One of the pilots of the B-2 stealth bomber, Spirit of Kansas, reported a fire at takeoff from Andersen AFB, Guam which was followed quickly by loss of control of the bomber, according to a senior Air Combat Command official.
The stealth bomber rolled uncontrollably to the right and fell between the taxiway and the ramp at 10:45 am Feb. 23 Guam time just after passing the control tower. It was attempting a takeoff toward the seaward end of the runway. The two pilots ejected with one being hospitalized. A dark plume of smoke rose from the crash site and civilians outside the base reported a second explosion about 30-min. after the initial impact.
The aircraft can lose one or even two of its four General Electric F118-GE-100 17,300-lb. thrust engines and still take off, so its unlikely that engine failure was to blame, says a retired U.S. Air Force pilot who has flown the B-2. Moreover, early suggestions that the aircraft struck birds or stalled in a steep takeoff climb also have been dismissed as unlikely. Also, the weather was reported as clear.
The Spirit of Kansas, tail no. 890127, was the second in a four aircraft flight that was ending its deployment and taking off for return to home base at Whiteman AFB, Mo. They were being replaced by six B-52s as a forward-based, heavy-bomber force in the Pacific. The loss cuts the number of combat coded B-2s to 15 from 16 out of the total force of 21. The force has a minimum aircraft requirement of 19 airframes.
The other three B-2s later returned to Whiteman where the wing commander has declared a safety pause for the fleet, says ACC officials. During the pause procedures are being reviewed with the pilots and training is at a standdown. However, if the stealthy bomber is needed for an operational mission it is cleared to fly.
The aircraft that crashed rolled off Northrop Grummans line in 1989 and had accumulated 5,176 flying hr. at the time of the crash.
Early testing indicated that the aircraft would remain structurally intact for about 40,000 flying hr. Analyses also posited that the rudder attachment points would be the first structural failure item.
Read more on this story and others from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.
– Christian
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
I’m surprised an onboard fire could have severed flight control connections so quickly. It appears to have barely even gotten off the ground. Recall MD-11 crash in Canada – that accident took tens of minutes to unfold.
Oh now this makes things interesting. Back in 1990 there were charges leveled that Northrop had badly designed a vital system in the flight controls of the B-2. The Actuator Remote Terminal (ART) suffered from two significant problems. The first was lack of cooling in the area around the ART which could to overheating and failing. The second was that all four redundant boards for the ART system were tied to a single resistor. If that resistor failed then all four boards were useless. This would allow the flight controls on that side of the aircraft to deploy putting them into uncontrolled flight.
The ART takes commands from the flight control surfaces and provides feedback to the flight control computers. This problem was supposedly fixed in 1991, yet during Operation Allied Force EIGHT YEARS LATER, they were having a problem with the ART units overheating. It was one of the highest failing parts on the B-2, despite the earlier fix to allow more cooling in the area, and changing out the resistor issue.
I’m interested to see what the cause turns out to be.. I always figured that the maintnance on the stealths must be borderline religious.
Ok, I may be missing something obvious, but in the story photo I don’t, uh, see any rudder. Is this referring to the control surfaces at the outer rear edge of the wing?
What makes the control surface a rudder is not its location or shape but its function. The B-2 uses what is commonly called ‘drag rudders’– of the same basic method of operation as the first Northrop flying wings. While there were various approaches considered for the B-2, it was found that the original concept was best. The Northrop designer responsible for the original design, Irv Ashkenas, was contracted by NASA for an aeronautical report on the aerodynamics and control of the flying wing in the late 80′s and a kind of crappy copy can be found here:http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890011628_1989011628.pdf – that will tell you all you will want to know about how the rudders (and most other controls) work.
Has anyone heard if the names of the pilots have been released yet?
Considering the immense reliance on computer systems for stability in the B-2, a fire could easily have overheated or damaged the processors that handle the aircraft. It doesn’t need to be a direct-effect like a fire in a hydraulics bay or a broken part, it could simply be a PC overheat and fail. Yeah, I’d expect there to be redundancy, but if the multiple computers are stored in the same location to facilitate maintenance and minimize cutting holes in the stealthy airframe, then it’s possible one small fire in just the right place could crash multiple systems, and kill the aircraft’s stability.
