If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark" wrote in message . .. Rumor had it that Creech personally had the one and only videotape of the accident. Mark Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing. Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team. His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me have a VERY good idea what happened to it. Dudley Henriques International Fighter Pilots Fellowship Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing. Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team. His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me have a VERY good idea what happened to it. In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? -Mike Marron |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes
attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path, but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead.... Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day Mark "Mike Marron" wrote in message ... "Dudley Henriques" wrote: Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing. Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team. His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me have a VERY good idea what happened to it. In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? -Mike Marron |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Mark" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote: In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path, but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead.... Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was there any chance of survival had they punched out? -Mike Marron |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Marron" wrote in message ... "Dudley Henriques" wrote: Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing. Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team. His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me have a VERY good idea what happened to it. In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? -Mike Marron The line abreast loop is the only formation that the team used in the T38 where the other pilots are looking back over their shoulder to maintain proper sight picture/position. In this situation, in the Talon, you can't see anything forward of the flight path, even by scanning forward with the eyes. With the practice area in the middle of a bowl with irregular terrain all around as it is at Indian Springs, even looking through the leader at the horizon would give no clue to anyone but lead as to where the bottom was. Contrary to popular belief that all positions but lead stay glued on a single point during a maneuver, actually what happens is that a "paint" on a position point is held, but peripheral vision is used as well, and a fairly clear peripheral sight picture can be obtained at various times by the two wings and slot. In the other formation positions, pilots can, and do in fact actually scan the entire instrument panel (fuel status, airspeed, power setting, etc.) and "peek" forward to see the ground coming up. It's not that you don't trust lead, it's simply that over time, you become so proficient at what you're doing, that you have the luxury of taking a "peek" on occasion if you choose to do so. This is no doubt contrary to what you have heard, but you can take it to the bank from me; this is exactly how it's done! Why did lead hit last? Because HE was the ONLY ONE who knew they weren't going to make it and he made one last attempt to avoid ground impact. It's THAT simple!! Keep in mind that when you are on the back side of a loop, aiming for a 50 to 100 foot bottom at 400 to 425KIAS, keeping it round while trying to be smooth for the guys in the formation, the only difference between a perfect bottom and a catastrophic bottom is the snap of a finger in elapsed time. The final report said that Norm was a highly experienced fighter pilot, had many hours and practice loops under his belt, had complete situational awareness about him and had all the attributes/qualities of a great leader. ALL THIS IS TRUE. It is also said by the "official report", that at the top of the maneuver, in the float at .5g, a foreign object lodged itself in the artificial feel system thereby giving Lowery the appropriate feel when he pulled on the stick but not the stab travel commensurate with the feel of the pull. It was so insidious they said, that Lowery was not aware of the developing hazard until it was too late to recover. In addition, he hit last because with the impending crash ahead, the adrenaline rush allowed him to break the stab loose and fly a few more feet before impact. This is the key if you want to understand what REALLY happens in formation acro and not the bull**** that most people believe happens in an acro team formation. The kicker is this. In formation acro, you don't live in a ONE CUE WORLD!!!!! Period!!!!! When you initiate a stick pull, a NUMBER OF CUES tell you all is well or all is not! Norm Lowery was NOT a one cue pilot!!! He was much too good for that. When he initiated the pull out of the float, he had the feel of the stick, the compression of his butt, the nose rate increasing it's track along the ground, the g meter showing increasing g, the airspeed increasing in line with what he was looking for, and so on. Can the powers that be have it both ways? On one hand, Norm was "experienced", had "complete situational awareness", and "leadership skills". On the other, he allowed only ONE CUE to develop into a tragic accident. I don't think so!! And why did they follow.......because there might have been some concern with one of the new pilots having a position problem, all else in the maneuver was presumed to be normal by the other pilots just prior to impact. Also, there was no "go exploded call". It's SOP for the team that if lead loses his radios, both VHF and UHF, and no transmission from him is made at the expected times, #2 calls exploded and the maneuver is terminated. There was no such call made. All indications to me would point to Lowery impacting last for the reasons I've just given, and NOT for the reasons given in the final report. I hope this information has been helpful. All the best, Dudley Henriques International Fighter Pilots Fellowship Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't have
a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho is good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without the specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was possible. Mark "Mike Marron" wrote in message ... Mark" wrote: "Mike Marron" wrote: In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path, but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead.... Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was there any chance of survival had they punched out? -Mike Marron |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Ejection would have been impossible without a "go exploded call" and none
was given, either by lead, or by number 2 which would have been normal procedure had a problem been detected at any point during the maneuver . Dudley Henriques International Fighter Pilots Fellowship Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired "Mark" wrote in message m... One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't have a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho is good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without the specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was possible. Mark "Mike Marron" wrote in message ... Mark" wrote: "Mike Marron" wrote: In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path, but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead.... Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was there any chance of survival had they punched out? -Mike Marron |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Certainly one needs to make the attempt.... even in the world's best
