Warbird Information Exchange

Or maybe russian roulette How fun.

Bob Love also used to do a VERY low pass in his Mustang routine.

i don't shave that close!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Here is video of the man in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXo0cZ_JaRE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLen3qxNH98

Cheers Dave C

Wow, those MC's were, let's say, umm zealous...

_________________
"There was no such thing as a bad day when you have a door knob on the inside of the door."

Cmdr. Paul Edward Galanti -retired

As I said before," find a safer hobby".

I have always enjoyed this one...Spitfire!!! ...(Caution Language)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH0IbfK8nfc&mode=related&search=

Is flying pointy-nosed military jets your hobby?

Don't know what group you fly jets with, but in the one that I'm in (the one where Uncle Sam picks up the gas bill), hotdogging is never okay when playing with the taxpayers' toys. Safe and smart are two entirely different things. I agree that low pass is not unsafe, but it's nowhere near smart.

I get plenty of kicks doing 1 v 1 dogfighting at 8.5G and 440 knots, or flying MTRs at 500' and 480 KGS, or actually defending myself against a real SAM being shot at me. Nobody I fly with feels the need to shine our a$$ to feel like a man.

Guess I'll just have to give up this whole fighter pilot thing and take up scrap booking, because I think that harrier low pass is right outta there.

At no point were either his life or the lives of the men he was overflying in any danger.

Bull. That was dangerous point to finish. One can never know what mechanical issues may occur or what natural obstacles could ruin your day. Looks great on film and all........but.

I didn't know that I had to fly an F-15 to have an opinion on a low pass.
I was under the assumption any aircraft could do one.
Unfortuneately I have to pay for the fuel I burn.

I guess we should cancel the Reno Air Races. No need to risk ones life or aircraft in a senseless display of speed.
It looks dangerous, people have died there, no real reason for it, just like the Harrier pass.

The Harrier pass and Reno is an apples to oranges comparison. Randy is right on the money and while Reno is not without risk, there are race procedures and protocol in place to make that risk more acceptable. If any organization legitimizes Harrier type passes, they're asking for smoking craters in the ground. There are Reno pilots who've been asked not to return the following year because they repeatedly failed to comply. One of my classmates from USAF pilot training was infamous for a**-shining and was finally kicked out of his ANG unit for bringing his airplane back with pieces of power line embedded in it that caused significant damage. He's lucky to be alive. While one can argue one buzzing event or another was conducted "safely" it doesn't mean it was a good idea. How many of us have survived dumb*ss decisions in airplanes? Doesn't mean it was a good call just 'cause you got away with it. Further, a**-shining is indicative of a larger pattern of behavior that is lacking in discipline, good judgement and puts lives and airplanes in jeopardy. Ain't no need to almost tie the low altitude record just because you can or to prove you're worthy of the big watch on your wrist or the craft strapped to your a**. Other pilots may disagree and I hope they stay far away from my airspace and my neighborhood.

I have to disagree on the apples to oranges comparison just because one is officially sanctioned. It certainly doesn't make one incident safer or less dangerous over the other. One could argue one new military jet versus a group of 60 year old aircraft is far less dangerous.

Couldn't your assumption of "Further, a**-shining is indicative of a larger pattern of behavior that is lacking in discipline, good judgement and puts lives and airplanes in jeopardy." be applied to all race pilots when not at Reno? That really wouldn't be fair to them or true for that matter. It's just your opinion on the Harrier pilot from seeing a 30 second video clip.
Perhaps the Harried pilot wanted to get his speed up to be certain of a positive rate of climb, simply a guess or another assumption. Neither of which could or would be right.

Nothing is 100% safe in this world. Low passes and air racing probably less so. I personally have known people that have died, playing volleyball, crossing the street and lying in bed. Safer than flying?

I have never met or spoken with Randy or T33driver, but in the past, with drink in hand, I never hear military or civilian pilots telling those "look how safe I was today" stories. It's always about the other stuff they've done. Maybe I'm the only one that hears these things?

I guess we'll agree to disagree.

