Arrestor Gear Installed At Raaf Amberley Date?, any clues will be helpful - thanks

[Luig]

When was any sort of arrestor gear installed at RAAF Amberley please? Thanks. I had assumed that the Phantoms flying for a few years there would have seen some kind of arrestor gear installed - but perhaps not. Probably whatever gear then has been upgraded since. Thanks for any help.
Phil.

[Luig]

At least we know the gear was there in 1970:

http://www.angelfire.com/extreme/raafphantoms/RAAFF4E.htm

"...A cruel twist of fate involved 69-7234 (the replacement aircraft) on her very first flight out of Amberley after delivery. On October 19th, 1970, FLTLT Jack Ellis and SQNLDR Brian Bolger experienced a generator and bus tie contactor failure. This meant a loss of nosewheel steering and anti-skid brakes together with a few other control systems. With a strong crosswind at Amberley, Ellis wisely elected to engage the arrestor cable for recovery. Unfortunately, the cable snapped on engagement and the huge shock absorber was dragged through the hook, breaking it off but also imparting a turning and nose rearing component to the flight path. The aircraft came back on the runway with about 30 degrees of drift, then proceeded to slide off the sealed surface sideways, ground looped during which the right main gear and the nosewheel collapsed. When the aircraft came to a stop, Bolger blew the rear canopy off and exited, while Ellis, opened his and followed rapidly. They both suffered only minor, superficial injuries."

This post has been edited by Luig on Feb 24 2008, 05:02 PM

[mark]

Luig,
I have received the following information from an extremely helpful ex RAAF
Canberra/F-4E/F-111 pilot concerning the arrestor gear at Amberley.

Quote...."The arrestor gear at Amberley is a long saga and I can fill you in on most of the background but some of the finer detail may be a bit off here and there.
When the decision to buy the F-111 was made, the need for an arresting system was confirmed. At that time, none of the US (BAK) systems could meet the requirements of such a heavy aircraft as the F-111. The RAAF put out a tender and the Swedish company, BEFAB, won the contract.
Their installation was the model BEFAB 56.2, which involved an above ground drum and brake unit to each side of the strip (about 20m off the edge), using a huge cable with a large metal shock absorber between the drum and the runway. The cable was held up by (about) 6 inch strong rubber donuts, to ensure that the cable was high enough for the hook to catch it. This had the impact of limiting the trample speed of most aircraft as the possibility of damage to bogey-type gear and low fuselages (like the C-130) was high. This was due to the nosewheel exciting some form of wave in the cable, which got worse before it settled down.
The BEFAB 56.2 in its original configuration was installed at Amberley in 1968-9.
As you are aware, the system caused the major damage to 234 in late 1970 and was deactivated until a lengthy investigation was conducted. Then SQNLDR Ron Green (a test pilot from ARDU) did the majority of the work on the investigation and redesign of the system and I can recall Pete Condon did some high speed ground engagements in the F-4E, in the 71-72 timeframe. It was cleared for the F-4E but never used and I suggest, understandably!
The system was not a popular one amongst either the aircrew, the techos or the ATC folks and was phased out after the F-111 was delivered. The trample limits really caused a hassle with aircraft movements and for some types, the available runway length was shortened by 1500' as the speed limit for running over the cable was down to less than about 20-30kts.
By that time, the BAK-14 was on the market,,which had (I recall) higher speed and weight capability than its predecessors and met the RAAF specification. The RAAF initiated a service wide program to install the BAK-14 (which has its controls, brake drums etc, all located underground in a concrete bunker adjacent to the runway and the cable recessed into the runway and raised on request by the ATC folks, thus overcoming the trampling limits of the BEFAB).
I don't recall exactly when the BAK-14 was installed but it has been at Amberley for over 20 years at least.
Hope this helps"....Unquote.

Luig, I hope this more than answers your original question!

Regards Mark

[Luig]

Mark,
Thanks very much and thank your correspondent for such an overview.

One anecdote about the NAS Nowra gear in 1970 - when the first RAN Macchis were delivered - was a lot of hassle about this trampling thingamejig. Probably this came from the Amberley experience. One new Macchi instructor Navy pilot was adamant that the RAN Macchi not land or taxi over the arrestor wire until it was eventually sorted out to be OK. Before that the Macchis would use the runway with the short field arrestor gear removed (it could become usable at some notice) while the long field gear remained active.

Of course when a quick wind change required a quick runway change then the RAN Macchis had to land or take off beyond the short field gear until it was removed from the new active runway. ONE BIG HASSLE that was thankfully resolved quickly. I'm trying to remember the exact designation of the arrestor gear at that time. Probably GPH knows off the top of his head. I'll have to dig around to find that detail somewhere in the archives.
Phil.

[gph]

I seem to recall it was a BLISS arrestor gear system, but as for the ID numbers ..... mate I would need regression hypnosis. :(

BLISS 500 ????? Maybe??

[gph]

And don't forget that pusser's innovation the "Old Anchor Chain" lucy Leader, cunningly coiled either side of the threshold with a cable in between. :)

[Luig]

Anchor Chains were part of the old arrestor system weren't they? I recall seeing a Venom snagged in one of those monstrosities. Somewhere I have the name of the new BLISS? gear. Consider yerself regressed and hypnotised. :-) & danke schoen.