Thank you, BEags.

This discussion about formation flying large aircraft begs a question.

Since the A400 is a tactical military aircraft, how come it does not have:
1. Eyebrow windows to provide visiblity when banking while flying in formation?
2. Knee windows to provide visibility on the ground when maneuvering on small austere airfields?
3. Electro luminescent formation lights?

Were these overlooked or does the A400 use a different solution to accomplish what these devices accomplish on other aircraft?

Yes, a well executed exercise, as shown on the film. It would be worth remembering that big-jet formation was a regular occurrence for AAR in the RAF and, could be flown in day/night/IMC, mixed (big-jet!) formation and without briefing, or any of the items listed in KenVs post.:ok:

OAP

It is theoretically possible to roll one if you were really determined, roadster. As beagle rightly says normal flight envelope will prevent this...unless you are silly enough to switch off some flight computers. Not permitted of course, or a career enhancing strategy.

One ex-military braveheart did perform such a manoeuvre in a turboprop belonging to my previous employer...and had to find alternative employment as a result. Which prompts me to question the thread title "ex-military"? These were all civil aircraft flown by civil pilots, whatever they USED to do for a living. When does one stop being ex-military? If I save the day with some superb flying next week is that how I'll be described? What if I close the airport by dragging a wheel bogie into the grass?

KenV, 1.Keep the same picture Bloggs..!
2 Send out the Loadmaster with a red/white flag....
3 Dunno,maybe just a big torch...

Pious Nav, I must have misunderstood something. Why does the bank angle affect your ability to see the aircraft you're formating on? Unless you're doing flat turns. As long as you maintain the correct formation position it doesn't matter much what angle the Earth's at, apart from the slight change in g. What were you driving at?

CM, I was referring to the need for the pilot to lean forward and peer up to keep the proceeding aircraft in sight, quite different from a clear canopy. The video shows this.

I described it as ex military to sneak it in here past the mods - and so that you bunch of sky gods could have a look at these guys doing formation stuff.
I'm teasing by the way :)

No, the video shows a pilot to lean forward and peer up, it does not show the reason why. As CM stated, it is a question of correct formation position, and only the aircraft which one flys its position of is of relevance.

Formation flying has to be trained, and military pilots not only have trained it, they have long expierience in doing it, even in night and IMC and some with bad guys shooting at them. So the poster may have choosen this title to express the fact, that it was good thinking of Airbus to use those test pilots with military formation flying expierience to fly this type of mission. Or do you expect any line pilot could do it?

The poster has just explained why he chose the thread title, F4. And I'm glad he did post it, quite the most impressive choreography I've seen for a while. Clearly it didn't impress everyone though. One post makes clear they used to do similar stuff "as a regular occurrence" and without any boring briefings. Just out of interest, OAP, how many times did the tristar fleet achieve five aircraft airborne at once?

Morning Shotty!:ok: Good to see your wooden spoon at work today. Pray tell your formation flying qualifications? Oh no, forgot, you are a civvi, aren't you?;)

OAP

To be an Experimental Test Pilot you need to be a fully qualified Fighter Pilot, with some University or Engineering degrees - then you can apply to the competitive exam to enter the Test Pilot School, from which you will graduate or not.
Then you will start a Test Pilot career, usually on fighter programs, and then maybe if you are interested in, you wil be hired by Airbus (or Dassault, or BAe)
Then you will be able to be part of a briefing/flying display like the one we are discussing here.

For that you need to be from a country with an aircraft industry (so OK for french, brits, italians, germans, swedish or swiss a little bit, brasilians, americans canadians, russians of course... but no hope for NZ or Aussies or Greeks, Austrians, Danish...)
and no hope of course for self-sponsored airline pilots with no University background .... they just can call themselves "test pilots " if they are TRI in a big airline and do acceptance flights, which is by now way relevant.

Well, as someone who's never been a pilot, (and is possibly part of the target audience) I enjoyed the skill of the aviators regardless of their background. :ok:

Morning to you too. Yes I'm a civvy, OAP although in the unlikely event I "do a Sullenberger" I'll probably be described as ex-military, as he usually is despite 30+ years in the airlines.

Hi, come on guys, it's Crimble. Good will to all men and all that................

Hey - it's my mate Frank from uni. Nice one!

Reinhardt

No you don't need to be a fighter pilot to be an ETP. Plenty of rotary and multi guys.

There is at least one civvy self sponsored ETP. I met her at a GAPAN do a couple of years ago. Very impressive she was too.

Airliner type formation is more tricky than with a glass dome above you yes, particularly from the left seat in echelon left. It is fine until you get just a tiny out of position vertically (who would ever do that!), but then you lose the other guy.

The reason they were probably bending forward and looking up and right is that on the break it is a different matter, where you really do lose all visuals as soon as you roll in. It should not be a problem on the break as long as everyone breaks the same, however human nature and airmanship means you try to keep the preceeding guy visual.

AAR formation flying is VERY different than tactical airdrop formation flying. In large tactical airdrops, there are a large number of aircraft (from a dozen to mulitple dozens of aircraft) that must maintain a tight formation while simultaneously maneuvering at low altitude, both day and night. This is difficult and dangerous to do in the best of circumstances, but especially so at night using NVG. I don't see how it can be done at night with NVGs without electroluminescent formation lights, that's why I'm asking if Airbus has come up with a different solution for the A400M

The same with eyebrow windows. If you are in a formation with another airlifter on either side of yours, when the formation makes a 30 degree bank to the left the aircraft on the left will be obscured by the cockpit ceiling. In these A350 formation flights individual aircraft "peeled off" one at a time while the rest of the formation continued straight ahead. This resulted in the distance between the turning aircraft ALWAYS increasing during the entire turn. In a tactical formation drop every aircraft MUST maintain relative position to every other aircraft in the formation (in the US this is called "Station Keeping"), even during climbs, descents, and turns. That means the aircraft on the inside of the turn must slow down while the aircraft on the outside of the turn must speed up in order to maintain relative position. This means each pilot must be able to see the aircaft next to him on the inside of the turn. I don't see how this can be done without eyebrow windows. Or has Airbus come up with another solution? For example, US C-130, C-141, and C-17 aircraft have SKE (Station Keeping Equipment) which does this electronically when formation flying in IMC. But using SKE (generally) requires a looser formation than flying by eye. The eyebrow windows in (most) tactical airlifters are there for a very good reason. It was not arbitrary.

And the knee windows are critical when operating on small austere airfields by allowing the pilots to see downward from the cockpit so they can safely maneuver close to the edges of runways, taxiways, and ramp areas. Has Airbus come up with a different solution? For example, the downward and rearward visibility in an F-35 is restricted relative to other modern fighters. However, Lockheed solved that problem by mounting multiple cameras on the aircraft and sending video to the helmet mounted display. The pilot can thus look "through" the sides, back and even floor of his cockpit. Has Airbus done something along those lines on the A400?

Reinhardt

Did you just make this up? To further Tourist's point, being a military pilot is not an absolute prerequisite to be a test pilot. There's plenty out there who aren't.

- not in the formations I have flown in. You must have a unique (and expensive) way of formating:D

- by no means 'guaranteed'!