Back to Squawk list

Engine Drops Out of B-52 During Training at Minot Air Force Base

Übermittelt
 
MINOT AIR FORCE BASE, N.D. — An engine dropped out of a B-52 bomber during a training flight on Wednesday, the Air Force has confirmed following questions from Defense News. (www.defensenews.com) Mehr...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


zcolescott
Zachary Colescott 34
Yup...they had to make the dreaded seven engine approach back into the airport!
ToddBaldwin3
Todd Baldwin 3
Sorry about that Zach, I should have scrolled down before making the same comment.
crk112
crk112 1
lol we have all been waiting a very long time for that one
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 9
R.N.: "And that, gentlemen, is how we drop ordinance"....E.W.O.: "But sir, we didn't have any ordinance loaded for this flight"
MrMopar
Aaron Shipley 8
As the engine maintenance guy was leaving work one day, he reached into his pocket and said to himself, "I wonder what this cotter pin goes to?"
skylab72
skylab72 -4
Cotter pins are for ground-based equipment. Engine retention nuts and bolts should be secured with safety wire.
lenshilt
Leonard Shilton 3
I think that was supposed to be a joke, skylab72.
skylab72
skylab72 2
Oh, sorry. Acft Mechs get a little literal...
AZAFVET
Wayne Fox 7
Better than losing the entire airplane. During my stint at Minot, we lost a B52 and a KC135 not from maintenance problems but due to pilot error.
jbsimms
James Simms 3
If I remember reading abt the KC-135, the LTC (?) was just days from retirement when it went down
AZAFVET
Wayne Fox 3
Yes
From Wikipedia
A KC-135A tanker (AF Ser. No. 58-0026)[3] from March AFB crashed shortly after takeoff from Minot AFB on 17 January 1968, killing 12 of the 13 on board.[4] Major General Charles M. Eisenhart, vice commander of the Fifteenth Air Force, was at the controls and over-rotated at takeoff in low visibility, inducing a stall. The survivor, a steward, was badly burned and later succumbed.[5] On a staff visit from March AFB, the aircraft was departing for Glasgow AFB, Montana.[4]

In the early hours of 4 October 1968, a Minot B-52H (AF Ser. No. 60-0027)[6] was on approach, completing an overnight training mission with six aboard. It lost power to four engines and crashed in a field eight miles (13 km) east, with four fatalities and two survivors.[7][8] Among the dead was a Lieutenant Colonel just days from retirement and the squadron clerk, on his first B-52 orientation ride.[6]

Col Eisenhart proceeded to takeoff against the advice of the tower (It was a rather odd, foggy day in January (Thaw?). The big shot didn't want to wait for the weather to clear. I remember it well because they crashed on base.

Similarly, the Pilot of the B52 was a desk jockey, getting his flight hours in bringing the clerk along on the ride. The radar gunner, got up to show the clerk, in the EWO seat, how to use the e seat and never was able to get out
airclaxon1
Paul Claxon 1
Always blame it on Pilot error......LOL

