Attn BBMF DC3 Capt.

[Fast Erect]

Do you understand the concept of crowd lines?
Not impressed by todays somewhat cavalier approach to crowd safety.
Then again, maybe I'm just jealous:rolleyes:

[Mach the Knife]

Mr Erect, a question for you. Have you ever done any military aircraft display flying? I suspect not. If you had you would know that the Pilots selected to display an RAF aircraft would not get anywhere near being allowed to if they had a "cavalier approach to crowd safety" Do you know what crowd lines were briefed and what the rules are for crossing them wrt types of mvr, height and flight path vector? If this was an official organised show and the DC3 had bust the rules it would have been dealt with by he airshow organisers. Questioning an easily identifyable pilots attitude to safety and airmanship on an open forum is pretty bad form old boy.

ps. I don't fly for the BBMF

[STANDTO]

Agreed Mach. There was certainly nothing wrong with Jurby the week before.

Interesting comments considering the posters profile.

[Art E. Fischler-Reisen]

Fast Erect,

Yes, I think you might be jealous. Many of us who watched the display thought it was the best part of the show, seeing as you mentioned it. I don't think he did anything dangerous at all.

I am appalled that a professional pilot should use an anonymous means to try and drop a fellow pilot (who is obviously far from anonymous) in the dwang. Not a very professional attitude IMHO. If you want to do this, why not put your money where your mouth is and publish your own name and address? :mad:

[Big Green Arrow]

Run away and hide yourself FE.....either that or stow it!

[Scud-U-Like]

Perhaps this isn't the Capt in question's first ride with the supporters of Charles I.

[Clematis]

OK, let's be more specific - Northern airfield, near a coal mining area, Saturday, middle of the afternoon, BBMF C47/DC3 - whatever, appeared directly over the crowd at about 200 feet. Proceeded in a low level circuit and did the same thing again with a chappie waving out of the back door. Fast Erect was quite correct in his original post about the breach of the crowdline, it was clearly shown on the pre show brief which was sent to all the participents. The Yak and the Spit were spot on the display line and did superb displays. While the Dak looked wonderful and everyone appreciated the spirited display, the current climate does not tolerate such behaviour and as such you previous posters should get your facts right or consider what you are supporting. A professional display shows the aeroplane off to it's best, you do not need to endanger the people who have paid to watch.

[Jackonicko]

What is to be achieved by posting about this supposed 'breach'? Is there any reason to suppose that the organisers (and others) will not react correctly if the breach was serious or anything more than technical and legalistic? Is there any evidence that the pilot in question has not already had 'tea and biscuits' with his CO, hat on and without the tea and biscuits?

FE's original post was at least fairly oblique - whereas Clematis was even less 'helpful'.

Do remember that this is a public forum, visited by journos who may be even less scrupulous than me, and less sympathetic to aviation and the forces, and who could easily pick up on this during the slow news season.

[LJDRVR]

As a newcomer to this BB, I'll probably be "flamed" for breaching whatever protocol is generally understood to be used, but I do have some comments for those of you who have taken FE to task for his observation.

While his posting certainly could have contained a more constructive tone, let's not get hung up on his language and miss the message. When we observe one of our peers blatently transgressing procedural and regulatory guidance, it is our duty to speak up. Possibly one of his peers or even a superior may become aware of the need for closer scrutinization. If we as aviators are willing to identify and discuss our mistakes, then safety is enhanced and the reputation of our profession is upheld, not denegrated. Are we so thin-skinned that we feel our attitude towards safety and airmanship should never be questioned? FE observed an obvious breach of safety. Who cares what his background is? When our First Officer says:"minimums, runway not in sight." do we mentally asses his experience level before deciding to execute a timely go-around?

If the Dakota pilot did nothing wrong, then that fact will become instanly apparent to everyone at BBMF. As a professional aviator, none of us are beyond reproach. To attack FE for attempting to "trash" the C-47 pilot is missing the point.

Feel free to flame away. I believe there should be no skeletons in the closets and no crazy old aunties. If I do something stupid in the jet, then by all means I want it pointed out.

Not afraid to be identified in public for my heresy,

Dan Johnson
Warm regards to all!

[Art E. Fischler-Reisen]

Well said Jacko, for speaking out, especially as a journalist yourself.

For those insisting on a complaint, there is a proper way to make complaints (for those with big enough balls) and IMHO this forum isn't it. Write a letter to the display organiser, with your name and address on top. Leave out the anonymous sniping, it says more about your own character than it does about anything else.

Before anyone asks, I was a UK military display pilot myself not so long ago, but not connected with the BBMF. I watched the display throughout and I think that 200 feet is a gross underestimate of the height flown. The wingspan of a DC-3 is 95 ft and the aircraft was never flown at just over 2 spans off the ground.

[Fast Erect]

Arty....are we talking about the same display?
Are you denying that said aeroplane flew DIRECTLY over the assembled masses at VERY low altitude?
By the way, whilst not wishing to blow my own trumpet, I am a CAA DA holder, therefore am reasonably qualified to comment upon such matters.
Sorry to have stirred up such a hornets nest, but I stand by my first post. I cant believe what I saw.

