It was said on the last video, but I think it needs to be said again - How quickly the crew went into a Damage Control and Fire-fighting procedures, 8 seconds from Flame to Foam - that is seriously impressive. Whatever the cause of the Crash is/was - the Flight Deck crew can at least pat themselves on the back that when it wasn't a drill, everything went as it should.
8 seconds is a little slow...... should have been 5 seconds ;) . but seriously.... EVERYONE on that boat is trained to fight fires better than most "civilian" fire fighters the navy takes fires VERY VERY VERY VERY seriously
Like you, I was impressed by their quick response, but I was also left wondering. The deck crews had seen a lot of landings. I wonder if they spotted that this one was in trouble several seconds before it smashed into the deck. Even a few seconds additional warning can make a big difference in our response.
Rowdy is a steely eyed missile man. Test pilots really put themselves on the line with every test. Hozer pulls them back as needed so they can keep on flying. Mooch provides all the ancillary information that keeps pilots pushing the envelope. Thanks to Mooch, Hozer and Rowdy for all their service.
The way of the future... Unmanned drones (e.g. Boeing MQ-25 T1 Stingray and Northrop X-47 ) can do all jobs better, safer and more accurate without loss of human life 🤔
well said. You're exactly right. Lemme take it a step further: We have to give credit to the folks on _and behind_ the flight line who keep things moving. Bootcamps and butterbars through goats, birds, and stars: It's a huge team effort. Kudos to all who kept on task without worrying about getting a pop on their social media stats.
@@bastogne315 To be fair, Volvos have crumple zones, meant to sacrifice themselves for your well-being. Jets do not. Also, Volvos don't need to stand up to supersonic airspeeds 😅
(Retired AF) airframes dont typically break up on hard landing or ground impacts of this type. A C-17 was belly landed in Afghanistan and was fixed and flown out, three cargo A/C that I know of were hit by MANPADs in Iraq and flew out. Aircraft disintegrating is a Hollywood thing.
The informed discussion of modern carrier ops by these three gentlemen was a real eye opener for me. I carrier qualified in flight training in '68 and '69 and then never served in a carrier based squadron, so I am totally unaware of the level of automation that is available for carrier ops today.
Phenomenal discussion by three guys whose careers were far more distinguished than mine. Especially appreciated the PLM explanation. I believe the F-8 was the first operational Navy jet with auto throttle, aka APC (approach power compensator) -- it was a real life saver around the boat at night. Landing an F-8 at night on a 27C with 10' hook-to-ramp was the scariest and hardest thing I ever did. By comparison, the EA-6B on a big deck was like going to heaven. The Crusader was not speed stable (the exact opposite of the F-4) and was given to an insidious decel on approach. Ramp strikes were all too common. As to CNOs statement, it only reinforces my lack of confidence in most of our current armed forces high levels of command.
You flew Crusaders? That’s insane. Would love to hear more about the Gator. Did you fly RF-8G or other variants? From everything I’ve seen and read about the Crusader, it was very difficult to bring back to the boat. Beautiful plane though. That variable incidence wing seemed like a big band-aid.
@@LRRPFco52 The variable incidence wing was not a "band-aid. Rather it was a good design feature because it allowed good viability over the nose and very short and strong landing gear. However, the flatter attitude of the fuselage meant that thrust adjustments had a decreased influence on rate of descent when compared with aircraft which came aboard with a higher angle of fuselage incidence; i.e. the F-8 thrust vector was more horizontal so power changes had a smaller direct effect on glide path. The drag vs angle-of-attack curve in the landing configuration was relatively flat on the bottom meaning that the aircraft could fly over a wider range of speeds at a relatively steady angle of attack. So you could be showing down without either the pilot or LSO receiving strong cues that the airplane was flying without sufficient power as it gradually decelerated. Remember, we're only talking about a couple of knots here, but in carrier aviation, speed control within a few knots is mandatory. Then, when the aircraft started to sag below glide path, unless the pilot responded immediately and with lots of power, the aircraft would quickly go low and things could get out of hand. With luck, you might get a "taxi-to-one-wire" grade in the LSO book. Or, you might "tickle the ramp with your hook". Unfortunately, this situation sometimes resulted in a ramp strike which would ruin your day (or night) and might even result in death. In spite of the best Naval Aviators competing to be assigned to F-8's, the accident rate around the ship was higher than any other type. On the other hand, we had the highest kill rate of any type in Vietnam and a kill-rate-per-engagement 7 times higher than the F-4 community. Plus we had bigger wrist watches and the trashy women hanging on our arm at happy hour were the best looking.
You Navy guys are seriously something else, and I have such a deep respect for each of you! Just the sheer passion you guys have for your field, and all the knowledge that you still retain and keep up with even years after retirement is just such an awesome thing to witness. Keep up the good work, Mooch!
Another great session covering the facts and providing invaluable commentary by three veteran Naval Aviators! Thanks for keeping us all informed as more info and video becomes public!
I think this video summarizes very well the reality of ships today and yesterday and probably the future. You have sailors who reacted incredibly well to combat the fire, and you had sailors who were incredibly stupid to video and transmit the accident. This brings back memories of cruise I served with who had sailors of all range and I’m sure everyone who has served could say the same!
Before retiring I worked for a government contractor for 35yrs. Several of those years were inside restricted/secured engineering areas. As cellphones with cameras became a thing the cellphones we're first required to be left in our cars or at home, then later lockers were provided outside the secure area for keeping cellphones in the building. Why would something similar not be the case in a military installation?
Entitled generation demands it, nothing more. Chain of Command with identity politics hires gives them whatever they want. Can’t have nobody without a trophy. Those types of kids are now all in senior leadership positions. The question is, had this been a fatality, would the leaks still have been released?
my guess is that the Vinson has them. The only issue I can think of is that these guys were likely off-duty sailors, and only those who are on-duty are required to turn their phones in. Heck, it's most likely that the two external media we have were likely taken by guys out smoking. The PLAT leak was likely done by someone who had access to that office and quickly booted it up, fired up his phone and pressed record before anyone could come back in and stop them
Since the incident was first reported I've been wondering if it might have been contractors or visitors on the ship that did the recording and leaking. Seems like they might be less disciplined than sailors.
@@touristguy87 The same way they enforce most rules. With the threat of severe punishment. A few years ago a sailor broke a rule by taking a photo on a sub because he wanted to show his kid where he worked. They enforced that rule by putting him in federal prison. 2 years later Trump gave him a pardon.
Bravo Zulu. As a former S-3 pilot with just shy of 500 traps, I’m amazed at the design and technology leaps with every generation of aircraft. In the Hoov we had little to no help from the aircraft in the pattern. Meatball, lineup, AOA. Repeat. PLM, I imagine, is a god send to NAV AIR. In my day, the mission was secondary to just getting back aboard without breaking bones or airplanes. These leaps in technology increase mission capabilities by huge factors, however, as long as we have a human at the controls, we have human error. Which actually speaks to both the mishap and leaked PLAT footage. The nonchalant attitude addressing leaked footage is unacceptable.
