Get Rid Of Warbirds At Oshkosh

Gatt,

I agree with you.

It's the new
Cessna....

There was no new Cessna. There was a "proof of concept". Google
"vaporware"...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Ah, treaties, they make the world safe from war.

Washington Naval Conference
Any thing signed by Russia or Germany or Japan before WWII
and many things since.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Thomas Borchert" wrote in
message ...
| Jarhead,
|
| I read where the Germans emphasized sailplanes
|
|
| Because powered planes were not allowed by the Versailles
Treaty.
|
| --
| Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
|

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
...
How is an overhead break a "stupid pilot trick?"

The people I've seen do it around here start with a high-speed, relatively
low pass (though not 10 feet off the deck...more like 200-500') and then
enter the proper traffic pattern with a climbing turn directly into the
downwind.

I realize that there are practical issues that are addressed by flying an
abbreviated pattern starting with an over-the-runway upwind. However, even
doing that starting at pattern altitude is not appropriate at a busy public
airport, and when executed as a chandelle it's even more inappropriate (and
dangerous).

As far as using the maneuver as "an alternative to a straight-in", I fail to
see how it would be better than a straight-in, especially if there is other
traffic. You spend more time in the pattern than you would with a
straight-in, and you do at least part of it in a location where the other
pilots in the pattern are less likely to be expecting you.

As far as "As long as you announce what you're doing there shouldn't be a
problem" goes, that's the classic "everyone has a radio" fallacy. The radio
is NOT a replacement for good traffic pattern usage.

Pete

And just out of curiosity, were there any ground marshallers along the
taxiway to help keep traffic from getting too close and keeping an eye
on things? We all know forward visibility is very poor on most warbirds
and it seems like they should have an escort from a guy on a scooter to
be a set of "remote eyes". Just a thought.

Scott


Kyle Boatright wrote:
"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...

snip

Warbirds, you are not welcome at Oshkosh.

Jim


To me, the warbirds are very welcome, as is everyone else until all the
parking fills up. What happened yesterday was simple pilot error, and could
have been avoided by taking more preventative measures. One idea would be
to let groups of warbirds depart once an hour. If you fly a warbird and
have it fired up and ready to taxi at 0:10 before the hour, you get to
depart with the group of warbirds that leaves on the hour. Yep, it'll be an
inconvenience to some, but if everyone knows the procedures, it won't be the
nightmare of mixing the warbirds with the spam. As someone who flies an RV,
I don't like taxiing and departing with warbirds or jets. The warbirds leave
a fair amount of wake turbulence if you're following one, and have the nasty
combination of a big prop and poor visibility. Taxiing behind a jet (I got
stuck behind one for 20 minutes yesterday) is miserable. Even if you're 50
or 100 yards back, your airplane rocks back and forth due to the jet blast
and it smells like you've stuck your head inside a kerosene heater for the
entire time.

As far as obnoxious warbird flyers go, there are plenty of other people who
are just as obnoxious. A pet peeve of mine is the guys doing formation work
(frequently RV's, but I've seen it done in everything from ultralights on
up) who don't think twice about doing a 4 ship overhead break without much
regard for other aircraft in the pattern. The attitude seems to be similar
to the warbird guys - announce what you're going to do and expect everyone
else to adapt.

KB

"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
And just out of curiosity, were there any ground marshallers along the
taxiway to help keep traffic from getting too close and keeping an eye on
things? We all know forward visibility is very poor on most warbirds and
it seems like they should have an escort from a guy on a scooter to be a
set of "remote eyes". Just a thought.

Scott



I don't know. We waited about 20 minutes in the departure line and there
were no prop warbirds or escorts in front of us. There were people at each
intersection. There were a couple of warbirds (a B-25 comes to mind) behind
us, but I didn't notice if they had escorts or not.

KB

"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
And just out of curiosity, were there any ground marshallers along the
taxiway to help keep traffic from getting too close and keeping an eye
on things? We all know forward visibility is very poor on most warbirds
and it seems like they should have an escort from a guy on a scooter to
be a set of "remote eyes". Just a thought.

Typically, there is only an escort for individual planes, when they enter a
high likelihood of getting around people, such as on the northern most
taxiway off of 36, going back to the RV parking on the left, and P-51
parking on the right.

As is currently done, there is not enough manpower to escort each warbird
all of the way down the taxiways. It is up to the pilot to maintain
spacing, except where they come to an intersection.

