Navy jet rolls into S.D. Bay on landing

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 10:32

[ QUOTE ]

By David E. Graham
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
August 27, 2004

A Navy fighter jet lay in San Diego Bay after missing its landing last night at North Island Naval Air Station. The pilot ejected before the jet hit the water.

A Navy fighter jet ended up in San Diego Bay last night after it ran out of runway while landing at North Island Naval Air Station.

The lone pilot ejected before the plane hit the water, and he ended up in the bay and was pulled from the water, officials said. The pilot, apparently uninjured, told rescuers his brakes failed.

The plane, an F/A-18C Hornet from a carrier off the coast, was partially submerged in the bay last night.

"The pilot was unable to stop the aircraft and ended up just beyond the runway," said Cmdr. Ed Buclatin, a spokesman for Naval Air Forces.

He was taken to San Diego Naval Medical Center, where he seemed in good condition, Buclatin said.

The nickname "Lucky" was painted on the side of the plane by the cockpit.

U.S. Coast Guard and San Diego Harbor Police helped rescue the pilot.

The plane, in Strike Fighter Squadron 151 with the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, had flown from the ship to North Island, Buclatin said.

The Lincoln is now off the coast. Buclatin said he did not know why the Hornet had come to North Island.

In March, two military planes crashed in the county.

On March 10, a Marine UC-35D Cessna jet went down at Miramar Marine Air Station when it was trying to land. Four Marines died.

On March 29, a Navy F-14 Tomcat, from Oceana Naval Air Station, Va., crashed into the sea about two miles off Point Loma, after it reportedly developed engine problems. The two-man crew ejected safely and two Navy contract employees in a nearby boat rescued them.

[/ QUOTE ]

mtsu_av8er · August 27th, 2004, 10:34

Good thing he's OK.

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 10:54

Just checked the RW diagram and 18/36 is 8000 x 200 and 11/29 is 7500 x 300. Holy crap are those some wide runways. I cannot remember seeing them when stationed there, but that is huge. The article said the brakes failed according to the pilot. I am in no way questioning a Navy pilot, but I wonder at what point you realize the brakes are not working and make the decision to 1, go around or 2, decide to eject. Like you said, good thing he is okay.

See Attachment.......Runway Picture....Crap that did not work. Go to:
KNZY - This should work

August 27th, 2004, 11:03

Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 11:09

[ QUOTE ]
Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

[/ QUOTE ]

WTFO???? Are you out of your mind? That would be pretty tough. Maybe you misread the diminesions:

RW diagram and 18/36 is 8000 x 200 and 11/29 is 7500 x 300

or I am completely missing what you are seeing? Do I have to break out that dreaded Two letter response for you? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Doug Taylor · August 27th, 2004, 11:13

Speaking of huge runways, KVPS/Ft. Walton/Eglin AFB has a very wide runway as well. It's freaky because you're flying the visual and you feel like you're a lot lower than the aircraft actually is.

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 11:17

[ QUOTE ]
Speaking of huge runways, KVPS/Ft. Walton/Eglin AFB has a very wide runway as well. It's freaky because you're flying the visual and you feel like you're a lot lower than the aircraft actually is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, yes the dreaded runway illusion. I can remember the first time I landed on another rw other than my home field (3900x75). I flew to a field that was (7000x150). I floated a looooonnnnnggggg time. But that's o.k., the second taxiway was a long way down.