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

rapidwolve
rapidwolve 3
And so is your reply irrelevant
wcraycroft
Warren Craycroft 3
Wow. You can't make this stuff up. Glad the crew got it down with just dirty laundry, no one on the ground hurt, and we can all chuckle about it. Could have been a real tragedy.
nk4091
Neil Klapthor 3
The Air Force is now saying the engine didn't just drop off the aircraft but, according to AF Secretary Deborah Lee James it was a catastrophic failure of the engine, "Literally, I'm told, it conceivably disintegrated and, upon disintegration, came out of the aircraft." The debris is believed to be "at the bottom of a riverbed". They also believe it is "a one-off" and not a fleet-wide problem. They stayed airborne to burn off fuel before landing so fortunately it was not an impending disaster type emergency. Still scary enough.
nk4091
Neil Klapthor 2
Love how the article says the pilot declared an in-flight emergency when he "discovered" and engine was gone..."Hey Co, didn't we have four of those on the left wing when we took off?"
A6SEA
Bill Butler 2
We had to chuckle one evening as we were putting along in our little A6 and we heard a MayDay from a B52.
They had lost an engine (not literally like this one) and had to get on the ground ASAP.
ToddBaldwin3
Todd Baldwin 3
The dreaded seven engine approach.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
I wonder if the investigation report will be public at some point.
If it wasn't fatigue, someone may well lose their Mr. Goodwrench badge.
wecrooker2
William Crooker 2
It was a training mission and a good one at that. Lateral trim quick !
jbsimms
James Simms 1
"Hey...while we're up here, let's practice our engine out techniques......"
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 5
That brings a whole new meaning to "losing an engine."
btweston
btweston -2
Do you do bar mitzvas?
A6SEA
Bill Butler 2
OK. Now we can all stop being silly. That really could have been catastrophic.
tcmarks
Tim Marks 2
Lots of critical posts and not enough concern for the aircrew. Thank God they did not experience a catastrophic airframe failure as a result of the separation of the engine and made it back to base safely. This is a 60 year old aircraft still being asked to serve its country and doing a fine job for its age, but after this many years of flight cycling some things are bound to fail. Thus the reason to push the B-21 and get a replacement on the line for these old workhorses.