Mooch - Hozer - Rowdy - extraordinarily well done! Consider having a former Navy JAG on in a future episode to discuss the way forward on preventing leaks from deployed units in the future. Would be interested in a discussion on legal limitations/considerations on how to take this issue on.
A lawer talking about the legal aspect, an HR type to talk about the morale aspect and whoever would be an expert in operational security. Those are the three elements that need to be balenced.
The most incredible thing is that (presumably) three different persons thought that it's a good idea to leak this material AND that they wouldn't get caught (or that the result of getting caught is worth it).
God be with those who were on the deck and the aviator. I remember those days and the real feelings that went through my body when something went wrong.
I remember those days well myself as a Powerplants Troubleshooter for VAQ-138 aboard JFK 80-82. Saw some crazy stuff up there, and assisted fire teams when it went wrong. I hope the injured sailors made a complete recovery. We will take away what comes of the AMB and roll with it. Flight Ops will go on.
When I served from the mid 1970s to early 1980s film cameras (movie and single shot) were common among the crews. The thing I remember is that while cameras were common on all the Carriers I served on, the ship's Command required that all hands register their equipment with the ship (if I recall correctly the ship's photo lab usually handled the registration records). If there had been an accident that was or could have been filmed by an individual sailor the ship's Command would have insisted that any film of the accident be turned over immediately.
You may recall the B-52 that crashed at Fairchild AFB in 1994; it was filmed by something like 30 different individuals who were watching the airshow practice. IDK whether the video was confiscated, or was voluntarily turned over, but the AIB reviewed them all (a bunch were from basically the same location). What I don't recall is how long it was before the footage hit the news media. I suppose a big difference is that at Fairchild everyone was taking their own footage; with the Vinson someone made and released a surreptitious copy of the official PLAT footage.
they should ban those recording devises as there is only one required for a naval ship they work for us the United States Of America and I demand confiscation of all video recording and transmitting devices before puting out to sea they may have it back at liberty calls. only!!!!!
As it should’ve been done in this case, instead of leaking the footage for the purpose of pointless discussions of non-evident “facts”. The “judges” seem to have been activated quicker than the fire-fighting team aboard the carrier.
@@stevephlyer my point if the pilot died video of his death should not be released the fod on deck must have been enormous what a mess now news video at six
I flew A-6E’s from the early ´80s to the mid-90’s. It was even harder then. No HUD, no DLC, very rarely functioning autothrottles. The advancing technology is hard to imagine.
HI Paul, same for me - as for auto-throttles, the CO's did not want us to use them because of their reliability and especially to maintain our proficiency. I could not dream of getting "OK-3" passes consistently! By the same token, being an "old guy", I cannot but miss the actual feedback that ol' rods, wires, controls, radio static, engine vibrations, and airframe "imperfections" that the aircraft would give me flying. Peace be with you, Ciao, L
A great discussion, I think it's great that even with all of your experiences the only thing that really surprised all of you is how quickly the leaks have taken place. It's also great that you haven't jumped to any conclusions and are happy to wait for the accident board . Keep up the great work.😎
Mooch I’m from a vigilante RA5C squadron aboard CVA61 attached to RVAH-1. I have witnessed both types of mishaps actually three types if you count an arrested barrier trap. The first was at night involving an A-7 which was my first encounter with total fear as a viggie plane captain working night flight deck operations. The A-7 hit the round down but fortunately still caught the wire which probably saved many of us. The second one was a fatal one in which I was the plane captain of a vigilante that had a major structural failure when coming in to trap. I was also fortunate to have one of our pilots take me out to the LSO platform during a recovery. Still in touch with him today. Awesome experience. Thank you for sharing and like I said I have a photo of the VA-113 A7 after the strike. Thank You to all three of you for the in depth explanation. Artie ADJ-2 West Pac 70-71 🇺🇸
The Navy's response to the changing landscape surprised me. This sounds like something that I would expect more from the modern day Air Force rather than the Navy, but perhaps this is just a sign of the times. On that note, I was sent to Long Beach a while back to attend a C-17 seminar. Boeing takes security seriously. So before a guest can enter their building they are required to leave their cell phone behind. In the lobby they have a whole bank of those brass post office boxes with keys hanging in them. Before you can make it any further you have to turn off and place your phone in one of them and take the key. Only to retrieve it before you leave the building. With our culture evolving to where we are today it must be really hard for military leaders to keep things under wrap.
Um, that's not serious security. If it was serious they wouldn't let you into the facility. You wouldn't even get past the gate on the drive to the facility.
In this case the concern is not so much to keep something under wraps, thats more the PR Guys. But you need to conduct investigations and you need uncontaminated witnesses and evidence to find out what happened and why. Thats pretty hard because Lokheed also has PR guys concerned with keeping things under wraps and they have also see this video. The Pilot may be able to watch the videos before investigators can have a talk with him or her and also this might spoil memory or enable keeping things under wraps.
Underwrap for swept under the rug that does not serve good but it's likely in almost all cases serves evil history replete with examples proselytize transparency honesty etcetera but reality does Not Shake Hands with the propaganda
Great Talk. I have nothing to do with Aviation. I’m a Doctor with a huge passion for planes. It really surprised me that we were able to get actual footage of the crash so soon. I though there was a certain level of secrecy about filming on a carrier (or any “sensitive” environment ) it would be a bit like filming an operation and putting it straight away online. I would probably face serious disciplinary consequences
Enlisted NAVY on CVN's and the CVN's themselves are like giant Cruise ships on holiday compared to the Vietnam era CV boats i served on. 24/7 ship to shore phones/smart phones/Satellite TV/Internet access/email .... yada yada. Near impossible to keep a lid on 6000 crew behaviors. At best i had USPS mail call and a chance to call home collect once every 3 to 4 months from a Foreign land on a year deployment.
@@Bat21bravo Yeah with smart phones it's hard to keep a lid on things. I served on the Enterprise in the 90's. We really didn't have internet (though I think you could email from the library, not that I had anyone to email), it was snail mail for us.
Same thing happened when a British F-35B recently crashed on take-off from HMS Queen Elizabeth. The sailor who leaked footage of the crash was quickly taken back to shore and arrested by military police.
@@dannyboyy31 OHHH??? Hmmm… one is a incident… two is a trend ( power issues in the automated area??? ) but as far as the “Leak” of this last video, I can imagine that after any more incidents at sea…. There will be a total blackout of personal ship to shore Comms…. IMO
Yep, this video would never have been seen by the public funding these mishaps in the USSR or North Korea or Nazi Germany. They knew how to always present happy outcomes to the stupid public. My favorite takeaway is all these plebs in the chat talking about muh OpSec when the USA government is already riddled with Chinese spies. Your Despot President colludes with China, chinese military hardware is built on stolen USA tech. But heaven forbid the American public see a plane crash. I know those types of morons, i argued with them 20 years ago over muh Iraqi WMD. Jingoism is easily manipulated it seems.
@@TheBelrick There are plenty of videos that were released by the Navy regarding aircraft mishaps onboard ships, but they are released AFTER the Navy finishes their accident investigation hearings. The F-35 being as classified as it is, as new as it is, as expensive as it is, onboard a floating target thats in an adversaries theatre..HEY! Great Idea, lets watch their tic tok videos and we can find out how much of their air wing is down right now! Sorry, but releasing the video this early after the accident without it going through the proper channels is just screaming to the world that our security is weak. But I agree with you on everything else.
This discussion was amazing. I think they are the best guests you've had on. You guys clicked well together. I think it would be great if the three of you would go over aircraft accident investigation boards. I'm sure it will be real hit with all your viewers. If it's not too much work, of course. Haha.
That deck crash-crew was amazing in their speed/response......and that was a stupid statement from that navy PSA person. Navy 'digital security' will figure out how put a plug-in-the-leak (could be as simple as NO PERSONAL cell-phones at many duty stations > bored? Get a book) -- 'cause if simple video can be 'smuggled' out...so can op. secrets.
Exactly right about complacency. The last month or 2 of a deployment are THE MOST DANGEROUS!!!! I was on Carl Vinson from 13-18 under Whalen, Thomas, and Verissimo and every morning, the XO came on the 1MC telling us to watch out for complacency. Don't be surprised if Skippers start going to River City 1 the moment ships pull out on deployment from now on
Makes me think there's something wrong with the plane, and the sailors aren't happy about how the navy is handling it. That's just a shot in the dark though.
I think it's just modern society leaking shit is just more common in general. Probably posted to a private group and then a 3rd person shared it somewhere else.
Really enjoyed listening to you old sea dogs! I grew up as a kid watching Phantoms and Tomcats fly out of NAS Dallas. Really appreciate everything you gents bring to the table. Keep up the outstanding convos!
I was in the Navy in the mid-80’s. I don’t know if such long deployments would have been possible without internet access. So that might be the reality they have to deal with. Thank you for the update. Fantasticly done. As much as I’d hoped.
I served on the Carl Vinson 1981-1985. There was no internet. Our cruises lasted 8 months and we did survive just fine without the internet. It ‘s called talking with your shipmates. 😉
I served on USS South Carolina from 76-81. 6 to 8 month cruises with no internet or cell phones. Stand in line at port calls for 3 or 4 hours for a 5 minute call to loved ones at "phone exchanges". No fun.
Holy smokes, I served aboard the Enterprise 1974-76. We had paper stationary, pencils, and envelopes and frick’n survived just fine. Granted.., porn was harder to find, lol. But seriously, what kinda weak-assed statement from an naval officer was that? I did one 4-year hitch and a two year extension and left as a PO1. I’d be ashamed of my division officer or a department head from my ship making a public statement like that concerning the violation of navy regulations. When I served, 999 out of a thousand guys did ok without these instant-everything telephones. Don’t hold me to that statistic, I pulled it out of the air, but my point nevertheless is, things worked out fine during long deployments. Maybe personal communication devices shouldn’t be allowed aboard ship Period. We seemed to function very well without cell phones and instant internet access in my day. Poor babies, deployed without the internet, my god, give a break! I remember there was always “no personal photography” areas aboard ship! Have they done away with that ? I served during the Cold War, you could really get your you-know-what in a ringer running around taking pictures in many ship spaces when I served.
I was a Photographers Mate in the late 70”s - early 80”s. Being assigned for months on PLAT cam, and having to produce PLAT imagery from crashes, the data has vastly improved. In May 1981 a Marine EA-6B crashed from a failed wave-off killing 18 crewmen. The Nimitz returned to Norfolk and somehow photos were published in magazines. The photos were of high quality at a time where the only ones who had the opportunity & capability was the Photo Division’s. In a very short time all Photographer were “interviewed” by NIS to find the culprit’s identity. The guilty party was never revealed. In this era, with smartphones and internet (on ship!) it’s going to be easier to trace electronically.
I can't believe cell phones are even allowed at all given how they could easily be used to locate our fleets. Not to mention the potential for sensitive information leaking out.
You can be sure that Chinese and Russian military observers would watch all the US carriers the whole time from space. US carriers have signal jammers on board, once shit is going to hit the fan.
Deployments were so much more secure in the 1980's. No cellphones, no emails, no social media. Your only correspondence was via snail mail or a landline when you reached a liberty port.
Well think at this moment it is wanted to be seen. Dunno if this has something to do with use of personal phones, and this can also been recorded with military phone? Dunno as Finnish how US Navy is pulling rules / different modes with rules in carriers. Heck my hometown is size of an US carrier here in Finland :D WSJ is showing also interesting data at the moment publicly from eastern Ukraine! (Paths of surveillance planes and other interesting stuff..) It has been taken care now that force is really been shown to possible offensive.
Dont still mean video is wanted to be seen ofc.. :) Also think that China has some clue what is happening in southern sea anyways.. Weird thing still that in that position you can shoot films there. So that really is strange.
dude this is a carrier task force with more EM emissions than the sun plus it has these things called "jet aircraft" flying around it, you may have heard of the concept I wouldn't be surprised if there's a website that tracks its location
As a Communications Specialist in the USAF it ComSec and OpSec were HAMMERED into my head. I can’t and won’t believe that modern sailors weren’t trained regarding matters of SECURITY. Someone needs to spend some time in a cell.
I agree with that 100%. For someone to think this was ok to release when their fellow Crew members got hurt is not cool at all. I hope they are dealt with accordingly.
Rumint is that the pilot was despised by the crew and the sailors in the hospital are 'stable' but maimed for life. It might not be some clout chasing zoomer. It might be somebody making sure the navy does the right thing for once. Tell me, when's the last time you trusted a staff or flag officer to do the right thing in the face of politics?
Enjoying the show, it's cool to hear things mentioned that I was involved in. I was in 115 under Zoil and was actually served with him when he was a nugget pilot in 136 back in the day!
My first reaction seeing the leaked PLAT tape is how immensely strong the F-35 fuselage must be, given the impact on the round-down. Aside from anything else to take away from this mishap, that alone could be a life-saver in years to come, and possibly was in this case. Another great episode. Hopefully next time you discuss this event will be after the investigation is complete, and its (declassified) results released, either with or without FOIA, rather than following yet another leak.
