Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Formation Flying question

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Formation Flying question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 9th Oct 2008, 23:03
  #1 (permalink)  

(a bear of little brain)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 51 10 03.70N 2 58 37.15W
Age: 75
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Formation Flying question

Hopefully there is someone here who can settle a pub argument, before it turns into a full-scale brawl. The argument is about the numbering of the aircraft in a 'diamond nine'. The general consensus is the formation is:-

. 1
. 2 3
. 4 5 6
. 7 8
. 9

but I have reason to believe it may be:-

. 1
. 2 3
. 6 5 4
. 7 8
. 9

Can anyone who knows confirm which is right please.

(And the thing looked ok when I sent it. Damn editor keeps shifting it left on the line).

Last edited by MadsDad; 9th Oct 2008 at 23:06. Reason: to try to tidy the thing up
MadsDad is online now  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 23:06
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Outbound
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Last time I was involved in one, you had 3 sections:

1
32

45

6
87
9

Which form a 9 thus:

1
32
465
87
9

But I know at least one unit that does it differently.
5 Forward 6 Back is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 23:24
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North Pole
Posts: 970
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
1
3 2
5 4 6
7 8
9



Seems to ring a bell!!
newt is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 23:27
  #4 (permalink)  

(a bear of little brain)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 51 10 03.70N 2 58 37.15W
Age: 75
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for your responses gents.

From the sounds of this everybody is going to have to buy everybody else a drink.
MadsDad is online now  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 07:33
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Formation Flying Question

As I have a non FJ background and it was a long time ago anyway, can someone in the know explain in a tactical low level cross-over, who goes high and who goes low? I seem to recall that the guy on the left stayed low and that the guy on the right went high.

This makes sense in a side-by-side cockpit as in the Vampire, JP or Hunter T7/T8 with P1 sitting on the left but I may have got this wrong. Might be the reason why I was sent Group 2!

MB
Madbob is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 07:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: south
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1
32
645
98
7
FILYSI is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 08:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: An airfield cunningly close the Thames
Age: 46
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Madbob,

I too eventually went 2 Gp, but I seem to recall it all involved lots of " chicken...tikka...masalla"! Perhaps I ended up in the right place then.
6foottanker is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 08:48
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chippenham, Wilts
Age: 75
Posts: 297
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tac Formation

In my experience the crew initiating the turn avoided the other ac. Bit more "A" level when doing night /IMC parallel track though, with "box" turns and the like.

3P
threeputt is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 09:11
  #9 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,264
Received 180 Likes on 106 Posts
outside man avoids... and if there is no outside man "tac-wingman" avoids

is my understanding.... (although I've had two near misses as "tac-lead" so perhaps my word is best not taken!)
PPRuNeUser0211 is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 09:19
  #10 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In my day (yes, i know...), from below, Arrows had

. 1
. 2 3
.4 6 5
. 8 9
. 7

Cross-overs used to be 'outside over'
BOAC is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 17:26
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 607
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Seem to recall 3456 states 'evens on the right and odds on the left' ie

1
3 2
5 6 4
7 8
9

Believe the 'experts' swap 7 & 9 and use:

1
3 2
5 6 4
9 8
7

All shown from above!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 19:24
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 209
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
It starts off as a basic 4 ship building block.

1
3 2
4

4 is the slot guy who sits behind #1. Note that #2 is on #1's right. General rules is #2 sits on lead's right.

Add the wingers 5 & 6 join in (general rule evens on right) so....

1
3 2
5 4 6

Then the rules progresses, evens on right with 9 as another slot filler!

1
3 2
5 4 6
7 8
9

Regarding tactical turns, general rule is lead #1 is the lowest guy in the formation, but the person turning first has the option to go high or low depending on terrain. Over flat terrain, I would expect lead to stay low and wing to go high (only slightly).

Once this initial high or low "trend" has been set (by the person turning first), then the other person does the opposite for deconfliction.

However, the contract always applies, 4 avoids 3 avoids 2 avoids 1!!
TruBlu351 is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 19:32
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the Nimrod we used to go:

1 2
3
(4.5)
6 7
8 9
10
11
12
13

- if that's any help?

(4,5 - when we changed formation the beams would move back to acoustics...and 13 would be in the galley filling the teapot).
davejb is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 19:44
  #14 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
It's much easier with today's Defence Budget...


1
Two's in is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2008, 21:52
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Here and there, occasionally at home.
Age: 56
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Made I larf

DJB

Please stop making me choke on my coffee!

You could have added that on some flights (when the P1/N1 felt brave enough);

21
3
(4.5)
76
8
9
10
11
12
13

Last edited by ShortFatOne; 10th Oct 2008 at 21:54. Reason: Obviously the AEO has had enough sun in this example and is now wandering around the aircraft lost.
ShortFatOne is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2008, 08:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: North of England
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dynamic Formation

Or, again on the Mighty Hunger, on long transits, once Biggles had it all nicely trimmed out:

1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

Followed by the dynamic cross-over to:

1
.
.2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Ah, we knew how to have fun in them days !
Dimmer Switch is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2008, 09:54
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...not forgetting the '12 people hiding from the copilot in the toilet on intercom' gag....
davejb is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2008, 02:24
  #18 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MadsDad
Hopefully there is someone here who can settle a pub argument, before it turns into a full-scale brawl. The argument is about the numbering of the aircraft in a 'diamond nine'.
Now look what you've done! They'll be posting their lunch menus soon....
BOAC is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2008, 06:08
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,787
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
Or the C130 at El Centro.


2
4












1 3 5
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2008, 06:15
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,821
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
Presumably that Mighty Muncher reference to all the back end sharing the lavatory together was actually:

1
.......
2 3 4......etc

Quite common on a certain squadron.......
BEagle is online now  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.