Mike,

You make a good point. I agree that sanctioning a flight operation doesn't guarantee safety since the machinery has to run smooth and the pilot must avoid errors/judgement lapses. A sanctioned environment like Reno or Red Flag can provide rules, guidelines, obstacle surveys, NOTAMs and hopefully a culture of safety, even while participants are operating at a high level of aggressiveness--I don't think it's a contradiction, military flight ops work that way every day and yes, bad things still happen, but with less frequency than they otherwise would. I'm confident Reno guys practice in a deliberate, progressive manner until they get to the high level they need to race...and I'm sure it's balls to the wall and very low to the ground. I don't include them in that statement and I'm not suggesting that any or all low-level aggressive flying is unsafe. It's when and where and not just how low that can determine if it's a bad deal. I believe the guy that does the unplanned, unbriefed low-level buzzing might be inviting trouble in that situation, regardless if he's an Eagle Scout the other 99% of the time. Just cuz they come through it, doesn't mean it was a good idea. The WV ANG crashed a C-130 because the crew decided to kill some time by doing an unplanned, unbriefed low-level (300' agl) flight over an area that wasn't flight planned or surveyed for obstacles. The hit a power line and crashed. Sure they flew low-level missions all the time and were otherwise competent, but this mission wasn't planned or briefed and tragedy ensued. I flew alongside RAF guys at the Maple Flag air war exercise out of CFB Cold Lake and they flew their Tornadoes and Jaguars down in the weeds--below us while we were at 300' AGL. They flew like that the whole two weeks in the range and did it safely. I don't think they were reckless--that's how they trained, planned and briefed and it wasn't a big deal. Mike, I'll buy the beer and bore you with a few "how I got away with it" stories...a six pack worth anyway. You make good points and I get what you're saying. I'm not a kiljoy about fly-bys, but there's a time and a place for them and sometimes air show fever and a desire to impress the chicks gets in the way of otherwise good judgement, that's all I'm saying. I hear you on the volleyball--my 12 year old daughter took a volleyball to the face at practice last week. Ouch!

That guy that bought the T-6 from a friend of mine a few months back then hit a power line in the Snake River Canyon after taking delivery of the airplane is extremely lucky to be alive as is his daughter.

JH

No, you don't. However, just to recap, your advice to people who thought the Harrier pass was unsafe was for them to go find a new hobby. I assumed that anyone who was able to make a judgment like that was at least part of that hobby. If I may ask, what type of flying do you do?



Not a fair comparison. First off, realize that I said the low pass wasn't unsafe, but it was absolutely not smart. Why? Because there's absolutely zero value to shining your a$$. Nobody has ever done anything while hotdogging in an airplane that is so cool that it's worth anyone's life.

I think that if you actually were involved in flying at Reno, and participated in all the safety and proficiency training required to participate (e.g. Pylon Racing School), you would see that the Air Races aren't just a bunch of cowboys out there horsing around on the course.



Well, no sh*t you've never heard that stuff over a beer. Talking about how they spent 4 hours studying threats, and planning out the route, and briefing up the training rules and contingencies doesn't impress fellow pilots and make groupies swoon. They also probably don't tell you about the 2 hours they spent after the flight reconstructing what happened and pulling out the learning points for improvement on the next flight. It's much easier to impress hangers-on with some exaggerated hand movements, simulated shooting of the oversized watch, and talking about how fast/slow/low/high they flew or how they barely made it.

Fighter pilots have enough trouble just telling a story without having it turn into a 'big fish' story -- what do you expect? Just because you haven't heard it over a beer doesn't mean it ain't so.



Yes, flying is an inherently dangerous business. That baseline fact does not give you free reign to make it as dangerous as you want.

We can agree to disagree, sure. I guess I just continue foolishly thinking that it's possible to be a professional aviator and mitigate danger through frivolous things like following the rules and playing it conservative when the scenario fails to dictate otherwise. I suppose I'll just accept the fact that some people will think I'm a pu$$y because I save the real daredevil sh*t for when lives are on the line in combat.