I did Advanced at NMM and am well familiar with the airfield layout. Not trying to be a ready room commando, but I still did an "oh sh!t" when I saw their point of touchdown.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
T-45 vs Bird HUD Video
- Thread starter mules83
- Start date
Well done.
From my discussion with 45 guys, I thought your EP's required ejection in the event of an engine failure (i.e., don't try to glide it back). Am I wrong in this, or was it one of those "we still have an engine even though it's in the process of failing" scenarios?
From my discussion with 45 guys, I thought your EP's required ejection in the event of an engine failure (i.e., don't try to glide it back). Am I wrong in this, or was it one of those "we still have an engine even though it's in the process of failing" scenarios?
The checklist says if below 180 kts and 1500 feet you shall eject. If you are above 180kts but still below 1500 feet, you have options (which was the window these guys were in). You have the option to climb and try an airstart or do some fancy manv and turn back to land. After knowing what happened, the only option was to try a landing while keeping the plane in the ejection envelope incase it went sour.
I understood what you were talking about. I just added that info so the non-Meridian'ites could understand it better.
Not to mention the fact that NATOPS does not preclude good headwork. Nothing is telling you you have to eject if your sink rate is such that you are out of the envelope.
No worries.
Not trying to interject myself into another guy's NATOPS here so I apologies in advance if this is overstaying my welcome in hook land...but it seems to me that anyone would be hard pressed to find fault with a guy who brings the aircraft and both aviators back in fix it and fly it shape. Mighta been another issue entirely if you smack the tarmac and break the wings off etc...no?
Pays to be a winner...
FrogFly
Knibb High Football Rules!
Heard of a guy who "won" by saving a -45 with a gear-up landing in a nearby field, due to a flameout. Although there's a bit more to the story, explaining why he got into that situation in the first place, he was supposed to eject. Although he saved the jet, you gotta wonder if his situation would have been looked at differently had he followed NATOPS. Hell, probably not.
Exactly my point. Good headwork prevails...
I see they're still harping on that mishap down in Kingsville. I swear the first week at ground school the sim/ground instructors could only talk about one thing....Don't run out of gas or we'll take your wings. Don't do "this" or "that" or we'll take your wings!!
...if you're lucky enough to get them in the first place.
Some of those sim instructors in Kingsville....we'll just say they made me a better pilot.....the hard way.
Why is that BS? It's flight school. Those procedures put there for a reason. Might as well keep going and say why we hot mic for takeoff...i don't want to hear heavy breathing
Why don't you explain to me the reason those procedures are there.
Yes, it is flight school. Not pre-school. What are you trying to teach a student who will more than likely go on to fly single seat/definitely fly single pilot? Want them to depend on someone else or follow procedures on their own? I would rather teach the student to be a good single pilot and do things on their own and do things right.
If a student overspeeds the gear or the flaps, is that safety of flight? Not really. Nothing a down/SOD and a maint inspection can't fix.
Hot mic in multi seat airplane is safety of flight issue. Eject calls low/slow are very time critical, don't want to be looking for switches. If you think they are of the same vein, then I weep along with A4s.
This happened while I was still at Meridian. From what I understand, the engine had not actually quit yet. The IP(VT-9 SERGRAD) had to bump up the power a couple times as it was slowly rolling back. So, while the book says eject for a complete engine failure, that wasn't the case here, yet.
While I was in T-45 land, the way I understood it was that if my engine seized, then by NATOPS I had to eject. If said engine was still turning/windmilling, then I could land. But if I landed with no engine then even if I saved the jet I might still be in trouble. I never tried it in the sim, but I had a discussion with one of the sim instructors that if I were in the process of a PA and I lost the engine that I would probably still try to land it vice ride the rails. He told me to not tell that to too many people as it was not what the book says to do. The PA profile is only there to keep you in the ejection envelope if you lose your engine, not dead stick it onto the runway.
While I was in T-45 land, the way I understood it was that if my engine seized, then by NATOPS I had to eject. If said engine was still turning/windmilling, then I could land. But if I landed with no engine then even if I saved the jet I might still be in trouble. I never tried it in the sim, but I had a discussion with one of the sim instructors that if I were in the process of a PA and I lost the engine that I would probably still try to land it vice ride the rails. He told me to not tell that to too many people as it was not what the book says to do. The PA profile is only there to keep you in the ejection envelope if you lose your engine, not dead stick it onto the runway.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Not sure about TW-1 vs TW-2, but I have NEVER used HotMic in the jet here.
When I asked about it, I damn near got a below for asking such a silly question.
When I asked about it, I damn near got a below for asking such a silly question.
Yeah in TW-1, you go hot mic when you run up the power and do your final wipe out checks. You stay hot mic until you get the gear up and locked with a handle check and then go cold mic.
bolterking
Member
Well said. Yes "perhaps" violation of NATOPS (depending how you look at it or who you telling story too) but bottom line in my opinion...Aircrew is safe on deck, saved aircraft that will probably be flying in a few weeks, and lots of lessons learned. I don't think anyone in Command would question that.
Still think it is a great thread for all reading to learn. Although in this scenario the end result was one we can thankfully talk about and joke about, it is not the norm to ride a failing single engine jet in. This is a good learning tool in every sense and food for thought on how you would handle situation.