Low-level aerobatics
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
TREADIGRAPH.
I agree with your comments re J.... C.... in the T.34. Been around a long time. First seen by me at Harlingen, Texas in 1983, doing the same act. Has come to grief a couple of times,so I believe, but no serious consequences to the pilot. Must be close to retiring!.
I agree with your comments re J.... C.... in the T.34. Been around a long time. First seen by me at Harlingen, Texas in 1983, doing the same act. Has come to grief a couple of times,so I believe, but no serious consequences to the pilot. Must be close to retiring!.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's little point doing anything below 100'. No-one at the back of the crowd will see it.
If a display pilot did his whole routine below 100' it would be a valid point.
=========
Too low or not?
An aggressive display for this type of aircraft but not IMO too low or flown in an unsafe manner. The critical factor is the direction of the energy vector of the the aircraft. The rolling manoevers all started with a upward line which keeps the energy of the aircraft pointed away from the ground for most of the manoever. The loop was also ovaled so that as the aircraft approached the ground it did not have a particularly nose low attitude thus ensuring there was not an excessive rate of descent.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: England
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't even enjoy watching low level performances live. I'm happy watching them on youtube (when I know there hasn't been an accident) but whenever I'm at a live airshow I cringe every time a trick begins/ends near terra firma.
At some point in my life I hope to experience aerobatic training and flying, so perhaps then I may be bitten by the low-level bug.
At some point in my life I hope to experience aerobatic training and flying, so perhaps then I may be bitten by the low-level bug.
One could not judge the height of recovery based on the video supplied.
Furthermore, none of the rolls that guy did were even close to the Barrel rolls discussed earlier in this thread. All he did was point the nose up and flop the stick over. This is an aileron roll, during which the vertical component of lift degrades to zero or negative. This is evidenced by the profound pitch and altitude changes during the rolls in this (admittedly really neat) display.
Furthermore, none of the rolls that guy did were even close to the Barrel rolls discussed earlier in this thread. All he did was point the nose up and flop the stick over. This is an aileron roll, during which the vertical component of lift degrades to zero or negative. This is evidenced by the profound pitch and altitude changes during the rolls in this (admittedly really neat) display.
Relative to the expert's take on the whole low level issue, I got a look inside Patty Wagstaff's plane back in the early Nineties. There was a fairly spartan instrument panel, and a large placard reading:
Instructions for Flight:
1) Fly at Ground
2) Miss Ground
Instructions for Flight:
1) Fly at Ground
2) Miss Ground
Moderator
There are a very few people, who through some special gift, have what it takes to perform low level aerobatics with adequate safety - they know who they are. The rest of us should not consider it!
My first, and last visit, to the EAA Oshkosh event, included a Siai Marchetti demonstration pilot, who was anounced as: "will now demonstrate a one turn spin from 200 feet". With great interest in how such a feat could be accomplished, I watched in awe... I was right to be amazed at the prospect of a one turn spin (and the recovery I presumed would follow) could be accomplished in 200 feet altitude - it could not. I hind sight, the announcer had not said he would recover, I just assumed that part!
The attempt was fatal, and I had just watched my first plane crash. It delayed the show for hours, and we taxied past the flattened wreck as we left. I learned my lesson there and then.
Saying from a mother: "Son, always fly in the middle of the sky, all of the danger is found near the edges".
My first, and last visit, to the EAA Oshkosh event, included a Siai Marchetti demonstration pilot, who was anounced as: "will now demonstrate a one turn spin from 200 feet". With great interest in how such a feat could be accomplished, I watched in awe... I was right to be amazed at the prospect of a one turn spin (and the recovery I presumed would follow) could be accomplished in 200 feet altitude - it could not. I hind sight, the announcer had not said he would recover, I just assumed that part!
The attempt was fatal, and I had just watched my first plane crash. It delayed the show for hours, and we taxied past the flattened wreck as we left. I learned my lesson there and then.
Saying from a mother: "Son, always fly in the middle of the sky, all of the danger is found near the edges".
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: in the mist
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I don't think the ground is sympathetic to experience, knowledge, ego, qualification, approval, respect or ability. My personal SOP therefore is not to mess about or get too close to it, play chicken with it, get too excited about getting close to it or go stupidly fast close to it. IT wins. Always.
I like playing with aeroplanes, most folk aren't that interested in seeing me play about with an aeroplane (not into voyeuristic stuff before you ask!).... So why should I do it close to the ground where all I am going to do is scare
myself, family and friends.
