Fighter jet crashes at Idaho air show...

[WrightAvia]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3147881,00.html

MOUNTAIN HOME, Idaho (AP) - A jet in the Air Force's vaunted Thunderbirds flight unit crashed at an air show Sunday, but the pilot ejected with only minor injuries and no injuries on the ground were reported.

 

[JHook]

Maybe now the Air Force will trash the Pratt and Wimpy piece of sh!t in favor of a real engine.

 

[flywithastick]

Maybe now the Air Force will trash the Pratt and Wimpy piece of sh!t in favor of a real engine.

 

[Goffer]

anybody find the video clip for it yet?

 

[cessna_driver2]

Maybe now the Air Force will trash the Pratt and Wimpy piece of sh!t in favor of a real engine.

I thought they were G.E. engines.

 

[SpiderMan]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/966660.asp?0cv=CB20

Video of it in media player format.

 

[wms]

When I was a jet engine mechanic and F15/F16 crew chief we had both the GE F110 and P&W F100(with DEECs). The GE had better acceleration, but the P&W was more reliable and easier to work on. That was some time ago, and maybe things have changed since then. The worst was the F100 with the EECs.

 

[GumbyDarnit]

Cessna Driver,

The first Vipers were powered by P&W F100-200s. GE built the F110 a little later. The GE had 3K to 5K more thrust (depending on small or large inlet) and no throttle restrictions making it a much much better fighter engine. After the GE became more prevalent, PW was sent to non-combat coded active duty units (Luke training base and the Thunderbirds) and the ANG. P&W has made many improvements, but I have recently discovered that their engineering practices basically suck especially when compared to GE. WMS is the only wrench bender that I ever heard have anything good to say about Pratt and Wimply engines and I certainly never heard anyone who flew them say they would rather fly Pratt over GE.

Gumby

 

[wms]

Like I said, it was a long time ago. We were time changing the F110s at 25 hours, and they required a lot of extra work. Like a full power run and all kinds of ops checks for anything we did. They made us miss the F-4's at the time, but I'm sure the bugs have long been worked out and that they're much better now.

The F100-100s and -200s(w/EEC's) were awful. When they were updated to -100dp, -220e, -220 & -229(w/DEECs) there were no problems. We installed them and didn't touch them again until they came out for time change. In fact, we had problems getting the new guys proficient because of the lack of work. Maybe after a few years of use they're not what they used to be.

I wasn't a pilot and didn't know much about the performance accept what I heard. I worked night shift as a jet engine mechanic and was just glad that I wasn't on the trim pad until the sun came up anymore.

 

[JHook]

"I wasn't a pilot and didn't know much about the performance"

Here's the difference between a Pratt -220 and a GE -110 in a clean F-16. Suppose you are at about 10k MSL going about 5 bills and you put on a max performance "on the limiter" 9G turn. Before you know it you are releasing G to save your airspeed. If you do the same thing with a GE, you will stay at close to 5 bills until you run out of gas. Not to mention the fact that as the airplane gets lighter, it will accelerate while maintaining the 9 G. You can see that during an airshow 9 G turn. If you watch the Thunderbirds do the turn with their Pratt, you'll see the burner steady as a rock because he has the throttle parked in student cruise. If you watch closely when on one of the Viper demo dudes does the same thing, you'll see the burner intensity changing slightly. That is the pilot modulating the power to keep his airspeed somewhere near corner.

On a different note, WHAT AN EJECTION SEAT!!! I always knew my butt was parked in a pretty darn good ejection seat but to see someone puch out as low as that dude was with a vector into the ground and walk away is sobering.

 

[flywithastick]

thread heist... ejection seats now

On a different note, WHAT AN EJECTION SEAT!!! I always knew my butt was parked in a pretty darn good ejection seat but to see someone puch out as low as that dude was with a vector into the ground and walk away is sobering.

haven't seen the video, but did see that one where the Roosky punched out of his MiG at low altitude. Must be a comfort knowing you have a fairly good chance of getting away from the plane. According to an uncle of mine, that wasn't the case back in the Korean War days. If the jet had an ejection seat, it may not work, and if it did there was a better than even chance you wouldn't walk away from where you landed (due to injuries).

How easily/quickly can the seat be activated in modern equipment? Must be a single handle pull with very little time delay based on this instance (although I'd bet the guy had one hand on the stick and one on the yellow handle waiting for the right moment to go) and some of the carrier footage I've seen where navy crews have ejected.

 

[Typhoon1244]

D@mn! God bless ACES II.