Warbird Information Exchange

There is a HUGE difference between tatical flying when your bacon depends on flying low and fast to get out of harms way as fast as possiable, vs flying low at a airshow to show off.
I started this by saying it was interesting that people that had no idea how to fly formation or land staggered on a runway were screaming that it was not safe, yet we know otherwise, because we do it and have had the training to do so, yet when those of us that do this type of flying point out what we feel is unsafe, those same people say how neat it is he can fly that low.

a pass in front of a airshow crowd at 20ft is neat, but it leaves very little room for error, plus only the front of the crowd can see the pass. A pass at 100ft gives a bit more room, and more can see the plane.

Even the pros sometimes need to be told that they are pushing it. I know of one of the best show pilots at one time was told by another performer about a manuver that left no room for error, he listened to the advice and adjusted the show to make it safer. Did the crowd know the difference? no, did those who flew in airshows know the difference, YES.

you got a problem with puppies and butterflies, pal?

That's beautiful .... hehehe .... never a shortage of funny Sh*t on these forums.

DaveG is my hero

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

Dale's a friend of mine, therefore it's really irrelevant. I don't own a P-51, but I'd give it to him in a second if I did. It's a hunk of metal. He, like most airshow performers, is an amazing human being, much more irreplacable than a P-51. I'd be sick if he "went" in any plane, car, motorcycle, etc, just as I was when Jimmy Franklin, Jim LeRoy, Leo Loudenslager, Bill Dodds, and about 30 other people I knew and loved left this earth before their time.

You don't like people flying outside parameters that you have in your mind for them. Great, free country, you're free to feel how you want, so have a nice night. I have better things to do than "argue" how much freedom the top professionals should have. God bless.

Rich

_________________
Rich Kolasa
www.crystalgraphix.com

if Dale's a friend of yours, shouldn't it be very relevent? as opposed to irrelevent? And if you owned a P-51 I'm sure it wouldn't be "a hunk of metal" to you. Unless you view 1.5 mill as a hunk of metal. No one's questioning his "amazing human" factor, just some of his decisions to fly very low. And if you would be sick to see him leave the earth before his time, wouldn't you want to agree with many of us here? And your right, it's a free internet, and I always have a nice night.



Who's arguing? .... you? ... read a little more, it'll come to you. Have a nice night ...

PS ... Dale "Snort' is a great human being .... feel better?

See this is when I actually enjoy posting here. I normally get bored with many "heated" discussions here because I always see people backing off for fear of p*ssing someone off. Well too bad, I rarely "argue" with anyone here simply because it's a sign of weakness. Not saying I haven't fell for a few arguements in the past, but I have learned over the months. This thread is a debate, simple and straight forward, no one's bashing Snort. We're just having a very interesting and respectful debate on a pilot or pilots decision to fly too low. Dale is a gift to the warbird community. No one here has a disgreement with that fact, but for anyone to get offended my this debate is clearly not seeing or reading the big picture. We all want Dale to be with us for many, many years. I personally get no thrill out of seeing Dale fly that low .... period!!!! and that is where this debate goes ... no arguement here ... just a very intellegent debate by well educated warbird folks here ... nothing at all personal.

One last thing ... don't you think it's a good thing to be able to have this forum to discuss matters like this? .... i think it's a gift. You just have to learn the rules like I did and try not to take others opinions personal. it took me a while.

Mark

That type of flying happens all the time...and every fighter in the USAF hasn't been reduced to scrap. Think you might be jumping the gun on this one a bit? My point is, many people's ideas of what is "safe" and "unsafe" would be challenged by what some military fighter guys practice and perform on a regular basis very safely.



So, what is your point here exactly?

First off, flying low and at that speed is a tactic to accomplish a mission. How is it that you have any possible idea what kind of flying might be required to accomplish some of the missions that me and my fellow fighter pilots might be charged with accomplishing? We don't just do certain types of flying because it's fun and we can -- it is developed to be able to do something specific, like hide from a threat or outrun it when it is trying to kill us. You are simply in no position to even have an opinion on if those tactics are necessary or not.

Second, I would be happy to engage in a discussion with you about the motivations of the people who perform this job every day...just not in this thread. The one thing I feel warrants discussion is the "relatively free" portion of your comment. The only part that is "free" about this job is that I don't have to pay for fuel or maintenance. That may look pretty neat to someone on the outside, but the cost in blood, toil, sweat, and tears is immense. If you had any experience with that part you would realize that there's actually an immense cost to this job. The joke that we use is that we have to pay back the cost of our flying by getting that thousands of dollars shoved up our a$$ a nickel at a time, because that's how it feels on a daily basis.

because I know a couple of your fellow pilots ...

I get you point and it's very well taken. No disrespect, just the panties remark was a fun way to get some heat going ... I did assume a few things as well that was off a bit .... so forgive my lack of forsight, not my lack of understanding, I understand the blood, sweat and tears part, I have a few personal losses from this mess overseas, and I have a dad that just left us who was a very good navy pilot and an uncle who is buried at Arlington. A brother in law who flew in Vietnam. I've been around aviation all my life. I'm just a simple VFR guy ... not a jet dude. Remember it's all good if you can take what you dish out, and I just took what you dished out ... And actually I do have a bit of experience myself, so I guess I have a very small right to ask some controversial questions, then again, maybe not ... BTW I'm NOT knocking your service, I'm just making a simple point about the possible attitudes of people who want to fly military aircraft these days, doesn't mean I know my *ss from a hole in the ground, you know much better than I do, what do you think in your own personal unbiased opinion? Do you think folks join the air force to fly jets or to serve their country? I'm sure you'll say .. both, and you should ... it's just a question, not a bash on anyone. .... and your just fine friend, keep up the good work.