Further to what was covered in the video: the F-18E/F/G fleet has, as I understand it, deployed improved flight control software for the final approach that allows corrections above and below glide slope using direct lift control, without affecting pitch attitude, airspeed and AOA. This has greatly reduced the dispersion on landing and also made vertical velocity on landing much more consistent. In conjunction with auto throttle it makes workload lower too. As it was explained to me, “put the thing on the thing” in the HUD and you will be on parameters. Remarkable technology. The F-35 fleet has similar flight control software, all to help maintain those critical parameters on touchdown and increase the probability of catching the 3 wire (2 wire on the newest carriers). Given these improvements compared to previous generations of carrier aircraft, I find it hard to understand this F-35C mishap. From the video the aircraft was established fairly well on glide slope but then descended below it quite rapidly: that seems very odd to me, indicating perhaps a loss of thrust or a significant loss of airspeed, hence the flight control system couldn’t maintain glide slope. It will be interesting to know the causal factors.
As more technology arises, the more incompetent humans get a chance to be. We will always figure out a way to mess things up. From the attitude of those above who lack trust on the people risking their lives and rather rely on technology and business deals with other people's money (taxes) to the irresponsible children on deck taking video and posting it on the internet for the enemy to gather even more intelligence. This truly is an information war.
I'm retired RN Fleet Air Arm. Unauthorised electrical equipment, especially anything that could transmit a RF signal, were banned from aircraft operating areas, especially the flight deck, in case they interfered with the a/c instrumentation, or explosively activated equipment, eg, weapons, fire bottles, cable cutters, etc. Not to mention letting any 'enemy' know where your ship was. So I'm surprised at the lack of control and discipline over these phones displayed on this carrier.
That's an interesting perspective. A counter perspective is that there shouldn't be any equipment that is authorized for use in a hazardous environment full of people scurrying around at random is that you don't allow any equipment that might explode or malfunction if exposed to a random radio signal. Or a fire. Or shock & vibration. One, because you don't know what radio signals or other stimuli will be present, and two, because of the hazard to the ship & crew. It's like saying that we're not going to allow any 5G equipment on or near an airfield. Well, it's kind of hard to control that. Second you can guarantee that if such equipment is banned from the vicinity of an airfield that some idiot will bring it there. People bring unauthorized weapons into airports knowing full well that to even get inside the terminal not to mention get their luggage and carry-on items onto a plane they have to go through some sort of screening. There's no bigger magnet for stupidity than a hazardous situation.
"So I'm surprised at the lack of control and discipline over these phones displayed on this carrier." That lack of control and discipline has infected the Royal Navy as well what with the leak of the video from the QE last November.
@@touristguy87 Its like with phones on planes, in theory (and practice) planes are hardened against electromagnetic radiation. The problem is once you state X,Y or Z is OK to use during flight, you (either as the individual engineer or at least as the company) take responsibility for every possible combination of devices and signals now and for the lifetime of your product, which might be in excess of 40 years. No one ever tested the B-52 for compatibility with even just normal mobile phones and yet it is highly relevant because these planes, that are at least 60 years old, are still in active service.
On that note, maybe there was a 5G ultra signal that interfered with the JPALS or landing system - just by chance - at random - even though it is not supposed to be possible. I realize the South China Sea is an unlikely place for 5G. On a more deliberate note, I am wondering if it’s “possible” for an enemy (China, in this case) to disrupt the anti-jammable equipment designed to safely recover jets…Maybe they tried it to see if it worked…like a disrupter or weaponized interference signal…I realize I am out on the peripheral here…
Mooch, not sure if you have already covered the Royal Navy F35b ski jump incident on HMS Queen Elizabeth a few months back. It would incredibly informative to hear your views on that with some of your excellent guest and their subject matter expertise. Keep up the solid work.
Thank you for the video. My curiosity is at an all time high. I hope the Navy releases their findings to the public. In addition, I would appreciate a future video on the X-32...Its handling characteristics, and any unique capabilities It possessed.
Thank you for your service. Two suggestions... How about quickly flashing up subtitles defining technical terms, acronyms, abbreviations and military/navy/aviator/aviation jargon, etc.? Also, with all the current R&D and increasing hype about future-gen fighter replacement of human-piloted craft by remote- and AI-piloted UAVs, perhaps you could do an episode with your take or possibly a panel chat (countering viewpoints would be interesting)...? Good channel. Thanks.
Bravo Zulu EVERYTIME You have Rowdy AND Hozer join you in the analysis and discussion! I look forward to more of those vids AND looking forward to the historical recollections!
As a nuke reactor operator from the '90s, I just can't even regarding the opsec and infosec. Having a walkman on your person would have been an egregious, and if you already have some strikes against you, potentially career-ending mistake. I'm glad I didn't have to deal with smartphones.
It's a black plastic box with electronics inside of it. Could you open it up and confirm those are all of the right electronics for it to only do playback but not record or broadcast? Personal electronics of any kind could not enter the engineering spaces where I worked, and in land-based facilities, they had to remain in your car. You couldn't even get them through the security check to enter the facility grounds.
@craenor I've always been curious why engine rooms seem to be so highly classified. The why's, that is, not the technical details themselves. Is it a matter of sensitive technologies in use, or the importance of acoustic signatures, or being able to make better estimates of performance based on the size/placement of machinery, etc?
Eh, it's arguable whether any secrecy is actually needed. But regardless if it's needed or not, it's all classified. Most of the reason for the classification is related to architectural design (reactor design) principals. US Naval Nuclear Propulsion plants are designed to function for "in excess of one decade of heavy use" before requiring refueling. How that's accomplished is classified. There are many other similar questions which could infer power density and whatnot which are classified for similar reasons.
Ex-Air Force Puke here, I do not fully appreciate keeping the videos "secret" until the "official" report is released and then requiring FOIA requests. I share the concern of many that there will be pilots incapable of getting the aircraft safely back on the carrier should the system be inoperative. If they can't trap in ideal conditions what is going to happen when they are battle damaged or the weather isn't optimal?
One day they will lose an aircraft carrier. It has happened already... Micro dissection of the obvious and cover ups will pave the way. There have been so many close calls in the vicinity of nuclear materials... "That guy" that crashed the bomber has not made the impact. Cheers 🍻
@@Argosh I wish I could remember the name, it was in Vietnam, not a total loss perhaps but a serious disaster. They redid all safety protocol after as it was from an accident, not enemy fire. People don't realize the complexity of a carrier, just to manage the crew is a colossal task. It was a fire... I'll Google the basics, maybe it will pop up, maybe not. The military bury risk factors.
@@Argosh Took my time on this one. It is in fact July 29, 1967 involving fire and explosions to the Forrestal carrier. In today's dollar it would have been nearly half a billion dollars damage, that does not include the cost of 21 jets slso lost. 134 sailors died, another 161 were badly injured. Luckily the fire was brought under control by the nearby destroyer Rupertus. The fires were still reigniting when it arrived to port. You might find the different investigations interesting... There was a false report issued by NASA that said an incoming jet 'accidentally' fired a missile due to some freak electrical anomaly, that is not possible. The final report said it was parked but someone pulled a safety pin, and again it mysteriously fired itself into.... wait for it!!!
