F-14 Flyby Explosion

J.A.W.

"Keep on Truckin'.."
Joined
28 February 2014
Messages
662
Reaction score
16
As regards this F-14 incident, is it definitively known whether it was an inlet duct issue, or a turbine-only problem?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG_myJ1fZJY
 
This may answer your question:

Source:
http://ameliaslanding.com/tomcat_explosion.htm

Tomcat Explosion
An explanation for the mysterious Tomcat explosion, quoted from another website:

This is my first post on Ebaums and really I am posting to clarify a few
things.

1) I am a Navy Air Traffic Controller.
2) I was stationed aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) From 1994-
1999.
3) I was on Marshal Control in the Carrier Air Traffic Control Center
(CATCC) when this accident happened.

I’m not certain how many specifics I can get into. I do not think I can
get into where we were exactly or where we were going. However, the
accident report has been declassified and as such I can relay a few
pertinent facts about what happened.

I was tracking the Aircraft and he was traveling at a high rate of speed.
He never requested to do a flyby on the John Paul Jones and since he was
inside my airspace (out to 60 nautical miles) he should have made a
request to do so. Fact is he never was in communications with me at all.

Naval investigators concluded the loss of the airplane was due to "pilot
error" because Bates failed to take the required action to prevent his
plane from going into an uncontrollable spin after an engine stall.

The F-14 he was flying was an F-14A and the engines on that series were
prone to compressor stalls when making high angle of attack maneuvers, at
high speeds, in dense atmosphere (read: Low altitude). At the time of
this accident they were transitioning to the F-14B with engines that were
30% more powerful.

Because of the great distance between F-14 engines, asymmetrical thrust
becomes a real problem should one engine fail.

Going outside of the official mishap investigation; it would appear to me
that just prior to the explosion, LCDR (Lieutenant Commander) Bates place
his aircraft in a very hard turn. If you look at the video, you will
notice the aircraft flying at a 90-degree wing down attitude just prior
to the explosion.

As I stated earlier; Naval investigators concluded the loss of the
airplane was due to "pilot error".

Some of you may recall there was an F-14 accident in January of 1996. In
this accident the pilot requested an "Unrestricted climb" and his
departure took him vertical. He was observed to pass into an overcast
layer of clouds at nearly a 90-degree angle of attack. Shortly after he
was seen going into the clouds, his aircraft reversed direction and
impacted a house. The pilot, RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) and three
people on the ground were killed.

The findings on this accident were also found to be "pilot error".

Can you guess who the pilot of the later flight was? If you guessed LCDR
John Stacy Bates you would be correct.

In a period of 16 months, there were 4 losses of F14's in LCDR Bates'
squadron, VF-213 the Fighting Black Lions. Two of which were attributed
to him.
 
Many thanks for that, T.

Now, does anyone wish to hazard a guess as to what nicknames flyboy Bates attracted?

Wonder if he remained on flight status long enough to make 'ace'?
 
Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you read carefully:
The pilot, RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) and three people on the ground were killed.
 
Yeah, its right there..

A hotshot/reckless B-52 pilot was allowed to push too hard/too long as well, despite warnings/predictions of a bad outcome..

& inevitably lost control, also with fatal consequences for himself & his crew..
 
aim9xray said:
Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you read carefully:
The pilot, RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) and three people on the ground were killed.

Makes you wonder how it was he was still in command after he busted his first Tomcat due to pilot error (more like hot-dogging it sounds like).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom