Chuck Yeager article in Flight Journal(wow)

[Tim Savage]

How come? Why is it O.K. to bash the national museums and anything that they do O.K on an open forum, but talk about the same stuff with flying warbirds, and it becomes a huge issue, and one that needs to be hushed up. What is good for one is good for another. This goes beyond just warbirds. Even beyond aircraft. We have all had that friend that owned a car that was way too much for him to handle and he ends up wrecking it.

Chris, it is very simple. People's lives and familes are involved...when you talk about a museum it is simply theory.

I think in order to properly discuss safety and incidents sometimes you have to discect the root cause of the accident. If your friend is one of those that is killed in an accident, do you want the details of his mistake, mechanical failure, etc, posted all over the web for his widow, his kids, etc. to read? Is that really necessary? Absolutely not.

No one is saying that we shouldn't call a spade a spade, but it should be done in a peer enivronment where it can be discussed openly with the ability to explain misunderstood points, etc. That isn't done well on the internet or in a magazine editorial. Randy Haskin can probably correct me, but I think he told me once that most of the USAF accident reports were classified for that very reason. They are discussed and dissected at the unit level, but they aren't printed all over the place for everyone to see. I think you would agree that the safety culture is pretty high at the USAF.

I have been involved in a large number of warbird debriefings after a flight where mistakes have been made. It is discussed, generally privately, and in the vast majority of cases the person steps up to the plate accepts responsibilty for their actions. If they don't accept the criticism and learn from it, they generally find themselves looking for new folks to fly with.

I hope that Vlado, FG1Dpilot, Bill, Eric Downing, DougR, Glenn Wegman and Jim Beasley will post to validate along with me that safety is being constantly discussed. We have all lost friends in recent years doing what we love. These aren't people we just know from reading Warbird Digest of another warbird magazine. They are folks we have dined with, flown with, stayed at their house, know their wife and kids, and on and on. We take it seriously. Most of us have families, nearly all of us have wives. Nobody is interested in ignoring the subject. When you have gone to the funeral of a fellow warbird pilot and given his grieving wife a hug, maybe you will better understand.

[bipe215]

My last word on this. Yeager is in print and on video 'bashing' all kinds of guys, including Gabreski. Thats fact. He did not just destroy the NF-104, he destroyed the entire program, because he would not admit he screwed up. It was pure pilot error, plain and simple. But because of his considerable influence, he shifted the blame. There's a pattern here.
Now he influences public opinion on warbird owners when there is already enough negatives out there on pleasure flying in general. He was a great pilot, but he needs to hush.

Steve G

[SPANNERmkV]

IF you fly them at ALL occassionally bad things are going to happen.
It happened when they were new with younger miltary trained pilots.
It will happen with ex-airline pilots.
It will happen with rich guys just like it happened with poor kids.

I am mindful of that risk everytime I fly a Cessna, much less any rare airplane I am fortunate enough to get stick time in.
BUT if we didn't have new guys willing to take the risk (for whatever reason) and rich guys or organizations willing to underwrite the expenses Warbirds will only be seen in Museums.
I WANT BOTH!
Flying and Museums!

To think that anyone will be influenced to NOT fly their iron just 'cause Chuck says there ought to be a law... hmmmm I don't think so.
Chuck is technically correct. We need to stop breaking warbirds.
To think that we shouldn't or can't all learn to NOT "do nuthin' dumb" based on others mistakes is to dismiss the notion of the Warbird community having any flying future left at all.

I'm voting with my logbook (and my wallet. GULP!)

SPANNER

[mustangdriver]

When you have gone to the funeral of a fellow warbird pilot and given his grieving wife a hug, maybe you will better understand.

Been there done that, would like to see it happen less.

[kenlyco]

People die driving, flying ,walking,YOU ARE ALL GOING TO DIE SOMEDAY,so let the rich bastards buy there toys and crash them, who cares, there is not a single thing you can do about it, just enjoy them while there are some left.

