Australian Growler burns on takeoff

The video doesn't do it justice. Pictures taken up close show significant damage, where the video doesn't seem to show much damage.

Going by pictures posted on Facebook, it was A46-301. That was the 100th Hornet airframe built for the RAAF, and the 116th Growler built. It was the first built for the RAAF, and spent six months with VX-9 starting in January of last year for training.

Honeycoam skins look like they caught the brunt of it.Start pulling her apart till they get to good bits..

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Going by pictures posted on Facebook, it was A46-301. That was the 100th Hornet airframe built for the RAAF, and the 116th Growler built. It was the first built for the RAAF, and spent six months with VX-9 starting in January of last year for training.

Hey mate talk is its actually A46-311.

ETA: Looks like the hook was deployed, I wonder if it caught the departure end cable or pulled up well before then?

a reply to: Ironside800

It's hard to tell from the pictures, with the tails so damaged.

a reply to: Blackfinger

Plus cost cutting on the ships we do build that arent what they are hyped up to be.

Example?

a reply to: C0bzz
Blackfinger is possibly referring to the ANZAC class which were famously ordered with the"fitted for but not with" philosophy by the Hawke Govt. Some of the other MEKO's, Turkey comes to mind were far better armed than ours at the time.

a reply to: Zaphod58
First impressions from that pic are "God that's ugly", but it depends on how badly compromised the underlying airframe is.

a reply to: thebozeian

A girl once offered to show me her growler, the works canteen was in uproar.

a reply to: waynos


Now now Waynos, I hope you said no not while at work!!

a reply to: thebozeian

We know the aft fuselage has significant damage. The right nozzle is missing in all the pictures that have made it out, which seems to indicate the right engine decided it was done while at full power. That's going to make a mess of the fuselage around it, and the fire would exacerbate things. It's possible it's not as bad as it seems, but I'm doubtful on that. A lot of what is shown in the pictures is superficial, but I'm hearing things like ruptured fuel lines and damaged fuel tank. That indicates quite a bit of internal damage.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'd imagine getting back into one is going to come with an extremely uneasy feeling now. If it had waited another 2 minutes or more, that crew would be dead.

a reply to: LSU0408

Regardless of outcome with the airframe they did get lucky. I'm sure the maintenance guys have enjoyed the hell out of borescoping the other engines all weekend.

Very lucky as it could have happened half way across the Pacific.
Bulkheads or Longerons will be the problem if heat or shrapnel damage.Skin panels are replaceable.Jig her up..
Im guessing the groundcrew will sequester a truck and make its way to the Boneyard for "supplies"..

a reply to: Blackfinger

If it gets fixed the structural sections will come from NG at Long Beach.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: LSU0408
I'm sure the maintenance guys have enjoyed the hell out of borescoping the other engines all weekend.

That was my exact second thought. Engines letting go without initial explanation equals "lets break out the boro gear".

a reply to: thebozeian

Hell of a way to ruin weekend plans.

You get a drug test, and you get a drug test, everyone gets a drug test!

The KC-30 is flying, as are the E-7A and AP-3C, but they're apparently still looking at if the Growlers will.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Meh, been there done that..
The only time its good is when there is an incident over the Christmas holidays and they have to do a mandatory stand down on full pay. Once had a colleague do that on first day back after a minor airside vehicle accident. We were on shift, it was Christmas and there was no one to carry out the test. He got the whole block off and had our manager ringing him with updates while he was at the beach every day, lucky bastard!