Great analysis of the mishap (approach procedures explanation/comparison. Regarding the leak, I concur with this panel comments about how the current leadership interpreted the leak of such sensitive information. Having served as an enlisted, senior enlisted and officer (LDO) (6360) I’m quite surprised that footage leaker’s are not being held accountable. Thank you again for the outstanding analysis and detailed explanations. “Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum”.
That footage is hard to watch, you can hear the LSO go from a regular day at the office to I'm about to die.... I hope everyone involved makes a speedy recovery
There were plenty of stupid sailors and Marines back in the 80's who did really ridiculously irresponsible things on deployments. Remember, 18-20 year olds are not known to have too much wisdom and seldom appreciate consequences, that's why NCO's and Petty Officers are soooo important.
@ETOPS ever heard of opsec? Back in WWII they had a campaign with a "Loose lips sink ships." Now we have a generation that's grown up with a mentality of "all information should be free information" (except medical & credit card info) Next: per my experience, the military provides a waaay more diverse working environment than *any* civilian company you'll find: huge range of talents, abilities, maturity-an inconceivable range, I'd even say, for those who've never been in. Not to dis junior enlisted folks, but @Dave's comment is a pretty standard observation. *Must be stated:* this is _not_ a reflection of all troops! All you need is a couple of years observing, say, 10% to accrue enough stories. (Pareto applies here) Example: LPO: "Sir/Chief- I just got a call from Schmuckatelli. He's gonna miss ship's movement because he's stuck in Peoria" LCPO/DivO: "what!? He was here yesterday" LPO: "Well it seems his ex-girlfriend's husband's son's car broke down, and he needed a ride, and then Schmuckatelli's car broke down..." You get the picture. (Even more so, when you consider the distance between Peoria and any major Navy port.)
Leak is an OPSEC issue. "In the day" (Indy 84-85) Frequency management seemed full with comms, radars, TADILS, ECM, Navigation, etc seemed full. Only satellite comm we had was UHF and there is a lot more to manage now. Also, GEN 3 Satphones (French Satellite) were only $149 a few years ago. Plug the cell phone frequencies into the frequency management planning. Court Martial offenses. Alternative, lock up the cell phones when coming on board -- they can be detected when on.
In case you have not heard already, five of the Vinson's crew, one Ensign, one Senior Chief, and three Chiefs have been charged with violating Article 92 of the UCMJ in in connection with the leak of the plat video....
Great conversation for a Coast Guard Aviation Crew type. I was born at Jax NAS and grew up with Navy pilot neighbors back when you could still hear sonic booms.
New subscriber! Thank you all for your service! Somehow some of your videos made its way to my feed and I began watching, becoming more interested. I have never served, but I have always, since a young age (48 now), been fascinated by all sorts of aircrafts. My cousin flew the F-14 Tomcat with Fighter Squadron 154 “Black Knights”. He was part of the last aviators to fly the F-14’s before transitioning to the F/A-18F Super Hornet in 2003.
I appreciate your expertise and your qualified and professional review of this topic and the event. Two items, 1) The flow if information, it is really concerning about the unauthorized release of footage of this event by sailors on the ship, the services need to develop some new methods to mitigate this from occurring. 2) This incident occurred in a part of the world where it could be considered a contested/hostile operating area. It is still undetermined if this this incident was due to a potential "equipment failure" or from pilot error, or even both. We should also consider other options and maybe explore and speculate on the possibility of external influences due to hostile action that could or might have been performed at one the most risky periods of flight durring carrier flight operations, and may have been a "triggered"effect to cause this event at a vulnerable time. A number of other usual naval events have occurred in this theater/region in the last few years, so a discussion on this might be we warranted and of interst to discuss threats (EW/Cyber/EMI/EMC) etc. to naval and aviation operations in this region. This might be a out of scope of your group or it might be too sensitive a topic to discuss, but from a certain perspective the need for the general public to be more aware of the increasing number and types of threats that our warfighters may encounter and are starting to newly encounter is worth some discussion. Hopefully this type of knowledge will start to influence how pressure needs to be brought and applied (diplomatically, economically, socially, etc) against certain regional powers, as well as providing increased support to develop mitigations for our warfighers and equipment operating in harms way, in any theater.
@Indrid Cold No... No it is not a huge leap if you know science and historical operational events in the reason. Electronic Warefare takes on a quite a number of forms, I guess in a way it is directed energy of some sort in a way, but one with cyber, or jamming, or EMI type effects rather than destructive energy like laser/maser effects. Plus range of those types of effects are many many km.
I would like to address number 1. You can sign non-disclosures and give orders to obtain or say no unauthorized electronic devices, but it is up to the first line supervisors to enforce this. Also on top of that, the chain of command to provide a reason to prohibit, or confiscate cell phones (service members still have rights). Leaks like this are going to happen in our military, and frankly I support it to an extent, because it keeps our military leaders accountable to what is happening inside our military.
Thanks for the presentation gents! Lessons learned from this mishap should help improve the software/training for manned aircraft carrier landings as well as UAS automated landings for those new drones..
For a member of the crew to send out videos or photos of such an incident that occurs on the ship in which he is serving, is reprehensible. He's betrayed his home, his family.
These guys are awesome. I was on the Ike in 93 and 94 and witnessed some unbelievable traps at night. Especially the Tomcats which were so ungainly compared to the Hornets or EA6E when landing. The A-8’ Harriers were just a walk in the park as they were VTOL and didn’t trap. My hat’s off to all the brown shoe Naval Aviators. And that’s coming from a black shoe.
Ward, what you described as a microphone on the desk in front of the monitor at the workstation is actually an antenna for a handheld radio with the external mic cord looped over.
So, could this presumed cell phone recording been taken via monitor from another part of the carrier away from the main PLAT screen? I mentioned in another comment, but I also believe when these things happen, there will be many playbacks immediately to see what happened - and at those moments where everyone in the room is staring at the playback screens, no one sees the sailor with the covert-recording cell phone pointed at said monitor!!!
As a commercial pilot, I surpassed my instructor in terms of actual IMC flight and approaches. One day we were talking about how I fly mostly autopilot and coupled approaches. He said, “Fly by the box, die by the box.” Then, when he got his first airline job, he found out very quickly that he was wrong. He had forgotten his earlier statement and then stated, “if you have autopilot, use it-much safer!” LOL. True, but, the pilot in command must be ready at all times to take control away from the autopilot and save the day. I liken your approach system to an ILS, which will guide you right down to the mark every time-assuming everything is working correctly.
