All those clean releases of ordnance I have witnessed on video over a lifetime has made me take this all for granted. I now see that a lot of work has gone into the science of the separation. Learn something new every day. Respect to the pilots and engineers.
The reason for the USAF SEEK EAGLE program. I worked on this stuff for the F-16 program for several years. We also did a lot of wind tunnel testing at Arnold Engineering Development Center before ever doing actual separation tests with new stores configurations. Great video.
one question, if the 'warheads' hit the fuselage like what is shown; why doesn't the explosive go off, and detonate the whole plane (JP-7 and all)? as isn't that where the fuse is, at least on ww1\2 munitions, from historical footage courtesy of Zenos war birds and others.
My uncle was a Lieutenant bombardier aboard a Liberator in WWII. Sadly, a sister bomber was hit (by anti- aircraft fire, I assume) and the debris from it took out my uncle’s plane, too. He was only 22.
That was really interesting. I never thought about how dangerous it actually can be. I'm sure a lot of research has gone into finding ways to get stores to detach without damaging the aircraft.
Tests like these brought on the evolution of "EJECTOR FEET" in the bottom of weapons release racks, or otherwise stores release racks. One of the most popular, was the MAU-12 bomb rack. When the pilot pressed the pickle button, a 27 volt charge hits the primers of 2 impulse carts (similar in appearance to 12 ga. shotgun shells). The gas pressure expanding from their firing not only opens the 2 hooks that grab the bombs lugs that hold it in place, but the pressure sends 2 solid stainless steel rods about 10" long to strike the top of the weapon extremely hard, so as to knock the weapon away from the aircraft, as well as open the retaining hooks. No more tail or stab strikes. I was a Weapons Systems Specialist in the USAF. Decades later, I still remember all this shit, but barely remember what happened freakin' yesterday! Life gets pretty weird when you get old.
jonesy97 I was in line delivery 78-82. I delivered cartridges along with practice bombs and mostly inert missiles. I was surprised to see the somewhat modern aircraft having problems. What happened to that F15 at the end? Looked like it might have been the test squadron at Eglin, I was there in the 33rd TAC.
That F-15C was doing what is called an ESJ (External Stores Jettison) used in an emergency to free the a/c of weapons, and lighten the load, so to speak. What was falling from the pylon, was a 6x bomb rack, called a BRU-3/A. It holds 6 individual 500 lb bombs on four shoulder stations, and two bottom stations. He has what looks like a MK-82 SE still attached to the #2 (bottom front) station, and upon the ESJ firing, that is NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN!!! This is obviously testing in progress to see characteristics with a hung weapon (a bomb that will not properly release). Working at Eglin would have been my dream, because as a Weapons Specialist, that place is IT! I wish I could have been stationed there, as I loved my job. Can't you tell, Tony? He he!
jonesy97 Yeah, it's a fascinating career field. I made the rounds including trailer maint. And link/delink-both suck! 😄 Control was boring as hell, line delivery was the best. Being on the flightline. I got out too early, I would have been at least a master by gulf one. I love youtube, I can relive or learn things I never knew.
Wow, that's amazing. Thanks for the detailed explanation. I'm a newbee in this field. Worked on carriage analysis a couple years ago. Now doing stores release using CFD. Working towards comparing analysis with flight test results. Just started though. 😅 looks like a tough road ahead. Respect to all these people who get these things to work!
Some of the external fuel pods on World War II planes were repurposed as bodies for salt flat racers. They were either found after ejection or purchased as surplus and the hot-rodders would build a car out of them. The aerodynamic characteristics, aluminum construction, and strength of the fuel pod gave great benefits to the finished car. I guess they could be said to be the original, "pod racers."
Check out the amount of flex on that external pod at 1:13! I'm a commercial jet structures mechanic and often when riveting and Hi Loking lots of aluminum together I wonder "how strong is this stuff, really?" Even after many years of work I wonder this. The amount of flex with no breakage at 1:13 (and many other parts of this intriguing video) testifies to the incredible high strength of aircraft structures.
😂😂😂😂ну ты и сказанул американец ты посмотри видео с нашими су 24 когда прилетают с боя пол самолета нету как так ? А он сам прилетел и летчик живой , а ты говоришь !
Reminds me of acoustic torpedoes the Germans developed in WWII. They were designed to home in on the sound of boat engines. But sometimes they'd lose their target and home in on the submarine that launched them. Some Wile E. Coyote stuff right there.
@@bradsanders407 torpedoes have a gyroscope inside them that disables them if the torpedo starts to do a 180. All it would take for a submarine to be sunk by its own torpedo would be for the torpedo to have a stuck rudder. The gyroscope stops this.
