Seafury T-mk20 midair?

BigGrey · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:34 pm

My condolences to all involved in this accident.
This is not the place or time to speculate on the how or why or decisions anybody involved made. If details are forthcoming, fine. If they don't come out, that is fine also.

Les

flyride · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:46 pm

There is FAR guidance for engine out (single and multi), but nothing for a mid-air.

If the airplane was controllable and I knew there were people waiting for me with recovery/support/crash equipment at home base, I'd probably fly there too. Potentially more risk at slow speed/landing than in level, unaccelerated flight.

What would a Sea Fury do, orbit over the crash site indefinitely? At 140 gph it won't do that for very long. It's not as if he could have helped other than tell ATC and to verify that someone on the ground is attending the site.

Chill out with the indignation. It's an awful tragedy and a horrible day at the Eagle's Nest today.

pilot06 wrote:

I have a question regarding the post mid-air flight. Isn't the correct course of action to find the nearest airport to land and assess the damage?

AFWhite wrote:

Fix? How about landing safely? This dude passed like 4 airports on the way...how about the damage you can't see? Not to mention, what about the dude who just bought the farm? Sure, there are malfunctions you'll encounter in flight that you can make it home on...I doubt the procedure for a mid air reads "Fly it home, it's easier to fix at your home base".

RyanShort1 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:54 pm

flyride wrote:

There is FAR guidance for engine out (single and multi), but nothing for a mid-air.

If the airplane was controllable and I knew there were people waiting for me with recovery/support/crash equipment at home base, I'd probably fly there too. Potentially more risk at slow speed/landing than in level, unaccelerated flight.

What would a Sea Fury do, orbit over the crash site indefinitely? At 140 gph it won't do that for very long. It's not as if he could have helped other than tell ATC and to verify that someone on the ground is attending the site.

Chill out with the indignation. It's an awful tragedy and a horrible day at the Eagle's Nest today.

pilot06 wrote:

I have a question regarding the post mid-air flight. Isn't the correct course of action to find the nearest airport to land and assess the damage?

AFWhite wrote:

Fix? How about landing safely? This dude passed like 4 airports on the way...how about the damage you can't see? Not to mention, what about the dude who just bought the farm? Sure, there are malfunctions you'll encounter in flight that you can make it home on...I doubt the procedure for a mid air reads "Fly it home, it's easier to fix at your home base".

Exactly.

All the FAA says is:

Sec. 91.7 — Civil aircraft airworthiness.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.

(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

Shall discontinue doesn't mean crash, obviously, so it is then up to the pilot's best judgment as to how to safely end the flight. For all we know he might have wanted to do a low pass down the runway so that someone knowledgeable about the aircraft could tell him the extent of the damage to the underside of his aircraft, or something along those lines. Plenty of reasons why a pilot might choose one airport over another.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 5:00 pm

Exactly. Very poignant given that the episode of "Air Disasters" last night on Smithsonian was on Reeve Flight 8 which flew for almost 6 hours after loosing the #4 propeller after departing Cold Bay to land in Anchorage, passing more than a few other airports, because ANC was best equipped to handle the emergency and had a long enough runway to give them the best chance of stopping without running off the end considering their predicament.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci2fIx-Df-k

Fearless Tower · **Joined:** Thu May 26, 2011 5:14 pm **Posts:** 362

davidwomacks wrote:

kinda like the sky raider that lost half of its wing in a collision with a P-51 at Duxford and still landed safely.

The Spad didn't fly on for 40 min to a private gated community.

RyanShort1 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 7:37 pm

Fearless Tower wrote:

davidwomacks wrote:

kinda like the sky raider that lost half of its wing in a collision with a P-51 at Duxford and still landed safely.

The Spad didn't fly on for 40 min to a private gated community.

Honestly, are you jealous of them, think that you know more about the situation than the pilot who was flying, or just want to do the FAA's job for them?

Randy Haskin · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 7:46 pm

pilot06 wrote:

I have a question regarding the post mid-air flight. Isn't the correct course of action to find the nearest airport to land and assess the damage?

PC

No, that's not always the "correct" course of action. It is one of the options, but not the singular correct one.

Here's something I wrote for another forum on the subject:

Quote:

I don't have any information on this specific decision by the pilot of Dreadnought, but I'll add this into the discussion.

