Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sat Jun 28, 2025 12:45 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 8:44 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 2:14 pm
Posts: 2370
Location: Atlanta, GA
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. :roll:
Robbie

_________________
Fly Fast Make Noise!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:37 am
Posts: 848
Location: Moncks Corner, SC, USA
How long is the warranty on an F-22? Sounds like Lockheed-Martin might be on the hook for that one.

Walt


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:29 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
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

Quote:
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 5:58 pm 
Offline
Digital Sniper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:59 am
Posts: 681
Location: Florida
Might sound like dumb questions but could the pilot just eject on the ground? And I thought the cockpit was a highly kept secret?

_________________
The conquest of space is worth the risk of life. - Gus Grissom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:06 pm 
Offline
S/N Geek
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:31 pm
Posts: 3790
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
systemofadown1162 wrote:
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

_________________
Mike R. Henniger
Aviation Enthusiast & Photographer
http://www.AerialVisuals.ca
http://www.facebook.com/AerialVisuals

Do you want to find locations of displayed, stored or active aircraft? Then start with the The Locator.
Do you want to find or contribute to the documented history of an aircraft? If so then start with the Airframes Database.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:36 pm
Posts: 138
Location: Portage, MI
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:19 pm 
Offline
WRG Staff Photographer & WIX Brewmaster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:57 am
Posts: 3532
Location: Chapel Hill, TN
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

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:36 pm
Posts: 138
Location: Portage, MI
The lack of a manual override has come up on other boards as well. I bet it's something that gets remedied...

John


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:12 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 4:43 pm
Posts: 7501
Location: northern ohio
they don't call us overburdened tax payers for nothing!! 182 grand for a piece of plastic!! :x

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 7:50 pm
Posts: 701
Location: Dallas / Midland TX
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:29 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 4:43 pm
Posts: 7501
Location: northern ohio
i guess the 182 grand is a bargain!! oh brother!!! :o :shock:

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 9:05 pm
Posts: 258
Location: Plano, TX
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 10:20 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:06 pm
Posts: 1757
If I am not mistaken, the canopy has gold flakes imbeded in it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:03 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 4:43 pm
Posts: 7501
Location: northern ohio
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!!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:15 pm 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 11324
RickH wrote:
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! :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group