Blue Angels stood down / grounded?

[iskyfly]

I hear that the Blue Angels have been stood down / grounded after an incident at an airshow in VA where they exited out of loop too low. CO called knock it off and rest of demo flight was terminated. Debriefed and returned to FL.Anybody know specifics? Altitude that was busted? Video / audio ?Thanks

[jamesdevice]

Correction: Blue Angels-Stand-down - seattlepi.com (http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Correction-Blue-Angels-Stand-down-1394749.php)

"Correction: Blue Angels-Stand-down"
"PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) — In a May 23 story about The Blue Angels flight team canceling a practice and show, The Associated Press reported that four fighter jets flew below an 8,000-foot ceiling established for the show. The entire show was performed below the 8,000-foot ceiling and four of six jets violated a lower, minimum altitude that has not been made public."
Published 02:11 a.m., Wednesday, May 25, 2011

[iskyfly]

Video here. YouTube - ‪Blue Angels at the Lynchburg Airshow May 2011‬‏

First half from the Saturday show. Maneuver flown correctly, starting at 11:30. Second half was from the Sunday show. Incident maneuver starts at 23:27. VERY close.

[Navy_Adversary]

Looks like the Boss got things a bit Pete Tong, can any experienced display team pilot give the finer details.
Thanks for the link iskyfly

[david parry]

Always remember listening in on the Blue Angels at Lossie in the 60s. From the cockpit of the Sea Prince. Think they were Grumman Tigers??? Maam i have 6 Turkeys in CCT, Drumsticks down and Feathers ruffled:cool:

[Robert Cooper]

As a result of this incident they also cancelled todays display at the Naval Academy graduation. Dissapointing, but understandable. :sad:

Bob C

[dead_pan]

If the boss had got it really wrong, would they have followed him all the way in, like the Thunderbirds 'Diamond Crash' in '82? One would have thought Bitching Betty would have gone into overdrive, or is she unplugged for the duration?

[A2QFI]

Snowbirds - I think!

[stumpey]

Worried about litigation perhaps? The great American disease - blame some one else and get paid for it.








Golly gee. I feel traumatised watching that video. There was no warning, can I claim? :eek:

[jamesdevice]

@ David Parry
I saw them at Yeovilton in the early 1960's and they had Tigers then

[Darwinism]

Were the No's 3 & 4's pulling up and out near the bottom of the loop part of the show or had they already realised it was all turning pear shaped?

[caligula]

Darwinism / Navy_Adversary

I've done a fair bit of this sort of stuff. To be honest, it's difficult to comment with much more confidence than anyone else viewing, however it all looks reactive at the bottom there. The fact that the 2 wingmen exit the formation asymmetrically crowd front, the guy in the stem turns his smoke off and the leader leaves his on tends to suggest that they had an OMG moment.

I would guess that the 2 wingmen escaped. Depending on their experience in that position, they may have had pretty low awareness that it was going to be lower than normal until very late indeed. In your peripheral vision, a 500' pull out is not going to look much different to a 50' pull out until very late. Given the aircraft excess performance available, it's surprising that the leader didn't rescue it a bit more aggressively - should have been clues in the 3rd and 4th quarters.

Hope that helps

[Background Noise]

Doesn't the commentator say that they are each going to do 'break turns' in separate directions?

[caligula]

Ah - didn't really listen to commentary. Still doesn't look very symmetrical, although it could be the camera angle. The other thing which didn't seem to stack up was that there wasn't any obvious attempt to rejoin.

Like I said, difficult to have too much confidence even in my own analysis based on the video...

[davejb]

If you watch the (presumably) 'correct' version, at around the 12 minute mark the commentator makes that comment, the formation stays intact along the front of the crowd, and having passed the crowd they then break in different directions. Now watch the less than perfect version, the commentator makes the same comment, 3 and 4 pull up and away before the formation pass in front of crowd. I'd suggest that's not the 'break turn' that was planned, but as a mere ex-dcs muncher I have no idea what the individual pilots were thinking or intending otherwise.