I don't understand why this guy in the Avenger ran all over the RV. For
years, warbirds have done a fine job of having no accidents, by doing their
S-turns. I don't understand why he neglected to do the clearing turns, in
this case. There are no places I can think of that there is not enough room
to S-turn.

As always, now there will have to be a reaction to prevent any other
incidents from ever happening in the future. One pilot's lack of awareness
will cause headaches for everyone.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

As always, now there will have to be a reaction to prevent any other
incidents from ever happening in the future. One pilot's lack of
awareness
will cause headaches for everyone.
--
Jim in NC

Hopefully, something will be learned and changed. Unfortunately, this
process is never totally right or the "changes" seemingly sufficient enough
to prevent accidents down the line. The usual result is a time of "increased
awareness" by the community, followed by a time of laxity, followed by
another inevitable accident caused by someone else in another place.
It seems that accident prevention is a never ending sine curve of good and
bad.
Dudley

Ps. just got back and boy am I burnt and tired.

Dave Zera
Co-Chair
Safety/ Flight line
AirVenture

David, You guys will probably catch a lot of flack over the Avenger - RV
accident. I for one appreciate the job you do every year. Please do not
be too hard on yourselves.

Joe Schneider

Thanks! Sunday was very rough, allot of crying from the other Chairs, The
whole day was a mess from a FuelTruck cutting off a tug taxing a B17 in the
west ramp to that horrific taxiway accident. I had to throw out of the
convention 2 photo journalists that were trying go around the safety line to
take pictures (Boy that REALLY burns me!) of the accident.

The accident will be in my nightmares for many years...... .... It was
a rough year for EAA.

Dave Zera
Co-Chair
Safety/Flight Line
AirVenture

I like the idea it is a good one. No right now the guys on scooters are not
allowed on the taxiways only the ramps my guess that is directed by the
insurance guys.

Dave Zera
Co-Chair
Safety/Flight Line
AirVenture
"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
And just out of curiosity, were there any ground marshallers along the
taxiway to help keep traffic from getting too close and keeping an eye on
things? We all know forward visibility is very poor on most warbirds and
it seems like they should have an escort from a guy on a scooter to be a
set of "remote eyes". Just a thought.

Scott


Kyle Boatright wrote:
"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...

snip

Warbirds, you are not welcome at Oshkosh.

Jim


To me, the warbirds are very welcome, as is everyone else until all the
parking fills up. What happened yesterday was simple pilot error, and
could have been avoided by taking more preventative measures. One idea
would be to let groups of warbirds depart once an hour. If you fly a
warbird and have it fired up and ready to taxi at 0:10 before the hour,
you get to depart with the group of warbirds that leaves on the hour.
Yep, it'll be an inconvenience to some, but if everyone knows the
procedures, it won't be the nightmare of mixing the warbirds with the
spam. As someone who flies an RV, I don't like taxiing and departing with
warbirds or jets. The warbirds leave a fair amount of wake turbulence if
you're following one, and have the nasty combination of a big prop and
poor visibility. Taxiing behind a jet (I got stuck behind one for 20
minutes yesterday) is miserable. Even if you're 50 or 100 yards back,
your airplane rocks back and forth due to the jet blast and it smells
like you've stuck your head inside a kerosene heater for the entire time.

As far as obnoxious warbird flyers go, there are plenty of other people
who are just as obnoxious. A pet peeve of mine is the guys doing
formation work (frequently RV's, but I've seen it done in everything from
ultralights on up) who don't think twice about doing a 4 ship overhead
break without much regard for other aircraft in the pattern. The
attitude seems to be similar to the warbird guys - announce what you're
going to do and expect everyone else to adapt.

KB

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

As always, now there will have to be a reaction to prevent any other
incidents from ever happening in the future. One pilot's lack of
awareness
will cause headaches for everyone.
--
Jim in NC

Hopefully, something will be learned and changed. Unfortunately, this
process is never totally right or the "changes" seemingly sufficient
enough
to prevent accidents down the line. The usual result is a time of
"increased
awareness" by the community, followed by a time of laxity, followed by
another inevitable accident caused by someone else in another place.
It seems that accident prevention is a never ending sine curve of good and
bad.
Dudley


Very true, and draconian measures have no greater lasting value. However, I
really like your suggestion (from past practice and posted on r.a.p) of the
wing sitter. I'm not volunteering, which I'll leave to the young bucks, but
I really like the concept because it leaves the wing sitter free from any
personal driving responsibility to attend to the task at hand. About the
only obvious risk is the possibility of sliding off in an unexpected stop;
which should be safe enough if left to the appropriate personnel.
Peter