But I will ask you to give me an example when you would need to fly at 100 feet to accomplish a mission. I'm not asking for great detail, just interested in a basic example that couldn't possibly be classified. And I'm not knocking you at all, I'm just interested respectfully. I'll understand if you don't want to explain. .... friends again? ...

And PS ... there really is no point here, just a conversation and debate. And if I didn't assume things in this debate, I wouldn't get a knowledgable response from guys like you. Do you see the point here now?



PSS, Pm me, I'd love a good debate. And on a civil level.

Mark

Just a guess... at 100' you have a much greater chance of flashing past enemy ground defenses without getting hit! 500' would be enough that someone could take a pot shot at you with their AK, but at 100, by the time the AK could be raised it'd be too late. The higher ya go, the longer folks can see you, so if you need to go down low, make it really low!
Also, it's a known fact that radar isn't perfect... stuff readily available on the internet to figure that out, for that matter, if radar is sooo good, then why do we carry Transponders on our VFR aircraft? I'm guessing that some missions use VERY low altitudes to "hide" behind terrain to keep the enemy from guessing the targets.
Keep 'em flying Randy! Thanks for your service.

Ryan

_________________
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.

Regarding why military tactical fighters fly low and fast. Randy may or may not respond to why that is, but in a nutshell, it's about survivability. You fly fast, because you want to maintain your highest possible energy level for defensive manuevering and you want to minimize your time and exposure in hostile territory. You fly low because it makes you harder for the enemy to see, both visually and more importantly, below the level that most enemy defenses' radar works. It's a very important tactic, and one that has been around since W.W. II. Flying low and fast, is an absolutely essential survival skill for tactical type aircraft.

I don't have a problem with this whatsoever, in fact, I would be worried if our Air Force pilots did NOT practice this. The big difference is, what does this accomplish at an airshow? We're talking risk mitigation and payoffs here. The risk to a military pilot is getting shot down by flying too high or too slow. What's the payoff? Coming back from a mission.

What about a low pass at an airshow? What does it gain you? Just bragging rights at the post airshow BBQ and a bunch of non-pilot types stroking your ego saying, "hey, that was cool, man". To me, the reward does not validate the risk.

This is the crux of the whole debate, IMO!

Yes, this has happened in the past. I was told by a well known airshow performer about a certain well known airshow performer who took unnecessary risks as part of their airshow routine and was told by ICAS to basically "tone it down". That performer is mentioned in this thread and unfortunately is no longer with us due to an airshow accident.

That kind of stuff happens from time to time, but we, the general public never hear about it.

I hope you don't think I am hammering him. I just feel it wasn't the safest thing to do.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Director

I'll give you two non-specific examples.

One, the lower you fly to the ground, the more difficult it is for radars to find you. This is both for "early warning" radars that will let the bad guys know we're coming, AND for target tracking radars that guide bad things to hit my airplane. That's called terrain masking, and is the easiest way to avoid detection.

Second, the easiest way to get a radar or infrared tracking system to lose track (or not be able to track at all) is to give it a difficult time sorting the target out from the background "noise". The earth is just about the best "clutter" that can be offered -- it is an immense radar return as well as having a lot of inherent infrared energy. In other words, it's easy to "hide" in that clutter.

At 500' you are only low enough to defeat some of the threat radars out there. At 200' that capability doubles. At 100', you're practically golden. At 50' where the British fly....we'll, that's something amazing in its own right.

Wow! Six friggin' pages.

I've got to tell you as the son of a fighter pilot, Air Force brat, and one Indy car veteran mechanic and former race car driver, I think Snort was a bit high on that pass!

What are thes guys doing? Putting on a show for the aviation fans of the world. That means you "let 'er dangle" and you want the audience to come a way with the "holy poo poo" factor. Do you take a chance? darn right! Are you at risk? Dah! Is this something you have chosen to do, yeah. Is it too low? Does it scare me? Yup! As planned.

Stop all this PC whining! JeezLaweez! Get over it. This is show biz and everyone that flies knows the risk. Everyone who drives a race car knows the risk. The business is the show and sending everyone home with the HSF. That is what breeds new talent, new enthusiasm, new blood. Some may cross that final border but they knew going in that was the risk. For all the PC fans, pi$$ off. If you don't risk and challenge yourself to perform, then you have not traveled that road. There is a fine line between bravery and stupidity and Darwin seems to control that. Otherwise, live your life and talent to the fullest and put on a hell of a show!

My rant, over. There is a whole lot more to life than life itself. Sit and idle in the background or take life by the balls and live it! Know your abilities and then push them to the limit!

_________________
"There are old pilots and bold pilots but few old, bold pilots."

The performer I know of is still very much around, becaused he listened to his peers.