Following a midair, or any other event where a high performance aircraft receives structural damage but is still flying and there is not another immediate need to land as soon as possible (ergo, fire, engine flameout, etc), it is normal procedure to perform a "controllability check" prior to attempting to land. This consists of configuring gear and flaps for approach, and then incrementally slowing to see what the slowest speed is where the aircraft can maintain control. The idea is that if you can safely get down to a logical landing speed and still have enough control surface deflection to maneuver the aircraft, then you go ahead and attempt the landing. If you can't get slow enough to make a good landing, then you keep your speed, climb up to a safe altitude and location, and bail out.

These checks take a bit of time and distance to accomplish, so you can either circle over one location and do them, or do the checks in a straight line (while you are pointing toward the home 'drome); the time in the air and distance flown is going to happen either way. 70 miles is not all that far to cover while doing this stuff, and the "home field advantage" has the benefit of people and equipment that know your aircraft type, and the pilot probably knows the runway and area better. Getting a good radio line of sight to the home field would be helpful for anyone you are talking to while doing a controllability check, as well as depending on the flight time, they could launch another aircraft to form up on you, visually assess the damage, and act as safety chase.

Given that reports say the vertical and horizontal stabs on Dreadnought were "substantially damaged" as I posted previously, it would make sense that the pilot might spend considerable time doing controllability checks prior to landing. There may have even been other damage they had to work through, like the gear not coming down, or something like that. If this was the case, he was probably on the radio to the rest of the Sanders folks at Ione during the process, too, while they broke out the Flight Manual and read him any relevant checklists or other data (since expanded flight manuals aren't usually carried in single-seat fighters or 2-seat trainers).

So, there is a difference between "land as soon as possible" and "land as soon as conditions permit", and either may be the correct course of action depending on the situation.

An aircraft that was flying in the area when the midair occurred followed N20SF through the NorCal Approach freqs as the pilot handled the emergency, and indicated that he was performing a controllability check during that flight back to Ione. Thus, the pilot in this case made the call that "land as soon as possible" wasn't as smart a choice as conducting a controllability check in a straight line toward home station.

Something else I posted on another forum:

Quote:

The home field presents a number of important advantages that (other airports) wouldn't.

- Your own people on VHF who know your rare aircraft, have the technical data for your rare aircraft, and can be your "virtual wingman" by helping talk you through the process of handling the emergency, reading checklists, giving other ideas and information, etc
- The potential to have a similar aircraft (the Sanders folks have several Sea Furies) launch and be your chase aircraft -- to give you a visual once-over and help assess the damage, as well as perform all of the other roles a wingman does during an emergency (basically someone to monitor the big picture while you focus on the stick-and-rudder small picture of handing the emergency).

rwdfresno · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 8:40 pm

Fearless Tower wrote:

davidwomacks wrote:

kinda like the sky raider that lost half of its wing in a collision with a P-51 at Duxford and still landed safely.

The Spad didn't fly on for 40 min to a private gated community.

I'm really not sure the point of your comment however, the PIC was an extremely experienced pilot in the aircraft in which they were piloting. Orbiting the scene, or landing at the closest airport wouldn't have changed the circumstances and would't have saved the life of his friend. Landing at an airport you know like the back of your hand can be the one comforting thing that keeps you cool under the extreme stress of the situation. The pilot took an already horrible situation and was able to do the only thing in his power and that was get him and his passenger home unharmed. That was accomplished successfully. I can assure you that the pilot has relived the circumstances 100 times over in his head and has questions at least that many times if he did everything he could have. Understandably, you can't understand that being that you no doubt are faced with challenging circumstances on a daily basis and always make all of the exact right decisions. Perhaps the next time you do so, you can post here telling us what circumstances you faced, your thought process, your decisions, and the outcome so we can all rank your decision making, or better yet, can you give us your phone number so we can call you up the next time we all are facing a difficult situation, perhaps you can tell us the right answer so we can all be as exactly perfect as you are. The Sanders are some of the most sincere, approachable, and respectable groups in the Warbird community. They have experienced a great loss to their aviation family, and your comments are no help to anyone.

DB2 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 9:02 pm

Exactly. When you watch a friend go down off your wing, no matter how tough you think you are, your emotions will be clouding your judgement and comprising your ability to perform the task at hand. If the Sea Fury wasn't in mechanical trouble, to me the prudent course of action would be to take some time, regroup and land where you are comfortable. My prayers to all involved.

Fearless Tower · **Joined:** Thu May 26, 2011 5:14 pm **Posts:** 362

RyanShort1 wrote:

Honestly, are you jealous of them

Not at all. Sea Furies aren't my thing.

RyanShort1 wrote:

think that you know more about the situation than the pilot who was flying, or just want to do the FAA's job for them?

