Get Rid Of Warbirds At Oshkosh

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote

Yes, but: Most of the other warbirds you saw have tailwheel steering.
Without
it, directional control is pretty indirect, and S-turning isn't just a
matter of
a casual push on a pedal. Couple that with the realization that every
S-turn
wears a brake pad, and that pads for TBMs are probably neither common nor
cheap.
Heck, they're $200 a pair just for my Fly Baby...

Ron, you know better than that. Every type of warbird at OSH has taxied
past me. They all managed. Plus, the cost of brakes is part of being at
OSH. If you can not taxi safely cause it costs too much, stay home.

Couple with a big radial cowling, the pilot probably doesn't truly get a
good
view forward until the longitudinal axis takes a significant offset from
the
centerline. With that, you're heading towards the taxiway lights that
much
quicker, and you're going to want to turn back early enough so the wheels
don't
leave the pavement.

There are no taxiway lights on that particular taxiway. It is not a
normally used taxiway.

Like Dougdrivr said, it certainly was the pilot's responsibility to clear
the
taxiway ahead. But I can sympathize with the problems he faced.

Problems that can be overcome, since everyone else managed.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Ron Wanttaja" wrote

Yes, but: Most of the other warbirds you saw have tailwheel steering.


Ron, you know better than that. Every type of warbird at OSH has taxied
past me. They all managed. Plus, the cost of brakes is part of being at
OSH. If you can not taxi safely cause it costs too much, stay home.


And all of it is neither here nor there. I used to drive a big truck,
and 18-wheeler as moving van. 18 wheels down through residential
neighborhoods. The number one rule was "If you don't know you're clear,
you don't move." Period. No guessing. No thinking. No hoping and no
wishing. Either you can see you're clear through mirrors or sticking
your head out the window, or you have your partner get out and sight for
you. If you don't have a partner, you set the parking brake and take a
walk around the truck.

The pilot knew the airplane had visibility issues, and he knew he would
be in crowded environment. It's his responsibility, plain and clear.
Oshkosh organizers are fully culpable for not requiring that he observe
the simplest safety rule. This isn't something that's limited to
aviation. Anytime you have large equipment moving in a crowded
environment, you will see extra precautions taken. Anytime a forklift
is moving something at the HomeDepot, they'll post two guards to keep
people back. It's my opinion that the Oshkosh organizers should be held
responsible for criminal negligence, and Uncle Tom should be whipped at
high noon for the crude and audacious remark that "this will not detract
from the success of the convention."

Not the fact that this was allowed to occur, but it was allowed to
happen in such a glaringly stupid fashion, without the first modicum of
the normal safeguards that you would see at any large convention is a
serious black eye on Warbirds, GA aircraft, the EAA, and especially
Oshkosh. Whether it is true or no, this just screams to the world that
we're all a bunch of reckless yahoos. Most of us aren't, but just try
to convince Joe Public of that when the biggest convention of GA
aircraft in the world doesn't practice safety measures that would be
strictly enforced at the county fair.

----
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

A warbird taxiing behind me in my homebuilt with limited visibility
would be an un-nerving experience indeed. Especially after what just
happened. Being that we are the inventors, and constructors we are,
I may just construct a whip type mast with a flag on top that the
warbird driver can see in front of his face. Like dune buggies use so
they can see the next one comming from below the dunes. I could have a
mount for it inside, like a fishing pole holder, and just need to
figure out how to stow it. (make it telescopic?) Or maybe the EAA
could provide them, and hand it to the flagman right before takeoff.
Give them to anyone taxiing in front of a warbird. The canopy would
have to be back of course to use it, but it's feasable. There's no way
to make a small plane in front of a plane like an Avenger visible
unless you get something up to where he can see it. I don't trust the
all the guys taxiing warbirds. Some have the money, but not the
experience to really be safe in the things. But many are plenty
experienced. But in an accident like this one, experience may not help
you see something that's out of your field of vision. Remember the
USAir 737 in LA that landed on top of the Metroliner. They couldn't
see it either, and there was no lack of experience there. But some
changes need to be made to prevent a repeat type of accident.
If you can think of a better idea, post it.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:00:05 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote:

And all of it is neither here nor there. I used to drive a big truck,
and 18-wheeler as moving van. 18 wheels down through residential
neighborhoods. The number one rule was "If you don't know you're clear,
you don't move." Period. No guessing. No thinking. No hoping and no
wishing. Either you can see you're clear through mirrors or sticking
your head out the window, or you have your partner get out and sight for
you. If you don't have a partner, you set the parking brake and take a
walk around the truck.

The pilot knew the airplane had visibility issues, and he knew he would
be in crowded environment. It's his responsibility, plain and clear.
Oshkosh organizers are fully culpable for not requiring that he observe
the simplest safety rule. This isn't something that's limited to
aviation. Anytime you have large equipment moving in a crowded
environment, you will see extra precautions taken. Anytime a forklift
is moving something at the HomeDepot, they'll post two guards to keep
people back. It's my opinion that the Oshkosh organizers should be held
responsible for criminal negligence, and Uncle Tom should be whipped at
high noon for the crude and audacious remark that "this will not detract
from the success of the convention."

