Confirmed: CF-18 Crashes in Lethbridge

[Buff]

Originally Posted by atb

Amazing pictures. Funny how the photographer is from the Lethbridge Herald, yet their main story is about a billboard: http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/

I've had my share of frustrations with the Lethbridge Herald. Unfortunately my wife doesn't want to stop getting it.

Anyways, If you watch the video containing eye witness accounts. It sounds like the engine died on him. One guy said he heard some popping noise coming from the plane right before the pilot ejected.

[Acey]

I know next to nothing about fighter jets but lots about commercial airliners, and if they're at all similar in regards to one engine being able to maintain flight, this was just a bunch of bad things coming together. In straight and level flight he probably would have been able to recover. Just in this maneuver, the airplane is very close to the speed at which flight is no longer possible. Recovering from a stall at that altitude with one engine = impossible.

[Lunatik]

Originally Posted by atb

Amazing pictures. Funny how the photographer is from the Lethbridge Herald, yet their main story is about a billboard: http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/

in fairness their website is not exactly to big city standards, the 'main story' is just the covrpage from today's paper... they don't update often... keep in mind this is a paper with a circulation of about 20,000

I would also like to add Ian Martens is a great guy, I worked at the Hearld for a few years and he treated everyone great. I would love to see his career skyrocket because of this

[Flacker]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Wow, amazing pictures.

It looks like to me a loss of control. Judging by the tail stabilizers, they locked into a position giving a right roll. Leading up to the roll, you can see the pilot moving the stabilizers and maintaining the AoA and bank, but just before the roll starts there doesn't appear to be any inputs or they have no effect. You can hear the engines spooling up just as the tip started, but he probably realized it was too late and ejected. I didn't see any apparent engine failure signs, such as a stall, flameout, or iconsistency in exhaust plume.

My bet... computer failure. Without a computer to aid in stability, they don't fly.

edit: On review of the photos even further, it appears the right engine nozzle is closed more than the left. I can't recall what the positions are and how they are controlled however.

These are some of the best trained pilots in the world, I highly doubt "loss of control" as you put it will be a factor. Obviously control of the aircraft was lost but at that airspeed and AoA in such an unforgiving machine very little thrust needs to be lost to plunge you into a stall.

To me it looked like the aircraft stalled (wings stopped producing lift due to lack of airspeed) and because the aircraft yawed and rolled to the right I would suspect a problem with the #2/right/starboard engine.

Spectators were quoted as hearing pops and bangs before it pitched over, that sounds mechanical to me.

As a commercially trained pilot, I always get a little defensive when someone's first reaction is pilot error.
Some Joe private pilot in his Cessna, maybe, but this pilot represents the upper echilon of Canadian aviation. I suspect his training and skill saved his life in an aging death trap, and managed to keep his aircraft on the flight line to ensure the safety of all present.

There is no recovery from loss of thrust at that angle of attack at such a low altitude which makes me wonder why the Alpha pass is still condoned for entertainment purposed. It is impressive as hell to watch but at what cost?

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Flacker

These are some of the best trained pilots in the world, I highly doubt "loss of control" as you put it will be a factor. Obviously control of the aircraft was lost but at that airspeed and AoA in such an unforgiving machine very little thrust needs to be lost to plunge you into a stall.

To me it looked like the aircraft stalled (wings stopped producing lift due to lack of airspeed) and because the aircraft yawed and rolled to the right I would suspect a problem with the #2/right/starboard engine.

Spectators were quoted as hearing pops and bangs before it pitched over, that sounds mechanical to me.

As a commercially trained pilot, I always get a little defensive when someone's first reaction is pilot error.
Some Joe private pilot in his Cessna, maybe, but this pilot represents the upper echilon of Canadian aviation. I suspect his training and skill saved his life in an aging death trap, and managed to keep his aircraft on the flight line to ensure the safety of all present.

There is no recovery from loss of thrust at that angle of attack at such a low altitude which makes me wonder why the Alpha pass is still condoned for entertainment purposed. It is impressive as hell to watch but at what cost?

Stalling in the high alpha would be considered loss of control, would it not? If it were an engine failure the rest of the fleet would be grounded until at least a preliminary investigation tok place. I have heard that this crash is not going to affect the status of the 18 fleet which usually points to either a known fod hazard, such as a bird ingestion, or an input error. Just because a crash is attributed to pilot error doesn't mean the pilot is 'bad', no need to be defensive. I don't think anyone is trying to make him look bad.

[chalms04]

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Madman

Take a look at the wind sock - definitely not calm.

Heck that windsock represents a perfectly normal day in Lethbridge, but sometimes it is ripped right off!