No further comment from me.:(

[Jackonicko]

But is THIS the place to make the observation? Just watch for Tabloid coverage.....

[Scud-U-Like]

In certain threads within this forum, it appears to be generally acceptable to criticise (and even hurl personal insults at) named, individual RAF officers; whilst, in this thread, it is deemed by most to be bad form to question the conduct of an unnamed (albeit identifiable) RAF ac captain.

Those who accept public positions of authority and responsibility (and take the privileges that go with them) should not be too indignant when the occasional public brickbat comes their way. Such criticism can be an effective safeguard against complacency.

[Reichman]

As both military and a display pilot (though not at the same time)it's heartening to know that the next time I'm displaying, amongst the thousands of upturned faces enjoying the show, there will be one **** who will be waiting for me to slip up so they can start whining on PPRuNe.

There are many words to describe those sort of people. Snitch and Grass are the only clean ones I can think of.

[canberra]

all i'll say is was it the bbmf dakota? and furthermore a civilian flying an ex military aircraft in military markings does not come under the same regs as a true military aircraft. to give you an example a civvy hunter is allowed down to 500' msd without having to book in the low level system, in the military any flight by fjs below 2000' must be booked in to the low level system, although there are a few exemptions.

[AllTrimDoubt]

Doesn't matter - Civilian OR Military direct flight over the crowdline is NOT PERMITTED. And that definitely includes an approach from crowd rear at low level.

I was there, I saw it. And whilst I have remained silent thus far for the sake of the a/c captain (in public) enough is enough.

I was always aware that in every crowd, large or small, there will inevitably be one "upturned face" (who is not necessarily an ****** please note previous poster) but who knows enough about the whole scenario to make life uncomfortable for those foolish enough to bend the rules. That's life.

I agree with earlier posts - this is an open forum and as such some care is needed to avoid unwelcome attention from certain areas or to ensure we do not drop mates in it. But Fast Erect is also correct in calling the shots as he saw it. We need to be professional enough to stand up to scrutiny (or criticism).

(And before the wolves howl...I am mil and have displayed.)

[Reichman]

AllTrimmedOut.

So, the pilot was "foolish" and "bent the rules". Nice to see you've made our mind up already. Is your name Wratten or Day?

The only people who will decide if the rules were bent/broken are the Display Comittee or the CAA representative.

[AllTrimDoubt]

Reichman -

Pse check your private messages. As stated in my post - You never know who is in the crowd. Re-read my post, then ponder before launching, and you will see that I am not in favour of dropping people in it in public. However...

Those of us fortunate to have been allowed to display in the past will all have memories of accidentally cutting it a bit fine or not allowing quite enough for that on-crowd wind. But then I would hope to put in the right correction for the next pass. We are all capable of ****ing up and learning from it.

But this was a bit too much! Yes, it looked marvellous - and in another time I would be the first to applaud. In fact, I'll just go and re-run the video now to see it all again! But I'm afraid this was just a bit more than the "oops " factor.

[InFinRetirement]

Are you sure about that ATD? The Reds have been cleared for arrivals from crowd rear for years.

However, when displaying the rules are clear. But, the TWO or THREE who claim to have been there, are the only ones who have ACTUALLY seen what rule may or may not have been broken. Also, there is a question in regard to the effects of parallax - where the object changes position in regard to the observer on the ground. What is actually required is a view from a person who was actually on, or very close to, the approved display line, and was, therefore, then in a perfect position to see where the DC3 was in relation to it.

Over the display line towards the crowd and he has broken the rule without question. Unless, there is written dispensation from the CAA and the organisers. I think I am right in saying that the organiser alone cannot authorise such dispensation. But I would also expect, since I know that it has happened, that the CAA would, in the case of exceptional pilots, give such approval - for the right reasons and within certain limits. I suggest that the Captain of the BMMF DC3 may well fall within that category.

I hope that there will be no more jumping to conclusions, and the making of rash opinions no longer pervades this thread.

[AllTrimDoubt]

InFin etc...

1. Reds no longer arrive from crowd rear. They now conform with Regs (they did have a dispensation for years) and as such can display in France etc again.

2. Sorry to say it but I WAS there and in the perfect (or unfortunate) position to have the Dak overfly me FROM CROWD REAR.

3. I too think enough has been said. It was an exceptional day out, well organised , with some splendid displays (Thanks Charlie Brown!). Let's leave it at that, eh?

[javelin]

Having seen the posts so far, I would agree that the subject has been done to death. I too saw the display, the whole day was absolutely marvelous and I would agree that the DC3 was spectacliar to quote the vernacular. He did a 'spirited' display and was good, the other chaps were excellent and further away ! I guess my view is that if the chap concerned gets a heads up then that is what was probably intended - espescially if you read the initial post carefully and understand the usual disclaimer at the bottom. I guess Fast Erect was either envious, appreciative, tiddly or all three.
At the end of the day, the show was good, no one was hurt and there were a load of people who had a fantastic day out.

