Marine Corps F-35 Caught Fire During Training Flight

Military aircraft accidents/mishaps.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8399
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 00:42

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016 ... light.html

Military.com | Nov 07, 2016 | by Hope Hodge Seck
The Marine Corps is investigating after an F-35B Joint Strike Fighter based out of Beaufort, South Carolina, recently caught fire in mid-air, Military.com has learned.

The incident happened Oct. 27 at Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501, a fleet replacement squadron for the Marine Corps consisting of 20 F-35B aircraft. One of the aircraft experienced a fire in the weapons bay while conducting a training mission over Beaufort, 1st Lt. John Roberts, a spokesman for 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, told Military.com.

"The aircraft landed safely and there were no injuries sustained," he said. "An investigation is ongoing and we will provide updates as they are available."

No estimate of damage caused by the fire was available. The incident was listed by the Naval Safety Center as a Class A mishap, meaning damage totalled $2 million or more on the $100 million aircraft.

The squadron didn't observe any kind of grounding or operational pause as a result of the mishap, Roberts said.

The F-35 program has suffered several setbacks due to aircraft catching fire, though previous incidents involved the Air Force's F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant.

In June 2014, an F-35A caught fire upon takeoff at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, prompting the Defense Department to ground the entire F-35 fleet as it investigated the incident. This move forced the Marine Corps to postpone what was to have been the F-35B's international debut at the Farnborough International Airshow that summer.

The damage to the aircraft in that incident came to more than $50 million and was determined to have been caused by a rotor arm that detached and came through the aircraft's upper fuselage, cutting fuel and hydraulic lines in its trajectory.

More recently, in September, an F-35A from the 61st Fighter Squadron caught fire in the aft section of the aircraft after its engine was started, forcing the pilot to exit the aircraft.

In an unrelated issue, the Air Force grounded 15 F-35As the same month due to failing coolant tube insulation.

For the Marine Corps, this incident comes at a crucial time for the aircraft, as the first operational F-35B squadron, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121, prepares to forward-base from Yuma, Arizona to Japan in January, ahead of a sea deployment in the Pacific early the following year. The aircraft is now completing its third and final round of at-sea developmental tests aboard the amphibious assault ship USS America off the coast of San Diego, and is expected to complete them later this month.

-- Hope Hodge Seck can be reached at hope.seck@military.com. Follow her on Twitter at @HopeSeck.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5453
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 01:14

"The F-35 program has suffered several setbacks due to aircraft catching fire, though previous incidents involved the Air Force's F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant."

:roll: These "journalists" should really compare the F-35 to other aircraft at this point in their development. They would be surprised.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8399
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 04:52

sferrin wrote: :roll: These "journalists" should really compare the F-35 to other aircraft at this point in their development. They would be surprised.


The term "lawn dart" comes to mind :doh:
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 853
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 06:46

Even with the issues like this popping up the F-35's safety and performance record is amazing, not a single crash, and no pilot injury or death. All of the teen series had crashed within there first 10 years and i believe they had all had a pilot death as well (dunno about the F/a-18).
Offline

beepa

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 246
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2007, 22:36
  • Location: Aust.

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 07:14

The fire was in the weapons bay? If that happened during vertical landing with the doors open it may not have had such a happy ending.
Shouldn't this post be in the F35 Forum?
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 511
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 07:59

geforcerfx wrote:Even with the issues like this popping up the F-35's safety and performance record is amazing, not a single crash, and no pilot injury or death. All of the teen series had crashed within there first 10 years and i believe they had all had a pilot death as well (dunno about the F/a-18).


The Hornet definitely did……..could have been one before this during the first couple years, but the first I am aware of is the very first (of many) F/A-18 planing link failures. Ended up in the ditch off the side of RWY 24 at Miramar, upside down, and drowned in a pool of water while the ARFF guys who had never seen a Hornet before tried to figure out what to do……or so the story goes anyway. Guy flying it had been one of the Libyan Fitter killers. In spite of literally dozens of modifications and fixes to the main landing gear assembly, this problem still plagues the F/A-18A-D community 30+ years later.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-04/local/me-470_1_landing-gear
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 555
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 14:37

If no aircraft were grounded, is it possible that something else caught fire, e.g. ACMI pod?
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 853
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 15:28

35_aoa wrote:The Hornet definitely did……..could have been one before this during the first couple years, but the first I am aware of is the very first (of many) F/A-18 planing link failures. Ended up in the ditch off the side of RWY 24 at Miramar, upside down, and drowned in a pool of water while the ARFF guys who had never seen a Hornet before tried to figure out what to do……or so the story goes anyway. Guy flying it had been one of the Libyan Fitter killers. In spite of literally dozens of modifications and fixes to the main landing gear assembly, this problem still plagues the F/A-18A-D community 30+ years later.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-04/local/me-470_1_landing-gear


Thank You, I couldn't find a list of accidents that went back further then the 90's for the F/a-18 family. I remember reading about all the tail structure problems they had in the early days, so I figured one had crashed for sure, just didn't know if a pilot was loss in the early crashes with the hornets. Had never heard about landing gear issues with the hornet.
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1353
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 20:27

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... re-431286/

The cause of the weapons bay fire is still not specified, but the event did also affect the IPP and a hydraulics system. Maybe the IPP started the fire, or maybe a hydraulic leak and/or chaffed wire caused a fire in the weapons bay that starved the IPP of hydraulics, or perhaps the fire just destroyed a hydraulics line and either wiring, PAO or fuel line that the IPP uses.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8399
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 20:28

1st Lt. John Roberts, a spokesman for 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, told USNI News today that the Marine Corps had not yet determined the actual cost of the damage. If it does exceed the $2 million threshold, it would be the first Class A mishap ever for the Marines’ variant of the .