Originally Posted by Buff

Anyways, If you watch the video containing eye witness accounts. It sounds like the engine died on him. One guy said he heard some popping noise coming from the plane right before the pilot ejected.

Perhaps those popping noises were the explosive bolts blowing the canopy free as he ejected?

[Pinner]

Originally Posted by Flacker

Spectators were quoted as hearing pops and bangs before it pitched over, that sounds mechanical to me.

After watching the 2 videos I would say the spectator is wrong, heck CBC was reporting it caught on fire at the same time they were showing a still shot of the flames from the ejection seat.

As I noted earlier, the afterburners look different, one is more open than the other, whatever that means ?

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Flacker

These are some of the best trained pilots in the world, I highly doubt "loss of control" as you put it will be a factor.

As a commercially trained pilot, I always get a little defensive when someone's first reaction is pilot error.

No where did I say it was pilot error if you read my post. I was referring to a loss of control caused by computer malfunction, evident by the lack of movement in the rear stabilizers. Any pilot worth his salt (and hopefully you) would move the stick to the left (or pedals) a bit to try to get out of a right roll, however the stabilizers didn't move, so I deductedhis inputs were not being translated to the control surface (ie, computer failure). Since fighter jets are naturally unstable and require a computer to actually fly, this would result in "loss of control".

[Bindair Dundat]

For what it's worth, my money is definitely on compressor failure in the right engine, likely due to a bird strike (ingestion) or perhaps another mechanical (internal) failure. Although out of focus, @ 0:12 in the "Stayin' Alive" video you see a slight puff of smoke from the rear of the A/C (moment of ingestion/onset of failure); around 0:19 the right wing dips slightly as the power drops off.

A few seconds further along, you can see him push the throttles to the stops (puffs of smoke emitting from the still functioning port engine, as it spools up to high power). He throws the stick violently to the left a second later, in a futile attempt to counter act the asymmetric forces generated as the left engine spools up to full power.

The power generated by the left engine throws the aircraft into a violent skid, which the rudder/ailerons are powerless to counter act, given the low airflow over them in the situation. At this point he's now abandoned any hope of recovering the aircraft and the evacuation training that's been drilled into him since Moose Jaw takes over.

Such an incident has no bearing on the viability of the CF-18 fleet as a whole, even if the compressor failure was mechanically related and not FOD. These are incredibly advanced machines and these things tend to break from time to time. Operating in almost any other flight regime the aircraft is fully recoverable on one engine. It happens with some regularity in military aviation.

Well done given the situation...godspeed to the pilot in his recovery to full health and the resumption of his chosen profession.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

No where did I say it was pilot error if you read my post. I was referring to a loss of control caused by computer malfunction, evident by the lack of movement in the rear stabilizers. Any pilot worth his salt (and hopefully you) would move the stick to the left (or pedals) a bit to try to get out of a right roll, however the stabilizers didn't move, so I deductedhis inputs were not being translated to the control surface (ie, computer failure).

If you look at the rudders they are in full deflection. Also, prior to the yaw the stabilizers are moving quite a bit, controlling the aoa.

[Bindair Dundat]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

No where did I say it was pilot error if you read my post. I was referring to a loss of control caused by computer malfunction, evident by the lack of movement in the rear stabilizers. Any pilot worth his salt (and hopefully you) would move the stick to the left (or pedals) a bit to try to get out of a right roll, however the stabilizers didn't move, so I deductedhis inputs were not being translated to the control surface (ie, computer failure). Since fighter jets are naturally unstable and require a computer to actually fly, this would result in "loss of control".

Take another look...the ailerons are fully crossed, as I indicated in my previous post. The reason why the aircraft went out of control is also (IMO) spelled out for you.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Bindair Dundat

Such an incident has no bearing on the viability of the CF-18 fleet as a whole, even if the compressor failure was mechanically related and not FOD.

Good post but I disagree with you here. They know something more than us, if the engine failed and they don't know why they would ground non essential flights for a time at a minimum. DND has stated there will be no impact to fleet operations at that means they know something. Hopefully it was a bird.

[Bindair Dundat]

Originally Posted by speede5

Good post but I disagree with you here. They know something more than us, if the engine failed and they don't know why they would ground non essential flights for a time at a minimum. DND has stated there will be no impact to fleet operations at that means they know something. Hopefully it was a bird.

With all due respect, I grew up in the world of military aviation (as you may have guessed). Born @ CFB Bagottville, lived in CFE (Baden-Sollingen) in the 70's, two tours in Goose Bay and ten years in Cold Lake. Engine failures in the J75/J79/J85 era were rather common place and in the case of the CF-104, always resulted in the complete loss of the a/c. Fleet groundings due to engine failures did not happen.