BTW, each engine is mounted individually to the pylon, they are not connected together. It only looks that way from the shape of the nacelle.
ToddBaldwin3
Todd Baldwin 3
You have a very good point. I did not express concern for the crew because of this line from the article "...pilots were able to land the aircraft safely without any injury to the five personnel on board."
tcmarks
Tim Marks 1
The engine separating from the pylon left live electrical connections exposed, likely a fuel leak and may have damaged the sister engine when the nacelle came apart/fell off. Depending upon which nacelle came apart, the potential for a flight control surface or spar damage was a real possibility. This event was not just an engine out approach scenario and there was real risk of losing the airframe and possibly a flight crew.
ToddBaldwin3
Todd Baldwin 5
I know that. I've spent plenty of time in the BUFF. I'm sure it was rather intense at the time and pucker factor was quite high. I've had quite a few tense moments myself. The point I was making, was that it did turn out well, no one was injured, they managed to keep their landings equal to the their take offs.
744pnf
744pnf 1
B-21, $500mil per copy...2010 $'s
picturetaker
Christian Parada 1
Aren't the engines connected to each other?
AZAFVET
Wayne Fox 5
There are two engines per nacelle and four nacelles. Each engine is attached to the plane via bolts just as in passenger aircraft.
tking2097
tking2097 4
Err, most of the engines were attached to the plane via bolts?
picturetaker
Christian Parada 1
What I mean is it looks as if 1 engine is connected to the engine directly next to it. So how can just 1 fall off? If 1 falls off, wouldn't the engine connected to it fall too? Or are they not actually connected to each other?
pclifton
Philip Clifton 1
Well, clearly some connectors in this plane didn't function correctly, whether they were connectors between engines or between an engine and the airframe.
btweston
btweston -2
Doesn't look like it.
TEAMERICA
Dan Egelhoff 0
Besides a few fuel and electrical connections (non-structural) there are only 3 bolts holding each engine to the airframe. Due to budget cutbacks, those bolts are supplied by the lowest bidder.
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
Whereas a older Volkswagen Beetle had 4. Just saying.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
joel...Me thinks he forgets when this bird was made
skylab72
skylab72 1
Nope, just to the nacelle frame. I would be curious to see the cowling damage sustained as the engine departed...
raymondlotito
Ray Lotito 1
I wouldn't want to be the Crew Chief on that plane; or the engines shop. (gulp!)
jordanabrown
Alan Brown 1
I wonder if the nacelle opened or if it tore out of the nacelle?
jbsimms
James Simms 1
"Hey Boss, the power's down & I'm getting readings for only seven engines. Sure you ordered up enough JP?"
17dec1903
17dec1903 1
This is such a poorly-worded headline. Doesn't an engine "dropping out" of a bomber sound like something being released from the bomb bay? Shouldn't the headline read "engine drops off a B-52...?"
sailsomsen
Hugh Somsen 1
You didn't know, a B52 carries an auxiliary engine in the Bombay.?
sailsomsen
Hugh Somsen 1
Grrr, auto-correct. Bomb Bay.....
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
LOL...good thing as USAF may carry a spare engine or 2 in Bombay.
billtanksley
Bill Tanksley 0
Good catch! Poor english grammer strikes the press yet again! I was beginning to wonder if they were carrying the engine in the bomb bay and someone let it go. I will be a 7 engine approach in a B-52 is as much fun as any other engine-out approach on a multi-engine jet. Glad everyone is safe.
17dec1903
17dec1903 1
That's what I thought initially as well: That they were carrying an engine and it somehow got dropped from the bomb bay. That would be worse than the "dreaded 7-engine approach," IMO.
bamaham93
Jacob McGowin 1
"Captain, engine 3 is missing!" I'll bet that isn't heard very often these days!
btweston
btweston -6
Would have been funnier if you had said 6 or 7, but I guess we're all here for a reason.
btweston
btweston -5
Wouldn't have happened if Donald Trump was the pilot.
joelwiley
joel wiley 8
Of course not, he would have traded it for a TU-95 before flying.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 2
LOL..good comeback joel...
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
You think part of the reason we have 60 year old bombers is that we don't want to give the impression we plan to bomb the hell out of somebody ILO of smart bombs?
joelwiley
joel wiley 4
Other parts of the reason include that it is in inventory and it can do the mission.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Can do it well if kept up. There has been wings fall off on the ground just from fuel load.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 0
He would have written off the airframe before leaving the tarmac while Tweeting away..
AWAAlum
AWAAlum -2
An off-topic aside-please forgive: Does it bother anyone other than me that the u.s. president-elect communicates his views via Twitter?
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
It scares the H^*& out of me. At least a loose cannon can be expected to roll down hill. But having National Command Authority setting international policy in 140 characters or less? You can't even put the 2nd Amendment verbatim into a tweet.
paulgilpin1953
paul gilpin 1
you prefer to receive you news via the filter that is MSM?
brian williams, is that you posting as joel?
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
I prefer my news from sources that do fact checking, verification and use one of the standard style guides. Then I do my own filtering thru a customized grain-o-salt meter. Do you have a preference?
nk4091
Neil Klapthor -1
He's not the President yet. His Twitter comments are just that, comments, albeit sometimes very pointed comments...he can't set policy until he is sworn in and he certainly can't set policy via Twitter. Take a breath, or two, people.
joelwiley
joel wiley 5
Your reassurance reassures me not in the slightest. This is getting well off topic. A better venue for such a discussion is at:
http://discussions.flightaware.com/general/the-banter-thread-t4618.html?hilit=banter%20thread&start=5500
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Ooops - you're right. Sorryyyyy Joel.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 3
I'm not sure I understand - is it your theory that after he's sworn in he's going to change his way?
PS - Thanks for the reminder to breathe ... that could have been disastrous.
nk4091
Neil Klapthor -2
I have no theory about anything. I was just commenting on the assertions that the "National Command Authority setting international policy" via Twitter were specious. How can anyone say he's setting policy when he's not the President yet? I have no idea if he will "change his way" after he is sworn in but my guess is he will still use Twitter...to what degree, who knows? My point was that he can't set policy using Twitter. Glad you're still breathing!
joelwiley
joel wiley 4
Well some do feel that he is doing that. Among others are:

Republic of China
Peoples Republic of China
Republic of Korea
Democratic People's Repubic of Korea
State of Israel
for starters.