It surprises me that these things being dropped are light enough to "float" vertically so much, yet heavy enough to keep up with the aircraft horizontally for so long. I would think they'd either be heavy and fall downward quickly, or else be light and be swept rearward (relative to the powered aircraft) immediately by the wind. They look like drunken geese flying in formation.
Right? I was thinking as I watched these that, given how much money is spent on just that ONE WEAPON being dropped right there, you'd think someone could have spent another few hundred bucks on a better camera.
You sound like an old shit who couldn't get to the pharmacy before it closed to get your hard-on pill refill so you're taking it out on the internet. Go to bed, cranky.
Fast moving air directly under the plane is lower pressure than air 10ft below the plane. Bombs get sucked upwards. WW2 dive bombers had a swing mount so the bomb swung away from the plane before release. Many people think this is to clear the propellor but it’s more about clearing the aircraft tail.
Second airplane in video, F-105, had bomb bay for carrying nuke internally. Rather than using explosive cartridges to power the weapon away, as was done on wing stations, a large actuator in the top of the bomb bay was charged with nitrogen gas at 225 psi. The bomb rack was bolted to the bottom of the actuator. A gas valve tied to the bomb release circuit unlocked the actuator and allowed it to shove the bomb out with plenty of separation. It worked quite well.
The Thud was an awesome plane in its time. Sadly it wasn't really built for the kinds of missions it flew in Vietnam. Navy pilots used to joke that with only one engine, if you had a flame-out the next sound you heard was Thud!
This is related to how the US Navy's nuclear attack bomber became a reconnaissance aircraft. The Navy had to have it's own nuclear bomber, that could be launched and recovered from aircraft carriers so the A-5 Vigilante was developed. The A-5 held the nuclear weapon in a bomb bay right between the two jet engines. It was designed to slide right out the back. Except it didn't. Air flow around the tail end between the engines pushed the bomb back into the bomb bay after release, and it would rattle around inside the jet. I don't think the Navy ever tried dropping a real nuke, only test bombs (nuclear parts replaced with sensors) and totally inert dummys. But a bomber that can't deliver it's bombs can't be a bomber. So it was converted to a photo reconnaissance jet with camera equipment where the bomb used to be.
We had the same problem in the early days of F-14 development. They hung 500 pound bombs from racks on ether side of the center line rails and in dive bombing runs when they pickled the bombs off they would get hung in the boundary layer between the intakes and just sit there bouncing around and beating the crap out of the belly of the Tomcat. The pilots would have to pull some hard G's to get rid of the ordnance. Needless to say the bombs landed anywhere but on target. New racks, new bomb shape, and a few other technical changes fixed it.
Ferndalien I always wondered why a photo-recon plane had to be so LARGE...now I know! Thank you! ...nothing quite so exciting as getting butt-fucked by a nuke....
MiG-25 speed: Mach 2.83 (Mach 3.2 is possible but at risk of significant damage to the engines), North American A-5A: Maximum speed: Mach 2.0... MiG-21 was able to fly faster(Mach2.05). You need to have no idea in the topic to swalow that BS.
The A-37 and F-105 ones were really scary. Some of the other ones, the fuse set would have kept the munition from exploding but you NEVER want your stores hitting your a/c.
That's why we test things, over and over, I worked Weapons lading in the air Force for nearly 20 years, a couple in weapons testing the Pilots who fly these drops have big armored steel ones. I've seen them come back after EUBAR drop and look at the carnage wrought on the airplane and like it was nothing. and do the same thing again in the afternoon
This is one of the reasons the UK Harrier GR5, 7 and 9 were never fitted with the guns. The discarded links and cases curled round from under the belly and hit your own fin and tail planes.
That was interesting. I would have pissed my pants laughing, if they ended this YT video, with that scene with Slim Pickens riding the H-bomb down, from Dr Strangelove 🤣🤣🤣
The German stuka of WW2 fame already had an eject system which released the ordnance only when it was outside the low pressure zone around the aircraft.
I was doing intercepts of bogey aircraft in the Texas Air Guard when a wsem (weapon system evaluation missle) came unglued from the rail. Evedently the weapons mechanics loaded it incorrectly or the rail lugs failed (I had done the preflight and shook the missle clone to ck it ) anyway, when it unassed itself, it nosed up and struck the rt elevon. The aircraft left controlled flight with an immediate 40 degree pitch-up resulting in a subsequent stall and spin. After 4-1/2 turn nose down spin, I and 8000' I got it back. Besides a split in the elevon and hinge assembly , there's was no other damage except I believe the seat cushion had to be surgically removed from my ass. I bought the drinks in terms OC that night. I spent the next 4 days writing reports and signing the -1 paperwork.
not my fault you want to die to make the rich man richer.. My buddy got cancer from his service.. Rich man has never been richer and turn your guns in ! Like all your immigrants? You can support them on your tax dollar and send your kids to school with some real GANGSTERS! Now what?
