Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
C-17 Mishap In Afghanistan  
User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 10154 times:

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123011269

8/9/2005 - BAGRAM AIR BASE, Afghanistan (AFPN) -- A C-17 Globemaster III rolled off the runway while landing here Aug. 6, damaging its nose and right main landing gears.

As a result, the runway was closed, but quick action and creative thinking by Air Force and Army engineers had the runway fully active again in less than 30 hours.

There were no injuries in the incident. The cause of the incident is under investigation.

When it came to rest, one of the C-17’s wings extended over the active runway, so the aircraft had to be moved. However, air operations continued while the C-17 was moved off the active runway. The C-17 measures 174 feet long with a wingspan of 169 feet. It is operated by a crew of three and can carry up to 170,000 lbs of cargo.

Aircraft from here diverted to other airfields and were able to continue combat missions supporting ground forces. Coalition air forces also assisted in ensuring constant airpower was maintained over the battlefield during aircraft recovery operations.

Nevertheless, moving the aircraft proved to be a complicated process, said Col. Donald Jones, 455th Expeditionary Mission Support Group commander, who directed the effort.

“It took one big team to brainstorm and come up with the tools and methods we needed,” he said.

The hardest part of the process, he said, was determining a way to lift the nose of the aircraft without further damaging it.

First the fuel and cargo needed to be removed. The team removed 105,000 pounds of fuel and unloaded 55,000 pounds of cargo, with the remaining gross weight of the aircraft estimated at 300,000 pounds. Because of the tilt of the aircraft, the cargo could not be removed by forklift through the cargo door. The cargo pallets had to be broken down into individual boxes, pieces and parts were removed through the crew door.

Next the team had to replace the C-17’s unusable landing gear. Their solution was a flatbed trailer, crane and railroad ties.

The aircraft was lifted with the crane, inches at a time, and wood was placed under the nose to support it. The team backed the flatbed tractor trailer under the nose and removed the wood. Straps were tied to the trailer and passed through the pilot’s windows and open doors to secure the aircraft onto the truck.

The team assembled metal airfield matting provided by Army engineers to roll the aircraft onto the runway. The Army engineers also provided two bulldozers and the flatbed to drag the aircraft back onto the runway to a parking ramp.

“Once again, we had great cooperation between the Air Force and Army here,” said Army Col. Michael Flanagan, 18th Engineer Brigade and Task Force Sword commander. “We worked together as a team to get a job done in one night that many people thought would take four days. This is the best cooperative effort between the Air Force and Army that I have seen in my 26-year career.”

Colonel Jones, knowing the priority was getting the runway open, orchestrated the two bulldozers, the flatbed and a ring of people around the aircraft. They used hand signals and walkie-talkies as they inched the aircraft down the runway through three 90-degree turns to its parking spot.

“We had to get this runway open and get A-10 (Thunderbolt IIs) in the air to provide close air support for Soldiers on the ground,” Colonel Jones said.

“Everyone came together to make suggestions and form a workable plan to help get the C-17 off the active runway and resume normal flying operations in minimal time,” said Brig. Gen. Bruce E. Burda, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing commander. “I am extremely proud of the way our Airmen, Soldiers and civilians came together, devised a solution to this unique challenge, and safely made it happen to quickly restore airfield operations.”

The aircraft is assigned to Charleston Air Force Base, S.C.


I had an awful feeling in my stomach when I read the headline. Fortunately no one was hurt. I'm surprised that I didn't hear about this sooner being a flyer from CHS. Results from the safety investigation should be interesting.

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 9970 times:

Quoting C17loadmstr (Thread starter):
I had an awful feeling in my stomach when I read the headline. Fortunately no one was hurt. I'm surprised that I didn't hear about this sooner being a flyer from CHS. Results from the safety investigation should be interesting.

Was it a CHS crew? Seems like the C-17 is going thru some landing gear issues. Is it a trend or am I seeing a problem that isn't really there?


User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 9933 times:

Yes, they were a CHS crew. From what I've heard, it wasn't a landing gear malfunction...more like an under-construction section of runway that was the culprit. Remember that C-130 in Iraq earlier in the year? Something similar to that.

User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9808 times:

i would contribute the event to more of high operations tempo, i bet some crew fatigue and the lower and lower experience of flight crews with ever expending demands on all airframes. Its just a matter of time till there is another class A or loss of an airframe.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineContact_tower From Norway, joined Sep 2001, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9748 times:

A buddy diverted into Bagram as pax on a civ An-12 earlier this year, and the runway was one big construction site. Half the with was beeing resurfaced at the time, or something along those lines.

Go to maps.google.com and enter 34 56.4258N 069 15.5260E in the search field, choose sattelite.

No date on the image though


User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9638 times:

i'm left wondering, why would the gear be damaged if the a/c is supposed to be able to land on unprepared strips?


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineAFHokie From United States of America, joined May 2004, 224 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9604 times:

Quoting Cancidas (Reply 5):
i'm left wondering, why would the gear be damaged if the a/c is supposed to be able to land on unprepared strips?

If you look at the photo in the article you can see a birm of dirt that runs parallel to the runway that they hit when they went off the runway.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9530 times:

Question, is this C-17 going to be able to return to service?..


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 9418 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 7):
Question, is this C-17 going to be able to return to service?..

I guess that is the question that everyone wants to know other than the obvious....what happened in the first place?

I saw some pictures today of the exterior damage to the plane. The nose gear was completely sheared off and all of the right main landing gear tires were completely shredded. Though it is unconfirmed, it has been stated that the cargo floor buckled which leads me to believe the plane may be scrapped. I'm sure Boeing has sent engineers over to assess the damage. I'm sure we'll be hearing something by the end of the month (whether it's official or unofficial).