Dave

[iskyfly]

I am curious to know what, if any, procedures exist for a formation flight situation where an aircraft in the formation has to exit because of problems but to do so without causing problems for others in the formation. Ie- if you are in the front right, you pull up and turn right?

[jamesdevice]

"Ie- if you are in the front right, you pull up and turn right? "

Saw the Red Arrows do exactly that once at Douglas IOM. They were performing over the bay during TT Week
At the top of a diamond - four loop the right hand man developed turbine surge and broke right and headed to Ronaldsway. The left-hand man of the four also broke formation left did a 180 turn and then followed rapidly. Most viewing didn't realise anything was wrong - the two Hawks broke away as if it was a planned move. Only obvious sign of a problem was the "wrong" engine noise

[Tay Cough]

I am curious to know what, if any, procedures exist for a formation flight situation where an aircraft in the formation has to exit because of problems but to do so without causing problems for others in the formation. Ie- if you are in the front right, you pull up and turn right?The escape is pre-briefed. If there are two or three of you, it's pretty straightforward (I hope - left or right as appropriate). The more aeroplanes, the more complicated. For example, a thirty degree bank right and up, a sixty degree bank right and up, a thirty degree bank and down, etc. Your mate may follow, especially if you're in the middle!

The most I ever did was a fourteen-ship (required a bit of thought)!! :eek:

[hoodie]

If the boss had got it really wrong, would they have followed him all the way in, like the Thunderbirds 'Diamond Crash' in '82?


Point of order. The Thunderbird's Lead didn't get it wrong - he had an elevator control linkage mechanical failure on the pullout.

[kemblejet01]

Escape manoeuvres:

Blokes at the front = up
Blokes at the back = fall off the back
Bloke in the middle = pull up through boss' slipstream (you're going backwards anyway)

(Could be a blokess of course)

Line astern took a bit more bottle in that you had to hold your depth as you fell off the back and theoretically not take the fins off the boys behind you.

Seemed to work on the odd time we needed it in my day.

KMB01

[iskyfly]

Thank you kemblejet01, hoodie, Tay Cough, jamesdevice and caligula.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Hoodie

You sure about that? I talked to a guy on the mishap investigation board, and that was certainly not the original finding...

[hoodie]

Ewen, I'm basing it on a detailed article (over several pages, IIRC) in Aviation Week following publication of the accident report. That's what was said at the time.

Was there later evidence, then?

Edit: Wikipedia says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Crash) that the official USAF conclusion is mechanical failure, but also says that many at the time nevertheless considered it to be CFIT.

[dropintheoggin]

The escape is pre-briefed. If there are two or three of you, it's pretty straightforward (I hope - left or right as appropriate). The more aeroplanes, the more complicated. For example, a thirty degree bank right and up, a sixty degree bank right and up, a thirty degree bank and down, etc. Your mate may follow, especially if you're in the middle!

It's not quite that easy (I know you said "For example"...). It might be when you're S&L but every Reds' manoeuvre has it's own specific escape. A brief I saw had them running through what would happen if the leader lost his engine half way up a loop. Each guy/girl was shouting out what they would do and where they expected the other members to be. Hats off I say, especially as they run through the same procedure for each manoeuvre (in different briefs).

As for the Blue Angels' vid, a smidge of an extension over the top followed by a tiny let out 'down the hill' might have lead to a lower than normal bottom out, but that's mere conjecture. Whether 2&3 were meant to pull out individually would be interesting to hear, it certainly didn't look controlled and synchronised.

I hope the Team aren't in any dwang and can continue with a successful season.

DITO

[caligula]

The escape bit actually is fairly straightforward most of the time. From a single formation, no matter how big, it's pretty much always just pull up and out on your side of the formation. If you're rolling, keep going in the direction of the roll. If you're if in line astern, despite how close it looks, you nearly always have nose/tail separation or can do very quickly and just pull straight up.

If it's the leader, there's going to a bit more drama, but actually nobody else should do anything dramatic - just open out in sections, left side, right side and stem.

It's a bit more tricky in some of the dynamic manoeuvring, where occasionally the escape is counterintuitive either because of your own aircraft attitude, or because of what else is going on around you. You just try and drill those ones in.

And ultimately of course, there's still a big place for common sense and good airmanship...

[Brian Abraham]

Chief of Naval Air Training, Rear Adm. Bill Sizemore, relieved Cmdr. Dave Koss, Commanding Officer of the Naval Flight Demonstration Squadron Friday, May 27, at his request following a lower-than-normal maneuver during the team’s last performance at the Lynchburg Regional Air Show May 22.

“With deep personal regret I shared with my command today that I will be voluntarily leaving the greatest flight demonstration team. I performed a maneuver that had an unacceptably low minimum altitude,” said Koss. “This maneuver, combined with other instances of not meeting the airborne standard that makes the Blue Angels the exceptional organization that it is, led to my decision to step down. I have the utmost respect for the Sailors and Marines of the Blue Angels organization and all that they embody. The reason this team is so successful, brings thrills to millions of fans across America, and represents the U.S. Navy so superbly is because of the absolute commitment to safety and perfection by every member of the team. I am honored to have been a part of this organization and I look forward to watching its success in the future.”

Koss will be replaced by Capt. Greg McWherter, who was the previous Blue Angels’ Commanding Officer, for the duration of the season.

This move requires the cancellation of the Blue Angels’ scheduled performances at the Rockford Airfest June 4-5 and the Evansville Freedom Festival Air Show June 11-12. The Blue Angels will remain in Pensacola for additional training and air show demonstration practice. Any potential changes to the team's future schedule will be announced at a later date.

The Blue Angels regret any inconvenience and look forward to continuing to represent the Navy and Marine Corps service members serving around the world.

http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/media/news/20110527_001.pdf

[L J R]

Someone with some common sense has made what he sees as the right decision to stand down, rather than see his team smeared all over a tarmac in front of the public. Good luck to you, and I respect your honesty and integrity.

[Neptunus Rex]

The new leader is Capt. Greg McWherter. Has any other national aerobatic team been led by a Captain/Colonel/Group Captain equivalent?

[Brian Abraham]

To be the CO requires at least 3,000 tactical jet flight-hours and have commanded a tactical jet squadron. The team leader (#1) is the Commanding Officer and is always a Navy Commander, who may be promoted to Captain mid-tour depending on if he has been approved for Captain by the selection board. Pilots of numbers 2-7 are Navy Lieutenants or Lieutenant Commanders. There are usually one or two Marines among this group, ranked Captain or Major.

The mans bio;

Captain Greg McWherter is a native of Atlanta, Ga., and graduated from Avondale High School in 1986 where he lettered in football and soccer. He attended The Citadel, where he played NCAA Division 1 soccer for the Bulldogs and graduated Cum Laude with a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering in 1990. He received his commission through the NROTC program and entered aviation training at Naval Air Station (NAS) Pensacola, Fla., in June 1990. Greg continued his training at nearby NAS Whiting Field, flying the T-34C Mentor, before moving to NAS Meridian, Miss., to fly the T-2C Buckeye and TA-4J Skyhawk. He earned his wings of gold in September 1992.

In November 1992, Greg reported to Strike Fighter Squadron 106 (VFA-106), the "Gladiators," at NAS Cecil Field, Fla., for initial training in the FA-18 Hornet. Upon completion of the Fleet Replacement Squadron, he was ordered to VFA-131, the “Wildcats,” where he served as the Landing Signals Officer (LSO), Weapons Training Officer and Quality Assurance Officer. From October 1993 to February 1997, he completed two workups and deployments to the Mediterranean Sea and Persian Gulf with the "Wildcats" aboard USS George Washington (CVN 73). He graduated from the United States Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) in May 1995 and was selected as VFA-131’s Pilot of the Year in 1996.

In March 1997, Greg reported to NAS Fallon, Nev., as a TOPGUN Instructor. During his tour in Fallon, he served as a Training Officer and the Navy’s AIM-9M/X, Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System and FA-18 Air-to-Air Employment Subject Matter Expert.