Spent 4 years in the Air Force and didn't even realise this was a thing. Guess they keep it under wraps for a reason, but makes perfect sense that things seldom go perfectly.
The RAFs carriers had cartridges as you described but also two pistons that punched the weapon away and into the airflow so it allowed a safe separation
I saw a Bomb release one time where the pilot had to ride the bomb out of the bomb bay like horse, yelling YaHoo and waving his cowboy hat, all the way to detonation.
1:49 the munition doesn't have fins in default mode (why? Drag? Fit more on?), and they spring too late after it drops to keep it going correct direction and it is already turning and moving sideways when they do. It's an interesting and depressing thought perhaps that if they FIXED the timing, and something failed in it (stuck fin, electronic failure), it could do the same thing or far worse. Something to ponder when trying to shave a tiny bit of drag off!
Great videos. Good to know they were tests ( now I understand the camera positions) I hope most of the planes made it back safely even with one elevator damaged so badly.
For those of you who have wondered why they don't have missiles that fire backwards, think about what happens if you drop something that aerodynamically wants to face one way, and drop it when it's going a few 100 mph the exact other way, and think about what you've just seen to things even very MILDLY flipping about in the airflow like this ;)
@@robertleach5355 They have "off-boresight" IR missiles that can turn a 180 after firing, but no aircraft carries any missiles backwards. Aerodynamically they can't. A missile facing backwards would be unstable and cause severe flutter.
The only thing I can compare this to that ordinary people might experience a similar consequence.. Hitting mailboxes with a baseball bat hanging out the side of a car. The bat can come back at you with some serious force and you end up getting it worse than the mailbox.
The fact that all these were so well filmed leads me to believe these separations were all intentional for some reason. Perhaps to determine design flaws or reveal dangers in design
LOL No, they don't PLAN for these to fail and then film it, these are MAJOR failures, just caught on film. ALL new ordnance gets filmed when being dropped until the DOD agency (in my case Navy) is satisfied with the separations.
Jesus ! Imagine firing off a missile at Mach 2 and it comes barrel rolling over your nose, with the rocket motor spewing burning fuel all over your canopy.
Thanks for all the explanations. I was assuming they were releases during maneuvering/turbulance. In a few shots i saw what i assumed were vapor trails from fuselage junctures. I was thinking they were releases during other than straight and level flying.
This is the exact reason why the Super Hornet has unaerodynamic canted wing stations. However, the problem was not solved, but they stuck with the bad design anyhow.
The RAF call them Ejector Release Units or ERUs, and the ejector rams push the stores away, they do not strike them as that could cause a catastrophe. Interesting to note that the USA servicemen only had one job at a time, whereas the RAF armourers did and do everything, whatever comes along. If it goes bang, we handle it lol.
Objects behavior can be so unpredictable in the air. To have aircraft capable of dropping bombs with any resemblance of accuracy is nothing short of an engineering an achievement.
This was precisely the reason my dear 'ol dad invented the ejector bomb rack in the 1950s. Separate (eject), the ordinance from that region of high pressure so we do not have incidental contact with the airplane.....Holds several patents. BTW that never stopped the airplane giants like Northrup, Grumman, Boeing and the likes from STEALING his design without compensation!
Having worked on Navy ordnance early in my career ('82-'91) at China Lake, I'm pretty familiar with the TER and MER racks, I had to use the dwgs as a Draftsman to copy side views to show our missiles on it. These failures are some of pilots worst nightmares, looks like the pilot had to jettison that entire MER rack near the end. You can jettison either TER or MER racks in an emergency for when shit REALLY hits the fan! There are explosive charges to drop the ordnance, but also to jettison the racks in case of an emergency.
Impulse carts (which look like short shotgun shells) are fired when the pilot presses the pickle button, the the gas pressure forces the hooks that hold the lugs on the weapon(s) as well as the aforementioned ejector feet to push the weapon away from the aircraft.
The only one I've ever seen was much less dramatic than the ones shown here and was more of a wrong switch incident. We were up at the Warren Grove Bombing Range in the New Jersey Pine Barrens back in the pre-9/11 days when spectators were allowed in to watch practice bombing and gun runs just by signing a clipboard. An A-37 Dragonfly (trainer) was coming in on a bombing run and suddenly an object MUCH larger than the 50lb practice bombs detached and came spinning down!! The rookie pilot dropped his drop tank instead of the practice bomb!! My friend had his - by today's standards - antique video camera going and you can hear one worried voice say "CRAP!! I hope that's not a real bomb!!". The guys up in the tower were all cracking up and giving him a hard time on the radio.