[Bill Greenwood]

Tim writes about the feelings of the relatives of a warbird pilot lost, and there is a lot to be said for that view. I once wrote my memories of a friend lost in a Mustang accident, which I thought were a fond view of him as a friend and fellow pilot. His Son wrote a scathing letter to NATA about the article, and to me. He was so hurt by his Dad's loss, that he needed someone outside the family to blame it on, like me. I wrote jokingly of flight from Kenosha where we got caught in lowering weather and some of us had to turn back. There were 5 fighters in our group, and about a hundred other T-6s, B-17 etc. that had the same weather problem and diverted. Matt Gunsch was in my back seat with me. I meant no critisim of the Dad, he had apologized to me about the flight and we laughed about it. The Son wrote that his Dad never flew in less than good VMC, as if I made it up and as if piloting was the total sum of his Dad, that he had to be perfect. I wrote about getting stuck in the mud at their airport, which his Dad and I joked about afterwards. Again, the Son thought that was an attack on his Dad, rather than just a funny incident, and wrote that no one else ever got stuck there. I wrote two letters to the Son and the family to assure them that I didn't mean it in a negative way, and they never had the courtesy to reply. At no time in my letter did I ever write that the pilot caused the accident(no one knows for sure, other than a likely scenario).

So in dealing with those who have had a loss, we can expect their sorrow to be so great that they may lash out even without cause. This case was not even about money.

When and if it is my time, IF THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE LEARNED, SOME POSITIVE LESSON, feel free to analyze and discuss. It would be best to use facts, not distortions or half truths. Don't claim something was a formation flight or landing when it wasn't.

Last edited by Bill Greenwood on Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[gary1954]

To think that we shouldn't or can't all learn to NOT "do nuthin' dumb" based on others mistakes is to dismiss the notion of the Warbird community having any flying future left at all.

I'm voting with my logbook (and my wallet. GULP!)

SPANNER

This is why ya go by the book, from preflight to post flight, not cut corners, don't do stuff you shouldn't do...fly it, have fun with it, and bring your mass of parts that have flown with you in formation back home.
The "actions and statements" of a few of the "Old Pro's" like CY, well, it is up to you guys that fly and maintain these wonderful machines, to set the example, and prove negative comments about OUR warbird community, is hot exhaust and quickly dissapted. You guys are cool, many times, you have set the standard in aviation safety practice, which has been carried across the pond. Ya, there have been a few crashes in Britian, where we have unfortunately lost your fellow aviators, and we have lost some examples of flying machines. Were the limitations of the pilots exceeded by the aircraft? possibly, was altitude a factor? or was it improper flight planning?
You guys know what you are doing, and you get better every year.
Don't let the hot exhaust of one put p i s s in your avgas.
I'M done now, thanks for puttin up with me.

[Fleet16b]

When and if it is my time, IF THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE LEARNED, SOME POSITIVE LESSON, feel free to analyze and discuss. It would be best to use facts, not distortions or half truths. Don't claim something was a formation flight or landing when it wasn't.

Well said Bill !


Fleet16b

[camshaw]

If you put yourself in his shoes and try to understand his point of view you might think twice.. The man came from a poor home and became a lengend here in the states & through his heroic efforts we are safe. He loved and still loves the machines for what they are. I'm sure with all these airshows and warbirds being restored he has probably ran into plenty of cocky rich warbird owners who couldn't find a sparkplug. I love going to carshows here in california and seeing these rich lawyers come driving up in some exotic multithousand dollar musclecar and profess to have built it and restored it themselves and the mere idea of these guys so doing makes me cringe. As you can tell by their hands, you can tell by their words, that the only knowledge they have of the lineage and history of the vehicle is only because they have the coin to purchase the darn thing.. It is rare to see and know an inthusiast who truly is a wrench and a motorhead. I'm sure he's had his fill of these bluecollared yuppies that claim to be warbird inthusiasts..plus the older we get,the less we want to be bothered. Leave him alone, he's paid his dues..my two cents, you can hate me for it...take care,cameron.

