its fuselage, said Air Force spokesman Doug Karas. During routine testing in December, Karas said, officials discovered that the titanium components may have been "improperly" treated, creating the possibility that the metal would not last as long as it is supposed to.

The flawed components, Karas said, "do not affect safety of flight and, consequently, no restrictions have been put on F-22 flight operations."

The problem affects Raptors No. 4017 through 4107, including most of the 66 Raptors that already have been delivered to the Air Force and several dozen more still being manufactured, Karas said. There are 23 Raptors assigned to Tyndall Air Force Base for F-22 pilot training with another six scheduled to arrive in the next year.

"This is not a result of improper design, but an issue with one supplier's manufacturing process," Karas said in a statement to The News Herald.

A spokesman with the Lockheed Martin Corp., prime contractor for the F-22, said Monday the company is working closely with Air Force experts to determine the extent of the problem. Structural tests including "fatigue" tests of the fuselage booms are continuing, said company spokesman Joe Quimby.

Under a "heat treat" process, the titanium boom frames are raised to a high temperature in order to "achieve the desired grain structure" in the metal, Karas said. "A section of the forward boom frames under investigation may not have been held at this temperature long enough" to reach the targeted strength, he said.

The trade publication Defense News reported Monday that it will cost about $1 billion to fix the flawed boom frames, but both Karas and Quimby flatly denied that allegation.

Raptor program officials also have identified the need to reinforce the aft boom in 41 of 73 Raptors to strengthen the juncture where the tail is attached to the fuselage, according to Air Force officials quoted by Defense News. (Of those 73 aircraft, 66 also are affected by the forward boom heat-treatment flaws, officials said.)

An Air Force spokesman told Defense News that the discovery occurred as part of the normal testing process for each new aircraft design.

"As the aircraft come down the production line, they continue to test the fleet," said Maj. Keith Scheirmann, chief of Raptor heavy maintenance and modifications at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. "Sometimes, we find areas where we want to go back and enhance the capability or upgrade the aircraft," he told the publication.

Still, fixing the problem in each airplane could require removing the wings to inspect the boom area, a time-intensive and expensive process, officials said.

The Air Force and Lockheed Martin are conducting further tests at a company facility to determine the severity of the problems and hope to have answers by the end of May.

The Defense Department and Congress have agreed to cap the F-22 program at 183 aircraft. Lockheed Martin has contracts to build another 107 of the advanced fighters, Quimby said.

[systemofadown1162]

Might sound like dumb questions but could the pilot just eject on the ground? And I thought the cockpit was a highly kept secret?

[mrhenniger]

Might sound like dumb questions but could the pilot just eject on the ground? And I thought the cockpit was a highly kept secret?

If you think the cost of replacing a canopy is expensive...

Mike

[John Ceglarek]

This is old news...but since it came up...ejection on the ground risks much more serious damage to the aircraft, not to mention the risk to the pilot and/or anyone the canopy lands on. As far as the cockpit being a secret, there have already been published photos of the cockpit.

John

[TimAPNY]

Ejecting is not the best option over patience. It is a much better option to death. I've seen several pilots who had to exit their ride and lets just say it did not look like they stepped off a Disney ride. Too bad one of those guys took his REO and F-14A into a house in Tennessee and killed both of them and the 3 people in the house.

I’m more surprised that there was not manual override (we could open the canopy with a speed wrench or ratchet on the Hornet) or a way to “blow” the canopy off.

Tim

[John Ceglarek]

The lack of a manual override has come up on other boards as well. I bet it's something that gets remedied...

John

[tom d. friedman]

they don't call us overburdened tax payers for nothing!! 182 grand for a piece of plastic!!

[MX304]

There is a way to blow the canopy off. The downside is that it does tremendous damage to the aircraft. It isn't as damaging as an ejection, but it would be way more than 185k to fix.

[tom d. friedman]

i guess the 182 grand is a bargain!! oh brother!!!

[needle]

Ejection????

Most definately, absolutely, positively, can't emphasize enough, the ultimate LAST RESORT!!!!!!! , which is normally preceded by the shortest, loudest conversation you will ever have with your maker, even if you are an atheist!

Been there. Done that.

(And I speak from experience. A very painful, life and career changing, personal experience.)

Needle

[Paul Krumrei]

If I am not mistaken, the canopy has gold flakes imbeded in it.

[tom d. friedman]

paul, what is the purpose of the gold??? some pentagon big wig flying the f-22?? with gold currently at near $700 bucks an ounce i really must question it!!!

[bdk]

On top of that little glitch the Pentagon just released news that there may be a manufacturing defect that will shorten the estimated 8000 hr service life on the first 90 aircraft.

Or this flaw in the heat treating could make the part more fatigue resistant... This could be merely a documentation issue or require some some sub-element testing to qualify the parts. This kind of thing happens in every military program when you as the prime contractor have literally hundreds of suppliers who themselves each use hundreds of sub-tier suppliers. This explanation doesn't raise eyebrows or sell papers though!