Wittering Tutor in a field
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prior to the tragedy, the procedure was:
Park and shutdown
Release seat harness
While remaining seated, undo the parachute harness.
Vacate ac leaving parachute on seat.
After the tragedy:
Release seat harness and vacate ac.
When clear of the ac (not on the wing) remove parachute.
Climb back on wing and place parachute on seat
Park and shutdown
Release seat harness
While remaining seated, undo the parachute harness.
Vacate ac leaving parachute on seat.
After the tragedy:
Release seat harness and vacate ac.
When clear of the ac (not on the wing) remove parachute.
Climb back on wing and place parachute on seat
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
rolling20, I had known the chap who was killed when he released both seat harness and parachute - but only as a fellow ULAS student many years earlier.
I can't remember the exact procedure we used when I became a Bulldog QFI in 1991, but the fatal accident was still quite fresh in peoples' minds and some procedure had been adopted to reduce the risk of inadvertent chute QRF release during a real abandonment.
I can't remember the exact procedure we used when I became a Bulldog QFI in 1991, but the fatal accident was still quite fresh in peoples' minds and some procedure had been adopted to reduce the risk of inadvertent chute QRF release during a real abandonment.
I was a Bulldog QFI on a UAS from 1989 till 1992. At the UAS I worked at, parachutes were not routinely left in the seat for the next person; they were normally kept in the line office. The procedure was to collect a parachute from the line office and return it afterwards, or when a running change was necessary, the oncoming student was assisted to don it before climbing in. However, due to wear on the parachute outer covering we were told we should use the practice of unstrapping from the parachute before exiting the aircraft and carefully lift it out afterwards, when standing on the wing. I declined to do this for the reason I already stated. The later accident occurred after this; it seemed obvious to me that the pilot who died probably reverted to the normal procedure used iaw with that instruction, rather than the emergency procedure, which was only carried out once a month. Had he been used to leaving the chute on his back every time he left the aircraft he might not have inadvertently unlocked his QRB before unstrapping his seat harness and abandoning the aircraft in flight.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that some haven't understood my post so I'll try again!
I was a Bulldog QFI on a UAS from 1989 till 1992. At the UAS I worked at, parachutes were not routinely left in the seat for the next person; they were normally kept in the line office. The procedure was to collect a parachute from the line office and return it afterwards, or when a running change was necessary, the oncoming student was assisted to don it before climbing in. However, due to wear on the parachute outer covering we were told we should use the practice of unstrapping from the parachute before exiting the aircraft and carefully lift it out afterwards, when standing on the wing. I declined to do this for the reason I already stated. The later accident occurred after this; it seemed obvious to me that the pilot who died probably reverted to the normal procedure used iaw with that instruction, rather than the emergency procedure, which was only carried out once a month. Had he been used to leaving the chute on his back every time he left the aircraft he might not have inadvertently unlocked his QRB before unstrapping his seat harness and abandoning the aircraft in flight.
I was a Bulldog QFI on a UAS from 1989 till 1992. At the UAS I worked at, parachutes were not routinely left in the seat for the next person; they were normally kept in the line office. The procedure was to collect a parachute from the line office and return it afterwards, or when a running change was necessary, the oncoming student was assisted to don it before climbing in. However, due to wear on the parachute outer covering we were told we should use the practice of unstrapping from the parachute before exiting the aircraft and carefully lift it out afterwards, when standing on the wing. I declined to do this for the reason I already stated. The later accident occurred after this; it seemed obvious to me that the pilot who died probably reverted to the normal procedure used iaw with that instruction, rather than the emergency procedure, which was only carried out once a month. Had he been used to leaving the chute on his back every time he left the aircraft he might not have inadvertently unlocked his QRB before unstrapping his seat harness and abandoning the aircraft in flight.
I left the Bulldog - first time round - in 88 and the procedure to vacate wearing the chute had been implemented before then.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dutystude,
During my UAS time (mid-90s) the drill was such that you released the seat harness, then shutdown, then released the parachute. Same reasoning but you didn’t vacate with a parachute on.
I very clearly remember the OC asking me if I knew the reason we did it like that.
During my UAS time (mid-90s) the drill was such that you released the seat harness, then shutdown, then released the parachute. Same reasoning but you didn’t vacate with a parachute on.
I very clearly remember the OC asking me if I knew the reason we did it like that.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
I don't know what happened prior to 1989 but it sounds like the same as our local procedures when I arrived (presumably it was done like that following the 1982 accident). The later edict to leave the chute in the seat came out during my tour. I don't know if it was later rescinded after the second accident because I no longer flew the Bulldog after 1992.