My feelings have no bearing on the work that the FAA or NTSB does. They do not consult me, nor should they.

I am particularly vocal about stuff like this because I have been involved in the warbird community long enough (and I suspect you have too) to notice that too many warbird operators seem to value privacy over safety. Folks should have some degree if privacy, but there is a sense of responsibility that goes with it. We have a perception problem. The general public does not have a real high opinion if aviation as a whole, let alone warbirds. Those attitudes don't help us as a community.

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 9:30 pm

Fearless Tower wrote:

The Spad didn't fly on for 40 min to a private gated community.

Part of the reason warbird owners and operators value their privacy in certain situations like this is because people make public comments like the one you made...

It was the PIC's call.

If I had something go wrong, the last thing I'd want are a thousand questions and wild speculation while I'm dealing with the aftermath. I'd likely be private and/or control the release of info.

Come ask me about one of my airplanes on an average day at an airshow and I will be the least private individual on the planet and talk with you for hours.

Most owners and operators love sharing their passion in almost all situations, but in the end it is their decision, not yours.

Finally, if there is one thing that is harped on most in the community, it is safety.

mlenoch · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:29 pm

Speaking of privacy vs safety, I once shared a situation I had in my bird with a well known racer. He published my experience and then proceeded to drill me a new axxhole in his publication.
With that, I don't care about sharing publicly.
VL

LadyO2Pilot · **Posted:** Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:54 pm

Quote:

too many warbird operators seem to value privacy over safety.

I usually don't comment in threads such as these; however, the above comment has to be the most incorrect indictment of warbird owners/operators I had ever seen. We are very much about safety. We are flying aircraft anywhere from 45 to 72 years old which do not have the most modern of systems. We try to maintain them as meticulously as we can and fly them as safely as we can. Do we value privacy also....sure....mainly because of people like yourself and others here who choose to make very public assumptions without facts....whether it be about an accident/incident or even a paint scheme. If I were encountering a problem in my aircraft the last thing I would be thinking of is your assumed right to know what decisions I make. First I have to determine what the problem is and how to safely correct it or how to safely preserve my life and any passenger I might have. After we are all safely on the ground, if....and I do mean IF....I choose to share my experience on a public forum that is my choice. It is not your right to be told of every incident in warbirds. As Taylor said, at an airshow, at a meeting or on the street corner if you want to ask me about my plane and its combat history....great....go for it....you will end up hearing more than you ever wanted to hear probably. But do not tell me I HAVE to share all my warbird experience with you or the public especially if it involves an accident, injuries, deaths or even maintenance issues.

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:02 am

I was actually crossing the Golden Gate Bridge when I caught sight of a round-engined warbird (which I thought at the time was a P-47- eternal envy, I guess) in formation with another aircraft. The wife noted to me that she thought that they weren't flying formation like she had seen in the past (she is a student pilot). When we got to the southern side, we did not see the other aircraft, but did see the Sea Fury heading East across the bay. We thought they were using the bridge as backdrop for a photo shoot and had just made the break to return to base. I'm real sorry to hear about what happened. The only other FACTS I have to report are that we flew into SFO in the morning and it was a bit gusty. When we saw the two aircraft, we had just come from the high ground (Fort Baker, north of the bridge) and it was pretty windy there.

I could speculate wildly, guess fervently, or start a rumor, but it isn't 10:00 yet and the speculation, guesses and rumors are already well-in-hand with the typical serious players (not!) here. Which is why a number of serious warbird people I know have ambivalent feelings about this place. I like WIX, but we have a contingent of people who need to get out of Mom's Basement and get a real life. If you want to be an accident investigator, go get 20 years of experience in aviation and work for the NTSB or FAA. If you want to come here and flap your gums and show your donkey to everybody, by all means go ahead but realize that your wild imaginations written here helps to marginalize everybody associated with this place.

lmritger · **Posted:** Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:23 am

This is horrible news, and I am certain the pilot and passenger in Dreadnaught are terribly upset about this... they surely understand they were extremely fortunate there weren't more fatalities due to this accident.

With that said, all this back-and-forth gum flapping about where the pilot brought the damaged aircraft is utterly disrespectful to ALL involved in this accident, not to mention completely fscking useless. I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps there should be a site requirement where posters are required to share their real name and cite their interest/experience in their site profile so we can simply killfile the ignorant loudmouths who are more concerned with being "right" than with the fate of the lost and the welfare of the survivors.

Lynn

Warbird Information Exchange

Seafury T-mk20 midair?

Who is online