Ahhh yes…the wonders of 100% fly by wire. I’ve never quite understood the concept of placing your very life in the hands of electric wires…with NO mechanical actuation system. At least the old but venerable F-15 has a mechanical flight control system which uses fly-by-wire technology as a backup. Yes, the instantaneous response to pilot input is nice, but the human body is limited in how aggressive the maneuver can be, so any overly zealous inputs have to be dampened anyway. Naturally, I imagine the B-2 is quite unflyable by hand, so my argument may be a non-starter. But why do we consider designs that are THAT unstable in the first place? By the way, the F-117 is very likely worthless now since the Bosnia shoot-down. Someone figured out how to track it, and if you notice…it has not been deployed in combat since. Stealth is a gamble without something to offset the eventual loss of that advantage…whether by accident or intent.
It may be like wearing belts & suspenders at the same time,but stealth aircraft in concert with aircraft with electronic jamming capabilities,like what was used by Israel against Syrian anti-aircraft sites would be the best way to go.
I thought that they used F-117s against Iraq during “Iraqi Freedom?”
How hard would it be to replace the stealth skin or tiles on the F-117 with the skin or tiles used on the B-2,F-22,& F-35?
The powers that be really need to investigate this fire on the B-2,because if another one goes down in peace time(& safety records on the over all safety of B-2s be damned) then there will really be a lot of red flags going up.
I remember that they interviewed a retired AF officer “talking head” on Fox News last week about the B-2 crash,& he didn’t spit out glowing safety records of the B-2.No,quite the contrary,he talked about how all of our B-2 bombers most likely are not on active duty,but remain in storage(could those “stored” B-2s be used for cannibalizing parts for the active B-2s?).He talked about how losing this B-2 would hurt our capabilities.
Though that you may be interested in this report
Conrad,
Would you feel better if there was a direct mechanical connection from your brain to your leg muscles instead of those unreliable neurons transmitting electrical signals? Perhaps you’d also be happier if you were a quadruped instead of relying on that inherently unstable bipedal locomotion.
Sorry about the sarcasm, but fly-by-wire technology solves a lot more problems than it introduces. Direct mechanical back-up hasn’t been used in decades. Most of the “mechanical” systems in the jet age have been hydraulically-boosted in any case – good luck managing stick forces otherwise! It’s also made a huge difference with aircraft stability & control. Take the flying wing design, for example: the original YB-49 had serious stability issues in the 1940s. The introduction of fly-by-wire solved those issues and made the flying wing a viable design. That enabled the B-2, which takes advantage of the inherent stealthiness and aerodynamic efficiency of the flying wing. Inherently unstable designs aren’t limited to military aircraft either – every airliner designed since the 1980s has used that approach to increase fuel efficiency.
1. This is part of chain of cases.
Second case is B1B damages.
2. These cases, I’m shure in it, was trying of distantion manage of battle mashines.
Both of these aicraft use computer-based systems of control system.
In first case crashed plane was destroyed, because noones wanted open true. US Federals — because this is end of they carriers, firms – because this fact is very dangerous for aircraft buisiness. In B-1B case, this motivation is too. Only in this case work more clearly.
Cases seems like Boeing-757 at 911, but I think that in this cases was amateurs. Not clear result — is my artifacts. This not profy.
Professionals will make bombing over Washington or nuclear impact at anyone points. Unfortunately it will. It will evil day. Bad day of all humans.
At this — may be russian computer systems geniuses (who invent principial new way of manage computer systems) was “pari” at 23Feb (Day of Soviet army we use as “man day”) and 8march (“woman day” in Russia): “Who better make it”? May be it girl and gay. B-2 and B-1 is very fine device for it. Big military birds.
In Russia we “very love” US after Serbia. We understand that we will like Serbia at 2017-2023years. These geniuses have respect for human life, in contrast to US and Russian goverments. You can seem — no one man not killed. Only real games. Homo ludens.
May be, in one day this homo sapiens sapiens safe us from Third World War. They can do it.
B-2
1. Crew was push at “red knob”, when understand that bomber was out they control and catapulted from plane.
2. Very intricate flight control not able to distantion fly in air. “Simulator” crushed.
B-1B When very new bird crushed will use more primitive plane and case – in full air and at base. As a child toy: if new toy is complicated for child use, you purshase new, more easyest.