Blue Angels

[cardinalflyer]

I was watching The Discovery Channel the other night about the Blue Angels. During a specific segment the commentator stated that the F-18s had to refuel 12 times from Honolulu to Pensacola; is that accurate? Sounded a little excessive to me (even though I know nothing about F-18s). What speed would they fly? Would they break mach 1?

 

[stonewall]

Pond crossings are done at 310 Kts, which is standard air-refueling speed (at least for USAF). You might get the tanker to push it up in some cases if the conditions permit.

The reason for the high number of refuelings is distance/fuel to the nearest piece of concrete. Sometimes you might be topping off continuously for an hour, like if you're crossing the southern Atlantic and the closest divert is Iceland. Once you get close to your destination and/or more alternates, you can burn down to a lower fuel state before you refuel.

 

[SIG600]

+1.

You gotta stay topped off in case you lose the ability to refuel, not because you're burning so much gas. Hornet usually refuels slower too... 270 knot range (have to be < 300 to move the probe in or out). Plus our max range profile is going to be in the .6-.7 mach range at altitude.

 

[JungleJett]

southern Atlantic and the closest divert is Iceland

I can think of a whole lot of other place to divert to while flying in the SOUTHERN Atlantic...maybe part of Africa or South America...

But thats just me....






( I knew what you meant....just busting your chops.)

 

[SIG600]

Ya, divert your jet full of secure radio's, crypto, etc into a third world country that's going to have no services, and no ability to fix you, no security, etc. Then the USAF/Navy/etc. has to spend several weeks organizing a rescue det to get parts and maintainers in to get you out.

If we had to divert a Hornet into Afghanistan, even with ISAF bases it would have been a at least a week before anything could be organized to get you out. Point is the closest runway is not always a viable divert.

I can think of a whole lot of other place to divert to while flying in the SOUTHERN Atlantic...maybe part of Africa or South America...

But thats just me....






( I knew what you meant....just busting your chops.)

 

[cardinalflyer]

Thanks for the replies...About how many miles can a F-18 fly at mach 1 or higher? How often would you go that fast (non combat)?

 

[SIG600]

Unless you're a Raptor guy, then they run around all day Mach +.

The Hornet can barely get above Mach 1 in level flight below 10K feet with anything on it more than a single drop tank. Down hill in burner is what it usually takes, and you've got maybe 5-7 minutes like that assuming you have a full bag of gas.

 

[McGillicutty]

Ya, divert your jet full of secure radio's, crypto, etc into a third world country that's going to have no services, and no ability to fix you, no security, etc. Then the USAF/Navy/etc. has to spend several weeks organizing a rescue det to get parts and maintainers in to get you out.

If we had to divert a Hornet into Afghanistan, even with ISAF bases it would have been a at least a week before anything could be organized to get you out. Point is the closest runway is not always a viable divert.

There are airplanes with guns, more secure radios/crew members and worth 4x more than a Hornet that list (and have diverted to) third world country airports with no services etc. If it needs to be done, it can.

 

[SIG600]

Landing a P-3 in China doesn't count.

You can divert into Karachi Pakistan, that doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[bagasticks]

Yeah, maybe t-tailers/tankers. You just throw parts, techs in another same unit tail and make a tdy out of it.

Logistical nightmare getting parts and people from a fighter unit deployed to some craphole in the middle of the ocean.

war story, when i was wrenching hornets back in the day we had one crap an AMAD on the range in south korea and it diverted into Yechon, R.O.K. Took 4 days to get me and a partner t-tailed from Iwakuni, and we sat there for 6 days awaiting parts from NADEP on the east coast, 2 days in work, hornet left, we waited another week to get t-tailed back to iwakuni, and this was a short hop. .

It is much easier for airlift dudes to get airlifted, than it is for a pointy nose dude to arrange short notice airlift. .throw air refuleing in and you can double it unless you can get a tanker to both which is easier in the marines because we had KC-130's. .


i digress

 

[SIG600]

I rest my case.

Throw in on top of that a carrier and it's battle group having to wait around to recover said Hornet, or worse arranging a single tanker to drag him god only knows how far if the CSG has to move.

 

[McGillicutty]

Landing a P-3 in China doesn't count.

You can divert into Karachi Pakistan, that doesn't make it a good idea.

I wasn't talking about P-3s, T-tails or Tankers. My point is, the sky isn't going to fall if you divert a Hornet (for legitimate reasons) into alternates that other DOD aircraft use. That being said, I agree with tanking several times. I know I'd rather stay on the boom a few extra minutes than stay the night on the airplane in BFE.

 

[SIG600]

Plus, if one diverts, two are going. Now you have two fighters with only two guys (versus a crew) in BFE.

Not always, I had a flight lead leave me behind after diverting to Al Asad. That was a fun day!

 

[SIG600]

Nah, we still had two VUL's to fill, and CAG's endorsement. Did I mention that was my first flight in Iraq when that happened? Had to find my own way back to the Persian Gulf and the boat. You want to talk about "manIhopeIdon'tf_ckthisup-itis"

 

[Wildmanny]

Nah, we still had two VUL's to fill, and CAG's endorsement. Did I mention that was my first flight in Iraq when that happened? Had to find my own way back to the Persian Gulf and the boat. You want to talk about "manIhopeIdon'tf_ckthisup-itis"

Ah yes, I should have known the Navy would leave you behind.

This doesn't happen in the Air Force! Magnum was right, this would be a serious foul.

JUST KIDDING!!!!

 

[milplt]

Diverting with secure radios on board is not the same as taking a fighter into a 3rd world country - it isn't all about the classification level - it's about what it is and how much others want it.

 

[McGillicutty]

let it go

Diverting with secure radios on board is not the same as taking a fighter into a 3rd world country - it isn't all about the classification level - it's about what it is and how much others want it.

Ok, fine; no one in their right mind would want to poke around an AC-130 over an F/A-18.

 

[SIG600]

Sure they would, just make sure you approach it from the right side and they'll never see you coming!

 

[bagasticks]

Didn't Clint Eastwood steal a C130 from russia in some movie years ago ? ? . . Fire-box or something. . ?

 

[SIG600]

That's my ex girlfriend...

 

[MJG]

The real question is what would Chuck Norris do?

 

[bizjet800]

I think Nacho Libre wouldn't back away from that mission!

 

[erj-145mech]

Blackout Led To Accident

Report: Pilot Failed To Compensate For G-Forces In Blue Angels Mishap

Tue, 15 Jan '08
Blackout Led To Accident At MCAS Beaufort

The US Navy's final report on the April 2007 loss of an F/A-18 pilot during a performance of the Blue Angels aerial demonstration team concludes the pilot failed to properly tense his muscles to counter the g-forces from a high-speed turn.
As ANN reported, Blue Angel #6, piloted by Lt. Cmdr. Kevin Davis (right), impacted a residential area near Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort in South Carolina near the end of an April 21, 2007 performance. Davis' plane pulled an extremely tight turn to rejoin the formation just before the mishap.
"In his final turn to attempt to rendezvous with the other Blues, he put a very fast, high-G turn on the aircraft. A real aggressive turn," Capt. Jack Hanzlik, a Navy spokesman and former aviator, told the Associated Press. The turn subjected Davis to six Gs of force.
The Blue Angels fly without the benefit of G-suits, which prevent pilots from blacking out during such maneuvers by inflating air bladders against the lower body to force blood upward to the head and heart. Instead, Blues are taught to handle the forces by tensing their abdominal and leg muscles.
It isn't bravado that keeps the Blue Angels from wearing G-suits, but rather the center-mounted control stick of the F/A-18.
Inflation of a suit's air bladders could cause the pilot to bump the stick, putting the plane into an uncommanded attitude during precise maneuvering. Members of the USAF Thunderbirds demonstration team do wear g-suits, as the side-mounted controller of the F-16 provides room for the bladders to inflate.
"Kevin had performed these maneuvers in training and in the fleet. He had done them in similar situations and he had a history of performing them well without any problems," Hanzlik said... but, apparently, not in the accident. Due to the high forces, Davis likely suffered a temporary loss of blood flow to his brain, leading to tunnel vision and disorientation.
In a heartbreaking statement, the report also notes Davis did try to recover, "and in the last few seconds he may have been aware of his low altitude and was attempting to save the aircraft," said the report by Marine Lt. Col. Javier J. Ball.
The AP obtained the accident report through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

​

The investigation also found the Blues violated Navy policy by allowing the waiver allowing the pilots to fly without g-suits to expire in 2005 -- a lapse Ball called "a lack of careful attention to operating requirements." The waiver was reinstated following Davis' accident.
FMI: www.blueangels.navy.mil