User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 11:42:56 AM EDT
Looks like a toilet plunger on a ten-foot yellow pole:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 11:44:56 AM EDT
[#1]
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 11:51:17 AM EDT
[#2]
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 11:53:58 AM EDT
[#3]
I'm guessing the OP is visiting Wright Pat?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 11:57:44 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 12:00:49 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a wing fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 12:01:21 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired! I used to fly C-141Bs way back when. Good times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 12:04:55 PM EDT
[#7]
ahh the Pogo stick
it was always fun teaching new guys how to use them, especially watching gas drip on them while they were pogo'ing the mains or aux tanks before I worked on BUFFs in 2010 I spent five years as a C-130 Crew Chief at Dyess AFB TX |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 12:06:31 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Spot on. Big fun for the crew chief and the fuels guys when the underwing poppet valve the pogo drains from sticks open. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a wing fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 12:10:29 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ahh the Pogo stick it was always fun teaching new guys how to use them, especially watching gas drip on them while they were pogo'ing the mains or aux tanks before I worked on BUFFs in 2010 I spent five years as a C-130 Crew Chief at Dyess AFB TX |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 2:01:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired! Edit: wow, I guess I opened this tab a while ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 2:11:05 PM EDT
[#11]
My first night jump was from a C-141. It was cool as shit, as I had door position on the first pass.
This huge black hat came over and grabbed my shoulder and static line hand and started shaking the hell out of me. He said " Are you scared?" I said "no" . The he says " then why are you shaking ?" . Good times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 2:12:03 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What years were you at Dyess? I was there 91-93.... started life as a 130 load in 1MAPS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 2:39:45 PM EDT
[#13]
I used to laugh at our P-3 FE's when they walked around with the milk-man crate of fuel samples - but it's a no-shit kinda' job when it comes right down to it. Screw having your engines quit at 25,000 ft over the pacific due to fuel contamination.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 2:57:21 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I used to laugh at our P-3 FE's when they walked around with the milk-man crate of fuel samples - but it's a no-shit kinda' job when it comes right down to it. Screw having your engines quit at 25,000 ft over the pacific due to fuel contamination. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 3:15:20 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired! OP, I saw the pic and thought it might be the 141 we got to tour at Warner Robbins a few years ago. Totally cool staff there. They found out my PIL was not long for this world and allowed us to tour the one they were still prepping for a display. Was really cool getting to see my PIL give us family a tour of his old bird. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 3:26:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Always checked the security of that damned thing before takeoff. Way too many stories of it coming loose and bonking passengers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 4:11:31 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Holy shit! Are their still 141's in inventory?!? My pop was an FE on A models, and I flew on a few (as a pax) in the early 90s, but i thought they had all been retired! There are 15 remaining C-141s on display at the following AF bases: Altus AFB, OK Charleston, AFB, SC Dover (C-141A & C-141B) Edwards AFB, CA (C-141A) March AFB, CA Mc Chord AFB, WA McGuire AFB, NJ NASA Moffett Field, CA (C-141A) Pima Air Museum, AZ Robins AFB, GA Scott AFB, IL Travis AFB, CA Wright-Patterson AFB, OH |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2017 9:18:37 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been in and out of the dry bays a few times. Mad props to the fuels guy doing in-tank mx. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a wing fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic.  Failed To Load Title |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 5:36:16 AM EDT
[#19]
used to turn wrenches on the A models used by the 4950th test wing when it was at wright pat. that was early 90s that wing moved to Edwards .
