wmh131
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 43
Location:
Joined: February 2008
|
Post by wmh131 on Feb 26, 2008 8:53:59 GMT 9
Anyone from the old 27th FIS (circa late '63) recall how/why 149's tacan compartment came loose in-flight? On a B model, the tacan compartment is the electronics compartment is at the top of the aircraft directly behind the cockpit. I got to Loring after it happened and was involved with repairing and rewiring it. After the fact there were a number of rumors as to how it occurred, but there was nothing definitive! Now, 45 years later, what really happened?
I am happy I got to work on the repair! Instead of 2 months on the flight-line I got 2 months in the ADC hangar. At Loring in January and February, that was good!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Dlugosh on Feb 26, 2008 10:22:33 GMT 9
I'd be interested in hearing about this also. I got to Loring in June of '64 and never hear about it. I wonder if thats why we always seemed to have power problems with that bird?
Tom Dlugosh
|
|
Black Bart
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 49
Location:
Joined: March 2007
|
Post by Black Bart on Mar 13, 2008 2:54:04 GMT 9
The TACAN compartment was a hinged compartment with a clasp and the around 40 screws. If the screws were misplaced, in all likelihood the compartment would tear off in flight. I think this happened several times over the years. I don't recall that removing the screws was a red X condition. In retrospect, I wonder why not, after-all, removing the radome or stick was?
Black Bart
|
|
|
|
Post by daoleguy A.J. Hoehn (deceased) on Mar 13, 2008 3:54:08 GMT 9
I never heard of this either. I will say that opening panels like the 05 always resulted or 95% of the time in a Red X condition, especially if you pulled a component. I do know as a 7 level I had to sign off each time it was dropped. Maybe I am wrong, but in retrospect each time we opened a panel it was a Red X maintenance job, unless the panel was opened by another shop or tech first, then I am not sure.
Part of my OJT for Avionics for all levels was stressed that if you did any action that would render non-flight worthy conditions it was a RED X, no questions asked. Better safe than sorry. I do recall one QC guy that said merrely bending over to look at the 05 door was not enough. You have to physically inspect the fasteners close up.
AJ
|
|
sixerviper
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 209
Location:
Joined: July 2007
|
Post by sixerviper on Mar 13, 2008 7:23:22 GMT 9
CAMLOC fastners can be opened in as little as 1/4 turn; they cannot be closed in 1/4 turn. That is why the wise technician screwed the CAMLOCS completely out when opening a door such as the 05. I had to learn that lesson the way I learned everything else back in those days--the hard way.
The A-7 had more CAMLOCS than the Six did, believe it or not!
|
|
|
|
Post by pat perry on Mar 13, 2008 9:09:32 GMT 9
CAMLOC fastners can be opened in as little as 1/4 turn; they cannot be closed in 1/4 turn. That is why the wise technician screwed the CAMLOCS completely out when opening a door such as the 05. I had to learn that lesson the way I learned everything else back in those days--the hard way. The A-7 had more CAMLOCS than the Six did, believe it or not! I learned the hard way that any panel removed is a RED X. I pulled the moisture separator out for a 25 hour inspection one time on the flight line. This is in the upper forward left corner of the missile bay. I left the panel and screws on the forward missile rack while I ran to the shop to get a new MS filter screen. When I got back for some reason they were cycling the racks and bay doors. Oh S*it! I thought - I sure hope they saw the panels were off before they did that. When the forward rack retracted it smashed the MS panel and ripped a big hole in the top of the missle bay - boy, were the sheet metal guys unhappy. The crew cycling the doors/racks said there was no red X in the forms - yep! I had to buy many beers for the sheet metal guys which was more fun than the arse chewing I got. LESSON LEARNED Pat |
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Mar 13, 2008 10:04:20 GMT 9
Panels! Reminds me of a boom operator that told me upon landing once that the receiver told him they were "missing a panel" on the lower, left side of the fuselage just forward of the wing trailing edge. Okay, I said. I asked the boom to come with me as we ducked under the fuselage and I pointed to the Air Cycle Machine exhaust. "Is this what he meant? There aren't any panels down here missing." I later found out this was a common receiver write up! See what I mean in this photo! Mark www.military.cz/usa/air/in_service/aircraft/kc135/pics/kc135r_right.jpg |
|
wmh131
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 43
Location:
Joined: February 2008
|
Post by wmh131 on Mar 26, 2008 4:42:52 GMT 9
Anyone from the old 27th FIS (circa late '63) recall how/why 149's tacan compartment came loose in-flight? On a B model, the tacan compartment is the electronics compartment is at the top of the aircraft directly behind the cockpit. I got to Loring after it happened and was involved with repairing and rewiring it. After the fact there were a number of rumors as to how it occurred, but there was nothing definitive! Now, 45 years later, what really happened? I am happy I got to work on the repair! Instead of 2 months on the flight-line I got 2 months in the ADC hangar. At Loring in January and February, that was good! Since no one responded with any facts as to the incident, I will try to relate what was told to me, 43 years after the fact. Basically the tacan compartment opened and separated from the aircraft shortly after takeoff. The compartment remained tethered to the aircraft by its large wire bundle. This caused the compartment to repeatedly impact the left side of the fuselage and upper surface of the left wing. The pilots had no idea of what was happening other than a large vibration, MA1 dumped power, and Comm Nav would not work on Emergency Power! The pilots were able to bring 59-149 back around and land successfully. After the fact it was determined that the tacan compartment had been closed but that none of the cam-locs were engaged. At this point the accounts of the incident diverged. Some accounts said a Red X condition had been entered in the log but never cleared. The other said no Red X for the tacan compartment condition was found in the log! When I got to Loring, some 2 or 3 months later, no one would talk about the pilots involved , the crew chief or the MA1 people that would have worked on the compartment (if it had been opened). To my knowledge, no one was disciplined regarding the incident. The airframe sheet metal was repaired on base and the tacan compartment was reinstalled. The job of rewiring the tacan compartment was given to 2 MA1 "short-timers". This was probably a bad decision as it turned out later. Bill |