All those clean releases of ordnance I have witnessed on video over a lifetime has made me take this all for granted. I now see that a lot of work has gone into the science of the separation. Learn something new every day. Respect to the pilots and engineers.
The video proves your imagination insubstantial.
The reason for the USAF SEEK EAGLE program. I worked on this stuff for the F-16 program for several years. We also did a lot of wind tunnel testing at Arnold Engineering Development Center before ever doing actual separation tests with new stores configurations. Great video.
Tell me why there so much turbulence suddenly and even make the bomb do lift, seperate too close the fuselage? Stay safe over there
I was about to ask about wind tunnel testing. The unpowered bombs keep up with the jet-propelled plane??
@@asiastreets4032руки из ж@пы потому-что)))))
Most of the engineering is done by drafting technicians.
one question, if the 'warheads' hit the fuselage like what is shown; why doesn't the explosive go off, and detonate the whole plane (JP-7 and all)? as isn't that where the fuse is, at least on ww1\2 munitions, from historical footage courtesy of Zenos war birds and others.
My uncle was a Lieutenant bombardier aboard a Liberator in WWII. Sadly, a sister bomber was hit (by anti- aircraft fire, I assume) and the debris from it took out my uncle’s plane, too. He was only 22.
Nobody cares. Tell me what YOU did in the war.
@@lc3853 Well, aren’t we all that and more.
@@lc3853 "Tell me what YOU did" in WWII ??
Well, for example, not born yet
@@lc3853 Troll alert!
@@lc3853your momma needs to re-raise you.
That was really interesting. I never thought about how dangerous it actually can be. I'm sure a lot of research has gone into finding ways to get stores to detach without damaging the aircraft.
Flying at high speed with detachable ordinance -- what could go wrong?
remember Maj. Kong.
Tests like these brought on the evolution of "EJECTOR FEET" in the bottom of weapons release racks, or otherwise stores release racks. One of the most popular, was the MAU-12 bomb rack. When the pilot pressed the pickle button, a 27 volt charge hits the primers of 2 impulse carts (similar in appearance to 12 ga. shotgun shells). The gas pressure expanding from their firing not only opens the 2 hooks that grab the bombs lugs that hold it in place, but the pressure sends 2 solid stainless steel rods about 10" long to strike the top of the weapon extremely hard, so as to knock the weapon away from the aircraft, as well as open the retaining hooks. No more tail or stab strikes. I was a Weapons Systems Specialist in the USAF. Decades later, I still remember all this shit, but barely remember what happened freakin' yesterday! Life gets pretty weird when you get old.
jonesy97 I was in line delivery 78-82. I delivered cartridges along with practice bombs and mostly inert missiles. I was surprised to see the somewhat modern aircraft having problems. What happened to that F15 at the end? Looked like it might have been the test squadron at Eglin, I was there in the 33rd TAC.
That F-15C was doing what is called an ESJ (External Stores Jettison) used in an emergency to free the a/c of weapons, and lighten the load, so to speak. What was falling from the pylon, was a 6x bomb rack, called a BRU-3/A. It holds 6 individual 500 lb bombs on four shoulder stations, and two bottom stations. He has what looks like a MK-82 SE still attached to the #2 (bottom front) station, and upon the ESJ firing, that is NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN!!! This is obviously testing in progress to see characteristics with a hung weapon (a bomb that will not properly release). Working at Eglin would have been my dream, because as a Weapons Specialist, that place is IT! I wish I could have been stationed there, as I loved my job. Can't you tell, Tony? He he!
jonesy97 Yeah, it's a fascinating career field. I made the rounds including trailer maint. And link/delink-both suck! 😄 Control was boring as hell, line delivery was the best. Being on the flightline. I got out too early, I would have been at least a master by gulf one. I love youtube, I can relive or learn things I never knew.
The UK also used Fraser Nash powered rams to launch Skyflash/Sparrow from the Tornado F3. Helped widen the envelope for missile launch dramatically.
jonesy97 Thank you for your service!
Amazing how air foiling changes how things release, or don't properly.
"A little kiss before I go sweetie"
😅😂😅😂😅😂
Lol
Wow, that's amazing. Thanks for the detailed explanation. I'm a newbee in this field. Worked on carriage analysis a couple years ago. Now doing stores release using CFD. Working towards comparing analysis with flight test results. Just started though. 😅 looks like a tough road ahead. Respect to all these people who get these things to work!
I use Computational Fluid Dynamics to make piston engines make more horsepower at racing rpms.
