Thunderbird accidents

"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

"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

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

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

"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

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

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

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

"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

"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