Looking4Lower · August 27th, 2004, 11:29

[ QUOTE ]
Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've flown an old-style 1959-model 172 that has 40 degrees of flaps. If you had a real good headwind, and you were lightly loaded, and you don' t mind being rough on the landing gear......you MIGHT be able to pull it off! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

August 27th, 2004, 12:10

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

[/ QUOTE ]

WTFO???? Are you out of your mind? That would be pretty tough. Maybe you misread the diminesions:

RW diagram and 18/36 is 8000 x 200 and 11/29 is 7500 x 300

or I am completely missing what you are seeing? Do I have to break out that dreaded Two letter response for you? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn, you don't have to make a big deal. I know it was a F/A-18C that landed and [censored]. All I ask is if a C172 can land in 300ft. I did not say it can. I asked. Relax now

triple7 · August 27th, 2004, 12:11

he was probably joking about landing on 300 ft...meaning could you land sideways on teh runway. with a real stiff wind you might pull it off with a 152....maybe

Kristie · August 27th, 2004, 12:16

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

[/ QUOTE ]

WTFO???? Are you out of your mind? That would be pretty tough. Maybe you misread the diminesions:

RW diagram and 18/36 is 8000 x 200 and 11/29 is 7500 x 300

or I am completely missing what you are seeing? Do I have to break out that dreaded Two letter response for you? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]no no no.. i'm pretty sure Brian misunderstood the dimensions...which is why he asked if a plane could land on a 300ft runway..

remember length is before width.. so the runways are 8000ft LONG x 200ft WIDE..and 7500ft LONG x 300ft WIDE... always Length then width!!

ok?!

with those dimensions, a cessna 172 can land on a 7500 ft LONG runway...

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 12:28

[ QUOTE ]
Damn, you don't have to make a big deal. I know it was a F/A-18C that landed and [censored]. All I ask is if a C172 can land in 300ft. I did not say it can. I asked. Relax now

[/ QUOTE ]
Easy there big fella. I won't get into a pissing match with you, [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/argue.gif[/img] but given some other questions you have posted, I thought it was a fair question on my part. That is the reason I stated "maybe I am missing something" and also the reason for the [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]. No need to get censored and all that to get your point across. Anyway take a deep breath and go outside and get some fresh air.

August 27th, 2004, 12:30

Yes I know. It is kind of obvoius that the runway wouldn't be 7500ft wide and 300ft long. I heard somewhere that it can be done and I wanted to check with you guys.

August 27th, 2004, 12:31

I can't go outside. It's still 3rd period. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 12:35

[ QUOTE ]
I can't go outside. It's still 3rd period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shame on you Brian. Shouldnt you be watching the chalkboard? Duh, maybe you're in a computer lab. Do they block much stuff from the lab? I may be aging myself, but in my H.S. computer class were were using the Apple IIE with an ugly green monochrome screen.. Yikes !!!

C310_pilot · August 27th, 2004, 12:43

[ QUOTE ]
Can a Cessna 172 land in 300ft?

[/ QUOTE ]
Technically yes. It really depends on the velocity you hit the ground with as to how far the debris field will extend.
[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/insane.gif[/img]

August 27th, 2004, 12:49

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't go outside. It's still 3rd period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shame on you Brian. Shouldnt you be watching the chalkboard? Duh, maybe you're in a computer lab. Do they block much stuff from the lab? I may be aging myself, but in my H.S. computer class were were using the Apple IIE with an ugly green monochrome screen.. Yikes !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in Web Design but already finished all my work. The teacher let's us listen to CDs on the computer while we work and we can go to any website and play any games as long as there is nothing offensive or sexual.

FOD · August 27th, 2004, 13:05

"The article said the brakes failed according to the pilot. I am in no way questioning a Navy pilot, but I wonder at what point you realize the brakes are not working and make the decision to 1, go around or 2, decide to eject. Like you said, good thing he is okay."

Well this guy was from a carrier. It is not always normal for them to divert to the island for landing. Its usually when they are low on fuel or for some other reason. So im assuming that the reason he didnt decide to go around was because of that.

aloft · August 27th, 2004, 13:17

[ QUOTE ]
I am in no way questioning a Navy pilot, but I wonder at what point you realize the brakes are not working and make the decision to 1, go around or 2, decide to eject. Like you said, good thing he is okay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe Mikey D will pop up here, but you don't jump on the brakes in a fighter until fairly late in the landing roll. In the F-16, for instance, you touch down somewhere around 140 KIAS and hold an 11 degree nose up attitude as long as possible for aerodynamic braking. As the horizontal stabilator loses its effectiveness the nose comes down of its own accord. Only then does the pilot get on the brakes, and on a short runway (7500' is short for a fighter), this may be well past the runway's mid-point, and also past the point where the pilot may reject the landing.

