2007 Puma Crash, Enquiry and Inquest (Merged)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rogersofaover, JT.
You guys are partly to blame for this terrible accident, as am I. We are the guys that should be passing on our experiences to the young Puma bods. Trouble is, we've decided the grass is greener where we are right now - and from what I see and read, I think we're right.
When I was a sprog, there was definitely a wazzing culture within the Puma fleet (as others have already posted). I think what's different now is that the 'old and bold' aren't passing on the lessons because they're either retired or not allowed to 'teach' the survival skills we were taught. One of the best lessons I was taught was never to wazz without recce'ing the site first. My first flight in Belize showed me how to tackle the Eastern branch safely. On the Wessex I remember being demo'd the Racetrack.
Nowadays the 'wingover' is a manoeuvre that is taught at DHFS. It could be considered as a bit of a pointless manoeuvre in many situations, particularly in the academic manner in which it's taught. Much of the reasoning behind it being in the syllabus is that pilots are going to fly them whether we like it or not so best we teach them to do it properly. A similar ethos used to be fostered, albeit underground and unofficial, regarding wazzing. I don't think that's in evidence anymore.
I think that because the microscope has been on 'flying indisciplne' for a while now, the survival skills and judgement just isn't getting passed on.
Or maybe I'm off the mark.......
J
You guys are partly to blame for this terrible accident, as am I. We are the guys that should be passing on our experiences to the young Puma bods. Trouble is, we've decided the grass is greener where we are right now - and from what I see and read, I think we're right.
When I was a sprog, there was definitely a wazzing culture within the Puma fleet (as others have already posted). I think what's different now is that the 'old and bold' aren't passing on the lessons because they're either retired or not allowed to 'teach' the survival skills we were taught. One of the best lessons I was taught was never to wazz without recce'ing the site first. My first flight in Belize showed me how to tackle the Eastern branch safely. On the Wessex I remember being demo'd the Racetrack.
Nowadays the 'wingover' is a manoeuvre that is taught at DHFS. It could be considered as a bit of a pointless manoeuvre in many situations, particularly in the academic manner in which it's taught. Much of the reasoning behind it being in the syllabus is that pilots are going to fly them whether we like it or not so best we teach them to do it properly. A similar ethos used to be fostered, albeit underground and unofficial, regarding wazzing. I don't think that's in evidence anymore.
I think that because the microscope has been on 'flying indisciplne' for a while now, the survival skills and judgement just isn't getting passed on.
Or maybe I'm off the mark.......
J
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jayteeto
I confined my remarks to the SH Force because that is what the thread is about; moreover SH crews work intensively and independently at low level whilst carrying Pax far more than other Branches of the Service.
What was revealed by the CVR in this instance was a level of disregard in respect of SOP's, GASO's, STCASI's and MODFO's which was truly staggering. What I find equally - if not more - disturbing is the number of contributors to this thread who tacitly admit that they too have indulged in such antics or relate "There but for the grace of God etc" anecdotes.
During WW2 Bomber Command lost 47,268 Aircrew on Operations; in addition a further 8,305 Aircrew were lost on Training Sorties - a total of 55,573 killed. Thus in the middle of a "War for Civilisation" 15% of Bomber Aircrew casualties were due to avoidable "Accidents".
The "Rules" which some see as attempting to curtail their fun are in place because a long history of tragedies has shown the need for such "Rules".
I confined my remarks to the SH Force because that is what the thread is about; moreover SH crews work intensively and independently at low level whilst carrying Pax far more than other Branches of the Service.
What was revealed by the CVR in this instance was a level of disregard in respect of SOP's, GASO's, STCASI's and MODFO's which was truly staggering. What I find equally - if not more - disturbing is the number of contributors to this thread who tacitly admit that they too have indulged in such antics or relate "There but for the grace of God etc" anecdotes.
During WW2 Bomber Command lost 47,268 Aircrew on Operations; in addition a further 8,305 Aircrew were lost on Training Sorties - a total of 55,573 killed. Thus in the middle of a "War for Civilisation" 15% of Bomber Aircrew casualties were due to avoidable "Accidents".
The "Rules" which some see as attempting to curtail their fun are in place because a long history of tragedies has shown the need for such "Rules".
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caz,
If I was a betting man my house and pension would be on there being not one single RAF pilot who can put their hand up and honestly state they have never, and I do mean never, knowingly broken their auth in the pursuit of of some fun, not one
If I was a betting man my house and pension would be on there being not one single RAF pilot who can put their hand up and honestly state they have never, and I do mean never, knowingly broken their auth in the pursuit of of some fun, not one
Good grief
Gentlemen,
I'm sorry,
Reading this thread, and one or two others on this website really makes me feel that standards in the RAF have slipped very badly over recent years.
