Warbird Information Exchange

Well said....

My condolences to all effected...

My condolences to the pilot of the 210, and to the pilot and passenger of Dreadnought, and to the families of all parties involved. I can't imagine the difficulty in flying to a safe landing knowing that you have lost a close friend.

A very sad situation.

Latest report is saying that the collision took place during or after a lead change.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/plan ... y-23508744



An interesting and important bit of information, IMHO.

The lead change is a maneuver that has a high potential for swapping paint due to the change in roles between the aircraft (ergo, who is responsible for clearing for the formation -- the lead -- and who is responsible for maintaining deconfliction with the other aircraft -- the wingman) and the close proximity and relative movement required when the change takes place.

There are numerous ways that either miscommunication between the two pilots or failure to adhere to the roles contract, OR simply some kind of distraction can result in airplanes hitting.

In the USAF jet community, we build an extra bit of lateral deconfliction between the aircraft during the lead change by having the overtaking aircraft (the wingman becoming the lead) have a vector that is slightly away from the other aircraft while moving forward. In my limited experience in the civilian world (the FAST standard) they don't do this, and there are even differences between different "camps" of civilian pilots as to what kind of space there is between the aircraft when swapping the lead. Maybe some of you who are more experienced with FAST can offer more insight as to what is trained to and what is expected there.

I can't comment on how these particular pilots did it, but it does not surprise me in the slightest that it was during this phase of flight that something happened which caused them to impact each other.

_________________

With a lead change there is no vector change per the FAST manual. There is a visual signal (there's two signals listed, but I have only seen the tap on the head and point to the wingman signal) or radio call by lead. A return signal (taps on head and points forward) or radio call by the wingman. The NEW flight lead becomes the stable platform, allowing the OLD flight lead to power back and move down into position. The lead change maneuver instructions fill up nearly three pages of the FAST manual. As always, safety is stressed as the number one priority of the maneuver.

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

I've kept my lips sealed the last several days on all the forums including this one and all the Facebook pages as I have watched every Tom, Dick, and Harry stumble over themselves to make inaccurate and inappropriate posts in a hurry so that they can be the 'first' to report it...as if pasting it everywhere makes you in the know. And I've seen a lot of people who aren't pilots (warbird or otherwise) spout off some armchair quarterback second-guessing of what (if the things that I'm hearing are true) are just a very tragic situation.

To those of you who are speculating and/or criticizing...shame on you. You are all an embarrassing example of why WIX is almost universally avoided these days by those who 'do' instead of those 'on the sidelines'. Seems to be a regular occurrence.

And for the questioning as to why the pilot went 'home' instead of where you think he should have gone, the bottom line I will defer back to my military flying days and what was pounded into us from day one until my last flight at every level of Naval Aviation: "The pilot is responsible for safety of flight, and in this regard must determine that emergency procedures are properly completed, BUT THE MAIN EXECUTION OF EMERGENCY PROCEDURES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PILOT AND SHOULD NOT BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOOD JUDGEMENT."

_________________
Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives, and I decline......

You said a mouthful Speedy, I agree with you 100%.

Hear,hear!!!!!!!!!!!!

_________________
Hang The Expense

Agreed. I'm not exactly sure what the pilot was supposed to do to make it better. The situation was hopeless.

When Carl went down, the other pilot did not return to Deer Valley, he called the tower and told them what had happened and the location, he then went to his home airport about 15 miles away, because he was too upset to have made a extra takeoff and landing. I took off and found the wreckage and knew there was no survivors, I did the same thing, I went to my home airport, because it was all I could do to fly the plane. It was my first flight as a certificated pilot.
Until you are in that position, and believe me, I hope you never are, you have no idea what you are going to do.

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

Out-effin-standing! Well said Speedy.

Chappie

_________________
Brrring. Dispersal? TWO SECTIONS SCRAMBLE!!

I'll follow up on my initial response, which to be clear, were directed to the "...easier to fix at your home base." comment more so than the actual event. It is indeed a tragic event anytime life is lost and I have lost friends and colleagues of my own in the aviation/military realm through the years. No doubt, the other pilot could not change the outcome of events whether staying on station or going on to his home field.

My initial thoughts/remarks where as to the safety of himself and passenger after the mid-air; "are we controllable?", "what are my engine indications", "am I losing fuel, hydraulics", "do I have comms" etc. All of which I'm sure he took stock of.

I agree with the remarks of "Speedy" and likewise have lived under the guise of NATOPS for the better part of the last 20 years of my life (hell, even in civilian life I write changes and updates for it), though not operating in the role of Pilot but as a Flight Engineer in the P-3 community (about the last FE job in the military that places any flight station responsibilities in the hands of enlisted men/women) flying as an integral member of a flight station crew where systems knowledge, procedures and decision making is a shared responsibility.

"BUT THE MAIN EXECUTION OF EMERGENCY PROCEDURES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PILOT AND SHOULD NOT BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR GOOD JUDGEMENT."

The wording has changed a bit through the years but the general idea remains the same and as such those words are gospel, when it comes down to it, the PIC makes the call.

I agree that the decision to proceed on to "homebase" was the right call.

My thoughts and prayers to all those at the Eagles Nest.

Very sad, some people like me, want to learn from someone like you. I see it all the time in corporate world as well...

Lynn

I work as an EMS chief. Over the years I have had to make many decisions where the life safety of my crews and that of the citizens hung in the balance. I learned early on I needed a very thick skin if I was to continue in this profession. You are second guessed constantly and it seems everyone could have done it better than you did no matter if the facts were known or not.

Today I have one simple question to ask those who arm chair quarterback. " Were you there ? " if not I simply tell them to shut up.

In this case we were not there. What we know is that two aircraft were flying in formation. One struck the other. One landed, one did not and there was a loss of life. So until the NTSB report is published everything else is guessing. It serves no purpose. None.

I have been flying for 38 years and like to consider myself a safe pilot. But I can say many times after reading an NTSB report thinking back to a situation I was in and thinking that could have been me. " There but for the grace of God go I "

I have always felt the best way to honor those who have lost their lives or been injured in aircraft accidents was to read and understand the NTSB report and learn from them.

Speculation serves no purpose.

_________________
Flying Piper L4-J 45-55209

I respectfully disagree. I think speculating allows you to explore other scenarios you might be able to learn from because you aren't limited by ony the facts in this specific incident. Instead of looking for fault or who moved which controls when, it might allow us to look at the bigger safety picture.

The fact that we don't know what happened to the missing Malaysian airliner MH370 allows us to explore many different scenarios from aircraft reliability, to radio procedures, to hardware and to mental health. If we just knew that the captain committed suicide, we might not have spent as much time exploring other possibilities.

Yes, speculation does serve a purpose, being the first step towards the construction of possible explanations (hypotheses). There is nothing wrong with our use of knowledge in attempts to explain the loss. In some sense, this is a natural part of the grieving process.

_________________
Kevin McCartney