An interesting view. For me its always been know how to use the automation but practice your skills whenever you can. When its a nice day, don't be afraid to disconnect all the automation and flight director! Practice various approaches and configurations. Don't always do the rnav but try the ils or the vor or ndb. Keeping your hands and feet sharp will mean you will be ahead of the airplane, so when the automation is on you will be ahead of that too. Used to have a hand flying job on a metro multicrew ifr. Had a rudimentary GPS and steam gauges. Because we hand flew all the time, in all sorts of weather and conditions we were always sharp. Everyone could fly her right down to minimums like a laser without much sweating because we practiced so much. I still admire the folks at my old company who do it this way to this very day while my skills have definitely degraded due to more automation dependency. At my new company we often are discouraged from hand flying ifr approaches right down to minimums. I get why, so the compromise is to practice when the weather isn't down to the wire.
It looks like a simple misjudgement starting at the completion of the final turn and I can't imagine a pilot at that skill level making such an error. I am inclined to think that something with the aircraft contributed to the crash unless the pilot says otherwise.
Excellent video showing what has come out regarding this incident. You are right certainly the people who leaked the pic and video have been identified and dealt with already. There will alway be those willing to break the rules especially in this age of social media. I am sure the Navy will get to the bottom of what happened on the ramp strike.
I once read a great analogy of how hard it is, something along the lines of "put a postage stamp on the floor in the middle of your living room, jump off the back of the sofa, and lick the stamp."
The plane is moving, the carrier is moving, the carrier deck is moving, and that plane has maybe three arresting wires to hit within about 15ft of deck at a fairly specific speed.
Let me start off by saying I know landing a jet at 160+ knots on a moving platform takes great skill. training and courage. That being said Rowdy's explanation of the evolution of PLM at 12:30 he discusses what every rotorhead deals with on a daily basis. Change one dynamic in one axis and you have to change all the other axis to compensate for the dynamic change made on the first change.
I remember watching a West Symposium a few years ago. One of the panelists was the CO of an aircraft carrier. During the the discussion he responded to a question of tech, the internet, etc that whenever he secured the internet for an extended time he had significant morale problems. So, question is how are sailors and officers trained about COMSEC? In today's connected environment we are welded to instant comms emotionally. The submarine force has to deal with this. Perhaps some airdales, skimmers need to have a talk with the boubbleheads to learn how they are handling the problem. By the way, the carrier CO also mentioned the ship gets an average of 5000 Amazon packages a month. Takes up a lot of space on the COD.
maybe part of the problem is that commanders are too reliant on a high basic level of crew moral... from older literature at least, it seemed that the natural state of crew-men on a military voyage was grim & angry, and that had been excepted as the common order of things.... yes, taking away communications and forcing your crew to do mentally grueling work with 100% dedication will lower moral, this should not be taken lightly, but, maybe, at some points it needs to be recognized as a necessity? whilst inspiring and helping is part of it, the leadership needs to accept that there will be tensions, in fact, at certain points they will be very much hated... they are not there to be the good guys, like a coach of a team, they are there to get out the max performance from there lads (both genders)... of course, this means they will gain some enemies at home, that they will be loudly blamed for anything that happens, even that throwing them under the bus will be an easy way to gain popular support... & that is why, in todays world, they cannot do that.
As a former Bubblehead on Ohio's I can say that unfortunately the platforms are so intrinsically different that it would be hard to isolate the results of that one difference to figure out how much it played into our overall ship Morale. The lack of communications was one of the annoying factors of being onboard a Boat, but that certainly wasn't the biggest factor if you want to get right down to it. I can say that the way we approached COMSEC in the Submarine force was one of near Brutal consequence. Granted, when I served was post 911, and during the age of PDAs and rudimentary Cell phones. I can only imagine what it must be like for WEPS these days overseeing the numerous programs in place that would have to exist with social media, cameras, and IMs. Needless to say, we Submariners didn't even have the option to try and break COMSEC underway, something about several hundred feet of water and a HY80 steel hull being bad for cell reception, lol. I think if the Surface fleet really wanted to they could crackdown on COMSEC, but the question is, would it even be effective? and would the cost of trying to implement it be greater than the negative impact to morale on the not quite statistically insignificant chance that events like this do occur? I can't speak on that as I don't have the facts, but my gut instinct tells me that the cure would be far worse than the disease, but then again when has that ever stopped the Government or the Uniformed Services from implementing anything?
@@stanislavkostarnov2157 the morale in the 7th fleet is already rock bottom with the unsustainable ops tempo, and far too much of the work on the ship now requires people to be on their mental A game to make the sort of environment you propose an effective way to manage the fighting force.
@@Dovorans maybe, not there, don't know... general feeling is that too many higher up are not ready to take the actual burden of their roles... preferring to do the "inspiration part" only. maybe it's closer to the situation in Russia circa 1900s, so much political and personal distrust, that the relationship between the echelons is totally broken down... well, I guess then we know we are in trouble.
@@WillCarter1976 a carrier on the ocean should only have military bands servicable unless they hit coastline, crew shouldn't have any connection except through whatever the carrier is providing. It sounds like personal devices need to be locked down and an electronically lightweight brickphone or microtablet issued with a slew of work-and-play programs preloaded from a Navy controlled app store- or something. You could even grant awards to third party developers if they build an app that survives quals to be in the store, something about directed govt software contracts just wastes money and performance.
00:00 - Intro 02:20 - Mooch plays the Leaked videos & shows the photo of F-35 floating on the surface right after it crashed backwards. 03:07 - Hozer speaks about LSOs & the approach 05:53 - Damage control, debris, pic of plane floating 07:40 - PLM, ACLS, auto throttles etc. Rowdy describes landing the F-14 & F-35 systems. 15:41 - Precision of PLM, catching desired wire, reduced pilot workload , airspeed callouts, meatball relevance today. 20:16 - Near term safeguards, "red stripe", what could have gone wrong with the F-35 systems (HUD, visor etc) 21:51 - Hand picked pilots for a first time deployment of a new type, only the best of the best picked for the 1st deployment. 23:48 - Complacency can creep in, 5th month is the one to watch for this. Shorter tours of duty in todays world. 25:00 - Rowdy on the importance of being on speed, on centerline, on the right power during the approach. No smoke coming from engine is notable. 26:17 - Mooch asks about the margins you need to be in to engage PLM, F-14 & flat spin testing 27:18 - Mooch & Rowdy on the learning curve ahead for F-35 ops. Rowdy describes pushing test flights to its limits. 28:31 - Leaks. Discussion about leaked videos and images. Mooch shocked that the video got leaked. Who shot the videos? It will be easily found out. 33:34 - Leaks.Hozer, leaks have always been around. Describe incident from the 80, back then VHS tapes were used. Back in the 90s he was on a carrier with another mishap but this time the footage was not shown around the ship even. We have to be sensitive with regard to families affected. 34:43 - Leaks. Rowdy addresses how times have changed - phones, social media, internet but there are still rules that must be obeyed. 35:40 - Leaks. Leakers will face disciplinary action. Mooch surprised at how brazen the leakers were, filming the computer monitor etc. However this is the connected world we live in 37:35 - Conclusion Any mistakes let me know and I will correct.