Greg returned to the fleet in March 2000 as Tactics Officer and Department Head for VFA-34 at NAS Oceana, Va. During his tour with the "Blue Blasters," he completed two more Mediterranean Sea and Persian Gulf deployments aboard USS George Washington (CVN 73) and was selected by his peers to receive the 2003 Commander, Naval Air Forces Leadership Award.

In August 2003, Greg received orders to the United States Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Va. Within the Joint Requirements and Integration Directorate (J8), he served as the Joint Close Air Support (JCAS) Branch Chief and was responsible for identifying mission area shortfalls and developing joint solutions through the Department of Defense. During his Joint tour, Greg completed Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) Phase I through the College of Distance Education at the Naval War College.

After completing refresher training in the FA-18 Hornet in March 2006, Greg reported as Executive Officer of VFA-192 stationed at Naval Air Facility (NAF) Atsugi, Japan. He commanded the “World Famous Golden Dragons” through three major deployments aboard USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) from June 2007 until July 2008.

Greg was the Commanding Officer of the Blue Angels from November 2008 to November 2010. He resumed command of the squadron in May 2011. He has over 4,200 flight hours and 950 carrier arrested landings. His decorations include the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, two Air Medals (Strike Flight), two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals, a Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, as well as various campaign and unit awards.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Hoodie

There was no evidence of mechanical failure uncovered at all during the first investigation.

When these results were presented to TAC/CC (Gen Creech, IIRC), the team was instructed to start the investigation again. This time, however, they were unambiguously instructed to return with "a different finding". Mechanical failure was subsequently discovered.

[GreenKnight121]

And you have some form of documentation for this conspiracy theory?

Just a link to some official USAF material would be nice... or anything credible.

[ross_M]

One online article (Christian Science Monitor) reports that they fly with wingtip separations of as small as 18 inches. Is this really true? Sounds so small. (I'm just working on my PPL! )

[davejb]

Naah,
complete hogwash - the qingtips on an F-18 are 40 ft apart at all times, according to my 'Goldfish Breeders' Gazette' anyway.

Actually, if you watch videos of the displays, I think you'll be able to judge how reasonable that claim sounds..

[ross_M]

Thanks davejb.

Just for referece here's the half baked CSM article (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0528/Blue-Angels-flight-leader-relieved-of-command-for-flying-too-low)

"A typical Blue Angels show includes four F/A-18 Hornet tactical jet aircraft flown in close formation – as close as 18 inches apart – plus two solo aircraft. The lowest maneuver – called a “sneak pass” – is flown by one of the solo aircraft just 50 feet off the deck."

[davejb]

No problem,
always glad to keep up PPrune's reputation for assistance above and beyond :}.

The 18" bit sounds like one of those silly exaggerations that people seem to religiously (pun intended) include in a write up to beef up something that needs no such artificial enhancement. If they are 18" apart at some point I doubt it's for very long...personally I'd also doubt that it's intentional.

[Thelma Viaduct]

The best display team I've ever seen. :cool:

[dat581]

18" is no exaggeration as the jets are this close for the diamod 360 maneuver. Thats from the Blue Angles Website.

[Wholigan]

Shows typical spacing.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Wholigan/blueangels.jpg

Not sure if your little quip about the wingspan was totally understood davejb :E

[andrewn]

I was lucky enough to see these guys at NAS Oceana last September and they were truly "awesome" - as our American friends would say. If you think that 18" is an exaggeration then I beg to differ!

http://i816.photobucket.com/albums/zz83/andrewn7/NAS%20Oceana%20Airshow%202010/oceana562.jpg

[MrBernoulli]

The best display team I've ever seen. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/cool.gifI've watched the Red Arrows, Frecce Tricolore, Blue Angels, Thunderbirds, and other national military aerobatic teams several times over the years. The Blue Angels fly very close formation ..... but largely in relatively undramatic passing manoeuvres with huge time gaps in between. Lots of vacant air! Not that entertaining, I'm afraid.

The best from a viewpoint of exciting, entertaining near-continuous display would be the Frecce Tricolore.