I was appalled at the poor standard of preparation of RAF airframes at the most recent show I attended. Reading this doesn't do anything to assure me that the professional standards I, and most other members of the British public are proud to expect and observe from our fighting services still exist in your force.
A great shame. I'd like to believe my perception is wrong. Please wind it in.
Flying whether done by civilian or military pilots requires certain standards be maintained and ultimate limits observed. Addressing the public also requires certain standards be met, one way or another. There are plenty good ways to do this, lots of options for skinning any particular cat. You don't need to demonstrate small mindedness by arguing over minutiae.
I'm sorry,
Reading this thread, and one or two others on this website really makes me feel that standards in the RAF have slipped very badly over recent years.
I was appalled at the poor standard of preparation of RAF airframes at the most recent show I attended. Reading this doesn't do anything to assure me that the professional standards I, and most other members of the British public are proud to expect and observe from our fighting services still exist in your force.
A great shame. I'd like to believe my perception is wrong. Please wind it in.
Flying whether done by civilian or military pilots requires certain standards be maintained and ultimate limits observed. Addressing the public also requires certain standards be met, one way or another. There are plenty good ways to do this, lots of options for skinning any particular cat. You don't need to demonstrate small mindedness by arguing over minutiae.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Detroit MI
Age: 66
Posts: 1,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roger:
You really need to read what you write. On one hand you acknowledge that I called "knock it off" where the lad in the rear who died in this "hadn't got to the point of asking for the fun to be racked back" thus admitting that my tolerance for the riskier aspects of low/extreme flight, were less than his, (and I say extreme because I don't believe this situation was one of simply low flight, it seems there were multiple occasions where the aircraft was carrying out aerobatic type manoeuvres at low level). Then you turn round and call me a liar. You base that not on personal experience of flying with me nor through the writings of others about their experiences flying with me. You do it by stating that you have experienced the same disturbing behavior demonstrated in the published recording on multiple occasions on aircraft you were flying and, therefore, through the wonder of judging others by your standards, I must be a liar.
I don't claim to be an angel... Never have, never will. My tolerance for risk was probably higher than many bearing in mind in the previous five years I threw myself out of miltary aircraft fifty times with kit and crap strapped to me. But I stand by my statements... You on the other hand confess to being serially reckless. Move on, you're not impressing anyone with an ounce of brains. You've appropriately tried to defend your mate's honour. He'll be proud of you.... Really...
Someone mentioned that the "older" aircrew are part of the problem because they left and therefore are unavailable to pass on the much needed experience. I can only say for my part that, of the 4 crewmen that arrived on 33 Sqn with me, I am the only one who is not still serving. Maybe I joined with a particularly resilient bunch but they are still there with 75 years of flying experience between them. Not saying that the theory is wrong but saying that there is the experience there if the poster wants to use it... Course, last I heard, the poster was on of the three that arrived on 33 Sqn with me.
You really need to read what you write. On one hand you acknowledge that I called "knock it off" where the lad in the rear who died in this "hadn't got to the point of asking for the fun to be racked back" thus admitting that my tolerance for the riskier aspects of low/extreme flight, were less than his, (and I say extreme because I don't believe this situation was one of simply low flight, it seems there were multiple occasions where the aircraft was carrying out aerobatic type manoeuvres at low level). Then you turn round and call me a liar. You base that not on personal experience of flying with me nor through the writings of others about their experiences flying with me. You do it by stating that you have experienced the same disturbing behavior demonstrated in the published recording on multiple occasions on aircraft you were flying and, therefore, through the wonder of judging others by your standards, I must be a liar.
I don't claim to be an angel... Never have, never will. My tolerance for risk was probably higher than many bearing in mind in the previous five years I threw myself out of miltary aircraft fifty times with kit and crap strapped to me. But I stand by my statements... You on the other hand confess to being serially reckless. Move on, you're not impressing anyone with an ounce of brains. You've appropriately tried to defend your mate's honour. He'll be proud of you.... Really...
Someone mentioned that the "older" aircrew are part of the problem because they left and therefore are unavailable to pass on the much needed experience. I can only say for my part that, of the 4 crewmen that arrived on 33 Sqn with me, I am the only one who is not still serving. Maybe I joined with a particularly resilient bunch but they are still there with 75 years of flying experience between them. Not saying that the theory is wrong but saying that there is the experience there if the poster wants to use it... Course, last I heard, the poster was on of the three that arrived on 33 Sqn with me.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biscuit 74: It goes against the grain to defend an air force that leaves itself wide open for your comments, and I suspect the Navy & Army are quite happy that the Air Force are taking the flak that they could so easy be in the firing line for.