All relatively "new" programs have teething issues. When the F16 began, there were so many crashes they were called "Lawn Darts".. Those issues were found and fixed as will these F35 issues.
not to mention how many grunts had their faces blown off or killed with jammed weapon when the m-16 was put in the field. not sure I'd be so cavalier about ironing out a weapon's problems with my butt on the bucket. besides, this plane has had some 15 years of development.
They have had 22 years to "fix" the F-35, it first flew in 2000. If a $100,000 warplane can't be fixed in almost a quarter of a century, it makes you wonder.
@@tbolt2948 the technology demonstrator is not the production item, and while the first pre-production A model flew in 2005, the C model which has a number of significant structural differences from the A model, is only just now being introduced. This aircraft family has had a remarkably low mishap rate especially given that it's a relatively new platform.
@@tbolt2948 it wasn’t in production until well after 2000. It’s relatively new to carriers. It’ll be fine. Same kinds of issues when F16 and F15 and probably every other type of aircraft. I remember when 60 Minutes did an “expose” on the F15 in early 80’s and how terrible it was. Now it is deservedly lauded.
Any complex system with multiple possible points of failure WILL have problems. And that complex system includes the human. Most are foreseen and addressed beforehand, based on the history of similar systems, but some are only seen after they occur. The Space Shuttle flew 136 times before Challenger, itself having flown 10 missions. It was thoroughly inspected and repaired before each flight. So, a unique set of environmental conditions caused an issue with O-rings.. an issue known and warned about, but politics got in the way of safety. Procedure changes after the fact changed those priorities. Columbia flew 27 times before falling ice damaged some tiles. With all those flights and pre-flight inspections, it was safe to assume the system was safe. But, the unforeseen are, by definition, just that. Engineering has often been described as the art of fixing failures. Safety procedures are usually written in blood. We won't know if this F35 event was a one off caused by some unforeseen equipment failure, pilot error or a combination... at least not for a while. As our 3 experts said, it could be something as simple as lackadaisical procedure... maybe even flipping the wrong switch. There's a saying that if you hear hoof beats outside your door, don't go looking for zebras. Equipment does fail, but the majority of civil/commercial air accidents are the result of pilot error and/or disorientation. We'll know more because the prime witness in this event survived basically unscathed. That's a big plus. The airplane is at the bottom of the ocean.. that's a big minus. But, since the SH-60 crash from the TR-71 was recovered, there's at least a decent chance this airplane will also be recovered. Like I said, the cause of this event will eventually be determined and mitigated. IMHO...
I savour every moment of these videos. Keep up the good work, guys. Also respect for reaching out to Hornet Vids to get the PLM low down. Thank you for keeping it honest.
It's really hard to believe that appropriate focus on the mission can be kept when phones./cameras are carried around like that. It's not far fetched to image the following - Making an adjustment on equipment, installing a part etc The phone goes off (not even a call, just a txt msg or whatever. ) And next "Did I do the full 3 turns or just 2." " Did I get the washer, seal and nut on there in the right position." Just so many ways a moments distraction can make someone miss something. Then add in say the wife is about to deliver a baby, SO is talking about a divorce, a parent is ill, any number of personal situations that make that next email or txt message a little more distracting. So while these videos/Picture are pretty blatant, there are so many other ways that a phone becomes an issue when you are working on a ship, a plane etc. Tolerances, Tech Orders exist for a reason and when they aren't followed... I can't forget that in 1982 Thunderbirds that all went in because Number 1 Thunderbird could not pull the stick far enough aft to get the normal elevator movement expected and needed to complete the pull out of the diamond loop and ALL 4 birds impacted in formation. As I remember the reason for the problem was identified as a bolt or part that became wedged between the stick and the actuator and prevented that final fraction of an inch movement needed. That part should never have been left loose in the plane but as a result 4 highly qualified people died.
I'm not part of winged aviation or ship maintenance. However, I have helped assemble many iterations of the largest rocket ever produced. Phones were allowed for the most part, just don't take photos unless strictly necessary for work proposes. Which in that role they proved very useful. As for distractions that was never really a problem. If anything it was a benefit to be able to look anything up that I needed to know or remember. Be it types of fittings, material properties, cost, torque specs, manuf. part numbers, what kind of lube or seal went with certain parts, or even fundamentals of rocketry that might be pertinent to the job. let alone the communications factor or being able to just call anyone in the company for anything you might need or need to know.
@@loxachi1291 I understand in some situations out side the military but onboard ship or at a base with aircraft, with systems fully fielded there are specific instructions on what exactly is to be done and how. In the Air Force the are called Tech Orders and they have to be followed explicitly along with all safety and security policies. Innovation has a place but not unless you are talking wartime, lives on the line situations. Clearly the videos here show a person either blatantly ignoring security and policy and/or out to catch some video to get attention. Hopefully the attention he gets he/she will never forget. From what we know, there appears to possibly more than one person doing this and that's a bad sign for the future security of everyone. Imagine a conflict and they are trying to be radio silent and keep their electronic signature to a minimum. Anyone thinking the rules don't apply to them, literally could endanger the entire crew of over 6,000 people. Not diminishing what you say can be done with a phone but there is also a risk when policies and security is compromised or ignored.
@@loxachi1291 Agree, besides the potential safety liabilities, modern phones are so incredibly useful. Looking up a tolerance or material characteristic on the fly, sending a colleague the exact picture of the part or just quickly getting a photo of calipers still on the measurement in question saves so much time.
I doubt cellphone notifications would be a problem out in the ocean, you have to be within 4 miles or so of a tower to get a signal. And I'd hope the Navy has a "no phones while on watch" policy, we had that when I was a cashier at a grocery store, we weren't allowed to have our phone on us when working the register, we had to put it in a locker in the breakroom (in theory -- in practice it was really more "if management or a customer sees you looking at your phone you get written up," but you get the idea). It looks like at least the person on the fantail was off-duty and just getting video of the jets coming in, but IDK if you can hang out in the place where the TV is when you're not on watch. Again with the grocery store analogy, we weren't allowed in the cash office unless it was our shift there, I'd assume the sensitive spaces on ships would be the same. But yeah, I'd bet that everybody that leaked it got knocked down a pay grade or three at captain's mast, if JAG isn't waiting to get their hands on 'em.
An Ens, a SCPO and 3 CPOs where charged with leaking the videos. How can they expect to hold Sailors accountable when Chiefs are breaking the rules. As a retired SCPO im sorely disappointed in those E7s and E8.
It indicates to me that the phone user knew that something was amiss with the jet and was forewarned. That and the immediate actions of the fire and rescue units. They were set and ready to go. No - this was an expected event from an aircraft with a problem/s.
@@johnmclean6498 I don't think so. #1 If there was a problem with the aircraft no one would be standing filming near the back of the carrier, incredibly stupid thing to do any lower and you could be killed standing in that position. #2 They weren't set and ready. No crash barrier and you can see the crew running to the hoses after the crash. The hoses would have already been out if they were the case.