[warbirdcrew]

Seems to me that CY should be thankful for some of the doctors, lawyers, and airline pilots who own mustangs. Without them he probably wouldn't get to sit in them anymore let alone fly them solo.

[Jack Cook]

If you put yourself in his shoes and try to understand his point of view you might think twice..

I'm waiting for you to say April Fool's
This sums it all up....................

This sounds like more of a personal vendetta on CY's part than reasoned thinking...

Leave him alone? ... gladly, it seems more approprate to say he should leave us alone. We know what he did and what he didn't. It's old news. Tell CY to try to shut up and be grateful we have many more P-51's flying today than ever before, and more to come. Someone ask him what we should do with all the surviving P-51's today. Put then up on poles and place a plaque under them that reads ... "Here is the airplane that CY famously flew, and oh by the way, it was also flown during WW2"

[k5083]

Tim, I think it's great that warbird safety is being discussed among warbird operators. I respectfully reject your suggestion that it should not also be discussed in this forum, in magazine editorials, or elsewhere.

Many people believe that vintage military aircraft reflect part of our shared heritage; many people donate of their time and money to keep some of them flying. So there are a lot of valid stakeholders in warbird safety other than the guys holding the stick. There is a lot to be learned by those willing to learn. If you do not want to condescend to participate in such discussions in a forum such as this, fine. But I hope other experienced operators will continue to do so.

August

[richkolasa]

Anyway in the short article Yeager explains some of his exploits in the P-51. But then starts commenting that we are losing warbirds all the time due to "rich, spoiled pilots who have no idea what is behind them(I think he is commenting on the "Precious metal" accident of last year). He mentions Reno and Oshkosh as the main subject.
Sorry for the rant,
Nate

Wow! Surely he is not referring to Gerry... WOW!

Yeagers quote: "we lost a few at Oshkosh, led by ex-airline pilots who have no idea what is going on behind them".

That to me indicated a red flag that he was talking about Gerry!!

Gerry was a cropduster, not an airline pilot, nor is the younger Odeggard, but I may be wrong about that. Gerry could not see what was going on ahead of him, tragically. Well, ahead and below. No disrespect meant whatsoever.

Rich

[Matt Gunsch]

as far as Yeagers comment about ex airline pilots leading a formation and not knowing what is going on behind him, let me try to give you a idea what it is like to be in the air during the show at Oshkosh as a lead aircraft.
things you have to do,
fly your plane, and also fly your wingmans plane as well, Carl once said leading a large formation is like flying a 70 engine airplane, but you only control 1 engine, if you are not smooth, it makes thier job harder, that is the easy part,
Now, you are flying your plane, leading your section, scanning for conflicting traffic, listening to show boss, and listening for your flight on you other radio, all while trying to stay close enough to the airport so you can be on station at the correct time, and not changing your altitude more than 5 ft or less. You do not have the time to turn around and look for your wingmen, except maybe in a mirror, and if they are in a diamond, you cannot see your #4 man anyhow, and if you try to turn enough to see your wingmen, you can apply pressure to the stick and cause the plane to go somewhere you did not intend, see part about smooth flying. I went up on a flight that when we got back on the ground, Carl asked me the time in the air, I was going to say 15-20 minutes, but before I said anything, I checked my notes and were surprised to see that we had been up over a hour. If I was that busy as the observer and leads extra eyes, you can imagine what Carl was going thru in the front seat.

With Dick James, if there was a mechanical problem, Dick should have been able to make a radio call, since he did not make a call, he might have had a medical issue, in that case, there was nothing lead could have done, Dick may have been dead before the plane hit the ground.

That is a quick idea, I am sure Vlado or someone else can say it better than I can.