B-52 Crash Fairchild AFB 1994
Atle Ohren
Investigation Board transcripts about the B-52 crashing at Fairchild AFB in
1994, while in a very low and very tight left turn. And maybe someting else
on that story ?
Lindsay O'Connor
"Atle Ohren" <atle....@c2i.net> wrote in message
news:UcBG7.9076$pK1.2...@juliett.dax.net...
Try:
http://www.crm-devel.org/resources/paper/darkblue/darkblue.htm
Cheers,
Linz
Phil Brandt
wrote:
Go to:
www.crm-devel.org/resources/paper/darkblue/darkblue.htm
This is a really good summation of the whole tragic scene at
Fairchild.
Phil Brandt
FVSone
B-52H-170BW (c.n464441/464453) 61-0014/0026?
Crashed 6/24/94
Pilot. Col. Aurthur Holland
Here is a description from the Air Force:
Begin Quotation --------------------------------------
After rolling out inbound to runway 23, the AA began a go-around because Earl
01 was on the runway completing a touch-and-go. The AA started his go-around
and made a slight turn to position himself left and parallel to the runway, but
on a heading that took the AA between the tower and the runway. The crew
raised the gear and requested a 360 degree turn around the tower for spacing
from the tower controllers. The tower controller acknowledged the request, but
did not specifically clear the crew to perform the maneuver. Tower controllers
were uncertain about whether or not the air show practice session was over;
they did not question the maneuver.
Testimony and other data indicates the AA pilot maintained approximately 250 ft
AGL and 170-180 KIAS pattern airspeed as he passed in front of the tower. The
AA then began another level turn and applied a small amount of additional
thrust.
The AA rolled into his left turn with a pitch angle that was slightly above the
horizon. The bank angle was 64 degrees and increased to 72 degrees of turn.
The aircraft began a tail-first slide and lost an estimated 50 to 100 feet in
altitude. At this point, the aircraft again entered into a partially stalled
condition. The high bank angles and the changing of the headwind component
into a crosswind had the same effect as in the previous partially stalled
condition described above. As the aircraft began to pass behind the tower, it
rolled out slightly to an estimated 45 degrees of bank, which broke the stall,
arrested the descent, and enabled the aircraft to start a slight climb. No
additional power input was detected. Because no power was added throughout the
first part of the turn, the aircraft had decelerated and was flying slower than
170-180 KIAS at the start of the turn. Photography of the aircraft passing
behind the air traffic control tower shows airbrake position two had been
selected. This is consistent with tear down analysis performed on the flight
controls. Selection of air brake position two, in the pattern, eases the pilot
work load by significantly increasing the aircraft roll response. The use of
air brakes has a negligible effect on the stalling speed. The AA rounded the
tower and began to turn toward the runway.
As the aircraft completed it’s pass behind the tower, the AA steepened its
bank to approximately 90 degrees of bank and the nose began to fall. The
aircraft had entered into a stalled condition once more. Several events
occurred that influenced the aircraft. First, the wind had not shifted to a
tailwind of approximately 10 knots. The wings sensed a loss of 10 knots of
airspeed since the turn was started. Second, the airspeed had decreased since
the beginning of the turn because no power has been added. Since the aircraft
was traveling slower it was closer to the stalling speed.
* * * * * *
As the aircraft continued its final turn, there was a second, deeper stall, as
evidenced by the nose falling through the horizon.
* * * * * * *
The falling of the nose was followed by a decrease in engine exhaust smoke and
noise.
The AA pilot made a control input to bring the right wing down and return to
level flight.
* * * * * * *
The nose of the aircraft continued to drop as the bank angle increase. The
copilot attempted ejection, but the plane was too close to the ground and in
too steep a bank. The aircraft impacted the ground. * * * * Approximately
twenty seconds had passed since the AA flew in front of the tower and initiated
the final 360 degree turn.
* * * * * * *
The aircraft impacted the ground at approximately 150 knots and 95 degrees of
bank in a nose-low attitude.
