Marine Corps' "Widow-Maker": Harrier Attack Jet (LA Times hit piece)

Yahoo Press Release (LA Times) ^ | Dec. 13, 2002

[hchutch]

What percentage of accidents are the result of pilot error?

[WhiskeyPapa]

A buddy of mine from Sea Duty was later an air traffic controller at Cherry Point. He told me about this colonel (brigadier general selectee) who got in trouble in a Harrier and was killed right over the active runway. They could see him from the tower. Per the tape, Bill said, the tower said "eject!" 13 times before the colonel augered in. That was about 1982.

Walt

[MCH]

It's been my understanding that all the Harriers will eventually be replaced by JSFs anyway. Anyone know what the upgrade timeframe looks like?

[WhiskeyPapa]

The technology is sound. Mistakes commited by four Osprey pilots has been the major problem.

Not again!

There are still a lot of problems with the technology and many have suggested that even if the thing worked as advertised, it is not suitable for the vertical envelopment role.

Walt

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

That technique is called VIFFing; Vectoring In Forward Flight. If I recall correctly, all the movable exhaust nozzles, four on the Harrier II, are linked, so if one is moved they all move.

[Poohbah]

A lot. Mostly in transition to/from vertical flight.

[Poohbah]

Thirteen eject calls, and the guy did nothing?

Good grief, why couldn't he have bit it at Pensacola, before he sired any offspring?

[WhiskeyPapa]

I think the rap on the Harrier is that it doesn't have particularly good "legs" and it typically doesn't carry a very big load of bombs. The main reason to buy Harriers, as opposed to say, A-6's, was that your air bases might be eliminated, and the Harriers -could- be based on a big parking lot say, or the autobahn.

The Viffing is neat and may help you dogfight, but if the bad guys don't play your game that may not matter. Viffing to dodge missiles is a good thing, no doubt about it.

I don't know the loss rate in Desert Storm was. I saw myself one coming back to King Abdul Aziz with a big hole in the vertical stabilizer.

Walt

[Axenolith]

Balloons on tethers should be the only way man should leap from this earth, and then not to high for there may be insufficient phlogisten to sustain their lives...

[hchutch]

I wouldn't be surprised.

Still, it's got its uses. A nice way to deploy something forward, and the AV-8B+ has a decent air-to-air capability. This looks like a hit piece in the L.A. Times, IMHO.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Thirteen eject calls, and the guy did nothing?

Good grief, why couldn't he have bit it at Pensacola, before he sired any offspring?

Bill suggested that he was maybe too busy doing whatever it is brigadier general selectees do to stay current in the aircraft.

If you think about it, you can say "eject!" 13 times -really- fast.

Walt

[Poohbah]

It's been my experience that if you say "EJECT EJECT EJECT," the pilot's outta there before anyone else can say "Huh?"

[The_Victor]

The LA Times is definitely up to something with this piece. I wonder about the timing (are there any Osprey return to flight trials or JSF acceptance reviews in the next month?).

[Gunrunner2]

Over all, all aircraft and all services. . .about 80% are pilot error.

[WhiskeyPapa]

It's been my experience that if you say "EJECT EJECT EJECT," the pilot's outta there before anyone else can say "Huh?"

That makes sense to me. I think one point to Bill's story was that this guy --didn't-- eject. I want to say he'd gotten the bird upside down somehow also. I make be misremembering that.

You're a lot more conversant with all this than I am. I saw the Kara Hultgren tape recently. You can hear the LSO (I guess) saying, "Power, power, power", then he switches to saying "Eject! EJECT!" and the bird was already hitting the water.

The RIO got out and she was killed as I recall. That is not much margin for error, that is for sure.

Walt

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

There are still a lot of problems with the technology

Not again with your generalizations. Give us specifics.

By the way you didn't read anything in the media about the MV-22 that flew nonstop, unrefueled, on October 12th from Amarillo to Pax River at altitudes up to 15,000 feet and speeds up to 300 knots, did you? After the flight the crew stated that the aircraft performed flawlessly. Try doing that in a Super Stallion or Sea Knight.

[blackdog]

LOL!

One thing I've always wondered was, why a VTOL fighter jet?

A fighter cannot pick up troops, only provide cover and napalm. A fighter in such a role needs to get there fast, the Harrier is not fast enough. What exactly is a VTOL fighter going to do in the field with VTOL capabilities? I think the Brits use it because of their limited realestate in England which frowns on having a few dozen 15,000' long runways taking up the countryside. A fighter craft needs a constant supply of fuel and weapons. Unless fuel trucks and bomb delivery trucks are roaming the edges of the battle zone, parked in shopping malls and Staples, I don't see how VTOL is practical or beneficial in a fighter platform?

Troop transport, you bet! That is the platform for needing a VTOL. We aint there yet. Those big monster turboprops on the Osprey scare the living hell out of me. Propellers and enemy fire do not mix well. But if my sorry ass position is being over-run by Abdullah mortaring Sarrin at me, I'll be glad to see anything that can extract me from terra firma.

[WhiskeyPapa]

There are still a lot of problems with the technology

Not again with your generalizations. Give us specifics.

The same way you did when you blamed the pilots and not the aircraft?

The thing has been in development a LONG time. It speaks for itself.

People can search "Osprey" or "V-22" and they'll see all our ranting from before.

Walt

[WhiskeyPapa]

By the way you didn't read anything in the media about the MV-22 that flew nonstop, unrefueled, on October 12th from Amarillo to Pax River at altitudes up to 15,000 feet and speeds up to 300 knots, did you? After the flight the crew stated that the aircraft performed flawlessly. Try doing that in a Super Stallion or Sea Knight.

Three hundred knots. How fast is a Cobra? Seriously now. A straight, simple answer would be nice.

Walt

[Gunrunner2]

What?

More details please.

13 times?

Towers don't make the call to eject. . .they are not in a position to know what is happening in the cockpit and how the aircraft is performing. They can watch but they can't make the call to eject.

It is rare even for another pilot in the same flight to call for an ejection of another pilot. Unless a pilot was watching a complete out of control situation, there is no way he would make a call to eject, and if he was watching a complete out of control situation then there would be no time for 13 calls for ejection.

I suspect that your friend was relaying some story from a friend that heard from a friend, that heard about something, sometime. . .and it is always something bad about a) a pilot, and b) an officer (the more senior, the better).

Tower controller are not pilots. They don't know what happens in a cockpit and have no clue about what is happening in flight and do not have the judgment or authority to call for ejection.