USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

[AirDOGGe]

SAF Explains Oshkosh F-16 Overrun

Fogged Cockpit, Concern For Spectators Cited


The US Air Force has concluded its investigation into last summer's incident at EAA AirVenture, in which an F-16 overran runway 36 and headed 300 feet off into the grass.

The report says the jet's environmental control system (ECS) caused fogging that obscured the pilot's vision, and resisted his efforts to clear the canopy.

Details and a photo oif a very foggy cockpit at Aeronews.net...Link: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?d...f-3286391854ac


.

[Coyote Chris]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Yeah, I read that. Makes one wonder if this is not the first time this type of failure has occured in the F-16. Wasnt there another older military jet that went off the runway that same day? I left two days before.....

[airtj]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

FJ-4 Fury

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub7PFQSQFkI

[deepsky]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Is that the tail of the damaged F-16 in the forground as the Fury rolls past?

[T. Adams]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Yeah, I read that. Makes one wonder if this is not the first time this type of failure has occured in the F-16. Wasnt there another older military jet that went off the runway that same day? I left two days before.....

I think Sugden just likes to keep things interesting. He also forgot to put the gear down on the very same plane a couple of years earlier.

[Coyote Chris]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Tim, what? No bitchin' Betty?
Maybe some folks need an IPhone app with a checklist....
Chris who never failed to lower the gear on his PA28...

[AirDOGGe]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Fogged up windshield? Can't see?

Do what I do,..........roll down the windows!

[flyboycpa]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Yeah, I read that. Makes one wonder if this is not the first time this type of failure has occured in the F-16. Wasnt there another older military jet that went off the runway that same day? I left two days before.....

Chris,

I have a close friend that is also in that same Alabama unit and flies those very F-16's. He was telling me a few weeks ago that their F-16's are an older "block" of aircraft. He stated that the F-16's (even newer ones, but particularly the older "block" aircraft) had problems with the ECS (environmental control system) fogging the canopy. They actually do have a procedure that is in layman's terms turning up the defog (there is a lot more to it than that). Also, he said that the runway at OSH is considered their minimum normal landing runway (7000' length) and that you have to be on your game even under ideal circumstances. They approach somewhere around 150-160 knots for touchdown, then pitch the nose quite high (aero-braking) down to approx 120 knots, then use the wheel brakes for the remainder of the decel. The F-16 has pitifully poor brakes (small, grabby, not very effective) and are therefore used only at slow (i.e., <120 knots) speeds.

He said that given the runway length, and that the canopy fogged, the pilot (a close friend of his) was doomed from the outset. Once the fog cleared there was simply insufficient runway remaining. Thankfully, the pilot was cleared and has resumed flying duties.

Sam

[MRussell]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Why were his speedbrakes not deployed?
Also if I'm not mistaken there a mention of vertigo earlier in the report and then never another mention of it... is that correct and does anyone know why?
Thx

[AirDOGGe]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Usually when you hear some point of fact reported by only one source, then never hear it again, ever, then it was most likely untrue.

In other words...oops, someone goofed. Perhaps one person suggested possible vertigo, then the rumor passed from ear to ear until it was believed to be fact and told to the reporter. It happens all the time.



People will see things that didn't happen too.

I was just re-reading about the MIZAR, the ill-fated Pinto/Cessna 337 "road-capable" airplane not long ago to refresh my memories.

In that particular article about it's crash investigation the NTSB said some witnesses stated that they saw a wing on the vehicle fold up and separate, while others reported that the car separated from the aircraft portion entirely and only remained attached by cables and such, two completely different scenarios.

A video or film shot by one source and acquired by the NTSB verified the breaking loose of a wing strut with the resulting failure of said wing. Yet at least one witness said he could SWEAR he saw the car break free entirely before falling.


Funny how our own eyes and mind can fool ourselves.

[W J Pearce]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

Vertigo, airbrakes, it is all in the report.
http://www.militarytimes.com/static/...ve_summary.pdf

"The board president found by clear and convincing evidence that the cause of the mishap was extreme fogging in the MA (Mishap Aircraft) cockpit, caused by the MA ECS, that completely obscured the MP’s (Mishap Pilot's) vision. The board president found by a preponderance of the evidence that substantially contributing factors were an inadequate aerobrake, a fast touchdown speed, and closed speedbrakes. Aerodynamic braking provides the most effective braking in the F-16 during landing. The ECS fog denied the MP the ability to establish a proper aerobrake increasing his landing distance. The fast touchdown speed increased the landing distance, but would have been negated by a proper aerobrake. Speedbrakes would add some minor aerodynamic drag during the landing roll, but would not have prevented the MA’s runway departure. The speedbrakes’ primary purpose is to increase drag which at landing airspeeds provides for a higher power setting allowing for faster engine spool up in the event of go around. If not for the lack of visual and instrument references, the MP could have executed a proper aerobrake, come to a complete stop on the runway, and still had approximately 1000 ft of runway remaining."

"The MP landed at 1120L touching down just past the 1,000 ft runway marker which was confirmed by witness testimony and photographic analysis (Tab V-1.14, GG-3 – 4). The AIB estimates the touchdown was approximately 1000-1300 down runway 36L and at approximately 165-175 knots with the speedbrakes closed (Tab S-35—38, DD-26, GG-3).

"Cockpit ECS fog started developing in the MA as it approached the flare. As the throttle was retarded to idle, fog began to envelope the entire cockpit (Tab V-1.5, Z-13). As the MP began to set a pitch attitude for the aerobrake passing through 10-11 degrees, he lost sight of the HUD gun-cross and was unable to use the Nose Wheel Steering (NWS) indictor and AOA indexers for a visual reference (Tab V-1.5, V-1.12). CSFDR data indicates that the aerobrake varied between 5 and 11-degrees AOA during the rollout (Tab DD-26 – 28). The MP started losing forward visibility first (Tab V-1.5). Using the view out the side of the canopy, the MP focused on keeping the aircraft tracking down the runway (Tab V-1.5). The MP reached for the DEFOG lever and shoved it full forward (Tab V-1.5, 1.12). He held it in that position for one or two seconds with no effect and then recycled, with yet again no change in ECS fog or airflow (Tab V-1.5, 1.12). The MP then experienced brief vertigo, almost a tumbling sensation, and considered ejection but was concerned for spectators and aircraft along the runways (Tab V-1.5). The MP did not consider initiating a go-around because of the disorientation and no assurance that the ECS fog would dissipate, rendering the MP blind while navigating through the ongested traffic pattern (Tab V-1.15).

"The MP momentarily read 140 knots on the MA airspeed indicator during the rollout and thought he had enough runway, but could not see any runway remaining markers (Tab V-1.12). The MP then applied main landing gear wheel brakes and the nose came down from the aerobrake (Tab V-1.15). The MP felt the brake anti-skid system cycle and continued to brake as hard as he could (Tab V-1.12). The MP never saw the end of the runway approaching, but felt that he had enough remaining runway to stop (Tab V-1.5). Runway 36L has no overrun or arresting gear (Tab O-26). As the MA departed the runway surface, the MP felt a bump and rumbling, and then the nose dug in (Tab V-1.6). The ECS fog cleared as the engine ingested dirt and sod (Tab V-1.6). After the MA came to a stop, the MP raised the canopy and egressed over the left canopy rail jogging northwest away from the MA."

[AirDOGGe]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

And there you go, all questions answered in one post. Appreciate that Bill.

[MRussell]

Re: USAF explains F-16 runway incident at Oshlosh

good stuff, thanks Bill!