Navy Carrier Crash !

[Jetranger]

Navy Carrier Crash Pacific Region

story : http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/05/us/california-navy-jet-crash/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

[PhantomTweak]

Well, sounds to me like an 18 driver was trying to do the approach visually, at night, probably in foggy or hazy conditions knowing California as I do, instead of following the instruments like he should. It's the same syndrome that killed John Denver and I think it was George Kennedy: My ass is telling me one thing, instruments another...instruments MUST be wrong!
He forgot literally one of the first lessons they try to beat into them in Navy/MC flight school: ALWAYS trust your instruments over your butt...your butt is WRONG!!
I'm glad he got out, don't get me wrong. Angel Flight did their job perfectly. They shouldn't have HAD to though. A pilot in the seat of a FA-18, of whatever model, has plenty of total IMC carrier recoveries and T&Gs, as well as countless shore based simulated carrier landings on shore based NOLFs, both VMC and IMC, and they stress that they should follow their instruments down to the deck, whatever the conditions. Basically, every single recovery is 100% blackout IMC proceedures. I think this guy either lost track of that or had a massive electrical failure in the cockpit, which can happen if the right breaker, of course located in a wing-root panel, trips. ALL electrical power gone. And a night time, visual approach to the bird in hazy conditions can be nearly impossible.
Of course, if this were the case, why not declare an emergency and head back to a nice, long, flat, non moving runway ashore? Who knows...well the pilot knows, and he will answer for the loss of the bird, and any wrongdoings on his part. ANY class A or B mishap requires a formal investigation by a board of the pilot's peers and superiors, and can result in all kinds of penalties, if warranted.
Another possibilty comes to mind: If he was hypoxic this may explain the crash. The FA-18s are starting to get a little old and the troubles they have with the OBOGS (On-Board Oxygen Generating System) are legion. Hypoxia can be a darn sneaky problem, and can bite even the best, most experienced Naval Aviators in the tail feathers. The reports I have read on incidents involving hypoxia indicate they don't realize what the trouble is till it's either too late, or nearly so...

I thought it was amusing, that the CNN report focused so much more on the Harrier crash in Imperial. Much better crowd pleaser, with a burning aircraft and ejected, dazed, and slightly injured pilot available for filming. No real injuries, of course, the delicate American sheeple can't be shown real dead people or severe injuries, but this is about as good as CNN can ask for. From the ONE witless (not a typo, btw) they interviewed it sounded as though the engine quit while he was in a hover, or fairly slow flight. That he was able to put the bird where he did was both amazing and darn fine piloting on his part. A Harrier without it's motor is pretty much a brick, and flies like one. The real good Harrier pilots tell you, that "...on the final approach, or in any hover, if the engine even hiccups, they are on the silk before they even realize they've pulled the handles" (Capt John, "Tanz", Tansy, USMC)
Sounds to me like this pilot did a perfect job of making sure the civvies were protected, which is his duty anyway as a Marine.

Sorry for taking so much of everyone's time, but this stuff fascinates me.

Pat☺

[Hawkeye07]

I don't know P.T. It sounds like you're making a lot of assumptions about the F/A-18 pilot based on the minuscule bit info CNN provided. Even the Navy Times didn't have any more info other than the other aircraft that were airborne at the time bingoed to the beach.

I thought it kind of ridiculous that they referred to NAS North Island as "the naval airstrip at the Coronado section of San Diego." I guess it must be to throw off the terrorists.

Hawkeye

[PhantomTweak]

Ya know, Hawk, you're right, and that really wasn't my intention. I apologise for that.
Having said that, there has to have been a reason they sent all the other birds ashore, which sounds to me more like a failure on the carrier side of the house than the planes. A failure aboard a plane (or pilot )during workups is part of the scenery. It's just one of "those things", and a failure aboard one plane isn't reason to abort the rest of the night's traps. A failure of the CARRIER's systems, now, that's entirely different. if it were true, blue-water ops, they would fix it asap and recover the birds. During workups, no need. Just send everyone home and fix it properly and at leisure.
Maybe the arresting cable system had a failure, and let the 18 run off the deck, but too slow to bolter. Maybe the ILS systems crumped on them, and in the weather conditions prevailing, even on a clear night, THAT's a reason to abort recoveries. When there's no real horizon, or even just a little haze at the surface, that boat can pretty much vanish, which makes recoveries without the ILS systems virtually impossible. Pretty tough at best
Once again, I apologise to the pilot of the 18 , I meant to cast no aspersions (big word for the day! ) on his skills. My wording was bad and rereading I can see how it reads very poorly, so I am really sorry, to him and his familiy.
Of course, it IS easy to get the "my butt is right" syndrome!

Pat☺

[Hawkeye07]

Pat
I took your comments as just being more focused on the human error factors which are always highly suspect in a crash and not really pointed at the pilot personally. And you made some very good points about Instruments VS Anus. You'd think most electronic or mechanical failures on the aircraft could have been dealt with by the pilot. At least those less catastrophic than a primary flight control failure or dual engine failure.

You brought up another good possibility with the ships systems malfunctioning. As for ship guided recoveries like CAT 3 where the aircraft is guided all the way to the deck I would think that wouldn't be an issue because carriers and airwings also practice EMCOM (Emissions Control) scenerios too. Arresting gear malfunction? The ship has 4 arresting gear systems that are totally independent of each other and many times they operate with only 3. (For the non carrier types in the forum... the cable the aircraft arresting hook catches is called a Cross Deck Pendant. Each one is monitored for wear and damage. sometimes right in the middle of the recovery cycle. After a "wire" has had 100 traps it is replaced. If the ship runs out of replacements then it's still removed but now there are only three wires to operate with.) Each aircraft's "stinger" is replaced after 100 traps also,not the truss part, just the hook itself.

So what about the IFLOLS (Improved fresnel lens optical landing system). If the Fresnel lens is out of commission there is a rudimentary back up system but it's no where near as precise and for that reason maybe the Air Boss had everyone else Bingo. Just more speculation on my part.

Hawkeye