Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A330 Mrtt Loses Boom Over Spain  
User currently offlinesturmovik From India, joined May 2007, 509 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7841 times:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...hose-during-flight-over-spain.html

Second time this has happened, apparently. Aircraft bound for UAE AF. How often does this happen with other types?


'What's it doing now?'
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinewingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2203 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7761 times:

Are the Airbus booms disposable or something?

User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2897 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7761 times:

What a poorly written article (journalists strike again, no fault of yours sturmovik)!

Did it actually lose the boom or the hose? They say both in the article, however on the EADS boom, the parts are separate.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1051 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7731 times:

Quoting wingman (Reply 1):
Are the Airbus booms disposable or something?

Very funny!  

Cleaning the coffee off of my keyboard.......



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently onlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7723 times:

Glad no one was hurt, that's a big piece of equipment to fall off of a plane.

User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2063 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 7693 times:

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 2):
Did it actually lose the boom or the hose? They say both in the article, however on the EADS boom, the parts are separate.

I know we engineers are not English majors, but a careful reading of the article states:

"A boom is a rigid hose that extends from the undercarriage of the plane . . ."

which is "literary" correct . . .  
"rigid hose" sounds better than a "pipe".

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2897 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7630 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 5):
"A boom is a rigid hose that extends from the undercarriage of the plane . . ."

Kind of a strange thing to hang off the landing gear, however I'm just a paleontologist, what do I know! So it was indeed the whole dangly off the back of the aircraft part that came loose.

If there only was a word for a rigid hose. Something like pipe. Quick, to the Pulitzermobile!



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3383 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7609 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A rigid hose also implies a flaccid state.... Don't think we want to go there

It's odd that there is no back up retention device that would prevent this.. like the chains used as back up on trailers.. although landing the tanker with an 18 ft pipe dangling beneath it's belly might be impossible

what is also curious is can this happen during refueling taking out the receiver a/c.?

here's another article with a picture and it appears it's a center-line hose not a pipe at all...
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-xml/awx_09_11_2012_p0-494036.xml


User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1051 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7584 times:

Form the article:

"A boom is a rigid hose that extends from the undercarriage of the plane to feed a second aircraft with extra fuel so it can continue flights without landing. Designed and built by Airbus, the boom measures 11.6 meters (38 feet) when retracted and 18 meters when fully extended."

The last sentence clearly refers to the boom and not a Probe-and-drogue system.

And from Airbus military website:

http://www.airbusmilitary.com/InnovationAndTechnology/ARBS.aspx

"The ARBS boom is 60 ft /18.2 m long when fully extended"



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2063 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7508 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 7):

It's odd that there is no back up retention device that would prevent this.. like the chains used as back up on trailers..

You don't want the chains. It would be like having an oversize nun-chuck whipping around near your stabilizer.

Quoting kanban (Reply 7):

here's another article with a picture and it appears it's a center-line hose not a pipe at all...

Must have been some file photos of a different airplane . . . you know how that is . . .

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3383 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7487 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 9):
You don't want the chains. It would be like having an oversize nun-chuck whipping around near your stabilizer.


recognize that if fully detached it's a problem, but at some point of extension, and before reaching the drop point, there should be a stop.. even if it has an override allowing the operator to jettison the unit like a lizard dropping it's tail.. by the way are they designating this series of the planes "Lizards"?


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2063 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7469 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 10):

Dynamics is not my forte. But once things start to go, I don' t think there's much you can do except to let it go gracefully. Otherwise, any additional weight for a "back-up" device would be better spent beefing the boom up.

We'll have to wait for the accident report.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12331 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7349 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 7):
here's another article with a picture and it appears it's a center-line hose not a pipe at all...
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....6.xml

The picture is just not consistent with the rest of the article, where they describe the piece that was dropped as being a boom, and they point out in the text that they understand the difference between a boom and a drogue/hose setup.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1051 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks ago) and read 7264 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):
Quoting kanban (Reply 7):
here's another article with a picture and it appears it's a center-line hose not a pipe at all...
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....6.xml

The picture is just not consistent with the rest of the article, where they describe the piece that was dropped as being a boom, and they point out in the text that they understand the difference between a boom and a drogue/hose setup.

That article in AW tells the story of the photo...

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-xml/awx_09_11_2012_p0-494036.xml

"Four tankers have been delivered to Australia as well as a single aircraft to the U.K., which uses a centerline retractable hose system instead of a boom. A single Saudi Arabia tanker has been completed but has not yet entered operations."

from above: "as well as a single aircraft to the U.K., which uses a centerline retractable hose system instead of a boom.'



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3383 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 7198 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

well the clarity of what happened and what the configuration is all 'hosed' up... and reporters get paid for this?

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6988 times:

Quoting kanban (Reply 7):
here's another article with a picture and it appears it's a center-line hose not a pipe at all...
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....6.xml
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 9):
Must have been some file photos of a different airplane . . . you know how that is . . .

No, not a different airplane, that is still an A-330MRTT. But it is a different version. The picture is of the RAF Voyager KC3 version which does not have a boom (neither does the Voyager KC2 version). The picture is of an airplane that has not been delivered to the RAF yet. IIRC, the RAF currently has one Voyager KC2 in flight testing. The difference between the KC2 and KC3 versions is the KC3 has the centerline hose drum-reel system in addition to the WARPs. The KC2 version only has the WARPs.