If they feel he has done so using twitter and respond to that then he has, in fact, done just that.
paulgilpin1953
paul gilpin 2
why not ask the people of syria, libya, tunisa, egypt?
they didn't get news about what was going to happen their country until MSM informed us.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 2
He has become the president before becoming president.
rapidwolve
rapidwolve 1
Maybe you best tell that to those who "follow" him...why is it stocks of those companies he "belittled", drop like a rock?...perhaps he best clean his own closet and family closets first for "Made In America"
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
No. Better than media spinning it.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
I'm not referring to him communicating with citizens, rather with other governments.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
We are in the loop! Lol
KineticRider
Randy Marco -6
Don't talk like a loon. The only media spinning news is Faux News, Breitbart, alt right news sources et al.

How about READING and educating yourself.
skylab72
skylab72 2
Sorry, all media "spins" the news. The whole right v Left is a contrived dichotomy wherein the two official "parties" can each share half of the better answers then swap access to the seats of power every few years. Wake up.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
A tad harsh.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -7
Reality IS harsh!!!
skylab72
skylab72 -1
Harsh? You can't handle harsh. The whole right v Left is a contrived dichotomy wherein the two official "parties" can each share half of the better answers then swap access to the seats of power every few years. You act like sheep act.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
If you paid attention you would see that even Fox can't repeat what Trump has said accurately.
That you start off by calling names says a lot.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

AWAAlum
AWAAlum 4
Randy, Randy, Randy. Don't make me change my opinion that we're all mature adults here, behaving in a respectful adult manner..
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
We're not. Lol.
How's the weather in Seattle?
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
Pretty typical for winter. A lot of rain. But I'll take it. It's better than the ice and snow we had in Chicago.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Yep. Chicago not on my mind. I'm headin for Florida next week. Golf, muscle car auction, and heat. At least you are warmed by the ocean and you have wine.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

HarryMetz
Harry Metz 0
Snowflake, everything you have said is of the complete far left wing agenda.
bigheadbob
bob reeves -2
your an idiot
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 -1
That's profound but kind.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 0
If you don't watch Fox you don't know what they say. So you are a liar.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 -1
Hell w/ the 52's. We need new VIP planes. 😀
MarkEbben
Mark Ebben 0
Back in 1988, P&W proposed a deal to re-engine with the 2037,
Iupton05
I sometimes lose my keys, why can´t the plane lose an engine :-)
ah6oy
Jim DeTour 0
Add a new procedure of one engine out of the ballpark for landing. Luckily it didn't take out and major controls.
sanukjim
James Wilson Jr -2
Definitely not The Great SAC anymore!Where were their QC people ?
nk4091
Neil Klapthor 2
Since there's absolutely no indication of what caused the engine to fall off, it's not a good idea to ask "Where were their QC people?" As Forrest Gump famously said "$#!t happens", and it can happen despite the best efforts of aircraft maintenance personnel who are wrestling a 50+ year old beast. I have 3000 hours in the BUFF as navigator and radar navigator (weapons operator) and can attest to that fact. Certainly, it could have been a maintenance issue, or it could have been bolt fatigue, or an explosion, or a bird strike, or who knows what? Speculation before any facts are known is worthless and, to me, is especially inappropriate when it questions the competency of very hard working BUFF maintenance folks.
BTW, it hasn't been "The Great SAC" for quite a while now. SAC became Strategic Command in, I think, 1992 and came under Air Combat Command (along with TAC). In 2009, the BUFFs and ICBMs were organized under the Air Force Global Strike Command....or something like that. Anyway, the old SAC is no more
wecrooker2
William Crooker 1
How did the AC write it up in the flight incident reports ? No readings with #_ Engine Displays. Also, High Fuel Flow from wing tanks. One wing seems to have more lift too.
ToddBaldwin3
Todd Baldwin 1
That is true. Certainly not the SAC I served in (I was Sacumcized)
btweston
btweston -4
That was my stage name in the 70s
randallkimm
Randall Kimm -1
This event changes the real meaning behind the acronym BUFF.

Anmelden

Haben Sie kein Konto? Jetzt (kostenlos) registrieren für kundenspezifische Funktionen, Flugbenachrichtigungen und vieles mehr!