[Wander00]

Frecce are certainly very good. Red Arrows were very good on Sunday at Rochefort, but I suspect that Patrouille de France beat them by a whisker, but avec huit avions, pas neuf avions. RA's "heart" was definitely better, and got a huge round of applause from the ground.

[andrewn]

I think there's a fairly common misconception that the Blues or T-birds Flight Demonstration Sqn's are a bit of a joke and that they don't really stack-up against the Reds or other European display teams.

My view (and like MrB I've seen em all over the years):


There's a bit of a clue in the respective titles (i.e. FDS vs RAFAT)
Both the Blues and the T-birds have significantly raised their game in recent times and I don't believe the old criticisms are any longer valid, i.e. they display over the next county, too high, too many gaps between passes, not dynamic enough, etc
The Reds are the best - end of!

[davejb]

If you watch the video on p1 you'll see that depending on viewing angle the visible gaps vary quite significantly even though the aircraft aren't actually manoeuvering relative to each other - whilst they certainly fly very close formation, I doubt very much that it's actually 18" apart - but to be perfectly honest I don't really care that much <g> Whilst appreciating their skill, I tend to agree with Mr Bernoulli about the display, my favourites remain the Red Arrows from around 1970.

Dave

[Cows getting bigger]

i.e. they display over the next county

I think the Turkish Stars stole that particular honour. :p

[DelaneyT]

And you have some form of documentation for this conspiracy theory? Just a link to some official USAF material would be nice... or anything credible. ( --GreenKnight121)


The final/formal 'Diamond Crash' investigation was widely questioned at the time, but there are no obvious Google links to the formal details now. Apparently, Aviation Week did publish the full USAF mishap report (publicly releasable sections)-- it's probably still in their online archives, but behind a pay wall.

An informal link here gives a flavor of the controversy:

Thunderbird crash (Ed Rasimus) (http://yarchive.net/mil/thunderbird_crash.html)

excerpt:

"The accident report was very controversial. As the only TAC unit other than the 'Birds flying the T-38, the 479th TFW at Holloman was tasked to supply both the Flying Safety Officer member and Pilot member to the accident investigation board. Both pilots were out of my unit, the 435th TFTS.

The initial report of the board was a finding of pilot error. The lead aircraft had topped out on the loop at an altitude below the minimum required to insure a safe recovery. Failure to recognize the altitude and continuation of the maneuver to the pull through meant that after reaching about 60 degrees nose low inverted, the formation was in a position from which recovery was no longer possible.

There was evidence reported that the control stick and linkages were deformed probably due to pilot effort to pull through at whatever G was available..."

[GreenKnight121]

Thanks... that's more that I had known existed.

I had never even heard that there was any controversy at all... you were the first person to mention it to me... and I served in the USMC air wing from 1981-1989, and was following the investigation as fully as I could.

I was very interested in the details of the T-bird crash, as I had been at the airshow where the previous T-bird fatal crash occurred... Captain David "Nick" Hauck at Hill AFB 9 May 1981 (a year after I graduated high school, and less than a month before I reported to USMC boot camp).


I have seen accounts of Hauk's crash on-line that were very wrong... significantly different from what I saw on the day, as well as what was uncovered on a day-to-day basis in the local media.

One recent on-line report claimed that he had stalled and lost flight lift, crashing into the ground in an uncontrolled manner.

The USAF released a transcript of the conversation between him and the tower & flight lead, discussing his loss of engine power and that he didn't feel he could clear the cars on the road across the end of the runway just outside the base fence, so he was going to try a belly landing short of the runway.

This matched hundreds of eye-witness accounts of the aircraft being fully under control as he set it down in a field between a sub-division and the rise in the ground below the road at the south end of the runway... only to catch a wingtip on an obstruction, causing the aircraft to roll and catch fire.




So while I grant this is something tending to lend credence to your contention, it is hardly conclusive... I shall try to find the AvWeek article you mention (I have access to a library with an archive of the physical magazines from that time period).

