Questions about .. Absolute Stupidity!!!!

Hellcat · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:08 pm

Forgive the cheezy youtube video & crappy sound tract ... This was sent to me from a friend. Most of us have seen some of this but it raises many questions ...

Questions:

Just how idiotic and unsafe are the guys in the T6's skimming the water? Is this an act that would find these guys in trouble with the FAA? I'm a pilot so I know enough about being above water, but this act seems to break laws ...

All the extremely low military flying. Would these guys lose their wings if they were found out? What's the USAF rules on low altitude flight restrictions for non-combat flights?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4vrV-pbJ8g

JDK · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:17 pm

The South African water ski team WIX discussion:
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... php?t=6462

The interesting bit of the discussion, including the 'secret' is on page 3.

Hellcat · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:23 pm

Finite amount of T6's .... infinite amount of stupidity .... I'm sure it's entertaining to watch, but I wish they would use Cessna's instead of T6's ... It would be a terrible waste of a T6 if the fool flying it endowed nose in :roll:

Stupidity holds no "secrets" ....

RyanShort1 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:39 pm

Hellcat wrote:

Finite amount of T6's .... infinite amount of stupidity .... I'm sure it's entertaining to watch, but I wish they would use Cessna's instead of T6's ... It would be a terrible waste of a T6 if the fool flying it endowed nose in :roll:

Probably waaay more dangerous in a Cessna than a T-6. That nosewheel, if it hit, would flip you.

Not that I endorse the T-6s being used!

Ryan

Hellcat · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:50 pm

Quote:

Well, not exactly correct...

This is one of those tricks that looks far worse than it actually is. It's been done many many times before, using lots of different types of aircraft (Cubs, T-6s, a Skyraider would be cool but the aircraft type really doesn't matter as long as it's convention gear). As for skill, well it's a wheel landing so I guess you have to be able to do one of those. Give yourself a decent run in, arrest your sink rate and skim her on. Once on the water you cannot push the plane in. It's just like being on concrete. There's a great stretch of the Missouri River near Kansas City that's seen this done more than a few times.

Cool that it's a 4 ship, but again not the hardest trick in the book. Basically a 4 ship section landing. Once on the water all you need is rudder and power to maintain position in the flight.

Sorry Neil, a sneeze wouldn't have guaranteed a crash, just like a sneeze during takeoff or landing is not a guaranteed crash. The risks shown here are no greater (and substantially less) than during a normal 4 ship formation flight, and MUCH less than during a 4 ship aerobatic routine.

Just wish I had thought of it first. The four ship element is SH.

Of all the BS I have read and posted here on WIX, this one is right at the top .... I guess flying below 500 feet, under bridges, through rock openings, into houses killing people ... is one of those tricks that looks far worse than it actually is ... being a foolish pilot is not the hardest trick in the book either ...

Quote:

Probably waaay more dangerous in a Cessna than a T-6. That nosewheel, if it hit, would flip you.

You made my point!!! ....

airknocker · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:01 pm

I think careful review of the clip will show none of these events took place in the U.S.. Most were in foreign air bases, over water, airshows not in FAA jurisdiction or in countries where feeling the breath of the dragon is socially acceptable.

jet1 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:03 pm

otherwise I don't see what the problem is....

Hellcat · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:10 pm

Well stupidity has no borders and " I didn't see a problem' usually are a buried pilots last words ... IMH IFR private pilot O of course :roll:

JDK · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:21 pm

Hellcat wrote:

Quote:

Well, not exactly correct...

This is one of those tricks that looks far worse than it actually is. It's been done many many times before, using lots of different types of aircraft (Cubs, T-6s, a Skyraider would be cool but the aircraft type really doesn't matter as long as it's convention gear). As for skill, well it's a wheel landing so I guess you have to be able to do one of those. Give yourself a decent run in, arrest your sink rate and skim her on. Once on the water you cannot push the plane in. It's just like being on concrete. There's a great stretch of the Missouri River near Kansas City that's seen this done more than a few times.

Cool that it's a 4 ship, but again not the hardest trick in the book. Basically a 4 ship section landing. Once on the water all you need is rudder and power to maintain position in the flight.