the aircraft I spent the most time working on and doing engine runs and whatnot. was tail number 61-2775 which was the prototype it now lives on at Dover AFB On display http://c141heaven.info/dotcom/61/pic_61_2775.php also spent some time on 61-2779 which later on in life had the pointy "universal" nose cone installed. http://c141heaven.info/dotcom/61/pic_61_2779.php think this one is at Edwards now |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:06:18 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe: USAF Fuel Tank Cleaner. Skip to 28:15.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksDutDCBeEsQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a wing fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksDutDCBeEs . As I said - mad props to those who can do that work.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:20:12 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The last C-141 flight was May 6th 2006 when HANOI TAXI (66-0177) was retired from AF Reserve service and sent to the Air Force Museum. The C-141 fleet was sent to the Boneyard and were scrapped. The C-141s did not stay long at the Boneyard. They were scrapped very soon after arriving, just like the F-14s. There are 15 remaining C-141s on display at the following AF bases: Altus AFB, OK Charleston, AFB, SC Dover (C-141A & C-141B) Edwards AFB, CA (C-141A) March AFB, CA Mc Chord AFB, WA McGuire AFB, NJ NASA Moffett Field, CA (C-141A) Pima Air Museum, AZ Robins AFB, GA Scott AFB, IL Travis AFB, CA Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 1:56:15 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Makes me feel old to think about how many years I worked on the stretch and re-wing projects on the C-141's years ago. About time for me to be decommissioned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 2:54:52 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My pop retired in 1969 out of Dover AFB cause he was not gonna crew the C5...... He swore to his dying day that [b]they ruined the 141 when they stretched it and "broke its back". If I recall correctly most of them had severe wing box cracks by the time they were retired right?[b] Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Makes me feel old to think about how many years I worked on the stretch and re-wing projects on the C-141's years ago. About time for me to be decommissioned. You are correct that when the C-141s were retired in 2006 the replacement wing boxes were cracking. Desert Storm and its aftermath flew the wings off the planes again. Along with the tail structure and windscreen structure. When I retired in 1995 a lot of the fleet was restricted to flying less than 250 knots and some planes were restricted to flying lower than 18,000ft due to the wing box, tail and windshield crack problems. There was talk about another wing box replacement program along with tail and windshield frame replacements, but the C-17 was going to be the fix for the C-141's problems and nothing was done. We had one of the special ops low level (SOLL II) birds at McGuire that had to be retired in 1994 due to cracks in the wing structures from the low altitude mission. That one hurt the special ops guys badly, since there were only 13 C-141s modified for the SOLL II missions and there were only a limited number available at any one time due to depot maintenance rotation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 7:27:15 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My pop retired in 1969 out of Dover AFB cause he was not gonna crew the C5...... He swore to his dying day that they ruined the 141 when they stretched it and "broke its back". If I recall correctly most of them had severe wing box cracks by the time they were retired right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 7:51:19 PM EDT
[#25]
My first jump ever was out of a 141 back when they were still using them to support Airborne School.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:08:00 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My first jump ever was out of a 141 back when they were still using them to support Airborne School. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:32:35 PM EDT
[#27]
8th
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:33:42 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stretching the C-141 was something added to replacing the original wing boxes that were severely cracked due to the wings being flown off the planes during Viet Nam. You are correct that when the C-141s were retired in 2006 the replacement wing boxes were cracking. Desert Storm and its aftermath flew the wings off the planes again. Along with the tail structure and windscreen structure. When I retired in 1995 a lot of the fleet was restricted to flying less than 250 knots and some planes were restricted to flying lower than 18,000ft due to the wing box, tail and windshield crack problems. There was talk about another wing box replacement program along with tail and windshield frame replacements, but the C-17 was going to be the fix for the C-141's problems and nothing was done. We had one of the special ops low level (SOLL II) birds at McGuire that had to be retired in 1994 due to cracks in the wing structures from the low altitude mission. That one hurt the special ops guys badly, since there were only 13 C-141s modified for the SOLL II missions and there were only a limited number available at any one time due to depot maintenance rotation. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:39:40 PM EDT
[#29]
I'm awfully proud that my question about a ten-foot toilet plunger has yielded such an informative thread
This is all really interesting stuff, keep it coming. So, was the C-17 NOT the "fix" for the C-141's problems? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:41:10 PM EDT
[#30]
The Hanoi Taxi is a former Norton AFB assigned C-141 of the 63rd MAW. Chances are that I flew on that very aircraft before it became the Hanoi Taxi
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 8:42:53 PM EDT
[#31]
I spent a LOT of time in C-141s as a kid. Dad and I used to fly MAC (aka AMC) Space-A quite a few times.
