Brand New AC-130 Ghostrider A Total Loss

[Darrell]

Wow:

Brand New AC-130 Ghostrider A Total Loss After Going Inverted While Out Of Control

11/17/15 7:30pm

One of the Air Force Special Operations Command’s brand-spanking-new AC-130J Ghostrider Gunships has to be scrapped due to a test flight that went horribly awry. Luckily nobody was harmed but the $115 million dollar highly-modified Super Hercules will never fly again.

The incident in question happened during a “medium-risk flying qualities” test set, part of the new AC-130J testing process. Flightglobal.com reports:

While being operated at roughly 15,000ft, “the aircraft exceeded the targeted angle of sideslip until it departed controlled flight,” the report states. It “momentarily inverted, before being recovered after losing approximately 5,000ft of altitude.” The aircraft’s crew – who escaped injury – returned to base and landed safely, but the Ghostrider was rendered a total loss, having exceeded its operating g limits and design load.

Investigators have attributed the incident to the pilot’s “excessive rudder input during the test point, followed by inadequate rudder input to initiate a timely recovery from high angle of sideslip due to over-controlled/under-controlled aircraft,” along with the “wrong choice of action during an operation.”

The report also adds that additional attributing factors included spacial disorientation (vertigo), confusion, instrument and warning systems issues, and poor procedural guidance and publications for the test team to follow.

Although losing a brand new, low density-high demand asset like an AC-130J is bad news, this is what testing is for. Better have a permanently grounded plane than one laying on the ground burning in the enemy’s backyard.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/brand- ... 1743122173

AC130J.jpg

So, will the pilot get his wings clipped? Or would it have been a test pilot just doing his job?

[toad]

Are they trying to say the pilot barrel rolled the aircraft.?

[mekender]

Are they trying to say the pilot barrel rolled the aircraft.?

That is how I read it... I don't see it as a total loss though, it sounds to me like Delta has a new airframe to practice hostage rescue on...

Or, I bet the could sell it to Hollywood for half the cost as a non-flying set.

[Aesop]

The purpose of a test flight is to test.
If they were going to punish the guy for doing what they sent him up to do, best to mothball the entire squadron now.

It sounds like, from the release, that they need to find someone with a better grasp of test regimens to oversee their flight planning for this before the next time.
At the end of the day, all they lost was the airframe. All the crap screwed into it comes out, and can go in another one. That's probably 75% of the price of a SpecOps bird (I defer to you in the biz with a better grasp on the particulars).

The only thing besides that they need to worry about is half a dozen new pairs of undershorts, and a visit for all aircrew on the flight to flight med, to make sure there's no fragments of the seat cushions still pinched off up in there.

[JustinR]

No, an aileron roll or even a negative-g slow roll wouldn't have been nearly enough to overstress the aircraft. Even normal category and utility aircraft are tested for negative-g's, I don't remember the numbers right now. The only problem with most aircraft going inverted is if they have a fuel and oil system that is designed to continue to work inverted for more than a few seconds.

The key phrase here is "departed controlled flight." That means a stall and possibly spin. Maybe an inverted spin. In all likelihood the C-130 airframe is not rated for spins, let alone inverted spins, and that's most likely what overstressed the aircraft, including recovery inputs. They are damn luckily to be alive after spinning that airplane.

Another key phrase is this:

The report also adds that additional attributing factors included spacial disorientation (vertigo), confusion, instrument and warning systems issues, and poor procedural guidance and publications for the test team to follow.

Poor procedural guidance for the test team to follow means the test card they gave the pilots didn't establish limits to stay within most likely, so although it's a royal f-up, it really shouldn't be a career ender, since they WERE following procedure. The fact they were actually able to recover and land safely is darn impressive. The fact the aircraft didn't fail catastrophically fail means they used the correct control inputs to recover and that the plane is built damn tough to begin with. It would simply be too cost prohibitive to replace all the structural spars, thus why it's a total loss.

[PawPaw]

Tex Johnston barrel-rolled a Boeing 707 at an air show in 1955. When they asked him what the hell he was doing, he replied, "Selling airplanes."

YouTube linky!

I wouldn't think that a simple barrel roll would "total" a military aircraft, but I admit that I know nothing at all about aviation.

[Aesop]

They didn't do "a simple barrel roll".
They departed any semblance of controlled flight, and then had to over-G the airframe wildly to return to a normal flight envelope and attitude.

I suspect after taking off everything important, the airframe is going back to Marietta to be autopsied in detail, down to the rivets, by Lockheed's version of pathologists, with USAF engineers at their shoulders every step of the way. It may actually prove a boon to the company, and all end users, in the long run. You don't get a lot of $30M airframes to nearly break, and then analyze. It would be foolish in the extreme not to take full advantage of this opportunity.

And about the only way to may any kind of silk purse out of this sow's ear.

[toad]

Many, many, moons ago a crew was ferrying a B-36 on its last flight to the bone yard. In the interest of experimentation they barrel rolled it. Legend has it many, many, rivets gave up the ghost.

[Mike OTDP]

I'd want to see the details before I passed judgement. Though one of the people I work with came from Eglin...would probably have been on that airplane had he stayed. He was not impressed with how they did business.

Certainly in Navy flight test, a Class A mishap will cost the squadron CO his career unless it can be proven beyond doubt that the test planning and execution was proper. The USAF isn't as hard-nosed about test losses.

[Mike OTDP]

I'll add that 15kft is very low for envelope expansion work.