Scott R Wilson Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 https://youtu.be/xWO0IlC83sE Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darren Roberts Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Cool video. But either they're taking off the wrong way, or the video has been flipped. I'm not sure why someone did that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hajo L. Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Nice, but you´re right! The numbers are mirrowed... HAJO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott R Wilson Posted June 5, 2016 Author Share Posted June 5, 2016 Cool video. But either they're taking off the wrong way, or the video has been flipped. I'm not sure why someone did that. That was odd, but it's still one of the best night ops videos I've seen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Micro Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Great video. I do know that some people will "flip" the video when uploading to Youtube when they are trying to bypass the auto-copyright detection. For example, you can find many full-length feature films on Youtube, but they are flipped horizontally in an attempt to avoid being automatically removed due to copyright laws. That said, I don't think the original video of this was copyrighted, but who knows. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
karl h Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 is it up to the pilot if he gives full burner when trapping? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rightwinger26 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 is it up to the pilot if he gives full burner when trapping? All aircraft go to full power when they hit deck, in case they miss the wires, they can go around again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Micro Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 is it up to the pilot if he gives full burner when trapping? All jets go into military power (full power without afterburner) when they hit the deck. But, in Hornets, the detent between military power and burner is not very tough to push through - it's only a couple more pounds of pressure if that. So, between adrenaline and the force of being thrown forward, most Hornet drivers end up going into burner in the last few seconds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 I thought only legacy hornets went to full a/b at landing and launch. The Supers have enough dry thrust so that under most conditions, a/b isn't needed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rightwinger26 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 I thought only legacy hornets went to full a/b at landing and launch. The Supers have enough dry thrust so that under most conditions, a/b isn't needed. Depends on the loadout, if the weight is high enough, (52 or 55,000, I can't remember) they will shoot in AB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Micro Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 I thought only legacy hornets went to full a/b at landing and launch. The Supers have enough dry thrust so that under most conditions, a/b isn't needed. Rightwinger is correct about the loadout determining if burner is needed for a Hornet launch. Supers and legacy Hornets each have their own NATOPS requirements. You might be thinking of Tomcats. F-14As required burner for every catshot after a few accidents in the early 80's. Bravos and Deltas would both launch in dry thrust regardless of loadout. All Tomcats trapped using only military thrust, but there are plenty of Alpha pilots who wish they could have gone straight into burner on landing. The difference was the type of detent on Tomcat throttles to go from military to max power. This lead to some accidents in Alphas if the pilot was slow to go to MIL, or if the cable snapped. The TF-30s just didn't have enough thrust in military power, and once the jet slowed even a little bit, the jet was in real trouble unless the pilot was quick to get around the burner detent. In this example the pilot didn't get it into burner in time, and the jet went in the water: In this other example, the pilot got it into burner in time and the jet was able to climb away, but the RIO pulled the handle (can't say I blame him): Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 "F-14As required burner for every catshot" Not really true. My buddy (RIO) had his Tomcat get wet one night getting spun up in CVW-5. Low weight launches during CARQUAL were done dry/mil power if within limits. I watched them go down the bow that night...then their lights disappear below the deck (pilot set the pitch trim wrong). The lag/dip in power waiting for the blower to kick-in caused him to pull then handle when he saw the negative VSI and the altitude. Split second and the right call IMO (and said such the next morning at B-fast) Seconds later we all saw the ejection...then a Tomcat in full blower (with no crew) start a stark climb-out off the bow then yaw into the water. Great start to a Gulf deployment I would say. Hornets look at their weight, but typically/always you will see Baby Hornets stroke burner headed down the cat. Same with Supers. Super Hornet Tankers normally cat off in full AB if loaded out heavy. Cheers Collin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Micro Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 (edited) "F-14As required burner for every catshot" Not really true. My buddy (RIO) had his Tomcat get wet one night getting spun up in CVW-5. Do you mind if I ask what year that occurred? It was precisely those types of accidents that I thought lead to a NATOPS change in 1983-1984 to require all Alphas to launch in Zone 5. Edited June 7, 2016 by Micro Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 (edited) I was in CVW-5 from ~'96-'99, USS Indy/CV-62. I'm sure they were way light on gas doing CARQUAL. It might have been the crash of 161618 on 31 Aug 1997, I'll have to check my logbook at home to see if we were in work-ups at the time. For sure it wasn't the crash of 161282 in May of 1996, that happened shortly after Toff, from what I remember one of the engines ate itself then threw all sort of stuff into the rest of the aircraft. It was no more than a few minutes after take-off that this happened. Collin Edited June 7, 2016 by Collin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kopychris Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 thanks for share it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Collin Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) It was a CQ period. Just checked my logbook and I have 2 day and 2 night traps with 'Pigpen' on the 30th of August. Collin Edited June 8, 2016 by Collin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.