ejection seat!!!!!!! So as you point out, the technical question of whether it would or would not have been successful is moot. vr Mark "Dudley Henriques" wrote in message hlink.net... Ejection would have been impossible without a "go exploded call" and none was given, either by lead, or by number 2 which would have been normal procedure had a problem been detected at any point during the maneuver . Dudley Henriques International Fighter Pilots Fellowship Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired "Mark" wrote in message m... One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't have a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho is good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without the specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was possible. Mark "Mike Marron" wrote in message ... Mark" wrote: "Mike Marron" wrote: In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path, but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead.... Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was there any chance of survival had they punched out? -Mike Marron |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote: In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience, what is the significance of that statement? The line abreast loop is the only formation that the team used in the T38 where the other pilots are looking back over their shoulder to maintain proper sight picture/position. In this situation, in the Talon, you can't see anything forward of the flight path, even by scanning forward with the eyes. With the practice area in the middle of a bowl with irregular terrain all around as it is at Indian Springs, even looking through the leader at the horizon would give no clue to anyone but lead as to where the bottom was. Contrary to popular belief that all positions but lead stay glued on a single point during a maneuver, actually what happens is that a "paint" on a position point is held, but peripheral vision is used as well, and a fairly clear peripheral sight picture can be obtained at various times by the two wings and slot. In the other formation positions, pilots can, and do in fact actually scan the entire instrument panel (fuel status, airspeed, power setting, etc.) and "peek" forward to see the ground coming up. It's not that you don't trust lead, it's simply that over time, you become so proficient at what you're doing, that you have the luxury of taking a "peek" on occasion if you choose to do so. This is no doubt contrary to what you have heard, but you can take it to the bank from me; this is exactly how it's done! Why did lead hit last? Because HE was the ONLY ONE who knew they weren't going to make it and he made one last attempt to avoid ground impact. It's THAT simple!! Keep in mind that when you are on the back side of a loop, aiming for a 50 to 100 foot bottom at 400 to 425KIAS, keeping it round while trying to be smooth for the guys in the formation, the only difference between a perfect bottom and a catastrophic bottom is the snap of a finger in elapsed time. The final report said that Norm was a highly experienced fighter pilot, had many hours and practice loops under his belt, had complete situational awareness about him and had all the attributes/qualities of a great leader. ALL THIS IS TRUE. It is also said by the "official report", that at the top of the maneuver, in the float at .5g, a foreign object lodged itself in the artificial feel system thereby giving Lowery the appropriate feel when he pulled on the stick but not the stab travel commensurate with the feel of the pull. It was so insidious they said, that Lowery was not aware of the developing hazard until it was too late to recover. In addition, he hit last because with the impending crash ahead, the adrenaline rush allowed him to break the stab loose and fly a few more feet before impact. This is the key if you want to understand what REALLY happens in formation acro and not the bull**** that most people believe happens in an acro team formation. The kicker is this. In formation acro, you don't live in a ONE CUE WORLD!!!!! Period!!!!! When you initiate a stick pull, a NUMBER OF CUES tell you all is well or all is not! Norm Lowery was NOT a one cue pilot!!! He was much too good for that. When he initiated the pull out of the float, he had the feel of the stick, the compression of his butt, the nose rate increasing it's track along the ground, the g meter showing increasing g, the airspeed increasing in line with what he was looking for, and so on. Can the powers that be have it both ways? On one hand, Norm was "experienced", had "complete situational awareness", and "leadership skills". On the other, he allowed only ONE CUE to develop into a tragic accident. I don't think so!! And why did they follow.......because there might have been some concern with one of the new pilots having a position problem, all else in the maneuver was presumed to be normal by the other pilots just prior to impact. Also, there was no "go exploded call". It's SOP for the team that if lead loses his radios, both VHF and UHF, and no transmission from him is made at the expected times, #2 calls exploded and the maneuver is terminated. There was no such call made. All indications to me would point to Lowery impacting last for the reasons I've just given, and NOT for the reasons given in the final report. I hope this information has been helpful. Most excellent post. Thanks! -Mike Marron |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark" wrote:
Certainly one needs to make the attempt.... even in the world's best ejection seat!!!!!!! So as you point out, the technical question of whether it would or would not have been successful is moot. vr No, the question is not moot. Once the formation had passed approximately 45 degrees below the horizon inverted on the back side of the loop, they were out of the ejection seat envelope for the T-38 seat. As they passed through vertical nose-down, 90 degrees, they were committed to a pull-through in some direction, even with a "break" call. Again, they were passed the point of no return. The T-38 ejection seat was good, but not "zero-zero"--it required some forward velocity at ground level, with no downward vector to guarantee survival. In a downward flight vector, the window narrows considerably. Below a couple of thousand feet with a committed downward flight path, nothing good is still in the option bag. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (ret) ***"When Thunder Rolled: *** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam" *** from Smithsonian Books ISBN: 1588341038 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Videos of aviation mishaps, accidents and crashes on-line | Rich | Home Built | 0 | September 7th 04 03:28 AM |
Two accidents at Lakeland SNF today. Anyone know anything more? One fatal, maybe both. | Tedstriker | Home Built | 1 | April 19th 04 01:06 AM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
BD5B | Big John | Home Built | 36 | November 19th 03 12:07 AM |