Some of the external fuel pods on World War II planes were repurposed as bodies for salt flat racers. They were either found after ejection or purchased as surplus and the hot-rodders would build a car out of them. The aerodynamic characteristics, aluminum construction, and strength of the fuel pod gave great benefits to the finished car. I guess they could be said to be the original, "pod racers."
yes, I read and saw images of them in books when I was kid in 1970.
I made a scan and 3D print of one of those for the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn michigan.
Now THIS is podracing.
Check out the amount of flex on that external pod at 1:13! I'm a commercial jet structures mechanic and often when riveting and Hi Loking lots of aluminum together I wonder "how strong is this stuff, really?" Even after many years of work I wonder this. The amount of flex with no breakage at 1:13 (and many other parts of this intriguing video) testifies to the incredible high strength of aircraft structures.
😂😂😂😂ну ты и сказанул американец ты посмотри видео с нашими су 24 когда прилетают с боя пол самолета нету как так ? А он сам прилетел и летчик живой , а ты говоришь !
@@МихаилКалугин-к4щyou mean the su's shot down by Ukraine?
Reminds me of acoustic torpedoes the Germans developed in WWII. They were designed to home in on the sound of boat engines. But sometimes they'd lose their target and home in on the submarine that launched them. Some Wile E. Coyote stuff right there.
You would think they would shut their engines off when firing one of those.
@@bradsanders407 torpedoes have a gyroscope inside them that disables them if the torpedo starts to do a 180. All it would take for a submarine to be sunk by its own torpedo would be for the torpedo to have a stuck rudder. The gyroscope stops this.
Pilot: Bombs away
Bomb: Lol naw
Boom!
You made me recall the scene in Dark Star when the bombardier tries to get the bomb to release by discussing philosophy with it.
It surprises me that these things being dropped are light enough to "float" vertically so much, yet heavy enough to keep up with the aircraft horizontally for so long. I would think they'd either be heavy and fall downward quickly, or else be light and be swept rearward (relative to the powered aircraft) immediately by the wind. They look like drunken geese flying in formation.
good material and i like that you put no music or sound it's the best unless the footage already has recorded sound
was hoping for a robotic text to speech narration really :(
Super video. A rare compilation of really interesting situations out of the reach of the common man.
This short movie cost more than avatar
Right? I was thinking as I watched these that, given how much money is spent on just that ONE WEAPON being dropped right there, you'd think someone could have spent another few hundred bucks on a better camera.
Krzysztof Kunicki which is why the US is broke.
@@marvinplettner You sound like a 12 year old who thinks Go Pro and digital recording has been around forever.
You sound like an old shit who couldn't get to the pharmacy before it closed to get your hard-on pill refill so you're taking it out on the internet. Go to bed, cranky.
Marvin Plettner
No need in fussing, silly gooses.
Fast moving air directly under the plane is lower pressure than air 10ft below the plane. Bombs get sucked upwards.
WW2 dive bombers had a swing mount so the bomb swung away from the plane before release. Many people think this is to clear the propellor but it’s more about clearing the aircraft tail.
Wouldn’t the fast moving air, low pressure, be just above the wing?
Second airplane in video, F-105, had bomb bay for carrying nuke internally. Rather than using explosive cartridges to power the weapon away, as was done on wing stations, a large actuator in the top of the bomb bay was charged with nitrogen gas at 225 psi. The bomb rack was bolted to the bottom of the actuator. A gas valve tied to the bomb release circuit unlocked the actuator and allowed it to shove the bomb out with plenty of separation. It worked quite well.
The Thud was an awesome plane in its time. Sadly it wasn't really built for the kinds of missions it flew in Vietnam. Navy pilots used to joke that with only one engine, if you had a flame-out the next sound you heard was Thud!
Bill C, in the USAF, we used to say that Thud jocks scored kills by driving uo next to a Mig and blowing up.
Sounds like you were a 462 / 2W1 like me!
Except the bomb bay usually held an auxiliary fuel tank.
This is related to how the US Navy's nuclear attack bomber became a reconnaissance aircraft. The Navy had to have it's own nuclear bomber, that could be launched and recovered from aircraft carriers so the A-5 Vigilante was developed. The A-5 held the nuclear weapon in a bomb bay right between the two jet engines. It was designed to slide right out the back.
Except it didn't.
Air flow around the tail end between the engines pushed the bomb back into the bomb bay after release, and it would rattle around inside the jet. I don't think the Navy ever tried dropping a real nuke, only test bombs (nuclear parts replaced with sensors) and totally inert dummys. But a bomber that can't deliver it's bombs can't be a bomber. So it was converted to a photo reconnaissance jet with camera equipment where the bomb used to be.
