Thoughts on Oshkosh

There is an overwhelming safety issue concerning tailwheel propeller
warbirds that absolutely has to be addressed AS A SINGLE ISSUE by the FAA
and the EAA before accidents like the one this week can be prevented.
I've seen this issue discussed peripherally in safety meetings at these
shows, and I've seen it addressed peripherally in the warbird community, but
I've never seen the issue of loss of visual cues due to lack of S taxi room
in a high density close in taxi environment dealt with as a MAJOR safety
issue directed at the community it affects.......tailwheel propeller
warbirds!

There is a HUGE problem involved in moving tailwheel warbirds like P51's,
F8F's TBM's, TBF's, Spitfires, Sea Furies...you name it.....in a ground
environment where there is limited room to S taxi these airplanes to clear
the nose while in motion.

I know the issue has been addressed in the pilot safety meetings and by
in-community newsletter, but it's not enough; not by a long shot!! You
simply can't put a P51 or a TBM in a mass of moving aircraft on the ground
in a taxi environment involving dissimilar aircraft in limited taxi space.
This in my opinion is one of the most dangerous ground scenarios you can
possibly imagine.

You taxi these fighters by constantly clearing the nose in front of you as
you yaw the airplane side to side. Your basic visual cue is a small area in
the lower sides of the windshield side panels. This results in a constant
blind area that you are both moving into and alternately checking visually.
This scenario has actually been addressed by the powers that be at Oshkosh,
as the people running this show are warbird oriented to say the least, but
the precautions obviously have not been enough on more than one occasion,
and most likely won't be enough again if something isn't done to improve the
ground safety situation out there.
On the face of it, radio contact and wing walkers should be enough, but
obviously there are flaws in this system. There are areas of transition
where handoffs are being missed, and individual airplanes are being allowed
to make position changes unassisted. It appears that in these areas the
accidents are happening.
NO tailwheel warbird should be allowed ANY ground movement at Oshkosh
without a wing walker.........PERIOD! It's just too dangerous. Pilots of
these airplanes can't see if they can't S taxi, and in many cases, there
just isn't sufficient room for the pilots of these airplanes to clear their
noses. Add to this deplorable situation the fact that the airplane in front
of a P51 or a TBM could be a Pitts, or some other extremely small airplane,
and you have the perfect recipe for a disaster.
FAA.......EAA......and the warbird community.........you people better start
realizing that the tailwheel issue taxiing these airplanes is important
enough an issue at Oshkosh that it gets addressed as one of the single most
important safety issues at this show and is handled in a manner dictated by
its importance and not as a general safety issue.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:47:59 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote in
et::

NO tailwheel warbird should be allowed ANY ground movement at Oshkosh
without a wing walker.........PERIOD!

Your suggestion sound reasonable, and coming from someone with your
experience, it would probably be given the attention it deserves if it
were posted he
https://secure.eaa.org/airventure/atc_feedback.html

"Dudley Henriques" wrote

There is a HUGE problem involved in moving tailwheel warbirds like P51's,
F8F's TBM's, TBF's, Spitfires, Sea Furies...you name it.....in a ground
environment where there is limited room to S taxi these airplanes to clear
the nose while in motion.

I would go as far as telling the tailwheel warbird pilots that they are NOT
authorized to move on ANY taxiway without a motorbike wing walker. That is
the ONLY way to stop what happened Sunday.

No handoffs. The same escort, from startup to takeoff.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" wrote

There is a HUGE problem involved in moving tailwheel warbirds like
P51's,
F8F's TBM's, TBF's, Spitfires, Sea Furies...you name it.....in a ground
environment where there is limited room to S taxi these airplanes to
clear
the nose while in motion.

I would go as far as telling the tailwheel warbird pilots that they are
NOT
authorized to move on ANY taxiway without a motorbike wing walker. That
is
the ONLY way to stop what happened Sunday.

No handoffs. The same escort, from startup to takeoff.
--
Jim in NC


I wouldn't restrict it to warbirds.

If you can't see someone standing in front of your aircraft from the
cockpit, you need a wing walker.