Sorry Neil, a sneeze wouldn't have guaranteed a crash, just like a sneeze during takeoff or landing is not a guaranteed crash. The risks shown here are no greater (and substantially less) than during a normal 4 ship formation flight, and MUCH less than during a 4 ship aerobatic routine.

Just wish I had thought of it first. The four ship element is SH.

Of all the BS I have read and posted here on WIX, this one is right at the top ....

I made it clear the discussion was about the South African Harvard waterski formation - nothing else. Steve doesn't post here anymore. I know why.

I don't think he'd mind my saying he has firsthand experience of what he's talking about - and as bdk said in the same thread, the watersking thing is less risky than it looks - although not guaranteed safe, of course. The South Africans, as outlined in that thread, undertook a risk assessment on the dam op, and reckoned it was a worthwhile thing to do - just like any other risk assessment. I was certainly stunned by the pics when I first saw them, and reckoned they were pretty dangerous - but then discussing it with people who knew the stunt changed my mind.

Anyway, let's have a safe 2009.

Moonlight · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:23 pm

While I'll grant this was a little bit of show-boating by a group of what I can only assume were some very accomplished pilots, water skiing a plane itself is not an inherently dangerous or reckless act...IF the equation involves BOTH the right type of plane (taildragger for sure, big tires a plus, being overpowered an even bigger plus) and the right pilot (one who has been taught and trained in the proper technique for doing this). I say that...'cause I do it. Regularly. What do I fly when I'm doing it? A 220 hp super duper bad-ass cub with 31" tundra tires on it. How did I learn? I was taught by one of the most accomplished bush pilots out there. Check out any number of videos of aircraft landing in the Alaskan bush (Big Rocks, Long Props; Cubdriver 749ER; etc.) and you will see footage of water being used as part of the runway...both for take off and for landing. I've used this technique on more than one occasion to land on gravel bars adjacent to the rivers I live by. Done properly, the plane is stopped just after the tailwheel is on dry ground. Is it "out-of-the-box" flying? You bet your tail feathers it is. So are aerobatics, crop-dusting, and most types of medi-vac. Does that make it inherently more dangerous than other types of flying? Only when done improperly.

Brad · **Joined:** Thu Apr 29, 2004 10:30 pm **Posts:** 1132

JDK wrote:

Steve doesn't post here anymore. I know why.

I just wish that dishonest individual would give back my Sea Fury manuals that he's had for the last several years.

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11332

This is no more dangerous than any low level aerobatic act, in fact, probably far less so. It was done under very controlled conditions with very experienced formation acro pilots.

I also know a few pilots in the us who have done this and they say that no matter how hard you push the tires will not submerge and flip the aircraft, assuming you don't get too slow and simulate a landing...

I don't have much daredevil left in me any more though, so I'll leave the foot dragging, flying under bridges, wing walking, landing on top of a moving vehicle, low level acro, etc. to others.

JDK · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:31 pm

Brad wrote:

JDK wrote:

Steve doesn't post here anymore. I know why.

I just wish that dishonest individual would give back my Sea Fury manuals that he's had for the last several years.

Fair enough. FWIW, I've not heard from him for quite a while. I doubt he's still got the manuals, given the Sea Fury's in new hands and the changes in Steve's personal circs.

Brad · **Joined:** Thu Apr 29, 2004 10:30 pm **Posts:** 1132

JDK wrote:

Brad wrote:

JDK wrote:

Steve doesn't post here anymore. I know why.

I just wish that dishonest individual would give back my Sea Fury manuals that he's had for the last several years.

Fair enough. FWIW, I've not heard from him for quite a while. I doubt he's still got the manuals, given the Sea Fury's in new hands and the changes in Steve's personal circs.

Yea but from what I've been told, the two owners after him didn't recieve the books either...
Oh well. I learned a lesson about loaning out my stuff. Especially the rare stuff!

JDK · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:39 pm

Brad wrote:

Yea but from what I've been told, the two owners after him didn't recieve the books either...

I didn't know that.

Brad wrote:

Oh well. I learned a lesson about loaning out my stuff. Especially the rare stuff!

Yes, pity. The warbird world goes around on people's generosity, so please don't feel too burned.

On the other hand thank God for digital images, PDFs and e-mail!

Meanwhile - Back to normal service...

Warbird Information Exchange

Questions about .. Absolute Stupidity!!!!

Who is online