US Navy TexanT6 crash fatal 10-23
Unfortunately, it's not a rare event. It is often related to cognitive dissonance, where as humans we attempt to resolve mental and physical conflicting scenarios by utilizing denial, rationalization and other unproductive defense mechanisms to try and reach a state of psychological comfort. When pilots haven't accepted the loss of the aircraft is likely, they will often fixate on other actions that don't change the outcome. In a military trainer, not using the ejection system in time is an obvious example of cognitive dissonance.
We obviously don't- know what happened here, but that's what cognitive dissonance is.
We obviously don't- know what happened here, but that's what cognitive dissonance is.
The entire south end of Baldwin County is covered with airports. Since my day, many of the Navy OLF's are no longer in use, but the runways are still there. Plus the area is literally covered in huge sod fields, even more so than when I learned to fly here back in the days of the T-34B. My options if the engine decided to shoot craps (I thought about it ALL the time) were to jump out or make a forced landing. With nothing wrong other than an engine stoppage, making an emergency landing either on an airport or in a field was considered a good option and we practiced exactly that down to pretty low altitude. It's actually pretty difficult to find a place in this area where you are not in gliding range of either an airport or a suitable field unless things go wrong at very low altitude.
Of course, the T-34 and T-6 are not the same and I have NOT flown the T-6. Plus I am ignorant of the SOP when it comes to a high altitude engine stoppage. I also don't know about the capability of the ejection seat. However, the T-6 is a relatively simple airplane and I suspect an engine-out emergency landing is well within the capabilities of the aircraft. Perhaps a Naval Aviator with experience in the T-6 can chime in here because I have some questions.
Is it reasonable to think that the instructor would elect to make an emergency, engine out landing? Single engine front-line fighters or attack airplanes mandate an ejection when the engine quits. Forced landings in those rare cases when the ejection fails to function have sad endings in nearly every case. Is the T-6 the same?
Does the seat have sufficient performance so that if he misjudged his glide and it became apparent that a safe landing could not be made, they could safely eject at a few hundred feet? I would assume so, but I don't know.
I suspect there is more to this story because a simple engine failure leading to the death of two guys just doesn't make sense to me.
some T-6 numbers:
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Single engine front-line fighters or attack airplanes mandate an ejection when the engine quits.
I suspect there is more to this story because a simple engine failure leading to the death of two guys just doesn't make sense to me.
The PC-9 design has a good safety record overall across a lot of operators. birdstrike features high in losses where fatalities occur. Engine failures are usually resulting in ejection or successful landings. MAC's ended up with one crew ejecting the other not, which is about par for the course for sharing cockpits airborne. CFIT, very few cases, but one notable one far away in a land needing civil works programs on their buildings was pretty untidy. For an aircraft that goes from basic to advanced training, the PC is a very effective and reliable and safe platform. OBOGS issues... not alone in that score, refer 22's... etc.
The Navy safety mags were always great reading and hammered home target fixation, cognitive overload, dissonance by another name. As the oceans were littered with F8's, SLUFs, F4's, Whales, A6's F14's F18s, scooters, etc that still had drivers installed at splashdown, it is no wonder that Fitts, Jones, and others added to the global knowledge of why ejections don't occur. The PC-9/T6 record suggests that the training around the world has been excellent, it is more likely that incapacitation causes such an outcome, our sharing space with birds that as yet don't have ADSB fitted is a perennial problem.
Statistically for this type dissonance is not likely to be a culprit.
R.I.P. guys.
The Navy safety mags were always great reading and hammered home target fixation, cognitive overload, dissonance by another name. As the oceans were littered with F8's, SLUFs, F4's, Whales, A6's F14's F18s, scooters, etc that still had drivers installed at splashdown, it is no wonder that Fitts, Jones, and others added to the global knowledge of why ejections don't occur. The PC-9/T6 record suggests that the training around the world has been excellent, it is more likely that incapacitation causes such an outcome, our sharing space with birds that as yet don't have ADSB fitted is a perennial problem.
Statistically for this type dissonance is not likely to be a culprit.
R.I.P. guys.
I'm with beardy.
There are times to hold back before speculating, and wait for official investigations to be concluded before offering personal - and possibly unsubstantiated - opinions which might be right, but might also be wrong, and which could be even more distressing to those more closely linked to the individuals who are now no longer with us.
Some might even read this forum.
There are times to hold back before speculating, and wait for official investigations to be concluded before offering personal - and possibly unsubstantiated - opinions which might be right, but might also be wrong, and which could be even more distressing to those more closely linked to the individuals who are now no longer with us.
Some might even read this forum.
A breakup.
Does the T6 have `Command Ejection` from both seats....?
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Florida
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
some T-6 numbers:
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
I don't understand why they rode it to the ground and then hit a house? The guy in the USMC C-130 rode it to the ground and found a field.
