Shoreline displays - a new can of worms?

[Shackman]

Following the Hunter accident - which is not the point of this thread - everyone seems to be climbing on the 'over sea' bandwagon for flying displays, but aren't we now increasing the safety risk for the aircrew involved.

On a nice clear day, with unlimited visibility, a bit of wind to give texture to the surface and a clearly defined coastline it can be fairly straightforward - and I mean no disrespect to those participating. However, start taking away some of those factors, particularly a smooth/calm sea with little wind allied with reduced visibility or full cloud cover and it becomes much harder to judge a lot of things. Turn away from the coastline and sudden disorientation can occur, a smooth sea can make the surface almost impossible to see (OK, gates and altimeters both rad and baro will help, but the Mk 1 eyeball can be fooled). Of note my worst case of disorientation occurred just in a gentle turn away from the coast at 100ft in what seemed like 'adequate' conditions for the demo in hand.

I would assume weather limits for over-water displays would have to be improved, and pilots/aircrew would have to practice a little more for that scenario. AFAIK there have been no accidents so far at shoreline air displays due to weather (although as usual stand to be corrected), but would appreciate other views on the subject.

[KenV]

I've never flown a demo/display flight over water, but being a carrier pilot and a P-3 pilot I have spent a LOT of flight time over water. On a hazy day with a high overcast it can be exceedingly difficult to see the horizon. The sky and water just blend together and its like flying inside a light bulb where all your attitude cues just go away. And over smooth/still water your speed cues go away as do your altitude cues. And if you're flying near high shoreline cliffs, your eye can mistake the cliff face for the ground which can be disorienting. And shorelines tend to have lots of birds in the air. So you make a good point. The cure may be worse than the illness.

[Wensleydale]

I was taught at Finningley to increase height to 500ft when crossing the coast at LL because of the bird-strike hazard! I assume that it still applies? I also remember one of the Reds hitting the mast on a yacht in the distant past.

[Above The Clouds]

I guess if it gets forced in to service as the only way to continue with vintage jet displays, then more will be cancelled due to weather related issues.

[just another jocky]

1000ft, not 500ft.

And at right-angles.

This applies to fast-jets. Not sure about rotary or multis.

[NutLoose]

Seagulls, seagulls and more seagulls... That's my worry.

[Fluffy Bunny]

The result of the Reds adventure into mast felling lead to their minimum display height being raised to 100ft.

[Random Bloke]

I agree with Shackman and KenV: as a maritime aviator I know that manoeuvring over water can be far more hazardous than over land due to lack of texture and other visual cues. That's one of the reasons why the pre-spinning checks include "not over the sea". The sea is not the easy, benign environment that people think it is.

[TaranisAttack]

@KenV
If weather is bad, airshow flights are cancelled over water.

@Wensleydale
Planes at coastline airshows are below 500ft for sure! Bird strikes would seem to be more of an issue with prop aircraft, with jets the birds can't get away fast enough.

@Random Bloke
Beacons or indicators of some kind could be placed in the sea to give some indication to pilot, if they felt they needed it. They seem to be doing ok without though!

[Willard Whyte]

1000ft, not 500ft.

And at right-angles.

This applies to fast-jets. Not sure about rotary or multis.

I seem to remember it as 500'. T'was a few years ago when I was on 47 Sqn mind, '94-'97.

Would imagine wokka mates get a nosebleed above 100', let alone 1,000'.

[Two's in]

Would imagine wokka mates get a nosebleed above 100', let alone 1,000'.

True WW, but you get this awful crunching noise if you coast in around Dover at around 100'.

[dctyke]

Taking away the aviation issues there is also the question of revenue. Going to an airfield based display ain't cheap as there are a lot of outgoings. Where is the money going to come from when you cannot have a captive paying audience?

[TheWizard]

@KenV


@Random Bloke
Beacons or indicators of some kind could be placed in the sea to give some indication to pilot, if they felt they needed it. They seem to be doing ok without though!

I think you'll find there are big indicators (inflatable usually) placed in the sea as a datum at most coastal events as a matter of requirement.

[Avtur]

I was on a Nimrod display crew that displayed in Toronto over Lake Ontario.

Displaying in that area was very difficult with reduced visibility and the geographic constraints of displaying near to downtown Toronto. A fire tender was used to spray water cannons that marked the display datum, but this was often hard to see.

I guess my point is that displaying over water is not a simple as one would think, and adds an extra dimension to an already brain-engaging activity.

