It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does crashed technology have a countermeasure?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TrueBrit
.....someone couldn't resist the temptation of the bright, shiny, candy like button.






posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Greatest. Episode. Ever.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You are kidding...right?

I mean, you would have to have that button under a covered switch...right?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

The Lockheed Polecat, which was funded with company funds as a demonstrator crashed after the flight termination signal was inadvertently sent to the aircraft.

In March of 99 a Global Hawk on a test flight crashed after the flight termination signal was inadvertently sent to the aircraft.

It's believed that an RQ-170 crashed in California in 2008 or 2009 I think it was, possibly due to a flight termination signal being sent to the aircraft.

No, I'm not kidding.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That is ASTOUNDING!

You would have thought that the abort button, or the termination key, or whatever, would require more than the number of physical processes which could be performed by accident!



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

To be fair, the Global Hawk might have been a spurious signal. The accident report said there was a weak control signal at the range they were operating, which was only 250 miles. But, yeah, you'd think it would take two people or something.

Lockheed wins for the most mealy mouthed gobbledygook announcement though.

According to the spokesperson, the crash was a result of an "irreversible unintentional failure in the flight termination ground equipment, which caused the aircraft's automatic fail-safe flight termination mode to activate."
edit on 10/25/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

At least a shielded button, requiring itself a button to be pressed to release the shield!

I mean what the heck!!!!?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I'm not sure which is more nervous making, that it's easy for someone to activate it, or that it's also apparently easy for it to inadvertently activate.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TrueBrit

2. If it can be accidentally activated, they'll find a way.



Some examples that I know of personally are:
A maintenance guy tripping off the ejection seat that he was sitting in, inside the hangar bay of an aircraft carrier.
A Ensign dropping a live Mk 46 torpedo, near a cruise ship.
A LTJG. hitting the jettison all on a smoke launcher, resulting in 4 cases of Budweiser cans falling out at 5000 ft. over Orlando.

I can find more, these are just off of the top of my head. I was at the base where the ejection seat incident took place. The other two, I was in the aircraft at the time.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Crew chief on a B-52 grounding the flare dispenser before it was emptied.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Would that cause the remaining flares to ignite?
edit on 25-10-2017 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Quite spectacularly. And all at once. The B-52 carries a LOT of flares.



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Did the aircraft survive?



posted on Oct, 25 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Oh god no. Neither did the two on either side. The three past them only suffered minor damage. Flares going everywhere.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 02:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TrueBrit

To be fair, the Global Hawk might have been a spurious signal. The accident report said there was a weak control signal at the range they were operating, which was only 250 miles. But, yeah, you'd think it would take two people or something.

Lockheed wins for the most mealy mouthed gobbledygook announcement though.

According to the spokesperson, the crash was a result of an "irreversible unintentional failure in the flight termination ground equipment, which caused the aircraft's automatic fail-safe flight termination mode to activate."


I don't have the crash report. However I was told by someone at the Edward's Open House that the ground control station that sent the termination signal didn't know the Global Hawk was in the air. If they had multiple GCS trailers, I could see someone in a trailer not being aware another GCS is in actual operation of an aircraft. These were early days in the program.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 03:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58


There are two rules that are almost inviolable.

1. If it can be broken, they'll find a way.

2. If it can be accidentally activated, they'll find a way.



so true

This happend rather recently:


Report Says Missile Defense Test Failed Because Sailor Pushed The Wrong Button

According to Defense News, the test's failure occurred because a sailor in charge of tactical data links inside the Combat Information Center aboard the USS John Paul Jones—the Navy's ballistic missile defense test ship—pressed a button that resulted in the command self-destruct of the experimental missile as it was hurtling towards its target. The button in question is used to designate incoming targets as hostile or friendly. The sailor supposedly pushed "friendly" by accident which resulted in a data-link transmission to the missile to end its intercept immediately. It did just that by blowing itself to smithereens

www.thedrive.com...

edit on 26-10-2017 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 03:41 AM
link   


"irreversible unintentional failure in the flight termination ground equipment, which caused the aircraft's automatic fail-safe flight termination mode to activate."

it broke itself...



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join