[SASless]

I have watched almost all of the Display Teams....and each team has its own attraction but for sheer Pizazz I rate the Italian Team at the top. Mind you the requirement for the Teams to fly along the show line and not across the line hampers the Italian Team.

I watched them at the Agusta factory and their show start was fabulous....directly from behind the factory building/hangars with gear/flaps down...streaming colored smoke...and unseen/unheard until overhead at about a couple of hundred feet maybe. Children cried...women wailed....and Men almost wet themselves withe sudden onset of noise...smoke...and mulitple jets in close formation.

[davejb]

Sasless,
you just described a great many Nimrod impromptu displays, but (and I like to see this as the KEY POINT of the Nimrod version), with Nimrods not only did you get 4 jets apparently appearing from nowhere right behind you, but you also (given sharp enough eyesight) got to see a slightly careworn individual eating a pie (possibly a doughnut) overhead as aural Armageddon overtook you.

You just don't get class acts like that on the airshow circuit these days...

[hoodie]

directly from behind the factory building/hangars with gear/flaps down...streaming colored smoke...and unseen/unheard until overhead at about a couple of hundred feet maybe. Children cried...women wailed....and Men almost wet themselves withe sudden onset of noise...smoke...and mulitple jets in close formation.


Best I've seen for that was the Canadian 4 ship team of CF-104Gs in the '80s.

There was one occasion at Mildenhall when I reckon 99.9% of the crowd had no clue at all they were there until Armageddon* fell. :E

Only one downside - no coloured smoke.

*Good to see davejb agrees with the comparison!

[Ewan Whosearmy]

GK

You're not going to find anything "conclusive", but have fun looking for it.

My source, as I stated very clearly, was on the mishap investigation. He was in the room when the conversation took place.

Beyond giving you his telephone number and email address (which I am not going to do), there is nothing more I can add. Take it or leave it.

If you did spend any time in the military, then you won't struggle with the concept that what you read in an official document may not tell the whole story of what actually happened. 'Nuff said.

[TLB]

> Mind you the requirement for the Teams to fly along the show line
> and not across the line hampers the Italian Team.

Their accident at Ramstein in 1988 - where sixty-seven spectators and three pilots died, and 346 spectators sustained serious injuries in the resulting explosion and fire - is why display teams must honour the crowd line.

Obviously, my favorite is the Snowbirds - nine aircraft and always in sight of the crowd.

[Thelma Viaduct]

Blue Angels "not that entertaining", you obviously never saw them at Finningley back in the day. I've never seen a display as close or as exciting as that, ever.

The Red Arrows have become a cliche of themselves and as such are incredibly cheesy, can't comment on the eyeties, other than the Ramstein crash which didn't do their reputation any favours.

All jmho :ok:

[MrBernoulli]

Blue Angels "not that entertaining", you obviously never saw them at Finningley back in the day. I've never seen a display as close or as exciting as that, ever.Saw them last 3 years ago at Lakeland in Florida. Sorry, but it was just not exciting - way too much 'dead air'.

[BEagle]

...but it was just not exciting...

And as for the utter bull**** from the commentator...:yuk:

[GANNET FAN]

Hoodie, I saw that display also but at Fairford. Unbelievable and earth shattering noise. But what got my attention later, was one aircraft making a slow pass over the runway and I really cannot guess the height but it was quite low, when very suddenly, another 104 travelling seriously fast flew underneath. Spectacular!

[DelaneyT]

I shall try to find the AvWeek article you mention (I have access to a library with an archive of the physical magazines from that time period) --GreenKnight121

Good... hope you can eventually post some key excerpts from that old USAF investigation report. Start a new thread here if you find any worthwhile info.

Looks like there are probably strong parallels between that infamous THUNDERBIRDs 'Diamond Crash' and this most recent BLUE ANGELs incident.

There have been several other recent incidents of airshow pilots misjudging their altitude on a pulldown, including that THUNDERBIRD crash at Mountain Home AFB. The last BLUE ANGEL's fatality was somewhat similar too.

Probably could start a permanent/ongoing thread somewhere in these forums about airshow/flyby/display incidents & crashes -- seems to be an unending supply of such unfortunate aviation events.