Granted they are less common in the present era but we're also operating only 80-odd high performance fighters now, as opposed to the hundreds of aircraft back in the day. Given their rapid assessment I would (as I stated in the first line of my initial post) lean strongly in the direction of a bird ingestion, likely reported as such by the pilot. Access to the R/T traffic during the incident would be indicative, but I doubt that will ever be released for public consumption.

Cheers, Ron

[Azure]

Judging from the pictures, the crash happened right in an area where a lot of spectators would either watch, or part of the air show might happen(Tora, Tora, Tora).

So, if they aren't canceling the air show I would guess that they already figured out what the problem was?

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by speede5

If you look at the rudders they are in full deflection. Also, prior to the yaw the stabilizers are moving quite a bit, controlling the aoa.

Originally Posted by Bindair Dundat

Take another look...the ailerons are fully crossed, as I indicated in my previous post. The reason why the aircraft went out of control is also (IMO) spelled out for you.

I'm basing my opinion on the video off the global site, which is filmed at 2'o clock off the nose. I was looking at the stabilizers only, not the rudder.

Maybe I made the wrong assumption, but don't the stabilizers turn independently of one another? (ie, right can pitch up and left can pitch down) Or do the wing ailerons control roll only? The video shows they were flat relative to each other.

I also discovered the engine nozzle inconsistency after posting my previous opinion. I'm not leaning toward computer failure anymore, however I'm not a fan of deleting posts.

Bindair, I'm fully aware of how aerodynamics work, so there's no need to spell it out for me. I know how the plane fell out of the sky, but I was mearly posting an early observation from a video I viewed.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Bindair Dundat

With all due respect, I grew up in the world of military aviation (as you may have guessed). Born @ CFB Bagottville, lived in CFE (Baden-Sollingen) in the 70's, two tours in Goose Bay and ten years in Cold Lake. Engine failures in the J75/J79/J85 era were rather common place and in the case of the CF-104, always resulted in the complete loss of the a/c. Fleet groundings due to engine failures did not happen.

I kinda guessed that you had some background. With all due respect I also have some experience with military aviation, and have been involved in several incidents and subsequent investigations. But lets not get into a dick measuring contest here. DND takes engine failures very seriously, as we recently saw with the entire NFTC operation. If the engine failed without a obvious cause (bird or possibly a surge brought on by improper operation) DND wouldn't be so quick to state that this will not affect the fleet. As a base brat you may not have been exposed to DND's Flight Safety program, but I can assure you that people have been busy doing Risk assesments since this happened, and they pretty much know what happened. That usually means a bird or pilot error.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by Azure

Judging from the pictures, the crash happened right in an area where a lot of spectators would either watch, or part of the air show might happen(Tora, Tora, Tora).

So, if they aren't canceling the air show I would guess that they already figured out what the problem was?

Crash is south of the runway, about 150 yards away from where spectators are.


Can still see the wreck sitting there as I type.

[Bindair Dundat]

Originally Posted by speede5

I kinda guessed that you had some background. With all due respect I also have some experience with military aviation, and have been involved in several incidents and subsequent investigations. But lets not get into a dick measuring contest here. DND takes engine failures very seriously, as we recently saw with the entire NFTC operation. If the engine failed without a obvious cause (bird or possibly a surge brought on by improper operation) DND wouldn't be so quick to state that this will not affect the fleet. As a base brat you may not have been exposed to DND's Flight Safety program, but I can assure you that people have been busy doing Risk assesments since this happened, and they pretty much know what happened. That usually means a bird or pilot error.

Interesting...I appreciate your candor.

As a base brat with a very serious interest in "fast air", the opportunities to glean "insider information" would make the average "civy's" head spin. I passed through the CF Aircrew Selection Course in Downsview back in 1982 (7 out of 130); did CF-104 simulator time, went to Winnipeg for my HAI and had a couple of rides in the CF-5D. I drove some of the guys at 10 FTTU, 417, 419, and AETE crazy, but they were very accommodating to a keen youngster who wanted to learn. After some serious investigation into the nature of the narcissistic dog pile which was (then) the community of fighter jocks, I decided not to join. Broke my Dad's (CWO, Air Traffic Controller) heart at the time but he got over it.

Most of my fellow "base brats" were busy smoking pot, so I see what you're getting at here...

...sorry to further the "dick measuring" contest, just wanted to add a little more "clarity".

Cheers, Ron

[PIMking]

Wow, They just showed this on the local news here in Alabama. Lucky that he made it out.