Not the fact that this was allowed to occur, but it was allowed to
happen in such a glaringly stupid fashion, without the first modicum of
the normal safeguards that you would see at any large convention is a
serious black eye on Warbirds, GA aircraft, the EAA, and especially
Oshkosh. Whether it is true or no, this just screams to the world that
we're all a bunch of reckless yahoos. Most of us aren't, but just try
to convince Joe Public of that when the biggest convention of GA
aircraft in the world doesn't practice safety measures that would be
strictly enforced at the county fair.

----
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Heck, they're $200 a pair just for my Fly Baby....

Speaking of which, I keep seeing Goodyear brake pucks for much (much
much much) less than that on the "overstock" webpage of Aircraft Spruce.
Thought you might like to know if you didn't already.

The downside is you have to pay for shipping on orders under $500

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:49:28 -0500, Jim Carriere
wrote:

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Heck, they're $200 a pair just for my Fly Baby....

Speaking of which, I keep seeing Goodyear brake pucks for much (much
much much) less than that on the "overstock" webpage of Aircraft Spruce.
Thought you might like to know if you didn't already.

Yes, thanks...these are the old Barry Jay inventory, which ACS got when they
bought the other company out. I had emailed ACS about it...whether it was from
my email or not, they did put the old stuff on the web page at the same price
Barry Jay had been selling it for. I bought four complete sets about eight
months ago. They're not "approved" parts, but neither were my homemade sets
(made with brake-pad stock and a router).

Installed a set just two weeks ago. Flip out the old outer pad (held with RTV),
slip out the thicker, inner pad (no attachment necessary), and reverse the
process with the new pads. Took less than five minutes per side (other than
jacking the plane up and removing the wheel, of course) and didn't use any tools
other than my pocket knife.

Ron Wanttaja

Convair wrote:
But some
changes need to be made to prevent a repeat type of accident.
If you can think of a better idea, post it.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:00:05 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote:


The number one rule was "If you don't know you're clear,
you don't move." Either you can see you're clear through mirrors or sticking
your head out the window, or you have your partner get out and sight for
you. If you don't have a partner, you set the parking brake and take a
walk around...

This isn't something that's limited to
aviation. Anytime you have large equipment moving in a crowded
environment, you will see extra precautions taken. Anytime a forklift
is moving something at the HomeDepot, they'll post two guards to keep
people back.


I've repeated myself, just in case you missed it. 8*)

A flag on the part of the protagonist moves the responsibility from the
antagonist seeing to the protagonist being seen (any time you move your
vehicle, you're the antagonist, the mover, the doer, the responsible
party). If the Avenger's co-pilot couldn't ride or walk a wing to the
run-up area, stick a bug-eye mirror on a stick or out on a wing
(temporarily). The solutions are simple, abundant, and in use all
around us every day.



--
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."

Ernest Christley wrote:

A flag on the part of the protagonist moves the responsibility from the
antagonist seeing to the protagonist being seen (any time you move your
vehicle, you're the antagonist, the mover, the doer, the responsible
party). If the Avenger's co-pilot couldn't ride or walk a wing to the
run-up area, stick a bug-eye mirror on a stick or out on a wing
(temporarily). The solutions are simple, abundant, and in use all
around us every day.

With the price and availability of tiny little video cameras and LCD
displays, I can't imagine why anyone who could afford to fly a warbird
couldn't afford to put a forward-looking video system in place (even
if it's only a temporary installtion used for crowded events). It
would cost what - $100? - to prevent blind taxiing.

Mark Hickey

In article ,
Mark Hickey wrote:

Ernest Christley wrote:

A flag on the part of the protagonist moves the responsibility from the
antagonist seeing to the protagonist being seen (any time you move your
vehicle, you're the antagonist, the mover, the doer, the responsible
party). If the Avenger's co-pilot couldn't ride or walk a wing to the
run-up area, stick a bug-eye mirror on a stick or out on a wing
(temporarily). The solutions are simple, abundant, and in use all
around us every day.

With the price and availability of tiny little video cameras and LCD
displays, I can't imagine why anyone who could afford to fly a warbird
couldn't afford to put a forward-looking video system in place (even
if it's only a temporary installtion used for crowded events). It
would cost what - $100? - to prevent blind taxiing.

Mark Hickey

This "solution" requires too much "head buried in the cockpit" to be
practical. If the pilot is looking at the screen, he is not paying
attention to other things of equal or greater importance happening
around him.

I like the idea of spotters better.

ridiculous argument. The person that needs to see the other aircraft
is the one taxiing the plane with his foot on the brake pedals.
Spotters, wing walkers, ect.. all involve critical delays. The pilot
has to look over to see them, then notice they are saying to stop, and
in those few seconds, you could have already hit the other aircraft.
Especially if planes are close together in a takeoff line. It would
make more sense for a warbird to be required to fall further beind the
aircraft in front of him when taxiing, but then you can still have a
plane turn in front of the warbird from another taxiway, too close for
the pilot to notice, which is what seems to have happened at OSH.

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 03:47:29 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote:


A flag on the part of the protagonist moves the responsibility from the
antagonist seeing to the protagonist being seen (any time you move your
vehicle, you're the antagonist, the mover, the doer, the responsible
party). If the Avenger's co-pilot couldn't ride or walk a wing to the
run-up area, stick a bug-eye mirror on a stick or out on a wing
(temporarily). The solutions are simple, abundant, and in use all
around us every day.

Convair wrote:

but then you can still have a
plane turn in front of the warbird from another taxiway, too close for
the pilot to notice, which is what seems to have happened at OSH.



I think you need to go read the full NTSB preliminary report.