Debris causes $1M in damage to Raptor engine

[unhappycamper]

Debris causes $1M in damage to Raptor engine
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Nov 5, 2007 15:13:19 EST

For the second time in just over two years, an F-22A Raptor suffered extensive engine damage after the jet power plant sucked in debris.

On Nov. 1, maintainers at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., discovered damage to the jet’s F119 engine during a post-flight inspection. Officials concluded the right-side engine had sucked in a foreign object.

There was no indication what the object was, or when the engine sucked it in.

The Raptor is assigned to Air Combat Command’s 53rd Wing.

Preliminary estimates of repair costs put the bill at $1 million or more and the mishap continues to be investigated.

In October 2005, an F-22A deployed to Hill Air Force Base, Utah, from the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley Air Force Base, Va., suffered $6.8 million in damage to an engine after sucking in a 5-inch-long landing gear pin while the jet was on the ground with its two engines running.


Rest of article at: http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/11/airforce_f22_mishap_071105w/

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. oh dear

a dodgy computer system
crashes on take off because of computer problems
corrosion
engine problems

and this is the weapon we plan to use against who? the shia or the sunni?

[groovedaddy]

2. It's probably going to take a $850 hammer and a $500 screw driver

to fix this damn thing!
There must be a real business opportunity in repairing these things.

[dipsydoodle]

3. You havre reminded of a story

concerning a lamp cover which was found in the ring road which surrounds Heathrow airport. It was thought to have fallen off a plane and was handed in. It turned out to be identical to the type BA use and for they'd been paying c. £800. It had infact fallen off a Ford Transit panel van and Ford's price was £40.

[groovedaddy]

4. Yes, the Military Industrial business is highly profitable

When will the madness stop!?!

[Eagle_Eye]

5. The $850 hammer

Over the course of time, organizations that handle energetic materials (like the military for instance) have learned some hard lessons about working around explosives. One lesson learned early was not to use tools that cause sparks in close proximity to explosives. Steel hammers have a tendency to spark when they strike other metal objects.

The military insists on non magnetic, non sparking hammers for use around ordnance. The procurement process employed by the military is rather specific about items like this, and numerous, inflexible requirements are imposed. Hammers purchased for ordnance use have to be made of a particular type of material, which has to be tested and certified. They have to be of a certain weight, size, and withstand a grueling environment. All of this has to be tested with written reports filed from each test. They have to be packaged, labeled, and stored according to the rules of ordnance items. All of this is expensive and there are not a lot of companies that will put out the effort to meet the military specifications.

An Aegis cruiser has 200+ sailors on board and cost around 2 billion dollars. Having a gunner's mate use a $9 steel hammer from the local hardware store down in the ship's forward magazine is not a good idea. A fully loaded Aegis cruiser can have 20 tons of propellant for the cannons and high explosive projectiles stored in its magazines. The ship also has in excess of 100,000 gallons of diesel fuel on board.

When the gunner's mate draws back to pound away with his hammer, $850 does not seem like a lot of money.