However if you want a static line up of nice new shiny aeroplanes and crews with high morale oozing out of their ears you need to invest in quality training, airframe & equipment procurement, and sufficient staff to permit a quality of life in balance with operational abscence. In short, the country cannot afford the air force you desire. Nobody would argue that your aspiration is not logical or reasonable, but those days are well and truly over.
If we pulled out of worldwide conflict tomorrow and became a home defence force it would still take years to achieve a cheesy smile glossy mag reality. Whichever box you tick in the General Election is not going to make an iota of diference when it comes to military budgets. Sad but true.
AA: I suspect that not one of your colleaques is still a crewman, and if the poster to whome you refer is JW; there have been 2 others since. You joined with a group who were particulary sucessfull at going en-route on the career path albeit still in uniform.
However if you want a static line up of nice new shiny aeroplanes and crews with high morale oozing out of their ears you need to invest in quality training, airframe & equipment procurement, and sufficient staff to permit a quality of life in balance with operational abscence. In short, the country cannot afford the air force you desire. Nobody would argue that your aspiration is not logical or reasonable, but those days are well and truly over.
If we pulled out of worldwide conflict tomorrow and became a home defence force it would still take years to achieve a cheesy smile glossy mag reality. Whichever box you tick in the General Election is not going to make an iota of diference when it comes to military budgets. Sad but true.
AA: I suspect that not one of your colleaques is still a crewman, and if the poster to whome you refer is JW; there have been 2 others since. You joined with a group who were particulary sucessfull at going en-route on the career path albeit still in uniform.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Finchampstead
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Sale had been grounded after flagrantly disregarding the rules (despite my advice to the contrary) whilst at Fairford 2 weeks before he killed himself, his crewman, the innocent trooper and ruined his copilot's life then this sad, tragic affair may not have happened. I make no apologies for being blunt but these are the facts. Forget the lack of anticipators in the Puma engines this was pure pig headedness from a person full of his own overconfidence!! FACTS
Last edited by Dundiggin'; 31st Oct 2009 at 12:58.
SFFP,
[Hand raised] I have never knowingly broken my auth in the pursuit of of some fun.
In fact, I gain satisfaction and enjoyment from executing my duties in a professional manner. Perhaps I am fortunate that my type and role lend themselves to enjoyable flying. Those who find their "day job" flying mundane would do well to get their kicks on a motorsport circuit or in a private aircraft, rather than abusing the privilege of being paid to fly HM's aircraft.
Good job you're not a betting man!
If I was a betting man my house and pension would be on there being not one single RAF pilot who can put their hand up and honestly state they have never, and I do mean never, knowingly broken their auth in the pursuit of of some fun, not one 
In fact, I gain satisfaction and enjoyment from executing my duties in a professional manner. Perhaps I am fortunate that my type and role lend themselves to enjoyable flying. Those who find their "day job" flying mundane would do well to get their kicks on a motorsport circuit or in a private aircraft, rather than abusing the privilege of being paid to fly HM's aircraft.
Good job you're not a betting man!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somerset
Age: 81
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Caz
How true - but hopefully the spirted independent mindset of military aviators will still allow some "FUN" in their flying. Occasionally this mindset will end in tradgedy and no amount of rules will stop these brave fellows pushing the boundaries - sometimes too far.
I am frankly amazed at the quote from you above - I do not know of any, and I mean any of my compatriots who would not admit to a There but for the grace of God moment - and most of them- and me - learned more from those moments than from any instructor or "rule".
I firmly believe that the current success of our SH forces - Blue Dark/pale/khaki - comes from this extrovert personality trait and the pure love of the task - especially the low flying element.
They do not dwell on the shortcomings of the equipment provided - they just get on with the job in in hand and to my mind do it superbly. Occasionally when young pilots are pushing their limits - and sometimes perhaps being reckless - crashes will happen. (note, not accidents, but crashes). This is terribly sad - but will forever continue as long as military aviators have spirit coursing through their blood.
Sad but true - and it makes our successors the fabulous aviators they are.
D
The "Rules" which some see as attempting to curtail their fun are in place because a long history of tragedies has shown the need for such "Rules".