End Quotation_--------------------------------------------
Paul Hirose
>
> The aircraft began a tail-first slide and lost an estimated 50 to 100 feet in
> altitude. At this point, the aircraft again entered into a partially stalled
I have seen video of the maneuvers culminating in this crash, and
don't remember anything that looked like a tail-first slide. And how
could a B-52 only lose 100 feet in such a maneuver?
> condition. The high bank angles and the changing of the headwind component
> into a crosswind had the same effect as in the previous partially stalled
> condition described above. As the aircraft began to pass behind the tower, it
...
> As the aircraft completed it’s pass behind the tower, the AA steepened its
> bank to approximately 90 degrees of bank and the nose began to fall. The
> aircraft had entered into a stalled condition once more. Several events
> occurred that influenced the aircraft. First, the wind had not shifted to a
> tailwind of approximately 10 knots. The wings sensed a loss of 10 knots of
> airspeed since the turn was started. Second, the airspeed had decreased since
> the beginning of the turn because no power has been added. Since the aircraft
> was traveling slower it was closer to the stalling speed.
Perhaps the report is merely saying the airfield experienced a huge
wind shift during the fatal turn. But that talk of going from headwind
to crosswind to tailwind as they turned sure sounds like the old myth
that you lose lift as you turn away from a headwind. Look, I'm not
getting on your case -- you're just quoting what someone else has
written -- but is this verbatim from a USAF document?
It reads like something an aviation hobbyist might write. Not just the
wind business. Take the closing sentences of the quote above. Don't
they sound awfully simplistic?
--
paulh...@earthlink.net (Paul Hirose)
Tamas Feher
increase. The
> copilot attempted ejection, but the plane was too close to the
ground and in
And he was NOT sitting in a Zvezda K-36 after all !
H. McDaniel
> Perhaps the report is merely saying the airfield experienced a huge
> wind shift during the fatal turn. But that talk of going from headwind
> to crosswind to tailwind as they turned sure sounds like the old myth
> that you lose lift as you turn away from a headwind. Look, I'm not
Wouldn't this depend on the wind speed and atmospheric pressure (density) ? If
you're in a plane capable of a max speed of 200 knots and you turn tail to a wind
going 200 knots aren't you going to have some problems?
-McDaniel
Peter Stickney
The airplane itself doesn't care how fast it is moving over the
ground, just how fast the air is flowing over the various surfaces.
The most common analogy is that of a boat in a river with a strong
current. The current is going 5 kts, the boar can go 5 kts. If
you're heded upstream, your "water speed" measureas at 5 kts, but
because the water you're in is moving at 5 kts, you don't make any
progress. If you turn and run downstream, you still have a water
speed of 5 kts, but because you're moving with the current, you have a
ground speed of 10 kts. The boat doesn't behave or handle any
differently.
An aircraft only moves in reference to the air surrounding it. (Unless
you're in the taking off or landing rolls.)
--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
Dante Mendes De Patta
Did he ever get out of the plane in that attempted ejection, or the
small dot coming out of the plane in the crash video is just the top
cockpit hatch pushing out?
Atle Ohren
Aircraft Accident Investigation Board transcript about the accident ? Or
some other reliable sources ? Besides Darker shades of blue.
"Phil Brandt" <f1...@prismnet.com> wrote in message
news:3beb3d20...@news.prismnet.com...
Mike Bandor
are considered "Safety Privileged" and not releasable to the public.
Mike
--
Mike Bandor, Software Engineer, BS-CS/SE
Ada83, Ada95, C++, Delphi, JavaScript, WinHelp, PL/SQL, SQL, JOVIAL, MASM,
Java, HTML
Creator of MEGATERMS, Military Terms & Acronyms
http://home.satx.rr.com/bandor/megaterm/megaterm.htm
"Atle Ohren" <atle....@c2i.net> wrote in message
news:CfhH7.9430$pK1.2...@juliett.dax.net...
matheson
AFIs, but the AIB report is public record. Sorry I don't know what the new
AFI is. The MIB (Mishap Investigation Board Report; used to be AFR 127-4)
is protected under "Executive Privilege"
Les
"Mike Bandor" <mba...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:YNBH7.4202$m_.1...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...