Originally Posted by
fatbus
Making light of a serious crash with , more than likely, loss of life is of poor judgment!
FB; I would contend that nothing serious was going on in either of these aircraft.
Back in the day when I was doing formation landings in small jets and stream landings in larger jets, it is standard practice for lead to offset to the cold side to ensure trail has a hot lane to use in the event of a stopping issue. That is one of the determinants whether a runway is suitable for the operations, which is also leads responsibility. It is also the responsibility of the aircraft in front to not stop on the runway or otherwise be a speed bump.
The second aircraft logged numerous landings on their attempt to break their plane. they made the point moot by trying to share the same place as #1.
One assumes the crew on these aircraft had passed some training course in basic flying, sufficient to achieve a set of wings. thereafter presumably they achieved sufficient experience in a RHS to qualify for command in said aircraft. They also presumably had training somewhere on formation, and also on landing aircraft.
There are no reported fatalities, there are two "probables" destroyed aircraft = 2/5 of the way to being an ace from Blue on Blue.
Serious crash? The planes should have had red noses on. As should AZ214, JT904, PX73, unmentionables521 etc. Nothing serious going on in front of the cockpit door on those aircraft.
Causation has changed somewhat over the years in aviation. Military aviation still loses more people and equipment in training than in combat. Civil accidents still occur from human factors, but there is a rise in failings from lack of basic competencies, to which end regulatory bandaids have had little rational basis for mitigating.
If there had been some seriousness anywhere in the event in Khartoum, then there would not have been the blooper video outcome.
cheers