We had the same problem in the early days of F-14 development. They hung 500 pound bombs from racks on ether side of the center line rails and in dive bombing runs when they pickled the bombs off they would get hung in the boundary layer between the intakes and just sit there bouncing around and beating the crap out of the belly of the Tomcat. The pilots would have to pull some hard G's to get rid of the ordnance. Needless to say the bombs landed anywhere but on target. New racks, new bomb shape, and a few other technical changes fixed it.
Ferndalien I always wondered why a photo-recon plane had to be so LARGE...now I know! Thank you!
...nothing quite so exciting as getting butt-fucked by a nuke....
Looks like an FB-111. Anyway that's unsettling. Wouldn't want to pilot an aircraft with a nuclear bomb rattling around inside. Ugh.
MiG-25 speed: Mach 2.83 (Mach 3.2 is possible but at risk of significant damage to the engines), North American A-5A: Maximum speed: Mach 2.0... MiG-21 was able to fly faster(Mach2.05). You need to have no idea in the topic to swalow that BS.
Baily, are you disputing your own comment or someone else's? Your comment seems woefully disjointed from the conversation that was being had.
The A-37 and F-105 ones were really scary. Some of the other ones, the fuse set would have kept the munition from exploding but you NEVER want your stores hitting your a/c.
The F-111 wasn't any better.
Air Conditioner?
@@MrChopsticktech Air Craft = a/c.
@@caribman10 The F-105 still looks futuristic. But the short wings likely required a very fast landing to keep from stalling and losing lift.
That's why we test things, over and over, I worked Weapons lading in the air Force for nearly 20 years, a couple in weapons testing the Pilots who fly these drops have big armored steel ones. I've seen them come back after EUBAR drop and look at the carnage wrought on the airplane and like it was nothing. and do the same thing again in the afternoon
@therealnightwriter Proof?
we? You are a fat piece of pus in a arm chair.
0:28 that's one way to deploy your carrier deck landing hook
That aircraft seems to be an F-111. While it does have an arrestor hook, that one’s too weak for use on aircraft carriers.
This is one of the reasons the UK Harrier GR5, 7 and 9 were never fitted with the guns. The discarded links and cases curled round from under the belly and hit your own fin and tail planes.
This this the reason why militaries all across the world stopped purchasing everything from ACME.
That was interesting.
I would have pissed my pants laughing, if they ended this YT video, with that scene with Slim Pickens riding the H-bomb down, from Dr Strangelove 🤣🤣🤣
The air flow dynamics couple with aerodynamic shapes of the stores added to the speed of the aircraft, all those as up to weird and scary movements
So do those pilots now have separation anxiety?
Yes they do
Well Played....
Heyooooo
ua-cam.com/video/6YMPAH67f4o/v-deo.html
...attachment issues?🤣🤣
The German stuka of WW2 fame already had an eject system which released the ordnance only when it was outside the low pressure zone around the aircraft.
- This brings to mind the D-21 piggyback drone (pioletless SR-71) mishap with its mothership SR-71 carrier.
Man, these test pilots put it all out there. Total Respect!
I now need to go back and re-watch the "conversation with a bomb" scenes from Dark Star.
Just found this video. What a great collection of "Oh Shit!" moments.
Whew! Thanks! Had not even thought of this type malfunction.
I was doing intercepts of bogey aircraft in the Texas Air Guard when a wsem (weapon system evaluation missle) came unglued from the rail. Evedently the weapons mechanics loaded it incorrectly or the rail lugs failed (I had done the preflight and shook the missle clone to ck it ) anyway, when it unassed itself, it nosed up and struck the rt elevon. The aircraft left controlled flight with an immediate 40 degree pitch-up resulting in a subsequent stall and spin. After 4-1/2 turn nose down spin, I and 8000' I got it back. Besides a split in the elevon and hinge assembly , there's was no other damage except I believe the seat cushion had to be surgically removed from my ass. I bought the drinks in terms OC that night. I spent the next 4 days writing reports and signing the -1 paperwork.
Was this in an F-4E? I vaguely remember reading something about this.
texn8 you mean they were able to remove the cushion ? Lol
not my fault you want to die to make the rich man richer.. My buddy got cancer from his service.. Rich man has never been richer and turn your guns in ! Like all your immigrants? You can support them on your tax dollar and send your kids to school with some real GANGSTERS! Now what?
Better doing paperwork than being dead.
You caught it, got it, put it on the ground. Even had a preflight that didn’t show anything obviously wrong. Great flying IMO.
I needed this on Monday. Thank you.
"Bomb No. 20, please return to your bay."
"Oh, very well! But this is the LAST TIME."
The fuel tanks sure do have hard feelings for their parent aircraft.
I am just baffled by how well Tiny Tim´s Loving in the Moonlight accompanies this video.
