Dallas air show crash
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Mars
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chiefttp
Schnowzer,
I will be willing to wager a lot of money that the P-63 wasn’t rejoining on the B-17. He was concerned with his position vis-a-vis the #2 fighter (Mustang) and never saw or was aware of the B-17’s position.
I will be willing to wager a lot of money that the P-63 wasn’t rejoining on the B-17. He was concerned with his position vis-a-vis the #2 fighter (Mustang) and never saw or was aware of the B-17’s position.
Last edited by Schnowzer; 19th Nov 2022 at 14:34.
Why are some posters stating that the fighters and bombers were at the same altitude? I’ve performed in a few air shows with the same lineup, WWII Bombers, fighters and even the Tora Tora group. At our pre-show briefings, which all participants were required to attend, altitude separation between disparate groups of aircraft was mandatory and stressed. And, to reiterate once again, the P-63 was higher than the B-17 as witnessed by the fact that it was in a DESCENDING left turn as it struck the Bomber.
Originally Posted by Chiefttp
Why are some posters stating that the fighters and bombers were at the same altitude? I’ve performed in a few air shows with the same lineup, WWII Bombers, fighters and even the Tora Tora group. At our pre-show briefings, which all participants were required to attend, altitude separation between disparate groups of aircraft was mandatory and stressed. And, to reiterate once again, the P-63 was higher than the B-17 as witnessed by the fact that it was in a DESCENDING left turn as it struck the Bomber.
Gnome de PPRuNe
The preceding P-51s had also descended and were at around 400' during their pass according to ADSB. Previous passes had been at 1000' +. They then both broke right and up towards the NW end of the display line - presumably choreographed rather than any reaction to what happened behind them.
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao...=4&trackLabels
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao...12&trackLabels
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao...=4&trackLabels
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao...12&trackLabels
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Confusion
I flew with the Texas Raiders on that B-17 in Rome, GA a couple of years ago and that really makes me want to understand the cause.
Question: Why is a double-teardrop parade that places aircraft on the photo-pass portion with other aircraft going the opposite direction even considered?
It seems to me an oval racetrack pattern is much safer since everyone would be single-file at like speeds in the oval parade and never in converging curved paths or never overtaking
another participant. The double-teardrop with climbing and descending is a flawed plan in my mind.
Bryan Cobb
Question: Why is a double-teardrop parade that places aircraft on the photo-pass portion with other aircraft going the opposite direction even considered?
It seems to me an oval racetrack pattern is much safer since everyone would be single-file at like speeds in the oval parade and never in converging curved paths or never overtaking
another participant. The double-teardrop with climbing and descending is a flawed plan in my mind.
Bryan Cobb
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,195
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Moush
Pilot incapacitated?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As with most airshows, the full circuit is in front of the spectators, this naturally results in aircraft turning toward the spectators before flying down the line.
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
Gnome de PPRuNe
Originally Posted by mickjoebill
As with most airshows, the full circuit is in front of the spectators, this naturally results in aircraft turning toward the spectators before flying down the line.
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
Originally Posted by mickjoebill
As with most airshows, the full circuit is in front of the spectators, this naturally results in aircraft turning toward the spectators before flying down the line.
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
In this incident, at the moment if impact, the momentum of the aircraft was *toward* the crowd. The impact was so catastrophic that both aircraft plummeted. But what if the P63 had been partially damaged and then descended on its track, would it have crashed into the crowd?
Would it be inherently safer for the circuit to be conducted *around* the spectators? Not as visually engaging.....
Mjb
In 40 years, I have only witnessed personally one fatal accident and have never personally been threatened by anything that has happened at an air show.
In those 40 years there have been untold deaths on our roads and several near where I live.
So, what should we restrict. Air shows or driving?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by uxb99
So, what should we restrict. Air shows or driving?
Personally I have seen a similar display at Duxford and must say that it was impressive. But not important enough for anybody to die for it.
Originally Posted by what next
How often do you drive and how often do you attend airshows? And what is the ratio between the two for the average citizen? (The vast majority never go to an airshow in their entire life.) Nothing can be derived from this kind of statistics. Only that every fatality is one too many, both on the road and at airshows.
Personally I have seen a similar display at Duxford and must say that it was impressive. But not important enough for anybody to die for it.
Personally I have seen a similar display at Duxford and must say that it was impressive. But not important enough for anybody to die for it.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by uxb99
Hammer it with restrictions and the event wouldn't happen.
Originally Posted by what next
It would happen but differently. Personally I don't need to see 30+ warbirds being displayed at the same time. We humans are not capable of multitasking and can only watch one at a time. So why not display one after the other? That would reduce the risk of a collision to zero and we would still be able to see historic aircraft outside of museums.
Same applies for horse racing, one on the track at a time. Also, any type of vehicle racing, one on the track at a time.
Sorry what next but I disagree with your assertion about multitasking (and agree with Zombywoof's gentle retort). Next time you get the chance, spend a day sitting next to a controller at a busy approach facility, and then tell me you still believe "humans are not capable of multitasking".
Cheers
Cheers
Gnome de PPRuNe
I'm typing/reading this, drinking a cuppasoup (while not typing) and listening to a comedy on TV - I'd say that's multitasking...
That said, I do prefer single type displays so one can watch and listen to one aircraft. Formations and the Flying Legends Balbo are something else.
That said, I do prefer single type displays so one can watch and listen to one aircraft. Formations and the Flying Legends Balbo are something else.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next time you get the chance, spend a day sitting next to a controller at a busy approach facility, and then tell me you still believe "humans are not capable of multitasking".
On the other hand, a pilot, flying an advanced fast airplane, is tasked doing that. Then that pilot is thinking about maneuvering into formation with another aircraft, another task with constantly changing parameters, and [hopefully] considering his own traffic separation - many distinct tasks - 'cause he has to look all over the ski for them, rather than at one radar display.
I entertain the notion that the Air Cobra pilot was task saturated, in a very complex situation, and could not keep all the balls in the air. I have had a few occasions in an uncontrolled airport environment where non conforming traffic was too much to mentally track, while I was also PIC, training a pilot new to the type, who was flying. I chose to overshoot a visual approach, and reorient myself with the traffic, before attempting another approach.
In my opinion, the set up of this flying display was a major Swiss cheese hole toward task saturation, and needlessly so. As said, great display antique airplanes, but not in a highly complex multi plane formation in turns. Just fly them one after another across in front of the spectators - and, then they can also enjoy the distinct sound from each one too!
