Being reported two warbirds collide at US Airshow

[J D 8]

  Read it last night and as you also appalled by the failure of ground control.

  Have seen a few mid air's at model shows/open days over the years. Often between models of vastly different types/speeds.  A couple of years ago at our club open day a large scale Mosquito and a foam something or other collided [ foamy was in the wrong place, my opinion.] resulting in total destruction.  

  This was both pilots were from the same club with us for the day used to operating together!

[Jon H]

I cant get my head round it. You do not have to be a big brain thinker to realise that commanding two streams of aircraft to cross each other at the same altitude is a recipe for disaster. 

 

 

[Peter Jenkins]

There have been many instances of accidents or incidents at air shows where it was found that there were failures to deconflict traffic in a robust manner.  The worst case I can remember was that none of the pilots had been in the same room for the briefing and things went wrong.  Why do people make the same mistake over and over?

To me, it seems silly to put the larger aircraft closer to the crowd and perhaps this Air Boss realised that after the first couple of passes and then changed the brief on the fly.  It doesn't take much imagination to get the plan right first time.  However, the video does not reveal how much Air Show experience this Air Boss had.  I guess he won't ever be asked to do that job ever again.

[Jon H]

21 minutes ago, Peter Jenkins said:

However, the video does not reveal how much Air Show experience this Air Boss had.  I guess he won't ever be asked to do that job ever again.

 

A comment on the video said this was his first show in charge. He was apparently the son of a chap who had run it for years. Allegedly the pre show brief was rather lacking but none of the pilots or FAA guys said anything. None of this is confirmed information though so pinch of salt and all that. 

[J D 8]

      Yes, the human race is set never to learn from previous generation mistakes [ Peter's post above] Just look at the Ukraine now, Attacked by a dictator who for many years before has been pushing his agenda in that region while others look on led by those whose main interest is to make more money, today, tomorrow, next month, perhaps next year.     Most of us will learn from our own mistakes [ known one or two who don't ]  but as a species I think not

[Jon H]

I agree. 

 

This Ukraine situation has many historical parallels. Putin's actions are very similar to Nicolas II during the Russo Japanese war of 1904/5. Equally the west's behaviour has parallels to the pre WWII treatment of Hitler with the appeasement policies of the 1930's. As for the behaviour of certain elements of the Russian military...well, we are back to the dark ages. 

 

Still, aviation does tend to learn from its mistakes with new procedures and rules. Sadly however there is usually a big accident first so the price is very high. 

[Nigel R]

5 minutes ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

As for the behaviour of certain elements of the Russian military...well, we are back to the dark ages.

 

"Civilization is a very thin veneer"

 

I can't help noticing how much general public was right underneath the display area at this airshow.

[Jon H]

24 minutes ago, Nigel R said:

 

 

I can't help noticing how much general public was right underneath the display area at this airshow.

 

You mean on the approaches to the airfield? Fairly difficult to avoid in a built up area and it will always attract spectators. I have spent many hours stood on the road round farnborough airport watching the show. Looking on google maps the area they were flying over was more or less the lowest populated area they had available to them. 

[John Stainforth]

4 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

NTSB preliminary report on this incident. To say i am appalled would be an understatement. 

 

 

Thanks for posting this very clear, and damning, report. It looks like the Commemorative Airforce and the airboss may be facing serious litigation. What strikes me as odd is that the CA have done these shows hundreds of times before. Was this a freak departure from their usual flying patterns, or have they got away with similar dangerous maneuvering before?

Edited December 2, 2022 by John Stainforth

[Jon H]

20 minutes ago, John Stainforth said:

Thanks for posting this very clear, and damning, report. It looks like the Commemorative Airforce and the airboss may be facing serious litigation. What strikes me as odd is that the CA have done these shows hundreds of times before. Was this a freak departure from their usual flying patterns, or have they got away with similar dangerous maneuvering before?

 

Current unconfirmed information is that the airboss was new to the job with this being his first show. Questions have been raised regarding the quality of the pre show briefing but this is all unconfirmed at the moment. 

[Piers Bowlan]

Irrespective of the (reckless) decision to transpose the respective fighter/bomber formations from the 500ft/1000ft lines for whatever reason, a planned minimum vertical separation of 500ft between the two formations (at all times) would have avoided a collision. Less spectacular certainly but definitely safer in my view.

 

[SIMON CRAGG]

Whoever was to blame.......RIP five aviators. Very sad.

[Peter Jenkins]

1 hour ago, Piers Bowlan said:

Irrespective of the (reckless) decision to transpose the respective fighter/bomber formations from the 500ft/1000ft lines for whatever reason, a planned minimum vertical separation of 500ft between the two formations (at all times) would have avoided a collision. Less spectacular certainly but definitely safer in my view.

 

I think not as this would still have involved crossing through each other's paths.  The 500 ft and 1,000 foot related to the height on the fly past.  As you could see from the video both the bomber and fighter stream pulled up to carry out the tear drop turn around manoeuver.  We do not know why the decision was made to get the fighters to fly at the same height and in trail of the bomber stream.  It would have been far safer to have had a fighter formating on a bomber or all 3 fighters formating on one bomber.  What this terrible accident does show is the extremely amateurish way in which the display was planned and conducted.

[martin collins 1]

On a similar note the inquest is under way into the Shoreham Air show crash, i still find it hard to believe that the pilot was found not guilty as the loop was started at too low an altitude. 

[Peter Jenkins]

What amazes me even more is that he survived!

[Don Fry]

46 minutes ago, martin collins 1 said:

On a similar note the inquest is under way into the Shoreham Air show crash, i still find it hard to believe that the pilot was found not guilty as the loop was started at too low an altitude. 