Was always cool being a kid on those, get to go up in the cockpit a lot and put on the headphones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:05:56 PM EDT
[#32]
When I was stationed at Elmendorf in the late 90's I seem to recall somebody had an unpleasant experience with one of those. They were holding on to the sill looking at something under the aircraft and someone else came by and shut the door. I'm pretty sure they broke a few fingers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:13:36 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Hanoi Taxi is a former Norton AFB assigned C-141 of the 63rd MAW. Chances are that I flew on that very aircraft before it became the Hanoi Taxi |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:18:13 PM EDT
[#34]
I've crossed the Atlantic twice in a 141. Coming back once was in seats on pallets rather like an air liner. The second was in the net jump seats. The Salts all grabbed the outboard seats and us boots were left inboard. The net jump seats were designed for paratroopers with a chute. We of course were not airborne and had no chutes. You had to crink your neck to sit down and the second you fell asleep the guy on the other side would move and wake you up.
Not much fun. Sure beat coming home by ship though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:44:08 PM EDT
[#35]
Lieutenant Colonel Les Roodzant, "The Big Kahuna" was one of the last C-141 pilots with just a high school diploma. He flew Special Ops Low Level II birds out of McChord and occasionally supported us at the HALO School at Fort Bragg.
Colonel Roodzant knew the 141 in-and-out and made it his mission to train new lieutenant and captain pilots to fly the bird to its published book limits. He would have us jumpmasters give the 20- and 10-minute warnings on the ground before releasing the brakes, climb to altitude and go into negative-Gs, turn the plane and drop the ramp to set up the jump run. Once all jumpers were away he'd turn and drop the plane for a direct landing at Pope Air Base to set it up all over again. Man, that dude could fly a jet! 
Here's to you, sir! Rest in peace. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 9:56:57 PM EDT
[#36]
Thank OP! This was a fun trip down memory lane.
C-141B/C Crew Chief from 1986-2003. SMS-ret |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2017 10:18:26 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oops - missed this. Confined space hazardous & toxic fumes work - . As I said - mad props to those who can do that work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 6:44:46 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We flew the shit outta the 141 on low level airdrop missions...Red Flag missions were brutal. That type of flying wasn't in the picture when the 141 was built...it was intended as a strategic airlifter. Great info in this thread thanks to all! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 7:14:05 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I spent a LOT of time in C-141s as a kid. Dad and I used to fly MAC (aka AMC) Space-A quite a few times. Was always cool being a kid on those, get to go up in the cockpit a lot and put on the headphones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 7:15:41 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oops - missed this. Confined space hazardous & toxic fumes work - . As I said - mad props to those who can do that work.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not a C-141 guy, but that is a "pogo stick". Used to take fuel samples from a wing fuel tank, check for water contamination and such. Common on other aircraft as well. The poor fuel cell bastards have this stuff we used to call "elephant snot" they can trowel over an actively running poppet. Has to be chiseled back off, though, hardens like rock. Easily one of the worst jobs in the AF, especially if you're at all claustraphobic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksDutDCBeEs. As I said - mad props to those who can do that work.She's QA now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 7:18:39 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This for me too. Flying sitting backwards in the seats behind the cockpit at takeoff/landing was always weird. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I spent a LOT of time in C-141s as a kid. Dad and I used to fly MAC (aka AMC) Space-A quite a few times. Was always cool being a kid on those, get to go up in the cockpit a lot and put on the headphones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 8:22:59 AM EDT
[#42]
Lockheed tried to sell C-141s to the cargo airlines back in the early/mid 1960s.