User currently offlineneutronstar73 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 497 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6932 times:

How many times does this have to happen for EADS? Don't they know how to put a tanker together or what?

First they had a boom fall off during testing. Then the embarrassing issue that the UK tankers couldn't refuel Tornado aircraft. Now they have a second boom fall away.

Maybe they should do a bit more design work or just farm out the boom work to Boeing.


User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1051 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6743 times:

I've been considering this response to this thread for a couple of days now. While not wanting to initiate a flame fest, it reminds me of the heated discussions regarding the USAF tanker competition. Particularly about the program risks for either contender.

In light of these recent developments regarding the two recent boom losses by the A-330MRTT, one has to wonder about the experience level of the two competitors to support this niche capability? Boeing 60+ years of continuous production/support with refueling booms. And Airbus with very little, primarily probe and drogue experience.

All other considerations aside, It would seem that this capability is of primary concern to the USAF, who are so much more reliant on the boom then most of our allies are. I'm not sure how long this boom issue will continue until a fix is found (as this does not seem to be a software fix as originally thought from the first incident), but this would certainly result in program delays and cost increases (Risk) yes?

Regards,



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3383 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 6585 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

TopBoom, what are the mechanics of boom tube extension and retraction, and how would a boom tube detach itself or extend itself clear out of the boom? (feel free to correct my terminology)

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6522 times:

Assuming the EADS Boom is of similar construction to the Boeing Gen III/IV/V/VI Booms, and attached in a similar manner, this could be a failure of the trunion where the Boom actually attaches to the tanker. The trunion has mechanical limits, as any piece of machinery does. Remember the Boom is a seperate piece of equipment from the tanker itself. On the Boeing Gen III Boom (KC-135) which I am most familure with, the extension/retraction mechinism is a chain and sprocket arrangement, driven by a hydraulicly powered motor. There are two mechanical stops, at full extension and full retraction. The ruddervators are hydraulic powered flight control surfaces, controlled by valves connected to the ruddervator stick, which is similar to the stick in a fighter aircraft. The extension/retraction is a seperate lever on the instrument panel. The KC-10 uses joysticks on the armrests for these functions, and my guess is this is what is in the A-330MRTT.

Not knowing what parts failed and what parts remained attached to the tanker, I can only guess what the failure might be.

1.) An unknown hydraulic or electrical surge that cause the ruddervators to become uncontrolable, thus exceeding the trunion limits and the entire boom breaking off.

2.) A failure of the extension mechenism, overruning the mechanical stop and shooting the fuel tube out of the Boom.

3.) Boom Operator error.


User currently offline135mech From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 411 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6422 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The writer of the airticle shows that you don't need ANY truth or research before posting aritcles, sad!

KC135TopBoom...thank you for pitching in! My co-worker and I are dying laughing from some of these inputs! We miss our 135's!

[Edited 2012-09-13 14:48:02]

User currently offlinelegs From Australia, joined Jun 2006, 235 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6397 times:

Forgive what might be a slightly silly question at this point, but did Airbus/EADS develop the boom system themselves, or did they contract the boom design out to a third party?

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 6346 times:

Quoting legs (Reply 21):
Forgive what might be a slightly silly question at this point, but did Airbus/EADS develop the boom system themselves, or did they contract the boom design out to a third party?

They developed their own Boom after looking at the French C-135FRs.

Quoting 135mech (Reply 20):
We miss our 135's!

Me too.   


User currently offlineneutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 605 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 6144 times:

If it ain't Boeing, the fuel's not flowing.   
Can't resist.  



Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5896 times:

Has anyone got more information on this incident? Do we know what parts of the Boom fell of, or was it the entire Boom? Do we have any pictures of the tanker, after it landed, or the Boom laying on the ground in Spain? I would think the tanker received at least some damage to its hydraulic and electrical systems.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A330 Mrtt Loses Boom Over Spain
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
A330 MRTT: New Customer Brasil posted Thu Dec 9 2010 18:54:55 by 328JET
A330 Mrtt Prospects According To Airbus posted Wed Sep 23 2009 13:03:58 by Keesje
Saudi AF Purchase 3 A330-MRTT posted Thu Jan 3 2008 10:08:42 by Breiz
UAE Air Force Chooses A330 Mrtt posted Tue Feb 20 2007 13:43:37 by Nohag
A330 Mrtt Wing posted Sat Jul 29 2006 18:54:53 by 747400sp
A330 MRTT Picture posted Mon May 15 2006 19:29:21 by Jbond
Mrtt Over EMA posted Mon Sep 3 2012 12:38:01 by asctty
Norwegian F-16 Doing 9 G's Over Oslo Harbour posted Sat Sep 1 2012 06:41:26 by Mortyman
Observations: Blue Angels Over Lake Wash @ Seafair posted Sun Aug 5 2012 16:54:32 by ulfinator
F-35 Sonic Boom posted Sat Aug 4 2012 15:03:06 by 787atPAE

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format