Jury decides. Best we have got.
Perhaps a barrister who has O level physics, could explain that. 

[kc]

This is a very sad situation for those involved and still alive.  

People using words like "reckless" and "amateurish" could perhaps leave themselves open to a libel situation if they cannot provide proof for those comments.   Maybe some changes by the moderators is called for to protect forum members?   

[Don Fry]

Or indeed, tight turning a fighter, different era, odd dials, difficult vision, less hours per month than a practitioner did year in year out, ( surrounded by experts, who will demand better day after day).

And a suggestion that the briefing was suboptimal, assuming that, in my experience, you need all personnel singing on the same song sheet, ( note management speak). And read the first sentence again to assess how well they are capable is singing on the same hymn sheet. 

And the pilot of the fighter got confused as to where another plane in a tight turn might be. 

I too feel sorry for the losers and their loved ones.

My point is, in 2022, does any group of people actually have the experience to try to do what they were trying to do..as a group. Old caveat, as strong as the weakest link.

 

[Peter Jenkins]

Don, I live 1 mile from an old B17 base in Suffolk.  At the last visit by the vets, we attended a church service that included reading from a book of remembrance of those who died. What struck me was that 45% of deaths were caused by accidents and not enemy action!  So, we are doing better these days despite all the Air Show accidents.

[MattyB]

17 hours ago, Peter Jenkins said:

Don, I live 1 mile from an old B17 base in Suffolk.  At the last visit by the vets, we attended a church service that included reading from a book of remembrance of those who died. What struck me was that 45% of deaths were caused by accidents and not enemy action!  So, we are doing better these days despite all the Air Show accidents.

Sorry, but that’s not really a valid comparison. We’re no longer in a situation where hundreds and hundreds of pilots and aircraft are flying thousands of hours of combat missions a month to save the free world. This is a handful of vets displaying historic aircraft for their own and public education and entertainment a few times a year, so safety should be the number 1 priority above all else. Not deconflicting the aircraft to a sufficient degree would appear to be a massive and entirely avoidable error. 
 

NY Post report on NTSB preliminary findings.

Edited December 3, 2022 by MattyB

[Peter Jenkins]

Sorry Matty, I think you have misunderstood the point I was trying to make.  The accident rate in wartime was accepted as just another hazard.  In peacetime, that rate became unacceptable and a lot of effort was devoted to understanding what caused accidents.  These varied from technical faults, through human machine interface faults, human error or some combination thereof.  Plus weather of course.

 

Added to that was the increasing cost of the aircraft itself as fewer were made driving up unit cost.  Plus, the length of time taken to develop an aircraft has steadily increased and the advances in technology also drove up costs.

 

Flight safety now is at least 2 orders of magnitude better than during WW2.  There remains the issue of pilot proficiency and organisational competence.  Both were found wanting in this case.  

 

Having had the dubious privilege of organising and controlling 3 increasingly bigger air displays when I was in the RAF, I can assure you that safety was my top priority.  I cannot describe the sense of relief at the end of the display when all went to plan and there were no incidents.  What I can say is that the aircraft displaying were flown by RAF pilots and civilan pilots and both had read the Op Order and attended my briefing - except the aircrew flying the RAF Nimrod (based st the other end of the country).

 

I was a tyro but these experienced pilots listened intently as I set out the ground rules including minimum heights, display line etc.  I did not change any procedure from that I had set out in the Op Order.

 

As they say, Flight Safety is no accident.

[Jon H]

If you guys are interested the two videos below are part 1 and 2 covering the loss of another B17 in the US back in 2020. Again, some of things revealed during the investigation were pretty shocking. 

 

 

 

 

[Peter Jenkins]

Thanks for posting those video links Jon.  As an ex RAF Engineer Officer, it always surprised me how small items can have a disproportionate impact on aircraft safety.  There is also the issue of failing to consider the course of action for incidents or emergencies at critical phases of flight such as take off and landing.  There is very little time during these phases to think about what to do and so these actions should be rehearsed by the crew (whether single pilot or multi crew) so that they are foremost in the crew's minds.

 

This translates to our model flying by ensuring that we are prepared for the unexpected on take off and landing and have a plan that we have thought about just before committing to these flight phases.  As an example, I always consider the effect of a cross wind on take off immediately before hand.  So, with the wind blowing from the front left side of the aircraft it will swing to the left so I will need right rudder applied to an appropriate amount before adding power and then adjust rudder to suit.  The same with landing when using the crabbing approach - Note this is not flying through the air in side slip but pointing the aircraft heading into the sidewind to provide a ground track down the runway.  The question is then which rudder movement to use to kick off drift.  So, if the nose of the aircraft is pointing to the left of track then I will need to use right rudder to kick off drift.  I generally say this out aloud as I've found this is more reliable for me than just thinking it.  Others will have their own methods of dealing with these issues which is fine.  The important thing is to have thought about it before you arrive at the point where you need to take action.

[Jon H]

I agree Peter and there is also 'big man' syndrome which is to be avoided wherever possible. No matter your experience level taking shortcuts or taking on too much work load will end in tears. Whenever there is a maiden flight going on i would always recommend having a co pilot next to you that can beep your trims for you if its a total handful or do other non essential flying jobs that might distract from the task at hand. If the model is well set up you dont need him, but if it all goes to pot having someone reach over and beep your trims can be a big help. 

1 hour ago, Peter Jenkins said:

The important thing is to have thought about it before you arrive at the point where you need to take action.

 

If more model flyers applied this we would probably wipe out 90% of model crashes over night. 

[Jon H]

Video speaks for itself