RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,185354,00.html

quote:

Originally posted by garylitaker:
RE: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,185354,00.html

MOD HAT ON


This article is available to anyone here and doesn't need to be repeated.

Either offer some comments to start the discussion or I'll close the thread.

Whatever the cause of the accident, may the souls of these warriors who died defending us all rest in peace.

Now how did I get to this comment set up which was replaced about a year ago.

Anyway if the trim setting can be manipulated easily and no warning comes on then this needs a new devise and warning for incorrect setting.

Wonder why though this ha never happened before.

The reason it didn't happen before is the same reason that we didn't accidentally fly nukes over the USA before... Because, when SAC had control of the bomber force and the nukes, EVERYTHING (and I do mean EVERY THING) was done with checklist in hand. Since the bomber force got TAC-umcised there has been a consistent, steady decline in adherence to tech data. Each year, a certain percentage of the SAC legacy team retired. Eventually the old SAC mentality all but disappeared, replaced with a "Git'er done!" ACC mindset. As in, "We don't care how you do it, but git'er done!" Tech data and checklists are still available, but are often circumvented and/or suppressed in favor of informal procedures. All the tech data was built over decades of learning how planes crash and people die - and trying like hell not to repeat those same mistakes. When AFRs were replaced by AFIs, that was the beginning of tossing the baby out with the bath water... And sad to say, that's how come there have been more and more "ooopsies" each year. This ooopsie cost the lives of six men. I dread the day when it costs us much more than that...

Sorry, But I find it realy hard to believe that a trim tab setting (right or wrong) could be dominate enough to crash an aircraft while the pilot is flying it. Any effect a trim tab could have is easily overridden by a control input by the pilot and if the pilot was paying attention (flying the AC) there is no way a trim tab setting could crash the AC.
A trim setting would crash the AC only if the pilot is not inputing control (not paying attention-not flying the AC)
How can this not be a pilot issue.

Shockey

May have been a trim runaway. I was flying a new 182 from the factory back to here and had a trim runaway at 7,500 ft. Glad I had my seat belt on! Seemed to take forever to get the auto pilot shut off.... Several years ago, Louisiana Tech had an Aztec (I called it the Azwreck) they used as the multi trainer. The trim controls broke and stuck in the full nose up position after a runaway. It took every thing both pilots had to keep it flying and to land the thing. It has much less surface area on the trim tabs than the B-52. It also flies a hell of a lot slower. If something like that happened to the B-52, there is no way the pilots could over power the controls.

quote:

Originally posted by shockey:
Sorry, But I find it realy hard to believe that a trim tab setting (right or wrong) could be dominate enough to crash an aircraft while the pilot is flying it. Any effect a trim tab could have is easily overridden by a control input by the pilot and if the pilot was paying attention (flying the AC) there is no way a trim tab setting could crash the AC.
A trim setting would crash the AC only if the pilot is not inputing control (not paying attention-not flying the AC)
How can this not be a pilot issue.

Shockey

Iy has been a long time, but IIRC, B-52s use trim controls to move the entire horizontal stabilizer and not just a tab for trim.

quote:

Originally posted by TucsonTrek:
The reason it didn't happen before is the same reason that we didn't accidentally fly nukes over the USA before... Because, when SAC had control of the bomber force and the nukes, EVERYTHING (and I do mean EVERY THING) was done with checklist in hand. Since the bomber force got TAC-umcised there has been a consistent, steady decline in adherence to tech data. Each year, a certain percentage of the SAC legacy team retired. Eventually the old SAC mentality all but disappeared, replaced with a "Git'er done!" ACC mindset. As in, "We don't care how you do it, but git'er done!" Tech data and checklists are still available, but are often circumvented and/or suppressed in favor of informal procedures. All the tech data was built over decades of learning how planes crash and people die - and trying like hell not to repeat those same mistakes. When AFRs were replaced by AFIs, that was the beginning of tossing the baby out with the bath water... And sad to say, that's how come there have been more and more "ooopsies" each year. This ooopsie cost the lives of six men. I dread the day when it costs us much more than that...