Roberts told USNI News that “at this point there’s nothing in the works, nothing being planned as far as a fleet wide stand-down or impact on training” for either the training squadron or the rest of thefleet. The Marine Corps has two operational squadrons, as well as Marines flying operational and developmental test planes. Several organizations are investigating various aspects of the incident, and Roberts could not say how long the investigation might take.

More at the jump

https://news.usni.org/2016/11/08/-in-tr ... on-ongoing
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 671
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post08 Nov 2016, 22:04

SpudmanWP wrote:
1st Lt. John Roberts, a spokesman for 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing, told USNI News today that the Marine Corps had not yet determined the actual cost of the damage. If it does exceed the $2 million threshold, it would be the first Class A mishap ever for the Marines’ variant of the .

Roberts told USNI News that “at this point there’s nothing in the works, nothing being planned as far as a fleet wide stand-down or impact on training” for either the training squadron or the rest of thefleet. The Marine Corps has two operational squadrons, as well as Marines flying operational and developmental test planes. Several organizations are investigating various aspects of the incident, and Roberts could not say how long the investigation might take.

More at the jump

https://news.usni.org/2016/11/08/-in-tr ... on-ongoing


It's been reported as a class A.

The incident was listed by the Naval Safety Center as a "Class A Mishap" — the most serious mishap class — which means that there was $2 million or more in damage. The Safety Center's report said the fire occurred in the aircraft's weapons bay on Oct. 27, and was followed by an "uneventful landing."
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 00:22

sferrin wrote:"The F-35 program has suffered several setbacks due to aircraft catching fire, though previous incidents involved the Air Force's F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant."

:roll: These "journalists" should really compare the F-35 to other aircraft at this point in their development. They would be surprised.


Yes! I agree. Journalists should compare the F-35 to other aircraft at similar periods in there development.
F15 - Dec 1969 Selected and Funded - operational 1976 - 7years - 384 built and operational by 1979.
F35 - October 2001 Selected and Funded - how many partly operational 2016 ???? - 15years.

Face the facts. No matter how effective the F35 ends up in 20?? its development has been a disaster.
Airforces all around the world waiting and hoping and adopting interim replacements and upgrades.
Now finally facing reality we have the US Airforce and Navy in desperation buying or wanting to buy new 4th Gen or upgrade 4th Gen aircraft to fil the gap until 20??
The US also considering two new CAS aircraft and upgrading and considering how to extend the life of the A10.
Come 2040/50 and there still will be upgraded and new 4th Gen flying all around the world.
Since when was that the plan. The F35 was to replace them all.
So much for the predictions of the "Penthouse Dwellers."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8399
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 00:36

Move advanced fighters take longer to develop, especially in the middle of an economic downturn, than they did in the 1970s. Computers & advanced integrated avionics are a big chunk of that. Add that to the increased scrutiny & attention to detail that today's development entails and you begin to understand why it take this long.

Compare the F-35 to the F-22, Rafale, or Eurofighter and they all took just as long.

btw, The F-35 is only 5 years late.

Now finally facing reality we have the US Airforce and Navy in desperation buying or wanting to buy new 4th Gen or upgrade 4th Gen aircraft to fil the gap until 20??

No they are not "desperate" to or buying any new 4th gen assets. Boeing has made some small success in getting some congressmen to add a few frames to the budget, but that is short-lived and not being required by the DoD. The only reason the USN has a shortfall is they have not properly planned for the gap as they were spending all their money on ships.

Come 2040/50 and there still will be upgraded and new 4th Gen flying all around the world.
Since when was that the plan. The F35 was to replace them all.

Only updated F-15s will be flying then and the F-35 was not designed to replace them. They were supposed to be replaced by the F-22 which got cut off at 187 thereby forcing the upgrades to the F-15s.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 07:18

From an updated Mishap summary:
FIRE WPN BAY R, IPP FAIL, HYD FAIL B in the landing pattern.

Apparently, the IPP runs for certain in-flight emergencies, including hydraulic failures.

Having a IPP fail and HYD B fail together, and the jet described as "Uknown" damage doesn't sound good.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 853
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 07:41

rkap wrote:
Yes! I agree. Journalists should compare the F-35 to other aircraft at similar periods in there development.
F15 - Dec 1969 Selected and Funded - operational 1976 - 7years - 384 built and operational by 1979.
F35 - October 2001 Selected and Funded - how many partly operational 2016 ???? - 15years.

Face the facts. No matter how effective the F35 ends up in 20?? its development has been a disaster.
Airforces all around the world waiting and hoping and adopting interim replacements and upgrades.
Now finally facing reality we have the US Airforce and Navy in desperation buying or wanting to buy new 4th Gen or upgrade 4th Gen aircraft to fil the gap until 20??
The US also considering two new CAS aircraft and upgrading and considering how to extend the life of the A10.
Come 2040/50 and there still will be upgraded and new 4th Gen flying all around the world.
Since when was that the plan. The F35 was to replace them all.
So much for the predictions of the "Penthouse Dwellers."


Yeah 9 years and the F-15's had only crashed 6 times with 3 or 4 pilots killed, great comparison. By 1979 how many of those F-15 had landed vertically? Or taken off from a aircraft carrier? If your gonna compare the F-35 to aircraft then you have to compare it to aircraft built with similar technology, otherwise you can do this. The P-51 was ordered in march 1940 by the RAF. It went operational in 1942 and had over 1300 aircraft flying in the RAF by 1943, the F-15's development was a failure.
Next

Return to Mishaps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests