Warbird Information Exchange

His injuries were sufficient to prevent him flying fast jets ever again. It was however, his second ejection having ejected from a BAC Lightning some years before, during his RAF service, and those older seat designs were much harder on the body during ejection than the more modern seats types in current mil types.

I'm sure they tried their best, but it's a stretch to say that "there must have been..." anything at this point.

Completely agree with this. All we know is the aircraft was rapidly transitioning to "brick mode" and the crew had mere seconds to address the situation. They survived, and no one was killed on the ground - that's about the best anyone could hope for in this situation.

We will no doubt learn what precipitated the issue in due course... IMHO the bigger discussion subject will be that of running airshows over highly populated areas. It was fortunate (if I can use that word) that the Texas tragedy didn't take place over the shopping mall just off the airport end, and now we have this divinely guided lawn dart effectively landing in the ONLY place it wouldn't cause massive damage and potential casualties. It's great to be lucky, but you can't build a plan around it.

Lynn

Yes, you could say that everything went right in the emergency. You certainly couldn't imagine a better outcome for the pilots or people on the ground.

They could have flamed out from a birdstrike. No way to predict or avoid that.

Some of the comments from the public on the news sites are astounding.

Agree with the gist of your comments but for accuracy I will point out that much of Willow Run, perhaps even a large majority, is surrounded by nothing but trees and fields.

The particular area it happened to crash at is populated, not densely. The only area close to dense is directly west, and show aircraft would have no reason to go that way, and I suspect the entire area is avoided under normal operations too.
I checked google maps in the wake of the TX disaster and yeah, now that is dense ,, But no comparison with Ypsi.

Officials are now saying it was engine failure that caused the crash:

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/loc ... s-injured/

Pilot received serious, but non life-threatening injuries, back-seater received minor injuries.

23s were always tricky to fly. I've talked with a few former Russian pilots who'd flown them and all said you had to keep an eye on the 23 every moment while you were flying it.
USAF LTG Robert M. Bond bought it while flying one out of Tonopah without so much as a typerating, because he had the stars and nobody could say 'no,' even thought a few of the MIG pilots there had warned them how tricky the Flogger was to fly.
In Bond's case, the earlier ejection seat was what killed him. I've always thought those seats led to the far better seats the Russians put in later planes. They have really good ejection seats now, and I think the 23 is a big reason for that.

_________________
Life member, 91st BG Memorial Association
Owner, 1944 Willys MB #366014
Former REMF (US Army, O3)

I appreciate the correction - having not visited Willow Run before (a deficiency I'd like to correct at some point), I am not familiar with the lay of the land up that way.

Cheers,

Lynn

I thought it was the speed at which he ejected (high supersonic) which shredded his parachute?

And I seem to recall reading somewhere, a quote from one of the Tonopah TP's that flew them, and who was the pilot with the most flights on it (over 250 IIRC) along the lines of "Everytime I flew that thing it was trying to kill me"

Just for the record, the TX airshow deal was not airplanes flying aerobatics, but essentially in the same area as the pattern. There are "corners" where turns are made and those are generally fairly close to points where an aircraft could make the runway. The mid-air was a freak swiss-cheese deal, but it is actually extremely unlikely that even a second midair (also extremely unlikely now that all the pilots are aware of the possibility) would happen somewhere off the airport. As has been shown quite a bit recently, the mid-air deal seems to be happening MORE with civilians depending too much on collision avoidance systems and not their eyes, so the risk is probably just as great without an airshow as with. Airports in dense locations accept thousands of flights every single day. Just look at how much traffic goes into or out of Love Field over downtown Dallas every single day. The public amplifies the risk based on fear, but that fear isn't exactly rational.

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

No prob, I have been going to shows there for decades and am ultra familiar with the lay of the land, can be a challenge to find a good spot off base with all the trees around and cops closing off streets, so I have been reconnoitering the entire area for quite a while [including for this show]. It is very wide open and sparsely inhabited compared to alot of other bases I have seen, the urban encroachment on some of them blows my mind.

edit: I can see how someone looking at the crash pics in a parking lot right next to condos would assume the whole area is packed with development. I don't know if this link will work but if you look on google maps and look for "belleville rest area", the crash happened right across the freeway from there, and for that matter, you can see the waverly apartments where it crashed by Denton Rd. If you zoom out, you can see the area is not that developed, there is far more water and forested land around there than development, and across the freeway to the airfield almost everything north, south and east for miles are open fields. [He was flying roughly parallel with the main runways going north east setting up for the next pass when the incident occurred]

If you can locate ATP flight school to the north west right off the end of the runway, that was my location for the show, at least 1.5 miles or so from the crash site but his show passes took him literally right over my head.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Willo ... &entry=ttu

I was thinking the same thing [about the chances of the TX disaster happening over a population center] being unlikely with relatively slow warbirds doing straight show passes.
I wouldn't say the Mig was doing "aerobatics", he was doing hot passes and mild climbouts ,, But obviously, the faster the jet, the more area it would need to make its turns, but I am assuming this is all accounted for and he was within the show box, or corners as you call them.
edit: And one thing I noted, well before the Mig crash, was that the F-22 demo barely leaves the perimeter of the airfield doing his aerobatics, and when he did they were just straight ingress/egress maneuvers to set up the next demo, very light on the afterburner too - In fact, the whole routine was to showcase its agility and maneuverability rather than its speed and power. Obviously, a Mig 23 would not be able to perform any of these maneuvers [most other jets for that matter], so it showcased what it did best, speed and power ,, And these required a far larger show box than the Raptor.

I'm personally just glad that everyone's okay. Sucks to see the loss of a very nice MiG. Thankfully, he's got 1 (or 2) more in the hangar. I heard rumor the guy in back was an FAA guy?

Also, from my limited exposure to the MiG-21 and MiG-23 in the early days of the Cold War Air Museum, I just remember John and Bud talking one day about the planes and saying something like 3/4 of emergency the checklists for both airplanes end in "EJECT!" and several are simply designed to ensure the plane is in a safe ejection envelope before pulling the handles. Neither have much redundancy (engine, hydraulics, electrical, etc) so there's a lot that can fail and kill ya quickly.

The info I heard today was that the back-seater was another individual, a current airline pilot, who either also owns (or is in the process of acquiring) a MiG-23.

My question is if Files has a two-person min crew as part of his Experimental Exhibition operating limitations, and what the qualifications of that second crew member are if that is the case.

_________________

Just to piggyback on what you said. The other pilot's name and info has been released here:

https://theaviationist.com/2023/08/15/i ... -michigan/

Apparently, Mark Ruff, the backseater, is a current United Pilot and not an FAA employee. That makes sense since the pilot, Dan Filer, is a United pilot as well. Maybe Mr. Ruff is a DPE and that accounts for the initial reports that he was FAA?

An amazing series of photographs of the ejection here:

https://www.instagram.com/darkroomeagle/

My question is why does that Mig-23 have a 2 person min as the crew? That variant, the Mig-23UB, was a two seat trainer. Technically, the rear occupant is not a "backseater" in the sense that he is the WSO, or radar operator. If that's the case, that is essentially a single pilot aircraft, just like a T-33, T-38, etc.? If a two pilot crew is part of the Ops Limits then that means Mr. Filer would never be able to solo the aircraft.

I'm not trying to be critical of the 2 pilot vs 1 pilot min crew thing, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind it. I'm not aware of any other high performance jet which originally was designed to be single-seat, but yet has a 2 pilot minimum as part of their FAA operating limitations.

I must confess, I know next to nothing about the Mig-23, somebody please educate me and correct any of us if we are wrong.