Tactical Air Command (TAC) is an inactive United States Air Force organization. It was a Major Command of the United States Air Force, established on 21 March 1946 being headquartered at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia. It was inactivated on 1 June 1992 and its personnel and equipment were absorbed by Air Combat Command.

quote:

Originally posted by TucsonTrek:
The reason it didn't happen before is the same reason that we didn't accidentally fly nukes over the USA before... Because, when SAC had control of the bomber force and the nukes, EVERYTHING (and I do mean EVERY THING) was done with checklist in hand. Since the bomber force got TAC-umcised there has been a consistent, steady decline in adherence to tech data. Each year, a certain percentage of the SAC legacy team retired. Eventually the old SAC mentality all but disappeared, replaced with a "Git'er done!" ACC mindset. As in, "We don't care how you do it, but git'er done!" Tech data and checklists are still available, but are often circumvented and/or suppressed in favor of informal procedures. All the tech data was built over decades of learning how planes crash and people die - and trying like hell not to repeat those same mistakes. When AFRs were replaced by AFIs, that was the beginning of tossing the baby out with the bath water... And sad to say, that's how come there have been more and more "ooopsies" each year. This ooopsie cost the lives of six men. I dread the day when it costs us much more than that...

Why is it that Class A mishaps rates have steadily gone down and are far better now than they were in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and the aircraft are the same just a lot older now?

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:
May have been a trim runaway. I was flying a new 182 from the factory back to here and had a trim runaway at 7,500 ft. Glad I had my seat belt on! Seemed to take forever to get the auto pilot shut off.... Several years ago, Louisiana Tech had an Aztec (I called it the Azwreck) they used as the multi trainer. The trim controls broke and stuck in the full nose up position after a runaway. It took every thing both pilots had to keep it flying and to land the thing. It has much less surface area on the trim tabs than the B-52. It also flies a hell of a lot slower. If something like that happened to the B-52, there is no way the pilots could over power the controls.

Light A/C are not equipt with advantage of hydraulic boost that allow the pilots to overide the control surfaces in such an event. Much like power steering. Both would have had to fail at the same time IMO.

I know light aircraft don't have it. But it is plausible that a full up or down position and maybe being stuck, could not have been over ridden. I am not sure what the full deflection is on the B-52, but they do state it was set at 4.5-5 deg. nose down while also making a descending left turn. It also states that they were already low. If it was a sudden runaway, it doesn't give much time to react.

Granted, I'm no expert. But I'm putting my money on gravity as the cause of the accident.

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:
I know light aircraft don't have it. But it is plausible that a full up or down position and maybe being stuck, could not have been over ridden. I am not sure what the full deflection is on the B-52, but they do state it was set at 4.5-5 deg. nose down while also making a descending left turn. It also states that they were already low. If it was a sudden runaway, it doesn't give much time to react.

Of course we can only guess at what might have been the cause based on what we know and have to rely on the official report. However There are some things tht I question. Like why was the auto pilot even on in a traffic pattern or approach to landing? Also why would it be trimmed down if being hand flown? If anything it should have been Nuetral positioned. I used to teach my students to use the pre landing check list prior to callin in, shut down the auto pilot and hand fly the A/C. And then on final approach trim to best angle of desent Till the last 1/3 of the approach then trim ever so slightly up so as to have to monitor the final desent path and if they were distracted the pitch would be slightly up instead of down and the level off and flare would be almost automatic.

Bush policies still at work. The worst president in modern times. Cut cut cut thats all the republican know. Bush and his fellow republican were responsible for the problems at Walter Reed and the care of the wounded from Iraq and Afganstain.

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:
I know light aircraft don't have it. But it is plausible that a full up or down position and maybe being stuck, could not have been over ridden. I am not sure what the full deflection is on the B-52, but they do state it was set at 4.5-5 deg. nose down while also making a descending left turn. It also states that they were already low. If it was a sudden runaway, it doesn't give much time to react.

Of course we can only guess at what might have been the cause based on what we know and have to rely on the official report. However There are some things tht I question. Like why was the auto pilot even on in a traffic pattern or approach to landing? Also why would it be trimmed down if being hand flown? If anything it should have been Nuetral positioned. I used to teach my students to use the pre landing check list prior to callin in, shut down the auto pilot and hand fly the A/C. And then on final approach trim to best angle of desent Till the last 1/3 of the approach then trim ever so slightly up so as to have to monitor the final desent path and if they were distracted the pitch would be slightly up instead of down and the level off and flare would be almost automatic.

