Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

A place to talk about all things military, paramilitary, tactical, strategic, and logistical.
User avatar
randy
Posts: 8354
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:33 pm
Location: EM79VQ

Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by randy »

Fortunately no one seriously hurt:

From the Air Force Association daily e-mail:
During initial takeoff from Offutt AFB, Neb. on April 30, a leak in the high pressure oxygen system in the rear cabin of a RC-135V Rivet Joint assigned to the 343rd Reconnaissance Squadron led to a fire that burned a hole through the aircraft's upper fuselage, according to a newly released Air Combat Command Accident Investigation Board report. The pilot immediately aborted the mission, and evacuated the aircraft on the ground as fire crews arrived. The fire, which occurred during a routine training mission in support of an Air Force Special Operations Command exercise, burned through the rear galley area of the aircraft, damaging both the aircraft's structure and its control and mission systems (repair costs are estimated at $62.4 million, according to the AIB findings). According to the report, failure by the contractor depot maintenance personnel from L3 Communications to properly tighten a retaining nut connecting a metal oxygen tube to a fitting above the galley caused the oxygen leak, which led to a "highly flammable oxygen rich environment that ignited." The fire then melted the retaining nut, leading the tubing to detach, which fed more oxygen into the fire, causing "severe damage" to the galley area. Four crewmembers received treatment for minor smoke inhalation. (Full report here, PDF file).
The linked report includes internal pictures (only ones I have, probably will ever have, of one of those birds)
Kinda scary given where I often sat as a JAFO, including on that particular bird.
...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".
User avatar
mekender
Posts: 13189
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:31 pm

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by mekender »

“I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” - Norman Thomas, a six time candidate for president for the Socialist Party, 1944
User avatar
evan price
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:24 am

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by evan price »

If that AF Times picture is the exterior fuse after the landed, they should count lucky stars they landed at all.
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc

http://ohioccwforums.org/
Ohioans for Concealed Carry:THE source for Ohio CCW information and discussion!
User avatar
Denis
Posts: 6570
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:29 am

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by Denis »

Inspection of the fittings removed from the MA revealed that the B-nuts at Junction #4, Junction #5 and Junction #11 were all finger tight...
Sounds like some mechanic, who forgot his torque wrench, can now look forward to spending many years learning about its proper care and feeding at a cold, cold airbase in the Arctic.

Maybe these guys will be flown up by Southwest to keep him company there:
A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 was being moved from a passenger gate to a maintenance hangar shortly after 10 p.m. Tuesday when it went off a taxiway and ended up nose-down in a grassy area, authorities said.

The jet's nose gear collapsed and an engine got stuck in the ground, according to the Federal Aviation Authority. That forced crews to use a crane to lift it back up.

Two mechanics were the only people on board during the taxiing ...
User avatar
First Shirt
Posts: 4378
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:32 pm

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by First Shirt »

That's gonna be tough to buff out!
But there ain't many troubles that a man caint fix, with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six."
Lindy Cooper Wisdom
User avatar
skb12172
Posts: 7310
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:45 am

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by skb12172 »

$62.4M for repairs? Wouldn't it be cheaper to just scrap it?
There must be an end to this intimidation by those who come to this great country, but reject its culture.
User avatar
mekender
Posts: 13189
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:31 pm

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by mekender »

skb12172 wrote:$62.4M for repairs? Wouldn't it be cheaper to just scrap it?

Maybe... I found an article that said in 1999, converting a single C-135 to a RC-135V cost $90m... So that plus the airframe cost puts it at $130m+, in 1999 dollars... I think the better question would be, is the repair worth it rather than just reducing the fleet of 15 down to 14?
“I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” - Norman Thomas, a six time candidate for president for the Socialist Party, 1944
User avatar
First Shirt
Posts: 4378
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:32 pm

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by First Shirt »

Even back in the late 70s, the airframe was the cheapest part of the package.

And I still think there are better collection platforms, that are cheaper to operate. But the zipper-suited sun gods won't ever give up the manned platform.
But there ain't many troubles that a man caint fix, with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six."
Lindy Cooper Wisdom
User avatar
randy
Posts: 8354
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:33 pm
Location: EM79VQ

Re: Hey First Shirt: 848 had a Boo-Boo

Post by randy »

mekender wrote:Maybe... I found an article that said in 1999, converting a single C-135 to a RC-135V cost $90m... So that plus the airframe cost puts it at $130m+, in 1999 dollars...
The Brits just bought 3 (new conversions from KC-135's) for £650 Million, so £216 Million (so about $334 Million each?) each. That may be high for the airframe portion as I don't know if that cost includes things like the ground data handling system and other support items in additon to airframe cost and conversion.
I think the better question would be, is the repair worth it rather than just reducing the fleet of 15 down to 14?
Given the high usage/demand rates I seen for this platform over the past few years, that would probably be a less than optimal solution, especially since some airframes are in phase/depot maintenance at any given time.

And according to the latest AFA Magazine, the air frame gets a major overhaul every few years (including swapping out the mission packages inside), so you might look at it as simply rescheduling the expense rather than a new expense.
...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".
Post Reply