Surely a mysterious accident. RIP to the deceased.
some T-6 numbers:
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
Even in the older seat like the Mk 4 which I used in anger, could be used in descent to a level which was at least equal to 10% of your ROD.
So, in a 10,000. fpm descent one could probably survive if ejecting at 1000 feet or higher.
Strange and very sad accident..
Sorry for the confusion. It is a 0/0 capable seat. Those numbers just describe the entire envelope in terms of airspeed and altitude individually. Create your own speed/altitude combination within those two ranges.
edit: And that out of control 6000' min altitude is a recommended altitude just like any aircraft has a recommended loss of control ejection altitude. The ones I flew it was usually 10,000' AGL.
edit: And that out of control 6000' min altitude is a recommended altitude just like any aircraft has a recommended loss of control ejection altitude. The ones I flew it was usually 10,000' AGL.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 82
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Debris
The aerial view of the crash site shows what appears to be roof damage in all directions (blue tarps) indicating a high energy near vertical impact.
The purpose of discussion of accidents serves to narrow the initial realm of posible causes and serves to focus the discussion.
When I was going through the training command we were killingh on average 1 person per week and we avidly read the CNATRA weekly accident report to better understand the numerous ways you can have a bad day.
I think FDR is probably pretty close to the truth with his thoughts on bird strikes. If proven, perhaps some reinforcement of the canopy or other structure would be warranted.
The purpose of discussion of accidents serves to narrow the initial realm of posible causes and serves to focus the discussion.
When I was going through the training command we were killingh on average 1 person per week and we avidly read the CNATRA weekly accident report to better understand the numerous ways you can have a bad day.
I think FDR is probably pretty close to the truth with his thoughts on bird strikes. If proven, perhaps some reinforcement of the canopy or other structure would be warranted.
some T-6 numbers:
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
ejection seat: altitude 0 to 35,000 ft. airspeed 0 to 370 knots.
uncontrolled: min ejection altitude 6000' AGL. Safe ejection possible in 10,000 fpm descent. controlled ejection: recommended 2000-3000' AGL.
forced landing: high key 3000-2500' AGL, trained to proficiency
(family member was a T-6 instructor....and T-34)
Not the F-16. There have been numerous successful engine out landings, one notable at the old NAS Glenview, down thru the wx.
Agree.
Thanks. So one impact only.
The minimum abandonment height that we use in the PC-21 is 4000 ft and, from memory, we used 3000 ft in the Tucano.
LOMCEVAK, thanks for the clarification.
Generally, the manual for the ejection seat equipped aircraft I'm familiar with used the phrase, "If not recovered by 'x' altitude AGL, eject."
In practicality, this was the typical safety hedge, leaning towards the unlikeliness of an actual recovery from spin/departure conditions before reaching the minimum altitude required in the actual pullout + some buffer recovery completion altitude above terrain level. The aircraft I flew with 10,000 AGL as recommended ejection altitude could all be pulled out in quite a bit less than 10,000' with flying speed regained and no rushed secondary departures. The hedge was against the odds of regaining controlled flying speed below 10,000 AGL if you already couldn't do it above 10,000'. Really wasn't ROD dependent.
If you departed an F-4, for example, at 3000' AGL, I fully understand the ejection system could get you out safely with timely action. It's been done of course. You could depart an A-7 at 5000' AGL for example, and because of the 100% reliability of a recovery not even need to honor the 10,000' out of control ejection recommendation that also applied to the A-7.
More explicit guidance like that for F-100F spins...."After one turn, recovery is not possible"....was much more definitive, regardless of altitude.
It's just a shame these guys couldn't get out at 6000'....or any altitude.
Generally, the manual for the ejection seat equipped aircraft I'm familiar with used the phrase, "If not recovered by 'x' altitude AGL, eject."
In practicality, this was the typical safety hedge, leaning towards the unlikeliness of an actual recovery from spin/departure conditions before reaching the minimum altitude required in the actual pullout + some buffer recovery completion altitude above terrain level. The aircraft I flew with 10,000 AGL as recommended ejection altitude could all be pulled out in quite a bit less than 10,000' with flying speed regained and no rushed secondary departures. The hedge was against the odds of regaining controlled flying speed below 10,000 AGL if you already couldn't do it above 10,000'. Really wasn't ROD dependent.
If you departed an F-4, for example, at 3000' AGL, I fully understand the ejection system could get you out safely with timely action. It's been done of course. You could depart an A-7 at 5000' AGL for example, and because of the 100% reliability of a recovery not even need to honor the 10,000' out of control ejection recommendation that also applied to the A-7.
More explicit guidance like that for F-100F spins...."After one turn, recovery is not possible"....was much more definitive, regardless of altitude.
It's just a shame these guys couldn't get out at 6000'....or any altitude.