What I find equally - if not more - disturbing is the number of contributors to this thread who tacitly admit that they too have indulged in such antics or relate "What I find equally - if not more - disturbing is the number of contributors to this thread who tacitly admit that they too have indulged in such antics or relate "There but for the grace of God etc" anecdotes.
I firmly believe that the current success of our SH forces - Blue Dark/pale/khaki - comes from this extrovert personality trait and the pure love of the task - especially the low flying element.
They do not dwell on the shortcomings of the equipment provided - they just get on with the job in in hand and to my mind do it superbly. Occasionally when young pilots are pushing their limits - and sometimes perhaps being reckless - crashes will happen. (note, not accidents, but crashes). This is terribly sad - but will forever continue as long as military aviators have spirit coursing through their blood.
Sad but true - and it makes our successors the fabulous aviators they are.
D
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was a betting man my house and pension would be on there being not one single RAF pilot who can put their hand up and honestly state they have never, and I do mean never, knowingly broken their auth in the pursuit of of some fun, not one
I can't see the need to break an Auth; get the auth you need to get the task done and accept the limitations.
I'm aware of my limitations and therefore have no need nor want to act in an unprofessional manner. People's lives are at stake here, so ego can take second fiddle to safety, IMO.
Crews who think they possess higher talent levels and can therefore act as they will end up like that tw@t Bud Holland or the guy flying the Puma in question.
I've got too much on in my life to get involved with creating aircraft-sized craters.
AA
I am afraid it is you that needs to re-read what you have written.
My post was written concerning YOUR confession to being seriously reckless down the Western Highway. As another contributor wrote, you just cannot admit that you are wrong can you? Any further dialogue with you is futile. I guess CRM means Cognac Resource Management to you!
i.e what you did was just very low flight, what this lad did was not!
There is nothing simple about low flight down a road with your main rotor blades a few feet from trees either side. It is just as wreckless as what the young man concerned here did.
Jelly
Yep you are right mate, as I wrote in my post earlier, there is both collective and systemic responsibility here and fixing the problem is a complex issue which must be addressed.
I am afraid it is you that needs to re-read what you have written.
You on the other hand confess to being serially reckless. Move on, you're not impressing anyone with an ounce of brains
I don't believe this situation was one of simply low flight
There is nothing simple about low flight down a road with your main rotor blades a few feet from trees either side. It is just as wreckless as what the young man concerned here did.
Jelly
Yep you are right mate, as I wrote in my post earlier, there is both collective and systemic responsibility here and fixing the problem is a complex issue which must be addressed.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
baston
I'll make that 3 with Easy Street and Farfrompuken - and in 31 years flying I had just one accident which was a Birdstrike at low level on a Saturday morning.
It seems to me that there is one word missing from a lot of posts on this subject, a word that is at the heart of the Military Ethos :
DISCIPLINE
I'll make that 3 with Easy Street and Farfrompuken - and in 31 years flying I had just one accident which was a Birdstrike at low level on a Saturday morning.
It seems to me that there is one word missing from a lot of posts on this subject, a word that is at the heart of the Military Ethos :
DISCIPLINE
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the three of you so far with hands up have never ever once, even all those years ago during flying training when solo, never even pushed the envelope slightly, not even the tiniest bit for the thrill of it then I take my hat off to you for your complete and utter professionalism
NO slight inteneded but that would be also be (a) pretty boring (b) hardly the stuff young thrusters are made from and (c) unbelievable so I suspect, had I been a betting man my money would have been very safe indeed
NO slight inteneded but that would be also be (a) pretty boring (b) hardly the stuff young thrusters are made from and (c) unbelievable so I suspect, had I been a betting man my money would have been very safe indeed
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am with you on this one Seldom. But of course there is a difference between recklous disregard of limitations (premeditated or not) and having an "Oops; wont do that again", moment. Whilst few people if any set out to take the P out of the rules (The DHFS student solo with a video camera who is now chopped) there will be many if not all that get carried away with the thrill of the chase on occasion. That attribute is part of being a fighter pilot, and all RAF pilots are recruited as fighter pilots until chopped (restreamed for the tree huggers).
I recall a Harrier mate decribing the stones in the furrows of a ploughed field in Germany (GR3 days) who I know did not intend to have that experience. There will be thousands of similar stories; but again the lack of old, not bold crews mean that such experiences are rarely shared nowadays.
I would suggest that every car driver, motorcycle rider, pilot on the planet has had an "Oops - That was silly" moment, if they think about it for.... a few seconds. ....and then listen to the traffic news on your radio and note how often "Oops" becomes "Oh Bollo, why me" to somebody who has just created a traffic jam due to an element of human nature.
