- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Accident Report for B-2 mishap from Dec 2022
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:56 am
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:56 am
Link to B-2 Accident Report Public Release
The above link is to the Public Release.
Actual Report
This one is to the actual report. I ran the Safety Investigation into this mishap and agree with about 99% of what is contained in this report. Unfortunately, I can't get into the exact details of why, but I disagree with their conclusion that no amount of time between normal gear extension and then subsequent command of the emergency gear extension would have prevented this. It was my conclusion that absolutely matters.
The above link is to the Public Release.
Actual Report
This one is to the actual report. I ran the Safety Investigation into this mishap and agree with about 99% of what is contained in this report. Unfortunately, I can't get into the exact details of why, but I disagree with their conclusion that no amount of time between normal gear extension and then subsequent command of the emergency gear extension would have prevented this. It was my conclusion that absolutely matters.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:00 am to FlyingTiger06
A single B-2 bomber is estimated to cost a little over 2 billion dollars.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:11 am to FlyingTiger06
Basically the crew didn't follow the check list... got it.
If any landing gear extension malfunctions are present, then aircrew should follow the Landing
Gear Fails to Extend/Emergency Extension checklist. The checklist directs aircrew to take the
following actions:
1. Landing gear handle – DOWN.
2. Landing gear emergency lowering switch – DOWN.
If all landing gear extend:
3. Do not retract gear.
If all landing gear fail to extend after 90 seconds:
4. Landing gear emergency lowering switch – RESET.
5. Landing gear handle – UP.
6. Prepare for gear up landing.
If any landing gear extension malfunctions are present, then aircrew should follow the Landing
Gear Fails to Extend/Emergency Extension checklist. The checklist directs aircrew to take the
following actions:
1. Landing gear handle – DOWN.
2. Landing gear emergency lowering switch – DOWN.
If all landing gear extend:
3. Do not retract gear.
If all landing gear fail to extend after 90 seconds:
4. Landing gear emergency lowering switch – RESET.
5. Landing gear handle – UP.
6. Prepare for gear up landing.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:17 am to jpainter6174
We just saw a 36 hour flight of the b2. Why can’t they extend the time to try these solutions over and over again?
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:18 am to FlyingTiger06
Nice job by the maintenance lead in discovering the indication issues on the LMLG.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:18 am to FlyingTiger06
quote:
B-2 mishap
quote:
FlyingTiger06
checks out
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:38 am to Kansas City King
quote:
A single B-2 bomber is estimated to cost a little over 2 billion dollars.
Yes, because Congress killed the program at just procuring 21 of them. The original plan was to buy over 100. When you have to divide the total cost of development and procurement by just 21 versus 100, the cost of each then just multiplied by ~5x.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:42 am to jpainter6174
Wrong checklist. They followed that one. When they ran that checklist governing emergency extension, they got good indications of all three gear being down and locked. So they would have stopped at Step 3.
What they failed at was acknowledging the one that said to wait at least 60 seconds between the normal gear extension and attempting the emergency extension. However, the AIB concluded that timing didn't matter. My investigation concluded it did.
What they failed at was acknowledging the one that said to wait at least 60 seconds between the normal gear extension and attempting the emergency extension. However, the AIB concluded that timing didn't matter. My investigation concluded it did.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:45 am to FlyingTiger06
quote:
Congress killed the program at just procuring 21 of them.
Old NASA slogan = "We can build it Fast, Cheap, or Good = pick any 2"
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:47 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Old NASA slogan = "We can build it Fast, Cheap, or Good = pick any 2"
And the AF takes that a step further and says choose 2 to aim for and you will maybe end up with one of those two.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:49 am to FlyingTiger06
quote:
My investigation concluded it did.
How could you know that? You have no idea what would have happened had they waited the 60 seconds. Youre guessing.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:51 am to dstone12
quote:
Why can’t they extend the time to try these solutions over and over again?
With the component failure they had, there was no way hydraulic fluid would have ever gotten to the Right Main Landing Gear to unlock and begin to lower no matter how many times they would have tried to raise and lower the gear handle. That's what led to the emergency extension which uses a completely different path. And according to what the pilots could see in the cockpit, once they used the emergency extension, they had indications that all three gear were down and locked, so no need to try anything else.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:54 am to LordSnow
quote:
How could you know that? You have no idea what would have happened had they waited the 60 seconds. Youre guessing.
Dude, I ran the safety investigation and we did certain tests that showed what the difference would have been. There's no guess in any of that. The recommendations from my report are what allowed Gen Bussiere to let the B-2s start flying again in May 2023. Unfortunately, I can't divulge what those tests were or the actual results because it is protected under safety privilege. And also unfortunate that the AIB was not able to duplicate those same tests.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:54 am to FlyingTiger06
Should have called it the 2B
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:59 am to dstone12
quote:
We just saw a 36 hour flight of the b2.
Indeed we did but theyve been running that route for years waiting for that moment. I wonder if they never ran into this issue in all past years
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:03 am to rattlebucket
quote:
I wonder if they never ran into this issue in all past years
Yes, they had...10 other times prior to this one. The one in Sep 2021 also led to a left main gear collapse. The other 9 all landed safely. What was different in those 9 cases versus the most recent 2, was the time between the attempt to lower the gear normally before commanding the emergency extension. That's as far as I can say.
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:12 am to FlyingTiger06
quote:
With the component failure they had, there was no way hydraulic fluid would have ever gotten to the Right Main Landing Gear to unlock and begin to lower no matter how many times they would have tried to raise and lower the gear handle. That's what led to the emergency extension which uses a completely different path.
So it looks like the hydraulic failure of the RMLG that led to its needing to be extended using the emergency extension procedure led to the collapse of the LMLG on landing due to the loss of hydraulic pressure. If that is the case, why not use the emergency procedure on all landing gear so that they are not relying on hydraulic pressure to remain locked? Or is that even possible?
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:19 am to BiggerBear
The emergency extension never applies hydraulic pressure to the lock link. It only applies pressure to a component (can't remember its name) that pushes the gear down and opens the door. Gravity then takes over and pulls the gear to the down position. Since left gear and nose gear and their associated doors were in the correct position, the emergency extension should have had nothing to do with it. The emergency extension was only to fix the RMLG. But we found there to be a flaw in the system that made that emergency extension have an unintended consequence that changes the position of the lock link on the gear that had hydraulic pressure applied to it; in this case the left main landing gear (the AIB noted that too). Since the RMLG lock link never had hydraulic pressure applied to it, the flaw was not involved.
Back to top

4