I have my questions about it too.... I was taught and do the same as you pointed out, so it is kinda baffling as to how it happened. As a side note, I had one instructor that had taught one of my mechanics to trim full nose down because he tended to pull back too far on touch down. I did a test flight and let him fly left seat, he more or less panicked on very short final because the runway lights turned on and just let go of the yoke! We were under 50ft agl with full nose down trim. Talk about craping on myself! LOL Nothing like seeing a windshield full of ground at a very low altitude........

quote:

Originally posted by 12394706:
Bush policies still at work. The worst president in modern times. Cut cut cut thats all the republican know. Bush and his fellow republican were responsible for the problems at Walter Reed and the care of the wounded from Iraq and Afganstain.

Talk about BDS! WTF does the previous admin have to do with the trim set wrong on a B-52?

It is sad when a Buff and the crew goes in but far and few between. They must have been low as no one punched out!? What were they doing to be in trim as they were low (on approch?) and in a turn. I have to wonder how much seat time the left seater (AC-Commander) had in a Buff?? Still bothers me even if it was pilot error! As most of us AF's know it is usually pilot error with no disrespect intended to any pilot intended, as I have a lot of respect for them and always will. I do not really like blame as most of the time it belongs at home with yourself. Blame makes life to easy !! My thoughts are with you guys (heros) in the "wild blue yonder" Probably see you again some day and it will be great talking! With all my Respect, I solute you guys.............Sage, E-4 crew chief- Flt- line AF 1968 to 1972-1976

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:

quote:

Originally posted by john2x:

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:
I know light aircraft don't have it. But it is plausible that a full up or down position and maybe being stuck, could not have been over ridden. I am not sure what the full deflection is on the B-52, but they do state it was set at 4.5-5 deg. nose down while also making a descending left turn. It also states that they were already low. If it was a sudden runaway, it doesn't give much time to react.

Of course we can only guess at what might have been the cause based on what we know and have to rely on the official report. However There are some things tht I question. Like why was the auto pilot even on in a traffic pattern or approach to landing? Also why would it be trimmed down if being hand flown? If anything it should have been Nuetral positioned. I used to teach my students to use the pre landing check list prior to callin in, shut down the auto pilot and hand fly the A/C. And then on final approach trim to best angle of desent Till the last 1/3 of the approach then trim ever so slightly up so as to have to monitor the final desent path and if they were distracted the pitch would be slightly up instead of down and the level off and flare would be almost automatic.

I have my questions about it too.... I was taught and do the same as you pointed out, so it is kinda baffling as to how it happened. As a side note, I had one instructor that had taught one of my mechanics to trim full nose down because he tended to pull back too far on touch down. I did a test flight and let him fly left seat, he more or less panicked on very short final because the runway lights turned on and just let go of the yoke! We were under 50ft agl with full nose down trim. Talk about craping on myself! LOL Nothing like seeing a windshield full of ground at a very low altitude........

That dont sound to swift on the instructors part
Most of the accidents are on landings I would say with the configuration that are required in a cross wind or slip to a landing. lots of instructors dont even allow the students to ecperience at altitude What they will get into if they get sloppy on final. I always made them experience a cross controlled Stall at altitude. It happens so quick you cant see it coming Till you see yourself Spiraling down. Even after there shown a few times and expect it they cant recover in less than 1,000 ft time ater time. That leaves a lasting impression of what could happen on final approach if the have thier heads up and locked.

Well, I'M not an old Buff driver, although I HAVE flown some light private birds, and I DO have enough cras htime on the old Megafortress simulator game to know that the Old Dog is a monster to horse around the sky at low & slow.
And, I also know that an FNG can crash a foam-padded-rubber-ball if you give him or her half a chance, whether said Newbie wants to or not - it's the nature of the beast!
BUT, I somehow DON'T see a Newbie flying to Guam for a celebration - not Left Seat. OR at least, not in MY Air Force. Not back in the Seventies; maybe now, but not then.
As far as the SAC/TAC/ACC debate is concerned, and the political debates of Bush versus Obama versus Reagan versus Clinton, well, we can ALL leave that at the back door, next to the trash cans - where it belongs.
THIS is a professional debate, and ALL those amateurs belong out back with the Good Old Boys!
Or to put it another way, Dale Brown could walk in and chat here, but Tom Clancy can stay home. THIS game of Liars Poker is for REAL players, not wannabees.
I suspect this one goes down as either just plain PE, or else maintenance on a tired bird that should have been either replaced a long time ago, or rebuilt from the spars out - a L-O-N-G time ago.
Combat airframes 90 years old before they get boneyarded? pardon my French, but - MY @$$! What IDIOT thinks we can fly the Buff until 2040?