Spent 4 years in the Air Force and didn't even realise this was a thing. Guess they keep it under wraps for a reason, but makes perfect sense that things seldom go perfectly.
0:08 I like how the horizontal tail on the F-105 just took it like a champ!
Yet another reason to nickname it "The Thud" - lol!
We should see more of these fails, and it goes to show that it isn't always perfect.😎
Awesome video. I haven't seen any of these before.
That's why fighter pilots don't throw their cigarette butts out the window until they land.
"Don't forget to give your mommy a kiss before you go."
Aerodynamics 101: given enough airspeed, you can make anything fly.
"Given sufficient thrust can make anything fly" 🤓
The RAFs carriers had cartridges as you described but also two pistons that punched the weapon away and into the airflow so it allowed a safe separation
I figured that, l never saw any footage of RAF incidents.
Now imagine the difficulty of releasing weapons loads from a hyper-sonic bomber.
I can only imagine what those pilots where thinking during these tests. Probably something like " crap crap crap crap holy shit!" Lol
*plonk* *crush* "Nuh-uh, that ain't right"
awesome , aerodynamics as a unit and individually .
I saw a Bomb release one time where the pilot had to ride the bomb out of the bomb bay like horse, yelling YaHoo and waving his cowboy hat, all the way to detonation.
Dr Strangelove was the movie, Major Kong was the Bomb Rider...
I would have pissed my pants laughing,
if they ended this YT video,
with that scene from Dr Strangelove 🤣🤣🤣
From the YT vault :) *Dr. Strangelove - Major Kong Rides the Bomb (1964)* ua-cam.com/video/3edi2Wkr5YI/v-deo.html
Yeah, we saw Slim Pickens heeing and hawing too...
Lives at China Lake as a kid, remember a few things like this happening during testing
Plenty of crazy cross winds up at that altitude that will influence things more than we could imagine as we just witnessed.
1.50 musta sounded like a dozen dimes in a washing machine!
Wow. Had no idea that simply "dropping them" was not that simple.. May the Air-God protect the test pilots :O)
i don't see how Chuck Yeager can protect them...
re: "May the Air-God protect the test pilots" let's leave Bob Hoover out of this, he's done his time/duty.
Best way you can protect them is turn your guns in. And pay more in tax...Freedom aint free pay up!
And impeach trump.
@@nicparker3809 I thought Mr Obama confiscated all guns? Fox lied! Impeach trump.
1:49 the munition doesn't have fins in default mode (why? Drag? Fit more on?), and they spring too late after it drops to keep it going correct direction and it is already turning and moving sideways when they do.
It's an interesting and depressing thought perhaps that if they FIXED the timing, and something failed in it (stuck fin, electronic failure), it could do the same thing or far worse. Something to ponder when trying to shave a tiny bit of drag off!
Great videos. Good to know they were tests ( now I understand the camera positions) I hope most of the planes made it back safely even with one elevator damaged so badly.
For those of you who have wondered why they don't have missiles that fire backwards, think about what happens if you drop something that aerodynamically wants to face one way, and drop it when it's going a few 100 mph the exact other way, and think about what you've just seen to things even very MILDLY flipping about in the airflow like this ;)
They do have missles that fire backwards though.
@@bradsanders407Oh? Which ones?
@@johnhickman106the Russians have some of their ir missiles which they can launch rearwards from aircraft such as the Su-34
@@robertleach5355 They have "off-boresight" IR missiles that can turn a 180 after firing, but no aircraft carries any missiles backwards. Aerodynamically they can't. A missile facing backwards would be unstable and cause severe flutter.
The early Vigilantes had the backwards bomb projector. That's not a missle, but that's only instance I can think of rearward fired munitions.
Fortunately you can always get new aircraft from the aircraft store.
The only thing I can compare this to that ordinary people might experience a similar consequence.. Hitting mailboxes with a baseball bat hanging out the side of a car. The bat can come back at you with some serious force and you end up getting it worse than the mailbox.
The fact that all these were so well filmed leads me to believe these separations were all intentional for some reason. Perhaps to determine design flaws or reveal dangers in design
Yes, it’s all trials footage.
LOL No, they don't PLAN for these to fail and then film it, these are MAJOR failures, just caught on film. ALL new ordnance gets filmed when being dropped until the DOD agency (in my case Navy) is satisfied with the separations.
Worked on bomb/missle rack design, late 80's. The acceleration down & away from the aircraft was tremendous.
ATTACHED TO MY AIRPLANE?
NOT JUST "NO"-- " HELL NO!!!"
Jesus ! Imagine firing off a missile at Mach 2 and it comes barrel rolling over your nose, with the rocket motor spewing burning fuel all over your canopy.
Pilot : what a wonderful day.
Rocket : lets start a war.