[BOAC]

Probably could start a permanent/ongoing thread somewhere in these forums about airshow/flyby/display incidents & crashes -- seems to be an unending supply of such unfortunate aviation events. - yours would be the second:)

[DelaneyT]

BOAC: ...pointer to the first instance, please. :)

[Background Noise]

Here's one for starters: http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/251704-air-display-c-ck-ups.html

[E-Spy]

@GANNETFAN
I think that was the German 'Vikings' display team in '84, I was only about 6 at the time but I think the fast and lower guy overcooked the speed and went a bit 'überschall'. All I remember is the loudest noise on earth, even with my dad's (he'd realised what was about to happen) hands over my ears!

[iskyfly]

Will the Navy / DOD / whoever release the report into this incident that the public can access?

I remember reading a very detailed report into the Tbird solo crash from a few years back.


Thanks

[jamesdevice]

Saw German Navy "Vikings" at Yeovilton in 1982 - Falklands year, most of the locals were in the South Atlantic and the visiting performers all seemed to "pull the stops out"
Those two German Starfighters have left an ever-lasting impression of noise speed and sheer insanity. So low the grass was kicking up behind them, oppossiiton passes with afterburner on at seemingly zero feet with visible shockwaves trailing. Incredible. You literally FELT their presence - and not just from the sound

That was the same show where when the "Marine Commando Assault" finale finished and the assorted multicoloured odd-ball Wessex that hadn't found a sea-berth landed en-masse, a hundred or more young kids ran through the safety barrier onto the apron to greet them. I still have bad visions of a single yank Chinook pilot screaming at them to get back as a Vulcan landed...

[LowObservable]

More on the "Diamond Crash" here...

Blogger: Thunder Tales - Post a Comment (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=10438070&postID=3893937479857002895)

[glojo]

There has been an excellent fly on the wall documentary series on the Blue Angels and my observations are that the Blue Angels without a shadow of a doubt fly extremely close to each other and far be it for me to argue over inches... My thoughts are perhaps a trifle blunt when I say 'Who cares?'

As a spectator we want to be entertained and I guess impressed, the stunningly close formation is okay but with fast moving aircraft you will get more gasps and screams as two fast jets do their cross overs when they are at least the width of the run way apart.

The kit of the Blue Angels is immaculate, the way they march out to their aircraft is precision itself. The way the commentator\pilot holds the microphone is precision personified. There whole performance is extremely well rehearsed and I take my hat off to them but as public display I would tactfully suggest they 'Could do better'

They are very good and please do not misunderstand what I am saying... I am perhaps suggesting that if there was less dead time at the cost of flying 3ft apart and at the same time perform more entertaining manoeuvres then would that not be a better trade off?

I just feel they are trying to impress each other and their piers as opposed to the paying public. We all know the pilots are possibly the best of the best... and I say that with all sincerity, they have NO need to impress anyone. They have already walked the walk and talked the talk.

[Wander00]

Seen the F5s of Patrouille de Suisse? They are pretty close

[Jumping_Jack]

Glojo, I agree. I had the chance to see the Blue Angels over at NAS Oceana Air Show when I was on a tour out there. As you say, very close but nothing else. I wondered how the locals would have reacted had the Reds done a show before or after the Blues.....

Good show nontheless.

J_J

[glojo]

I think this might demonstrate the incident (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/43199892#43199892) (apologies for the annoying advert) in a much clearer manner and having seen it and also the comments that this very senior, very experienced pilot had admitted that this was not the first error during his command then I hate to say this but his options were VERY limited and like others before him (in different circumstances) ... far better to gracefully step down as opposed to facing the alternative options.

This has done a degree of harm to this person's no doubt well deserved reputation, possible career but my God, they were seconds away from making an awful skidmark on that pristine condition runway!

[Semper Fido]

I saw the Angels at Fleet Week at the old NAS Alameda in '12 with some optics I probably shouldn't have been using. They were more than 18" apart, but not by a hell of a lot. I'd guess at their closest? 36" Just a guess, though...