Thank you, thank you, thank you gentlemen for your (always) articulate accurate factual experienced naval aviator debrief and responsible dissemination. As always your presentations are informative, educational and professional. Excellent!.
I am sure that the Navy should be able to limit the band width that goes out from the Carrier so that pictures or videos could not be sent. (if they wanted to)
May not be an internet access thing. Someone could've recorded it on their phone and saved it to an SD card, then mailed the SD card out and had a stateside friend upload it. Last I heard, snail mail to and from the carrier is still a thing.
This is the new Armed Forces, apparently security and protocols have become extremely lax, this leak came out quickly, as did the follow up leak, some heads definitely need to roll and some remedial training must occur ASAP!
I'm fairly old school, I started flying the Eagle over 30 years ago . I'm curious, if the pilot is on a short final to the 3 wire and this auto everything magic box madness gets bent, how fast is the pilot able to recognize the error, disengage and fly out of there? If he was short and the black magic went south, would he have time to recognize and react? I know nothing about the boat landing system, although I'm very familiar with autoland.
@@danmurphy9173 As an air force pilot I only have a top gun (the movie) level understanding of coming aboard the boat. I'm wondering if our hero could have had a failure in the guidance gear that he didn't recognize until recovery wasn't possible or was very improbable. Hearing that engine spool up so late in the approach makes it seem- to me- as if he thought he was squared away for the vast majority of the approach, possibly because he trusted the gear and missed any error calls. In my experience in fast jets, end-of-life level errors are generally accompanied by bright red lights and klaxxon alarms, or at the very least Betty raising holy hell. But not knowing the boat specific hardware or the airplane... I'm curious if perhaps there's a scenario where the pilot could be left ignorant of a drift or uncoupling.
The landing signal officers are talking to every pilot on every landing. If the landing is looking fishy, or the plane’s information doesn’t match the line up to the ship, they will be advised
@@egutierrez3961 right, I'm wondering if he was still on glideslope until right at the end, and when he went low he fully expected the system to correct.. when it didn't he may have lost crucial seconds waiting on the system. When I was a young pilot, before the Air Force, I went up to Alaska and was a bush pilot. I flew taildraggers, seaplanes, twin turboprops. I was flying into a mountain village on one of the few ILS approaches in the state in a Cessna 406, a small twin turboprop. I had a total localizer failure inside the middle marker and missed the flag. I came about as close as you can come to hitting a granite cloud without actually hitting it... All because I had dumped my faith into this 30 year old instruments lap. Seeing flyboy come v-reffing down lined up pretty well, apparently, until right at the last, and then seeming slow to respond to the power then wave off call reminded me of that Alaskan approach. Wonder if the tech let him down and dropped him off a bit behind the airplane.
Just watched the tapes a few times because I was wondering at what point the pilot ejected. It seems he was half way down the boat when he punched out if I saw that correctly. In watching that I also noticed just how fast the DC guys got water streams on the deck in case of fire. The friggin plane had JUST hit the water when you see the first hose team go into action. I'm prior military and seeing that was just incredible. Getting the pumps running and pulling a line that fast.. and we're talking mere seconds... just phenomenal work and goes to show the amount of training these folks go through, the drills and such.. zero hesitation. I don't have enough good to say about that.. just amazing.. and with 7 deck crew down for the count. Excellent performance
@Shawn Colson Time & place for that. SecNav was busily attempting to manage appearances / whitewash TR's CO being booted. Blatantly political & rightfully cost the arrogant buffoon his Pentagon office. Seems to me that individuals releasing these vids - of a mishap during Operations - is entirely different. It may illuminate the widely felt cynicism about our institutions.
I'm ex-Navy (AE) and worked on A-4s, A-6s, A-7s, F-14s. Just curious what happens when PLM (or any new technology) fails? Does the pilot have the ability and skill set required to land aboard manually? One has to think about the 737 Max that failed with catastrophic consequences, using the latest technology, and those pilots had no ability to override the "system".
They did have the ability to pull the runaway trim if they understood the problem, the issue was the shoddy way in which it was implemented making a problem more likely and the lack of pilot awareness training about the feature
Some thoughts from an old Tomcat Driver. And looking at my logbook, as I see that Rowdy Yates is familiar, I believe I flew with him at Beeville?? Memory may be fogged over . . . . . Rowdy, were you a stud at VT-25 late 1984? I was in VF-32 with Mooch. Good stuff, here, Ward. Anyway, I digress. As a CAT 1 new F-14A guy at VF-124 RAG at NAS Miramar, 1979, I CQ'd in November 1979. It was my final syllabus event. Day CQ went OK, but night was very tough. It was on the Ranger, and we had pitching deck both night and day. Bob Lawhorn, God bless him, was my RIO. That man had nerves of steel and the patience of Job. Tried as hard as I could, but I could not fly the ball well at night in Manual Throttles. It took Auto Throttles to get aboard. Following a couple of Taxi One Wires, I was halted for a motherhood chat with the LSOs. Anyway, I finally successfully qual'd and went to the Wolf Pack of VF-1. I endeavored that I would learn to night land with Manual Throttles. I did, and after that I forgot where the darn switch was. I rarely again ever used Auto. In contrast, our son flew F/A-18s with VFA-146 (the C) and VFA-105 (the E), and he told me he was ALWAYS Auto. Learning to fly as a teenager, and as I completed my Private and Commercial / Instrument in college, several times instructors would place a suction cup or two over the A/S and altimeter indicators to force me to learn to fly the pattern and land No-Flap / Full-Flap. I found this to be a big help and confidence maker. To cut to the chase, does the F-35 community ALWAYS rely on PLM, or are pilots trained to fall back and practice on basics and fly the pattern and the ball the good old-fashioned manual way? Just some honest observations. PackRat
@@WardCarroll I be good. Spoke with my son this morning IRT this F35 fandango. He told me the Super Hornet has PLM, and that it worked very well. The PLM / Auto Throttles on the legacy Hornet had a different software setup, he said. I didn't know that. He also told me that PLM had been extensively tested with large entry deviations and that it would capture and work well. So based on what Rowdy said, I'm not sure what the F35 testing parameters were.
January 9, 1962 the then CO of VAH-7, Cdr Bud Gear (a highly qualified Naval Aviator and former test pilot), was lost in a ramp strike trying to recover on the FDR flying a, then brand new, A3J (A-5A) Vigilante during carrier quals for that aircraft prior the VAH-7s first deployment on the Enterprise. It's my understanding that Cdr Gear turned onto final and then didn't respond to any power or glide slope calls from the LSO and the aircraft was destroyed and Cdr Gear was killed when the aircraft struck the ramp. It was apparently assumed at the time that Cdr Gear lost at least partial consciousness due to some kind of a medical issue.
