FOD was treated very seriously on the Carriers. My first day on the Ranger I got my ass chewed off by a commander for wearing my Dixie Cup (sailor cap) above the flight deck.
The caps can easily blow off and cause issues.
Of course there’s FOD, and then there’s FOD!
Apologies for the hijack.
Ugh! I don’t want to see that.
Stranger
If FOD is a problem, just make stronger engines:
IIRC, he was OK. The strap on his vest caught on the pitot tube (or something) and that kept him from being ingested.
I’d assume there is also a fair bit of actual non-simulator flying around required in that 18 months, which is fine in the middle of the continental US, but probably trickier when most other things in the sky want to kill you before you qualify.
Which prompts the question, in squeezy-packed Europe, do warplanes have to observe their national boundaries in normal circumstances, given that a lazy right turn could see you crossing half a dozen countries? Maybe there’s a Nato dispensation for friendly forces perhaps?
There have been several instances of crew becoming FOD, and more than one captured on video and put up on YouTube. In one I saw, the FOD got hung up on something before getting sucked too far in. There was a pic of him with his face all bandaged up but apparently he was okay-ish.
In other cases, the FOD simply gets squirted out the back in a puddle of blood, protoplasm and bone meal. Somewhere on-line I saw a still pic of that.
Ordinance for aircraft may have been destroyed on a large scale as well. So that also has to be got into the country. Unlikely that western ordinance can slot onto the rails of Russian aircraft. Trying to get such large complex a weapon as a jet fighter into a war zone that has quite good anti aircraft and ground transport defense as is active in Ukraine is a losing proposition. A jet fighter has to land somewhere. It will be tracked to that site. The attacker only needs to decide how many targets have landed versus when to destroy the facility.
As noted above, aircraft can be fitted with removable engine intake covers to prevent foreign objects entering the intake. These are removed before the engine is started and are painted a bright red to make it obvious that these are installed.
The Russian fighter in the video has a different design, with a retractable permanent screen which is lowered into the intake when the engine is off, They remain in place for engine startup and taxying, when a comparatively low airflow is required, which is supplied through auxiliary louvres which open on the ground, or in later aircraft through ventilation holes in the intake cover. The covers retract up into the top of the intake before the engine spools up to high power for takeoff and flight.
I’m a little surprised that, in the 30-odd years since these nations moved out from under the Soviet umbrella, none of them have started manufacturing their own parts as a matter of national security. My (perhaps mistaken?) understanding is that these nations wound up with the MiGs after the Soviet Union fell versus entering into some agreement like the US selling weapons systems that might include “no reverse engineering” in the lease agreement.
I’m sure there’s a perfectly good reason why Poland or Ukraine or whoever isn’t making their own parts but I don’t know what it is.
There is both the licensing issue—perhaps less of a concern as Russia certainly isn’t exporting these aircraft or parts to NATO nations today—and the fact that it just takes a lot of manufacturing and supply infrastructure to build replacement components even if you have design information or can reverse engineer them. This is especially true for avionics components, ordnance, or any of the exotic alloy components in the engines; you can’t just mill these out of a steel stock to some measured tolerances, and even if you can source a comparable alloy the manufacturing process may require such costly tooling (especially complex forgings or sintering) that it is unaffordable to make just a small quantity of them. There is a common meme in casting that the first one costs $50,000, and the nine hundred ninety-nine thousand cost a $0.50 each because all of the cost is in the tooling, not in the materials or finishing.
Stranger
An article on it:
Video shows U.S. Navy crewman getting sucked into A-6 air intake. He survived because of Intruder's engine design. - The Aviation Geek Club.
“When he was sucked in, his arm extended above his head which caused his body to wedge between the bullet and inside wall of the intake.”
He also added: “Lucky for him, his helmet and coat were sucked in first which prompted the pilot to cut the throttle.
If Ukraine has pilots already qualified to fly a fighter jet then it should be possible for those pilots to trainer on a different jet. It will take some time, but not as much as training an entirely brand new pilot.
Part of why that went off the rails is because of “loose lips” - whatever is happening with the Polish (and other) MiGs it is best that it is NOT talked about in order to keep the Russians in the dark as much as possible.
Taking planes apart in a manner conducive to reassembly, and reassembling those parts in a manner conducive to pilot survival, requires trained mechanics and time. This must be considered carefully and taken into account with any airplane transfer scheme.
There’s a reason quite a few air forces around the world will send their pilots to the US for some training. It’s not unusual for foreign pilots to be in the US doing their thing.
True but it still takes a long time as mentioned in the video posted by @Stranger_On_A_Train above in post #5.
It takes longer than one might think. Sure there is no need having to train them to fly but it seems that is the short part. Training them on a new fighter jet can take a great deal of time. New language used, new systems and performance characteristics and so on.
And there is more to it. You would have to get all the maintenance crews up to speed on a new plane. Not to mention getting the whole supply chain in place for spare parts put in place.
It’s not that it cannot be done but it is a lot more work than just handing over a plane.
Am I terribly out of place suggesting that, IMHO, a post consisting only of a YouTube link is missing a certain Olde-Tyme SDMB meatiness? Indeed, lacking a trace even of side-saladness?
For me it still always kinda throws me, like, so I have to watch an entire video now to know what his/her point is?
ETA-- that was a bit harsh probably. I think sometimes the changing board culture just leaves me behind a bit. But that’s on me. Cheers
That’s actually been the case for a long time now. During the early days of WWII, the British actually started several flight training schools in the US because it was problematic to have flight schools in the UK and coordinate with air defense, etc… I found this out because I saw a local PBS documentary about the nearby one in Terrell, TX (No. 1 British Flying Training School) during 1940-1945. There is actually a CWGC cemetery in Terrell where the pilots killed in accidents are buried.
I remember hearing about a crash a few years ago where a Russian pilot misread the artificial horizon because Russian artificial horizons work opposite to Western ones.
ETA: I found a video. This is actually where I heard about this crash, from The Smithsonian Channel. (I wish we still had that channel.) Images of the different artificial horizons can be seen at about 1:33. The crash was Crossair Flight 498, and it crashed on 10 January 2000.
I remember seeing something about that too although I think it was a commercial flight that crashed as a result.
Yes. My point was that if two pilots who were fully-trained in the aircraft they were flying could become disorientated because their previous flying was in aircraft equipped with an instrument that operates differently from the one in their current aircraft, then a single pilot in a fighter jet in combat conditions could also become disorientated if a Western-modified aircraft had an instrument that behaves oppositely from the ones s/he’s been using his or her entire career even when the aircraft itself is the same
The solution, if providing former-Soviet/Russian aircraft that have been modified, would be to re-equip them with the instrument(s) the pilots are familiar with. Otherwise more training (especially mock combat) would be needed to get rid of ‘bad habits’.
There is (at least used to be) an Air National Guard facility at Tucson International Airport where foreign pilots would come for F16 training. You could tell who was in town because their country’s flag would be flying in front of the facility while they were training.