B-2 crash near Guam? (Update: Post Crash Pics & Video)

page: 6
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by B2AV8R
 


Thanks B2AV8R! Its great to get info from those who have it and can give it. Yet Another reason why I so enjoy ATS's Aviation Forums. Gives me a chance as a long time buff and researcher to discuss these subjects with others and hopefully shed light into subjects that are too filled with BS news and opinion that the news outlets provide. Hope that you will stick around for sometime B2AV8R and that you can continue to give your insights! Welcome to the forums!




posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by B2AV8R
 


i thought there was a failure over the balkans?



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Canada_EH
 


Thanks, Canada! I don't get involved in a log of Blogs but this one caught my eye. It's really interesting to read some of the theories...



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by B2AV8R
Thanks, Canada! I don't get involved in a log of Blogs but this one caught my eye. It's really interesting to read some of the theories...


B2AV8R,
Are you by chance a Naval Aviator? If so, I might know you.

If not, how about some background info?



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


Sorry, 25+ years AF. I remember when the first Naval Aviator showed up to start flying...I can see his face but can't remember his name. I left Whiteman 4 years ago...



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


Sorry--I disagree. These computers are controlled by completely different electrical busses. It wouldn't make sense to do otherwise.



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
No, he's right. That was one of the original problems with the ART. It had four boards for the redundant flight control systems, but they all tied into the same resistor. If the resistor failed then all four would have gone out. The other problem was overheating. They said they fixed the overheating problem by cutting ducts around the area for more airflow, but 8 years later it was overheating again.

[edit on 3/4/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 4 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by B2AV8R
Sorry, 25+ years AF. I remember when the first Naval Aviator showed up to start flying...I can see his face but can't remember his name. I left Whiteman 4 years ago...



Funny... I never heard of an AF guy going with AV8R as a screen name.

I thought you guys were all pilots?



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


A
V
EIGHT
R

Aviator.

B2 Aviator.



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


It wasn't original on my part. A buddy did something like that for a different aircraft and put it on his license plate. It was just a little more creative than going with PILOT.



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz


I know that.

My point was, that Naval Aviators go by the term Aviator.

AF Pilots have always called themselves pilots. I have never heard of an AF guy use the term aviator and apply it to what they do in any way, shape, or form.

That was what I was commenting on. I thought he might be someone I knew, since there have been a couple of Naval Aviators who went on to serve as B2 pilots (but they never called themselves B2 Aviators).

[edit on 5/3/08 by COOL HAND]



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


Haha man to get this off the topic over a name lol. Anyways I understand your point Cool Hand and it is valid due to your experience that you would interpret the information that way. But for the pure sense Aviator simply means a pilot of an airplane or other heavier-than-air aircraft (someone who operates an aircraft). Anyways back the the OP eh?



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


Cool Hand, if you've been around for a while, you might remember Wil Gildner. He was a Naval Aviator then made a transfer to the AF, and eventually came to the B-2 for one tour. I've lost track of him since then.



posted on Mar, 5 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by B2AV8R
 


He is not the guy I was thinking of.

Was Gildner the NFO that got trained as an MC?



posted on Mar, 9 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Instead of coming up with wild theories about shoot downs and ART fails you might want to consider pilot error. Because that is what this is going to end up being.



posted on Mar, 9 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Yeah, you're right. It was all the pilots fault that they caught fire before take off. He went out and deliberately lit up something and caused the crash.



posted on Mar, 9 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Made a new thread for it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 3/9/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 10 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I'm hearing from sources that the USAF is going to use the aft deck cracking issue, as well as this crash to push their new bomber harder. They have spent a LOT of money on the aft deck mods to the current fleet, and the Block 30 aircraft had the entire aft deck replaced to try to help with the cracking problem. The Spirit of Kansas was a Block 10, and there's no word on whether it had gone through the modification process.



posted on Mar, 10 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
The Spirit of Kansas was a block 30 as are the other 20 B-2s. The air force times article is wrong. The aft decks are titanium tubs that engine exhaust gases follow until they hit the tiles and finally go over the trailing edge. The cracks in the decks were initially addressed with deck replacement and recently stiffiners were added to ease the vibrations causing the cracks. They are an unlikely cause of the crash. Also, ignor the aviation week article by David A. Fulghum that says sources at "ACC" said there was a fire before takeoff. He is full of it. Abort and rotate speeds for a B-2 are the same on a runway that long. If there was an indication the takeoff would have been aborted.

[edit on 10-3-2008 by B2guy]



posted on Mar, 10 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by B2guy
 


I haven't heard anyone say there was an indication until after rotation and the PIC tried to move the controls and was putting input into the controls and the alarms and fire warnings went off at about the same time. With no final check before take of and the possiblilty of fire already in the plane it went undetected and there was no itme to save the plane. the only way this could be PIC is if he missed warnings before take-off. At this point we havent seen that he missed any so its unlikely that PIC is the main issue but instead is a failure of ART or something similar.

Your right to question and say that something doesn't add up here and that it seems unusual for it to only effect controls and no warnings to go off before hand but the ART may be the root cause and no warnings about issues there seems strange but not impossible to miss or not have indicators of any issues that are related to ART to inform the crew.






top topics



 
8
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join