The Air Force said the first crash of a B-2 stealth bomber was caused by moisture in sensors and estimated the loss of the aircraft at $1.4 billion.
The crash probably could have been avoided if knowledge of a technique to evaporate the moisture had been disseminated throughout the B-2 program, said Maj. Gen. Floyd L. Carpenter, who headed an accident investigation board.
The Spirit of Kansas abruptly pitched up, rolled and yawed to the left February 23 before plunging to the ground at Andersen Air Force Base on the island of Guam. Both pilots ejected safely just after the left wing made contact with the ground; it was the first crash since the maiden B-2 flights nearly 20 years ago…
Water distorted preflight readings in three of the plane’s 24 sensors, making the aircraft’s control computer force the B-2 to pitch up on takeoff, resulting in a stall and subsequent crash.
A technique learned by some two years ago that had gone widely unknown and unadopted probably would have prevented the crash, Carpenter said. The technique essentially heats the sensors and evaporates any moisture before data calibrations.“This technique was never formalized in a technical order change or captured in ‘lessons learned’ reports. Hence, only some pilots and some maintenance technicians knew of the suggestion,” according to Carpenter’s executive summary of the accident.
Haven’t yet had a chance to discuss this with any jet jockeys. The essential reason for this crash was poor communications skills and procedures?
When you are in a fly-by-wire system you better make sure the wire is working. Sounds like typical government bureaucracy got in the way of disseminating the proper information.
So, like most electronic devices, it doesn’t work when wet. Seems that might be problem for an airplane since those are susceptible to getting rained on.
I guess thats what happens when you put your top secret testing airbase in the desert.
#2 Good point.
I wonder if the H-8’s have this trouble?
Army, navy, air force, marines!
We don’t ask for experience, its obvious!
Cursor_
Government bureaucracy wasn’t the cause of the crash.
It was engineering error. They only planned for what they could foresee based on their experience with older technology. They were breaking new engineering ground and had tunnel vision, and a lack of adequate prudence.
The government’s mistake was being bought lock, stock and barrel by the “military industrial complex” that presidents George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and (Gen.) Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about.
We don’t need the B-1, B-2, F-22 Raptor, F-35 or any similar nonsense. Proof?
1) We were successful in Afghanistan because our Special Forces on horses and mules could sneak around and call airstrikes from the ancient B-52s, and jet fighters – and work with the locals.
2) We’re getting our asses kicked in Iraq by guerilla fighters with very old technology hand held weapons.
Technology can’t help us in a country where the local people don’t want us there.
#5 – Your comparison is invalid, as the weapons that give us air superiority aren’t the weapons used in hand-to-hand ground combat.
With regard to planes, while agonizingly snow, the military’s long term plan is great, though the lack of stealth technology in the F-35 will create an us vs. them environment amongst our allies.
With regard to ground combat, our nation has never been decent at controlling territory. The differences between Afghanistan and Iraq have nothing to do with technology: We’re successful in Afghanistan because there are people there with the same goals as us, while there are no groups in Iraq that have the game goals as us.
Also, time to put away the “we’re getting our ass kicked in Iraq” comments. Things have made a dramatic turn there over the past year (and if they hadn’t, you’d still be hearing about it every night on the news).
Jägermeister,
How do you exactly find all these information?! It is amazing.
And what do you think of the links further down on the left side of that blog?Cherokee muslims and Nevada rock inscriptions..?
#9 – uzam – How do you exactly find all these information?
Google.
Cherokee muslims and Nevada rock inscriptions..?
Doubt it. It would have made waves earlier if it was true.
What this tells us is the pilots had insufficient time to overide the sensors controlling influence on the flight computer. I’m curious to see where they’ll take this. They could overhaul the B2 fleet, they could install a panic button to overide sensors, or they could do nothing. I’d bet they’ll do nothing. The future is UAV, especially for bombers, go see for yourself -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MQ-1C_Warrior
#1 Daniel said,
“When you are in a fly-by-wire system you better make sure the wire is working.”
There you go. Nailed it. It’s unbelievable word of these sensor problems didn’t make it as an Airworthiness Directive to the whole fleet. Geez.
“Carpenter said. The technique essentially heats the sensors and evaporates any moisture before data calibrations.” /// Gee–thats been known from the first electrical instrument ever put in an airplane. I think the checklist for a Cessna 150 says “let your instruments warm up and stabilize.” I think some other variable involving moisture is in operation here.
Awww… the poor little killing machine died.
And just thing… Airbus bet the farm on this same fly-by-wire tech. Nice to know next time I have to get on an A380.
#15 – Ron Larson
Airbus have built fly-by-wire airplanes since 1984.
The B-2 can’t fly in rain anyway. The droplets damage the rubberized skin, necessitating millions of dollars worth of repairs.
The cost of the B-2 fleet (15 planes) is as much as the entire FY2006 USDA Food Stamp program in the United States.
The B-2 is not stealth, it is “low observable”. Russia already knows how to shoot them down, they can’t wait for us to attack iran….The Tor-M2 is not fooled by stealth.