Spill your coffee, or tea what have you

[Skoshi Tiger]

The hook must be a fairly standard procedure for emergency landings where fitted. The F-111G isn't a naval aircraft yet it still has a hook. Back when we operated Phantom II's hooks were used used during emergency landings and most of our big RAAF bases have arrestor cable systems.

I guess that using it is to stop the plane in the shortest amount of time. Ejection from an F-111 is to be avoided if possible. From memory it almost always causes back injuries to the pilot and navigator.

Anyway they are the experts so they should know what they're doing!


Cheers

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by Coen020

i still think that thing looks better then the f-111.

I is double decker and also doubles as a clothes washing machine.

As has a can opener built in.

Multipurpose appliance.

[Triggaaar]

Good video to watch the landing. Pilot's fly bys and 2 attempts to land looked very good, but the comments along with the story were a bit weird.

If they were worried about the 3000 litres of fuel exploding, why not fly about until it ran low? Perhaps because they weren't worried. And given that landing it on its belly meant it would never fly again, why bother landing it at all if it put the pilots in danger - they could have just ejected. Again, presumably because it wasn't that dangerous (or they don't value the life of their pilots).

[JG53Frankyboy]

perhaps the RAAF didnt trust the F-111 ejection system for 100% ? you know, the whole cockpit is ejected in this plane.

and sure, the fuel should be no proplem at all, as all the flightshows are showing when the F-111 are "burning" their fuel... there is an emergency releaese for fuel.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by Triggaaar

Good video to watch the landing. Pilot's fly bys and 2 attempts to land looked very good, but the comments along with the story were a bit weird.

If they were worried about the 3000 litres of fuel exploding, why not fly about until it ran low? Perhaps because they weren't worried. And given that landing it on its belly meant it would never fly again, why bother landing it at all if it put the pilots in danger - they could have just ejected. Again, presumably because it wasn't that dangerous (or they don't value the life of their pilots).

Most likely because they had a written plan/policy for what to do in a similar event, and as you know military people follow policy to the letter (you dont get rewarded for inginuity normally) so they just followed their policy.

Still why didnt they dump the fuel? Its flamable and it weights the aircraft down...

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by JG53Frankyboy

perhaps the RAAF didnt trust the F-111 ejection system for 100% ? you know, the whole cockpit is ejected in this plane.

and sure, the fuel should be no proplem at all, as all the flightshows are showing when the F-111 are "burning" their fuel... there is an emergency releaese for fuel.

When you eject from the F-111 the whole cockpit is rocketed away from the aircraft and comes down with it's parrachute and lands as a unit (it is actually used as a life boat over water). It is designed to save the crew ejecting at very high speed and zero altitude. Because of the envelope that it's designed to work in the process is VERY harsh and almost always causes back injuries to the crew.

I guess that if there is a more controlled way of putting the plane down that the option they'll take.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8l79lSjVMg

Cheers!

[engarde]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

This will make you spill your coffee, or tea what-have-you.

Darned awesome video...

without giving away too much, i remember that day very well, i learned over the radio that a colleague of mine had been required to attend the incident in an official capacity.

i was SO jealous i didnt get to see what happened close up.

That is a remarkable piece of flying, incredible.

the pilots circled for a good 3 hours to burn the fuel they had in the tanks, fuel dumping is not allowed for obvious environmental and security reasons.

Uh and I dunno who said that "if they do it it's a standard procedure for it" I can tell you NO, there's not such "standard procedure". You're giving the means and the scenarios, but you cannot fathom any possible solution.
A close friend of mine flies with F-18s in Canada and he said that he would probably deploy the arrestor hook once he hits the ground, not BEFORE ("we know of the F111 guys, that was a non standard procedure that could have gone very, very wrong.."), cos you're gonna slam the plane on the tarmac.

[digix]

What about bellylanding on the grass? Not an option?