In fairness to the system (regardless of how big/pointy/fast/noisy your particular chariot is) Flight Safety nowadays is head and shoulders better then it was in the seventies and eighties, when fast jet JCBs were modifying the urban landscape of central europe with regular occurance.
>>Tonque in cheek mode<< A birdstrike is not an accident. If you are a human it is an 'incident', and if you are a bird, it is 'man..' no make that 'birdslaughter'.
I recall a Harrier mate decribing the stones in the furrows of a ploughed field in Germany (GR3 days) who I know did not intend to have that experience. There will be thousands of similar stories; but again the lack of old, not bold crews mean that such experiences are rarely shared nowadays.
I would suggest that every car driver, motorcycle rider, pilot on the planet has had an "Oops - That was silly" moment, if they think about it for.... a few seconds. ....and then listen to the traffic news on your radio and note how often "Oops" becomes "Oh Bollo, why me" to somebody who has just created a traffic jam due to an element of human nature.
In fairness to the system (regardless of how big/pointy/fast/noisy your particular chariot is) Flight Safety nowadays is head and shoulders better then it was in the seventies and eighties, when fast jet JCBs were modifying the urban landscape of central europe with regular occurance.
>>Tonque in cheek mode<< A birdstrike is not an accident. If you are a human it is an 'incident', and if you are a bird, it is 'man..' no make that 'birdslaughter'.
Last edited by Tiger_mate; 30th Oct 2009 at 09:35.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somerset
Age: 81
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seldom
Hey - I agree with you! Pushing it a bit was how we learned where the limits were
On so many occasions in active theatres how the hell do you get an authorisation that covers all eventualities? Are the righteous amongst you saying that if tasked to lift six men from a mountain ledge and you arrive and find seven you leave one behind because you are not authorised? Yes - this used to happen in Borneo amongst the light blue and it did not make them hugely popular with the customers.
The ability to think outside the box and push the limits without endangering life is surely a prerequisite for military SH ops?
Two views of rules.
1. A book of rules that tells you what you can do.
2. A book of rules that tells you what you cannot do.
I know which one my lot operated under and it surely worked.
So often when a "Catterick" happens, instead of learning from mistakes even more rules are put in place, and they won't make a jot of difference.
See you here again when it happens again, as it surely will.
Hey - I agree with you! Pushing it a bit was how we learned where the limits were
On so many occasions in active theatres how the hell do you get an authorisation that covers all eventualities? Are the righteous amongst you saying that if tasked to lift six men from a mountain ledge and you arrive and find seven you leave one behind because you are not authorised? Yes - this used to happen in Borneo amongst the light blue and it did not make them hugely popular with the customers.
The ability to think outside the box and push the limits without endangering life is surely a prerequisite for military SH ops?
Two views of rules.
1. A book of rules that tells you what you can do.
2. A book of rules that tells you what you cannot do.
I know which one my lot operated under and it surely worked.
So often when a "Catterick" happens, instead of learning from mistakes even more rules are put in place, and they won't make a jot of difference.
See you here again when it happens again, as it surely will.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in November 1971 a night stream parachute drop was planned for an NATO Exercise in the Mediterranean. The Captain of the Andover Weather Ship radioed back that, in his opinion, the weather was not suitable for a low level night stream assault. The Air Staff for the exercise did not cancel the stream assault and Hercules XV 216 crashed into the sea in poor visibility killing all 50 Personnel on board.
The Weather Ship Captain was not a 1st or 2nd Tour Pilot but a very experienced Pilot who had been one of the 22 at Farnborough in 1958!!
The Weather Ship Captain was not a 1st or 2nd Tour Pilot but a very experienced Pilot who had been one of the 22 at Farnborough in 1958!!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somerset
Age: 81
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Caz
and your point is...........................?
and in 31 years flying I had just one accident which was a Birdstrike at low level on a Saturday morning.
Back in November 1971 a night stream parachute drop was planned for an NATO Exercise in the Mediterranean. The Captain of the Andover Weather Ship radioed back that, in his opinion, the weather was not suitable for a low level night stream assault. The Air Staff for the exercise did not cancel the stream assault and Hercules XV 216 crashed into the sea in poor visibility killing all 50 Personnel on board.
The Weather Ship Captain was not a 1st or 2nd Tour Pilot but a very experienced Pilot who had been one of the 22 at Farnborough in 1958!!
The Weather Ship Captain was not a 1st or 2nd Tour Pilot but a very experienced Pilot who had been one of the 22 at Farnborough in 1958!!
and your point is...........................?