Saw a dozen or so -141s sitting down at old Connally AFB back in the late 1990s. Wish I had a camera.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:17:17 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This makes a lot of sense and answers another question that I have had for over ten years.... On a rotation back from Asscrackastan, I was chatting with a C17 driver at Manas..... he swore that the C17s were already having wing problems (05/06 timeframe)..... I did not even consider that the 141 was never built for a low level mission, but you are absolutely spot on... it was an "airliner" (at least stress/design wise), that was used in a role it was not engineered for...... I wonder if this happened with the C17 as well! Great info in this thread thanks to all! Just like the C-141 the C-17 is a Cold War design, with the idea that wartime ops tempo missions would be from the US to Europe (3950mi McGuire AFB to Ramstein AB). They ended up flying heavy ops tempo missions from the US to Afghanistan (6750mi McGuire AFB to Bagram AB) or US to Iraq (6050mi McGuire AFB to Balad AB). But since the C-17 was built with lessons learned from the C-141 and C-5 wing box design problems, any cracking of C-17 wing boxes are likely going to be repairable "stop drill the cracks and add doubler plates to the structure fixes" and not a "Ground the plane and wait for a replace the wing box program" issue for now. Doesn't meant that the oldest C-17s won't be candidates for wing box replacements when they hit age 30. But when compared to the C-141s having catastrophic wing failures at just eight years old (1975 inflight breakup of 67-006 over England) and the oldest C-17s are over 20 years old with no wing box replacement needed yet, it proves that the design is much more robust than the C-5 or C-141. By comparison the older C-130 E and H models had wing crack problems appear at forty years of age and the A-380 is having wing crack problems before the oldest planes in service are 10 years old. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:29:33 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the C-17 is having wing crack problems it's more likely that they have seen a lifetime's worth of flight hours going back and forth to Asscrackistan in one third the time they were originally expected to see such hours. Just like the C-141 the C-17 is a Cold War design, with the idea that wartime ops tempo missions would be from the US to Europe (3950mi McGuire AFB to Ramstein AB). They ended up flying heavy ops tempo missions from the US to Afghanistan (6750mi McGuire AFB to Bagram AB) or US to Iraq (6050mi McGuire AFB to Balad AB). But since the C-17 was built with lessons learned from the C-141 and C-5 wing box design problems, any cracking of C-17 wing boxes are likely going to be repairable "stop drill the cracks and add doubler plates to the structure fixes" and not a "Ground the plane and wait for a replace the wing box program" issue for now. Doesn't meant that the oldest C-17s won't be candidates for wing box replacements when they hit age 30. But when compared to the C-141s having catastrophic wing failures at just eight years old (1975 inflight breakup of 67-006 over England) and the oldest C-17s are over 20 years old with no wing box replacement needed yet, it proves that the design is much more robust than the C-5 or C-141. By comparison the older C-130 E and H models had wing crack problems appear at forty years of age and the A-380 is having wing crack problems before the oldest planes in service are 10 years old. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This makes a lot of sense and answers another question that I have had for over ten years.... On a rotation back from Asscrackastan, I was chatting with a C17 driver at Manas..... he swore that the C17s were already having wing problems (05/06 timeframe)..... I did not even consider that the 141 was never built for a low level mission, but you are absolutely spot on... it was an "airliner" (at least stress/design wise), that was used in a role it was not engineered for...... I wonder if this happened with the C17 as well! Great info in this thread thanks to all! Just like the C-141 the C-17 is a Cold War design, with the idea that wartime ops tempo missions would be from the US to Europe (3950mi McGuire AFB to Ramstein AB). They ended up flying heavy ops tempo missions from the US to Afghanistan (6750mi McGuire AFB to Bagram AB) or US to Iraq (6050mi McGuire AFB to Balad AB). But since the C-17 was built with lessons learned from the C-141 and C-5 wing box design problems, any cracking of C-17 wing boxes are likely going to be repairable "stop drill the cracks and add doubler plates to the structure fixes" and not a "Ground the plane and wait for a replace the wing box program" issue for now. Doesn't meant that the oldest C-17s won't be candidates for wing box replacements when they hit age 30. But when compared to the C-141s having catastrophic wing failures at just eight years old (1975 inflight breakup of 67-006 over England) and the oldest C-17s are over 20 years old with no wing box replacement needed yet, it proves that the design is much more robust than the C-5 or C-141. By comparison the older C-130 E and H models had wing crack problems appear at forty years of age and the A-380 is having wing crack problems before the oldest planes in service are 10 years old. 