[chinook240]

I never really felt comfortable doing an overwater display, not just because most of my work up was done down on a runway, but you are generally so far from the crowd line (for a helo) that the punters don't see the display. Obviously, overwater practices were a prerequisite before the public display. A minor drawback is, apart from shows like Southport, Jersey and Plymouth there is no opportunity to do a static afterwards and meet the public.

[Random Bloke]

Yes, markers or buoys can be used to aid alignment but they can create other issues. I've seen plenty of pilots lose SA while flying round the buoys in D001 and D807 and another get disoriented with the approach buoys at Gibraltar. I am not saying that it can't be done but I do suggest that it needs a lot of thought before it becomes policy and a lot of practice, more so than over land, until it is safe.

[India Four Two]

That's one of the reasons why the pre-spinning checks include "not over the sea". The sea is not the easy, benign environment that people think it is.

Years ago, I did some PA-38 Tomahawk flying in Guernsey. The practice area was over the sea out of necessity. Spinning over the sea was extremely disorienting.

[teeteringhead]

Would imagine wokka mates get a nosebleed above 100', let alone 1,000'. Exactly so - but you do get birdstrikes in the rear of the aircraft! Boom boom but you get this awful crunching noise if you coast in around Dover at around 100'. With all the "corrections" - mainly subtractions - for rotary BoHs in the 1970s, ISTR a Master Green Break Off at Manston of 50ft QFE!! :eek:

Not many days that wouldn't work......:ok:

[Shackman]

ISTR a Master Green Break Off at Manston of 50ft QFE

I also remember a Decca approach in IMC to Manston at 0200 (post search and the stratus had rolled in) which I broke off at 150ft when this red light appeared in front of and above me. It transpired it was a 300ft cooling tower on the Richborough power station, which was south of Manston, and the Nav was one lane out on his map. Before that I never liked Decca approaches (in the Wessex it was the only thing we had apart from an even worse ADF), afterwards I was even more distrustful.

Sorry, slight thread drift, back to subject. Reading the replies so far would seem to indicate a similar feeling of disquiet for overwater manoeuvering. I have a goodly number of hours over water in both fixed wing and rotary and much as I like to watch displays I think the safety case might need further investigation.

[chinook240]

Overwater displays are already highly successful , mainly because they are free! I believe one claims an audience of 500,000 over the w/e. Display lines are generally further from the crowd than A/F so have less impact.

[teeteringhead]

Before that I never liked Decca approaches (in the Wessex it was the only thing we had apart from an even worse ADF), Ah Decca!

I recall doing a night famil for a Newbie at Aldergrove once - 1980s maybe? We were bimbling out to the East of Aldergrove when they told me the weather was socking in - it was that wierd low fog that rolled in unannounced from Lough Neagh.

"Oh" they said, "and the radar's just gone off line and so there's no SRA!"

Never mind methinks - good opportunity to demo Decca approach to Newbie (did all helicopter Stations have to be on a Green 30 Decca lane??).

Decca gets us back, but at whatever DH we had - 300 ft maybe - we were still above the tops of the now blanket of fog on the airfield.

One knew it WAS the airfield, cos sticking out of the clag was the top of the civvy terminal building, with the red neon sign (so true at the time!) saying:

Welcome to Belfast International Airport

Hover taxi across to the terminal, and let down gently keeping building in sight. Land on - shut down. Phew!

ATC: "Well done, we'll send transport - where are you?"

TH: "Haven't a f:mad: clue - on the civil side somewhere!!"

Sorry for continuing the thread drift - 'twas Shackman's talk of Decca and red lights that made me do it! :ok:

[Herod]

(did all helicopter Stations have to be on a Green 30 Decca lane??).

Don't know, but if the old brain is still working (it was 1970 when I last did it), Odiham was also on green 30.

[Mogwi]

I remember the time that the baddies blew up the red Decca transmitter to the south if Aldergrove because they had been told that it would ground the Wessex detachment. Could only happen in Ireland (other provinces are available).

[Lima Juliet]

I witnessed this a few years ago - https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/5422f9d5ed915d1374000773/dft_avsafety_pdf_501477.pdf

'Goldfish Bowl' comditions were most likely a contributor.

LJ

[Random Bloke]

Some years ago, when conducting an inquiry into a Service flying accident, I spoke to one of the officers involved in the investigation into the Lightning crash at Scarborough in 1983. He was firmly of the opinion that the pilot became disoriented while manoeuvring at low level over the sea. The subsequent loss of SA may have contributed to the final, and sadly fatal, manoeuvre.