User currently offlineMikefly562 From United States of America, joined Oct 2002, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 9186 times:

I work on the C-17 program, and the latest word is that this aircraft is repairable, and that they will make temporary repairs to the aircraft and ferry it back to Long Beach for permament repairs. Most of the major damage is in the nose area and right main gear. A team is out there evaluating and repairing the aircraft for the return ferry flight to LGB (no time frame set yet). Looks like a lot of work ahead to restore is back to normal. Hopefully they will keep supporting the repair of the aircraft, as we have not had any hull losses yet (knock on wood).

User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9143 times:

That's good news. Thanks for the update.

User currently offlineFlyer732 From Namibia, joined Nov 1999, 1368 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 9120 times:

Hey C17ladmstr,

If you get a free chance, could you email me via the link in my profile? I'm preparing to enter the loadmaster program and have a few questions if you have a minute.

Thanks.


User currently offlineB747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 245 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8683 times:

I sure hope that they are able to repair it, it is a 2001 ER model, and has IRCM capability. I am also willing to bet that she only has about 4000 hours or so. Definitely a valuable asset, with a lot of life left in her!

I was talking to someone the other day he said that it will be scrapped in place or flown to the US, and scrapped, anybody in the know?

Brian



At Pope, where not happy, until you're not happy!
User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8618 times:

All the info is still being held close. I was talking to the Boeing guys here at CHS today and they repeated essentially what MikeFly said in his post.

From a crewmembers standpoint, I'm more interested in the cause. The SIB results will be most interesting since the crew has been ordered to keep their mouth shut.


User currently offlineMikefly562 From United States of America, joined Oct 2002, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 8598 times:

Last I heard (as of this morning) is that repairs are well underway, with numerous parts being sent out from Long Beach and other supply sources to the aircraft. I have also heard that the replacement temporary nose gear installation is going well and nearly complete. The current plan is still have the aircraft flown back to Long Beach for permanent repairs. Fortunantly this aircraft looks like it will be made great again  Smile

User currently offlineB747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 245 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8602 times:

Thanks, C17loadmstr, and Mikefly562 for your responses, I hope you are right about them fixing it.

After seeing the photo's it really is going to be a job fixing all that damage, and in an austere location to boot!

Take care,
Brian



At Pope, where not happy, until you're not happy!
User currently offlineC5onknees From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 8223 times:

I can see that pilot's carreer dissipation light start to flash.

User currently offlineDuce50boom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 8209 times:

Quoting C5onknees (Reply 16):
I can see that pilot's carreer dissipation light start to flash.

No way dude, no spurious lights. That suckers on solid!


User currently offlineC17loadmstr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 8173 times:

Results will be made public on Monday. Too bad I'll be on leave and miss the briefing. I should hear something later next week when I get back in town. I'll keep you guys informed.

User currently offlineDuce50boom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 8165 times:

Thanks load. Have fun on leave

User currently offlineLongbowPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 577 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8163 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting C5onknees (Reply 16):
I can see that pilot's carreer dissipation light start to flash.

I've seen people flat out buy an aircraft because they messed up. 99% of the time they are flying within the following month after the investigation. Crashing an aircraft is reall no worse than crashing a car. The only difference is the cost and collateral damage. I have seen many Class A accidents in my tenure in the Army. Aircraft that cost 25 million dollars in heaps of scrap metal and composites. Pilots are flying in no time. The golden rule being tell the truth about what happened. Own up to your errors, and be forth coming with everything. The truth will set you free.


User currently offlineDuce50boom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8111 times:

I see your point Longbow, but the AF seems to have a "screw the crews" mentality that comes to play with our mishaps. Any emergency, mishap, etc, the first thing that happens when you land isn't "congrats on getting her home boys". Instead, it's "get in the bus, we gotta take you to the hospital to piss in the bottle". You're definitely right about owning up to your mistakes. But the AF has hosed enough people who made simple mistakes/errors.

You want to hear a good example. There was a KC-10 mishap about 3 years ago. The 10 had a near mid-air with an F-18 and tore up the horiz stab. Crew had to put her down on the dry lakebed at Edwards (they were flying in the Edwards range, R-5008). Without going into all the details the crew was nearly screwed, it was luck that the FAA tapes proved their side of the story


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic C-17 Mishap In Afghanistan
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...
Luftwaffe Tornado NLG Collapses In Afghanistan posted Sat Apr 28 2007 12:07:36 by A342
C-17 Mishap Last Year posted Fri Nov 24 2006 03:58:13 by Babaero
Nimrod MR2 Down In Afghanistan posted Sat Sep 2 2006 20:40:13 by RichardPrice
Dutch F-16 Down In Afghanistan posted Fri Sep 1 2006 11:18:07 by Ptrjong
Chopper Down In Afghanistan posted Thu Jul 27 2006 00:41:29 by EHHO
C-17 Globemaster In PHX posted Tue Nov 29 2005 01:49:06 by Phxplanes
Helicopter Down In Afghanistan posted Tue Aug 16 2005 17:10:40 by NORTHSEATIGER
Chinook Down In Afghanistan 16 Death posted Wed Apr 6 2005 20:09:42 by Arniepie
Marine Corp Air Units In Afghanistan? posted Fri Apr 9 2004 04:29:58 by CX747
RAF Aircraft In Afghanistan posted Sat Sep 20 2003 22:06:11 by EGFFbmi

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format