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
There is an overwhelming safety issue concerning tailwheel propeller
warbirds that absolutely has to be addressed AS A SINGLE ISSUE by the
FAA and the EAA before accidents like the one this week can be
prevented.

I hesitate to suggest technical solutions since not everyone is comfortable
with using fancy technological solutions (and also because new problems may
be added), but why not require such aircraft to install a USB video camera
under the nose of the plane with the cable terminating at a low cost laptop
or tablet PC in the cockpit? The cameras are relatively low cost these days
(as low as $20! [1]) so the major cost is in the laptop or tablet PC.

[1] http://www.usbgear.com/USB-Cameras.html

"Steve Foley" wrote

I wouldn't restrict it to warbirds.

Smaller tailwheel birds have enough room that they can S-turn. You have to
draw a limit somewhere. There is no way you could escort every taildragger
at OSH.
--
Jim in NC

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:51:49 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote in ::

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
There is an overwhelming safety issue concerning tailwheel propeller
warbirds that absolutely has to be addressed AS A SINGLE ISSUE by the
FAA and the EAA before accidents like the one this week can be
prevented.

I hesitate to suggest technical solutions since not everyone is comfortable
with using fancy technological solutions (and also because new problems may
be added), but why not require such aircraft to install a USB video camera
under the nose of the plane with the cable terminating at a low cost laptop
or tablet PC in the cockpit? The cameras are relatively low cost these days
(as low as $20! [1]) so the major cost is in the laptop or tablet PC.

[1] http://www.usbgear.com/USB-Cameras.html


That is an obvious and appropriate solution; thanks for mentioning it.
Just as is done with motor home rear vision, it could be done on the
front of tail draggers. The question is, will it successfully be
approved by the FAA FSDO inspectors. And, is there a sunlight
readable LCD screen that will provide adequate visual information? If
the camera were blue tooth enabled, there wouldn't even be a necessity
for video cabling.

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
There is an overwhelming safety issue concerning tailwheel propeller
warbirds that absolutely has to be addressed AS A SINGLE ISSUE by the
FAA and the EAA before accidents like the one this week can be
prevented.

I hesitate to suggest technical solutions since not everyone is
comfortable
with using fancy technological solutions (and also because new problems
may
be added), but why not require such aircraft to install a USB video camera
under the nose of the plane with the cable terminating at a low cost
laptop
or tablet PC in the cockpit? The cameras are relatively low cost these
days
(as low as $20! [1]) so the major cost is in the laptop or tablet PC.

[1] http://www.usbgear.com/USB-Cameras.html

One reason would be that when taxiing an aircraft....any aircraft....total
attention should be outside the cockpit. This is especially true in the
tailwheel prop warbird situation. One solution I used often in tight and
busy places was to have a wing "sitter" out on my wingtip. This "sitter" was
assigned to me and went with me all the way into the parking spot. Totally
simple........and totally effective!
Dudley Henriques

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:51:49 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote:
I hesitate to suggest technical solutions since not everyone is comfortable
with using fancy technological solutions (and also because new problems may
be added), but why not require such aircraft to install a USB video camera
under the nose of the plane with the cable terminating at a low cost laptop
or tablet PC in the cockpit? The cameras are relatively low cost these days
(as low as $20! [1]) so the major cost is in the laptop or tablet PC.

[1] http://www.usbgear.com/USB-Cameras.html

And if it were to be hooked to the aircraft's electrical system, it
now becomes a $9K item...

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:51:49 -0000, Jim Logajan
wrote:
I hesitate to suggest technical solutions since not everyone is
comfortable
with using fancy technological solutions (and also because new problems
may
be added), but why not require such aircraft to install a USB video
camera
under the nose of the plane with the cable terminating at a low cost
laptop
or tablet PC in the cockpit? The cameras are relatively low cost these
days
(as low as $20! [1]) so the major cost is in the laptop or tablet PC.

[1] http://www.usbgear.com/USB-Cameras.html

And if it were to be hooked to the aircraft's electrical system, it
now becomes a $9K item...

On a P51; probably 10 :-))
Dudley Henriques