(Fine point here: a "go around" implies you're still airborne and you opt to discontinue the approach; a "rejected landing" implies that you've touched down already but things ain't working out and so you opt to take off again rather than risk continuing the roll-out.)

Military runways, however have cables stretched across both ends of a runway that lie beneath a trap door of sorts but can be raised rapidly by the tower when the pilot calls out "CABLE CABLE CABLE", allowing him/her to drop the aircraft's tailhook and arrest the landing roll that way.

So, my guess is that the Hornet driver was past the point where he could safely reject the landing when he learned he had no brakes. Now, why he didn't call for the departure end cables to be raised (or why the tower failed to do so) is a mystery and will probably be a focal point of the investigation.

Windchill · August 27th, 2004, 13:22

[ QUOTE ]
The teacher let's us listen to CDs on the computer while we work and we can go to any website and play any games as long as there is nothing offensive or sexual.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well in your interests of still being allowed to surf the web in class I would advise you to stay away from the Olympic volleyball threads in the lav while you are in class--hate for your teacher to get the wrong impession while he/she walks by the computer and sees pics of hot, close-to-naked women falling all over each other [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Well this guy was from a carrier. It is not always normal for them to divert to the island for landing. Its usually when they are low on fuel or for some other reason. So im assuming that the reason he didnt decide to go around was because of that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to ask if they practice carrier landings on the ground--i.e. do they apply full power in the event they do miss and need to execute a go around . . . if Naval Air Fields use arresting cables on the runway to practice . . . but if he was low on fuel than I don't think he would be trying any of that . . . a la Maverick.

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Goose: "Come on Mav . . . we're getting really low on gas"

Mav: "I'm going after Cougar"

. . .

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 13:22

[ QUOTE ]
Well this guy was from a carrier.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really, I never would have known that being that I was stationed on an aircraft carrier myself. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
It is not always normal for them to divert to the island for landing.

[/ QUOTE ]
There was no real mention of the pilot having to divert. It is however normal for them to leave the ship before it gets into port or fly out to the ship once it has left. When we would depart for a cruise, the air wing would always meet up with is after we were well underway and the reverse could be said when we were coming home.
[ QUOTE ]
So im assuming that the reason he didnt decide to go around was because of that.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a pretty big assumption to make. I was just wondering (aloud) as to "at what point do you realize the brakes are not working and your options are.....go around or eject"

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 13:26

[ QUOTE ]
I was going to ask if they practice carrier landings on the ground--i.e. do they apply full power in the event they do miss and need to execute a go around . . .

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that they do. I have seen pictures of some of the fields were there are arresting cables on the ground. They still do have to get qualified to land on a carrier while underway though. You want to see some fun, watch the newer pilots or any pilots for that matter when a ship is underway and they are onborad to get their "carrier quals". Nothing beats watching an F14 go around after the ship has started to unexpectedly pitch or roll. Talk about crapping your pants.... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Windchill · August 27th, 2004, 13:34

What carrier were you on JEP? My dad was on the USS Eisenhower (CVN 69) in the early '80s.

JEP · August 27th, 2004, 13:42

I was onboard the USS Ranger from 1992-1993. I made the final cruise for her; Yokosuka, Japan, Pusan, South Korea, Abu Dhabi & Jebel Ali, U.A.E., Perth & Sydney Austrailia, and then Pearl Harbor, HI. Taht was by far the best 6 months I could recall (outside of marriage and kids).

kellwolf · August 27th, 2004, 13:46

[ QUOTE ]

I was going to ask if they practice carrier landings on the ground--i.e. do they apply full power in the event they do miss and need to execute a go around . . .

I believe that they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes they do. I saw it on "Pensacola: Wings of Gold." [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]