|
wmh131
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 43
Location:
Joined: February 2008
|
Post by wmh131 on Mar 26, 2008 4:58:18 GMT 9
I'd be interested in hearing about this also. I got to Loring in June of '64 and never hear about it. I wonder if thats why we always seemed to have power problems with that bird? Tom Dlugosh Tom, As best I remember, 149's power problems turned out to be some weird problem in the engine to CSD mechanical/hydraulic interface. This was determined by process of elimination - we replaced many generators and several CSDs before pushing the problem off on the engine guys! :embarassed: For anyone who has not worked one a F106 power problem, the 6 had 8 generators,: 300VDC, 150VDC, -140VDC, 400 HZ MA1, 400HZ CVAC, 110V 1600HZ, 28VDC MA1, and 28VDC CVAC. The 400HZ generators were 3 phase. I hope I remembered these correctly! BTW Tom, I do remember you. From 2000 to 2006 I lived near you. I was living in Livermore CA. Bill Hamilton |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Dlugosh on Mar 26, 2008 7:27:08 GMT 9
Bill,
Were you the guy that made SSGT in under 4 years?
Tom
|
|
wmh131
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 43
Location:
Joined: February 2008
|
Post by wmh131 on Mar 26, 2008 21:39:14 GMT 9
Bill, Were you the guy that made SSGT in under 4 years? Tom Guilty as charged. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Dlugosh on Mar 27, 2008 1:55:37 GMT 9
I remember you also (as you were more than 40 + years ago.) I got to Loring in June of '64 and got married and moved to Limestone in late Dec. '64, but in between I remember some marathon pinochle games we were involved in. I'd be interested in hearing about life post USAF and the Livermore stretch. You can e-mail me at tom@store-fixtures.com if you want.
Tom
|
|
wmh131
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 43
Location:
Joined: February 2008
|
Post by wmh131 on Mar 27, 2008 5:34:42 GMT 9
I remember you also (as you were more than 40 + years ago.) I got to Loring in June of '64 and got married and moved to Limestone in late Dec. '64, but in between I remember some marathon pinochle games we were involved in. I'd be interested in hearing about life post USAF and the Livermore stretch. You can e-mail me at tom@store-fixtures.com if you want. Tom I remember the pinochle games and beer well. :yellowbeer: At Loring they were the ways to pass our spare time in Fall, Winter and Spring. We took the one day of Summer off!  I'll send an email in the next couple of days. Bill |
|
Bullhunter
Global Moderator 
318th FIS Jet Shop 1975-78
Currently: Online
Posts: 7,445 
Location:
Joined: May 2005
|
Post by Bullhunter on Mar 31, 2008 12:02:08 GMT 9
I did that also. Paycheck gets larger.  |
|
deuel
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 13
Location:
Joined: April 2008
|
Post by deuel on Apr 23, 2008 9:06:49 GMT 9
I'm new here, but I was stationed at Loring with the 27th when that bird (59-149) came in to land with theTacan saddle units, beating themselves to death on the side of the A/C. I seem to remember having to walk through a chunk of marshy area off the end of the base looking for the pieces of electronics that didn't make it home. The official verdict was "somebody screwed up" but I don't recall if anyone
in MA-1 got blamed for it. I seem to recall we lost several wingtips in '63 due to "somebody screwing up.
deuel
|
|
mummy
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 18
Location:
Joined: February 2009
|
Post by mummy on Feb 8, 2009 23:22:25 GMT 9
Of all of the planes we had at Loring I could just about count on seeing my name on the MA-1 assignment board adjacent to 149 when I came in to work every afternoon. I got there in January of '64, did some classroom upstairs conducted by Sgt. Solerzano (sp) then hit the flightline, I believe starting with 149 in the hanger, trying to get it put back together. By the way, the Sgt was a robust Italian with a booming voice. There was a window that faced the taxiway outside the shop and he liked to have it open. Must have been more towards spring. KC's and B52's would taxi past that window and sometimes sit there a minute waiting for takeoff clearance and be on their way. Noisier than hell, but the good Sgt with his baratone voice always kept on teaching shouting above the noise. Rarely closed the window.
Anyway, 149 was quite a problem for a year or two until most of the bugs were worked out, but it was never an easy fix when it was down. One problem that kept coming up was an intermintant loss of intercom to the back seat in flight. It went on for weeks. Difficult to duplicate because it always worked on ground power. I finally requested an engine run on the trim pad with me in the back seat to see if I could get it to fail. Never failed. With a ground mechanic in the front seat, me in the back, canopy closed we hit max throttle and afterburner 6 or 8 times. That radio and intercom never failed. I really don't remember if it ever reoccurred after that. It was a mysterious aircraft.
One of our trips to Tyndall included 149 and guess who was assigned to it? Yup. Got a drone too.
Unfortunately I read somewhere here it was shot down when assigned drone duty. Sad ending of a good memory.
|
|