I think we may be a little out with some of the dates on this one. The pilot in the “harness accident” was Flt Lt Ian Redwood. Ian came through the CFS Bulldog course as a student QFI in the summer of 84 at Scampton. I flew with him on the course. The accident happened the following year in Mar 85. Generally speaking the chute stayed / lived in the aircraft seat. You walked out to the aircraft and the chute was already in the seat waiting for you. Prior to the accident, the parachute procedure after normal shutdown was to unstrap in the cockpit and leave the chute in the aircraft seat prior to vacating the aircraft. The chute harness was the higher of the two boxes and was realeased first, followed by the lower seat harness.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,560
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
I must confess that my memory of flying the Bulldog in 1975/76 involved leaving the parachute in situ....but it was a while ago (although I still remember the downwind checks).
Prior to the accident, the parachute procedure after normal shutdown was to unstrap in the cockpit and leave the chute in the aircraft seat prior to vacating the aircraft. The chute harness was the higher of the two boxes and was realeased first, followed by the lower seat harness.
I think we may be a little out with some of the dates on this one. The pilot in the “harness accident” was Flt Lt Ian Redwood. Ian came through the CFS Bulldog course as a student QFI in the summer of 84 at Scampton. I flew with him on the course. The accident happened the following year in Mar 85. Generally speaking the chute stayed / lived in the aircraft seat. You walked out to the aircraft and the chute was already in the seat waiting for you. Prior to the accident, the parachute procedure after normal shutdown was to unstrap in the cockpit and leave the chute in the aircraft seat prior to vacating the aircraft. The chute harness was the higher of the two boxes and was realeased first, followed by the lower seat harness.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we may be a little out with some of the dates on this one. The pilot in the “harness accident” was Flt Lt Ian Redwood. Ian came through the CFS Bulldog course as a student QFI in the summer of 84 at Scampton. I flew with him on the course. The accident happened the following year in Mar 85. Generally speaking the chute stayed / lived in the aircraft seat. You walked out to the aircraft and the chute was already in the seat waiting for you. Prior to the accident, the parachute procedure after normal shutdown was to unstrap in the cockpit and leave the chute in the aircraft seat prior to vacating the aircraft. The chute harness was the higher of the two boxes and was realeased first, followed by the lower seat harness.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Evidence from the accident suggested Ian may have inadvertently released the chute harness before jumping from the spinning aircraft (albeit he may have hastily attempted to resecure the chute harness). Reflecting on this the white coated behavioural boffins decided we Pilots needed to “make it normal” to leave the aircraft with our chute still attached to us and so the norm / SOP was changed so that after shut down the crew would simply release the seat harness, vacate the aircraft with parachute still attached, and after jumping / stepping off the wing (ie feet now on the ground) to then release the chute harness and take the chute off. Having completed this “normal behavioural pattern” the crew would then step back onto the wing and return the chute to the cockpit seat. So my point is that the change came then in the summer of 85, after Ian’s accident. I left the waterfront and the Bulldog world in the following summer of 86 but I would have expected the revised SOP for the chutes might have been in force throughout its remaining service life; though the thread (albeit thread drift) on here might suggest otherwise ?
Happy days.
Indeed, following the change, I logged a practice abandonment drill every time I flew since standard egress mirrored the actions I would take if I needed to abandon.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Still on the beach (but this one's cold).
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the thread
Is there any one with any news/info concerning the Tutor in a field near Wittering. Tired of the disappointment of opening this thread up to read the new posts only to discover they are all about some unrelated Bulldog bolleaux.
Last edited by 212man; 11th Oct 2018 at 10:18.
I confess I keep seeing the thread title and expecting a discussion about an instructor standing in a paddock, wittering on about something nobody else is interested in hearing about.
If this thread hadn't drifted, then I for one wouldn't have known the answer to a few queries that have been unanswered for a number of years.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,809
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
I found the input from Mach the Knife quite inappropriate.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well, Lincolnshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Accounts have run a computer module and have come up with an answer.
The Accountants plans are:
A: Build a runway and fly the thing out.
B: Leave the runway in situ, then other aircraft in difficulties could use it.
C: Constuct the rumway in airportable sections so it can be re-used.
Fred the Farmer (who owns the field) offered to cut the vegetation down, harrow it and fly the thing out.
I wonder who's plan will win the day.
The Accountants plans are:
A: Build a runway and fly the thing out.
B: Leave the runway in situ, then other aircraft in difficulties could use it.
C: Constuct the rumway in airportable sections so it can be re-used.
Fred the Farmer (who owns the field) offered to cut the vegetation down, harrow it and fly the thing out.
I wonder who's plan will win the day.
Whichever plan is used, I suspect they will do more damage getting it out of the field than somebody did getting in there in the first place!
I don't think it will be Plan A. 2 years is a long time to wait to get your aeroplane back.
I don't think it will be Plan A. 2 years is a long time to wait to get your aeroplane back.