0:32 "You are gonna need this hook. Here, let me drop it for you."
Started at REM sleep and learning/ memory and ended up here.. Gotta love the internet.
It's a good thing that those things don't have zero time impact fuses.
Thanks for all the explanations. I was assuming they were releases during maneuvering/turbulance. In a few shots i saw what i assumed were vapor trails from fuselage junctures. I was thinking they were releases during other than straight and level flying.
1:25 "Iraqis again... launching sidewinder missile"
This is the exact reason why the Super Hornet has unaerodynamic canted wing stations. However, the problem was not solved, but they stuck with the bad design anyhow.
Who's the jokester who filled those bombs with helium?
And here’s me thinking that dropped bombs would just travel straight downwards..
It's not possible to watch this without saying "Oh shit!"
The RAF call them Ejector Release Units or ERUs, and the ejector rams push the stores away, they do not strike them as that could cause a catastrophe. Interesting to note that the USA servicemen only had one job at a time, whereas the RAF armourers did and do everything, whatever comes along. If it goes bang, we handle it lol.
John Taylor more a lack of funds in the RAF than any inherent superior skill...
couldnt help it eh billy bob? hahahah
Working smarter, not necessarily harder.
С такими ракетами как барон Мюнхаузен на ядре, авось долечу не рванёт
I see why the Soviets were not fan of separate fuel storage tanks on the wings.
this would be nice footage for a sound design contest
Objects behavior can be so unpredictable in the air.
To have aircraft capable of dropping bombs with any resemblance of accuracy is nothing short of an engineering an achievement.
Wow, crazy, crazy stuff!
As I watched this I kept hearing Randy Newman playing like I was watching Pixar outtakes. Really, really expensive outtakes....
Pilot: ordinance away... I've been hit!?!?
2:31 I think he lost his exhaust pipe and muffler
Always wondered why certain missiles were launched by dropping them clear of the aircraft before the motor ignited.
Awesome video . 😎
Thats a clear case of using "external stores jettison" handle,............😂😂😂
This is why they do test flights.
After incidents like this people have to go back to the drawing board
Lesson from this Video:
DO NOT DROP BOMB.
1:49 lmao what a clusterfuck
And this is why they can achieve pinpoint accuracy with their bombs.
This was precisely the reason my dear 'ol dad invented the ejector bomb rack in the 1950s. Separate (eject), the ordinance from that region of high pressure so we do not have incidental contact with the airplane.....Holds several patents. BTW that never stopped the airplane giants like Northrup, Grumman, Boeing and the likes from STEALING his design without compensation!
Lordy! Some of those bombs look pretty dangerous.
At 2:12 that F-16 turned into a bendy straw. Wow.
Having worked on Navy ordnance early in my career ('82-'91) at China Lake, I'm pretty familiar with the TER and MER racks, I had to use the dwgs as a Draftsman to copy side views to show our missiles on it. These failures are some of pilots worst nightmares, looks like the pilot had to jettison that entire MER rack near the end. You can jettison either TER or MER racks in an emergency for when shit REALLY hits the fan! There are explosive charges to drop the ordnance, but also to jettison the racks in case of an emergency.
Are weapons jettisoned by using squibs on loaded springs? Or is Mr Newton is all that's required to steer the ordnance away from the airframe?
Impulse carts (which look like short shotgun shells) are fired when the pilot presses the pickle button, the the gas pressure forces the hooks that hold the lugs on the weapon(s) as well as the aforementioned ejector feet to push the weapon away from the aircraft.
is this pre CAD jettison technology? When were CADs introduced?
The only one I've ever seen was much less dramatic than the ones shown here and was more of a wrong switch incident.
We were up at the Warren Grove Bombing Range in the New Jersey Pine Barrens back in the pre-9/11 days when spectators were allowed in to watch practice bombing and gun runs just by signing a clipboard.
An A-37 Dragonfly (trainer) was coming in on a bombing run and suddenly an object MUCH larger than the 50lb practice bombs detached and came spinning down!! The rookie pilot dropped his drop tank instead of the practice bomb!!
My friend had his - by today's standards - antique video camera going and you can hear one worried voice say "CRAP!! I hope that's not a real bomb!!". The guys up in the tower were all cracking up and giving him a hard time on the radio.
The wind tunnel guys said, “no problem.”
That is shitting in the wind. BTW, them drop loads flew chaotic due to my farting ahead :P
It’s amazing they actually have film of this. And why doesn’t this stuff just drop off instead of sailing up and ripping off tail planes?
Air directly under plane is moving faster than air 10ft below the plane. The bomb gets sucked upwards.
Aerodynamics
What a fucking nightmare
I had a car like that, around 90mph, big bits would fall off it.