We had E models with wing cracks, with three different levels of flight restrictions, when I was at LR in the mid- and late-80s, and IIRC our birds were year modeled between 61 and 70. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:35:11 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the C-17 is having wing crack problems it's more likely that they have seen a lifetime's worth of flight hours going back and forth to Asscrackistan in one third the time they were originally expected to see such hours. Just like the C-141 the C-17 is a Cold War design, with the idea that wartime ops tempo missions would be from the US to Europe (3950mi McGuire AFB to Ramstein AB). They ended up flying heavy ops tempo missions from the US to Afghanistan (6750mi McGuire AFB to Bagram AB) or US to Iraq (6050mi McGuire AFB to Balad AB). But since the C-17 was built with lessons learned from the C-141 and C-5 wing box design problems, any cracking of C-17 wing boxes are likely going to be repairable "stop drill the cracks and add doubler plates to the structure fixes" and not a "Ground the plane and wait for a replace the wing box program" issue for now. Doesn't meant that the oldest C-17s won't be candidates for wing box replacements when they hit age 30. But when compared to the C-141s having catastrophic wing failures at just eight years old (1975 inflight breakup of 67-006 over England) and the oldest C-17s are over 20 years old with no wing box replacement needed yet, it proves that the design is much more robust than the C-5 or C-141. By comparison the older C-130 E and H models had wing crack problems appear at forty years of age and the A-380 is having wing crack problems before the oldest planes in service are 10 years old. Maybe they got it right going with the McDonnell-Douglas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:37:53 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We had E models with wing cracks, with three different levels of flight restrictions, when I was at LR in the mid- and late-80s, and IIRC our birds were year modeled between 61 and 70. Wing box changes are a fact of life when you keep tactical planes for 40 to 60 years. The j has the same box, but no externals... yet the lockheed engineers say the j is softer on boxes. I dont get that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:52:26 PM EDT
[#47]
I was in Lajes in the 1990's fueling our Herk..next to us a 141 had an inboard wing tank collapse.
It was a mess. She sat there a long, long, time..Don't know what happened to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:53:29 PM EDT
[#48]
We were at a monthly flying safety meeting at Norton AFB in SoCal right after the first wing cracks were discovered. The head of maintenance was standing up telling us about it and answering questions. One guy asked about catastrophic wing failure in flight because of the cracks. The maintenance chief said "There is zero probability of that happening'. Just as he finished the sentence, we had an earthquake and everyone dove under the tables. A buddy looked at me and said, Even God doesn't believe him!"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:54:28 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still a thing. Wing box changes are a fact of life when you keep tactical planes for 40 to 60 years. The j has the same box, but no externals... yet the lockheed engineers say the j is softer on boxes. I dont get that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We had E models with wing cracks, with three different levels of flight restrictions, when I was at LR in the mid- and late-80s, and IIRC our birds were year modeled between 61 and 70. Wing box changes are a fact of life when you keep tactical planes for 40 to 60 years. The j has the same box, but no externals... yet the lockheed engineers say the j is softer on boxes. I dont get that. The new boxes were supposed to be an upgrade, to last longer. Was there a second round of box changes on the E's? I thought they had all gone to the boneyard/ sold shortly after I left, except for some special airframes? As for the J's... from what I was told, less loading on the wing without the externals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2017 2:56:43 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still a thing. Wing box changes are a fact of life when you keep tactical planes for 40 to 60 years. The j has the same box, but no externals... yet the lockheed engineers say the j is softer on boxes. I dont get that. 
We were told the new motor/ prop combo transferred less unused torque thru the airframe than the T56, fwiw. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