[Art Field]

Whist the individuals chastisement should indeed cease, the subject of display safety is very relevant at this time of the year. As someone who came extremely close to having a mid-air in front of an International audience of half a million people there are lessons for display pilots and controllers that never date. The incident was one where the previous display over ran his allotted time and both he and we were going for the same line, he belly on to us as he turned in. Fortunately my co-pilot, not previously renown for look-out, caught a glimpse of him and we yelled on the display frequency. At the subsequent inquest, the display controller took his eyes off him to watch our run in, he got carried away with completing his display ignoring the time factor and we were totally concentrating on the run in line. Plenty of food for thought.

[Reichman]

AllTrimmed Out.

Didn't get a private message (?)

[Art E. Fischler-Reisen]

Fast Erect.

Yes, we are talking about the same display. I did not comment on where the aircraft flew, I voiced an opinion on a comment about its height. That's all.

Have you written your letter to the display organiser yet? I'm sure they can't wait to hear from you.:rolleyes:

[AllTrimDoubt]

Private Mssg resent!

[Lima Juliet]

I've spoken to the Dak crew involved:

1. The venue, Netherthorpe, asked for a FLYPAST and if you read GASOs you will see that crowd-line does not come into it.

2. If you read GASOs further you will see that the minumum height for flypasts is 250'MSD.

3. "Dog and Pony" events like that at Netherthorpe often publish display and crowd-lines when requesting flypasts from military aircraft which really do not apply. If they published and broadcast that the Dak was displaying then they are wrong as all it was authorised to do was a couple of flypasts and then depart.

4. The DISPLAY sequence as authorised by the AOC involves a 100' fly-through, followed by 300' 360 degree turn then a slow and configured fly-through and then a final 100' fly-through in the opposite direction to the arrival - There are to be no changes to this. Is this waht you saw? - Ivery much doubt it!

So for my not-so-learned friend who started this thread, you may have been mislead by the commentator at Netherthorpe, you may have seen what you thought was a display (But was actually a perfectly legal flypast) and you ARE wholy incorrect.

LJ:mad:

[Reichman]

Nice one Leon.

[Twin Peaks]

Flypast or not, do you really think it is safe and sensible to fly a large aeroplane DIRECTLY over an assembled crowd?
I think not.
Also, the profile you describe certainly did not happen on the day.

[CrabInCab]

Hen's teeth anyone?

[fobotcso]

Oh dear! I thought we were going to let this sad, tatty thread die. Instead there seems to be a hard core of mean-spirited sanctimonious contributors determined to prove that only they are right about something that most of us could not give a big rat's arse about.

Next time you are doing 90 on a Motorway in light traffic and good conditions remember that you are breaking a safety law whilst not being unsafe.

But then find youself at 70, three car lengths behind the one in front, and remember that whilst you are obeying the law you are being patently unsafe.

So safety is context relevant.

Large aeroplane? The Dak? Hardly, Twin Peaks! Compare and contrast the AUM of the C47 and a modern combat aircraft.

And then let's knock this one on the head and talk about something else.

[BEagle]

There appears to be some disecrepancy between reports concerning this 'event'. If a 'flypast' turned into an anauthorised and unapproved display - note that I say 'IF' - then there are certainly legitimate grounds for concern.

However, there are more appropriate ways of expressing that concern than in a public forum.

Remember Ramstein? The UK has some pretty strict air display rules - as a result there hasn't been a member of the public killed since the crash of John Derry's DH110 at Farnborough in the early 1950s. Impromptu unauthorised displays by the unapproved will inevitably attract severe repercussions - and quite rightly so. There have been some pretty serious allegations made on this thread - if you have a genuine complaint, perhaps using the correct reporting chain would be a better way to ensure that it is investigated?

[fobotcso]

If we're going to keep this thread going let's get it right, BEagle.

So you don't count the RAE driver(s?) killed when the Breguet Atlantique went into their rest room in the Black Sheds at Farnborough in, I think, 1968?

That was as bad a piece of display flying discipline as most of us will ever have seen; and I saw it head-on from the Officers' Mess garden.

It is fantasy to imagine that if a breach of rules or authorisation did take place at Netherthorpe it has not already been addressed by the proper authorities.

Discussing it on PPRuNe will not have changed the course of history any more than the Chinook saga has been affected. (Although we all fervently hope that action off the PPRuNe stage will be successful in that case.)

[Reichman]

I agree with Fobotsco.

IF there's an investigation people can spout on when the findings are out. IF there isn't, stop the muck raking.

[PPRuNe Pop]

I have been closely monitoring this thread from two perspectives. One as a past display pilot and the other as a moderator. I have to say that in the latter capacity, and taking into account the current feelings, that this thread is being battered by a fair bit of nonsense and I am, therefore, closing it.

If there is some very sound reason to open it again, please feel free to contact me and I will review it.


PPRuNe Pop
Moderator
[email protected]