I think before applying for a display authorisation, some folk should really step back and ask themselves, why they are doing it. And then ask themselves if they have the ability to do it..... Finally, ask themselves "am I ready to die?" as they step into the cockpit.
Judging by the lack of wing flex with g-loading, prop motion and obvious lack of inertia, I would say that video is a fake made by mr plastic fake airshow video man. Probably the same guy that did the "wing falls off" stuff on that aerobatic model plane stunt. Very good video work, but sadly lacking in the laws of physics.
I like playing with aeroplanes, most folk aren't that interested in seeing me play about with an aeroplane (not into voyeuristic stuff before you ask!).... So why should I do it close to the ground where all I am going to do is scare
myself, family and friends.
I think before applying for a display authorisation, some folk should really step back and ask themselves, why they are doing it. And then ask themselves if they have the ability to do it..... Finally, ask themselves "am I ready to die?" as they step into the cockpit.
Judging by the lack of wing flex with g-loading, prop motion and obvious lack of inertia, I would say that video is a fake made by mr plastic fake airshow video man. Probably the same guy that did the "wing falls off" stuff on that aerobatic model plane stunt. Very good video work, but sadly lacking in the laws of physics.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
GORRILLA.
You are SOOOOOooooooo wrong. The C.27 was evolved
from,, and has the same basic airframe as the Aeritalia G.222 which, whenever it attended Fairford Airshow in the U.K. was rolled on every single appearance. It figures on several occasions on my own video's!!!!
Eventually, after several years, Safety Committee got a bit worried, and it was no longer allowed.[sob] Seen by many, many people!!!.
You are SOOOOOooooooo wrong. The C.27 was evolved
from,, and has the same basic airframe as the Aeritalia G.222 which, whenever it attended Fairford Airshow in the U.K. was rolled on every single appearance. It figures on several occasions on my own video's!!!!
Eventually, after several years, Safety Committee got a bit worried, and it was no longer allowed.[sob] Seen by many, many people!!!.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 300 Likes
on
168 Posts
Pilot DAR, your memory is slightly out regarding the SF-260 crash at Oshkosh. I was intrigued by the idea of anybody deliberately spinning an SF-260 from 200ft (I once saw Charlie Kulp spin a J3 Cub from perhaps 500ft but that's slightly different!) and looked it up.
Briefly, I-RAID at Oshkosh '83. Aircraft pulled into a half loop from about 100ft, half rolled off the top and entered a two turn spin which was stopped at about 300ft but clearly too low to pull out. Pilot actually survived the impact but succumbed to grievous injuries a few days later. His FAA briefed min altitude for the display was 300ft.
Same sad result though.
Briefly, I-RAID at Oshkosh '83. Aircraft pulled into a half loop from about 100ft, half rolled off the top and entered a two turn spin which was stopped at about 300ft but clearly too low to pull out. Pilot actually survived the impact but succumbed to grievous injuries a few days later. His FAA briefed min altitude for the display was 300ft.
Same sad result though.
Moderator
Treadigraph,
I shan't challenge the information you have, as mine is based only upon recollection of all those years ago. The event was very memorable for me though, as a glaring example of how low level aerobatics, even flown by a pro(?) are potentially fatal. We heard it was fatal a few days later, as it was not announced at the time. I do have a photo of the wreck, as we taxied past it to take off that afternoon. Impacting the earth level, but on a somewhat vertical path, with the wheels retracted, and sitting on the wing spar, is doubtful as survivable.
I shan't challenge the information you have, as mine is based only upon recollection of all those years ago. The event was very memorable for me though, as a glaring example of how low level aerobatics, even flown by a pro(?) are potentially fatal. We heard it was fatal a few days later, as it was not announced at the time. I do have a photo of the wreck, as we taxied past it to take off that afternoon. Impacting the earth level, but on a somewhat vertical path, with the wheels retracted, and sitting on the wing spar, is doubtful as survivable.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm always happy to come second in a "who can fly the lowest" competition. 
As for the C-27, Tex Johnson barrel rolled the 707 prototype without anything falling off. Just keep positive g and don't pull beyond the limits.
As for the C-27, Tex Johnson barrel rolled the 707 prototype without anything falling off. Just keep positive g and don't pull beyond the limits.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 300 Likes
on
168 Posts
Blimey, one would have imagined that to be survivable. The impact was assesed at about 10deg nose down. The report mentioned the pilot spinal and brain injuries amongst other things; I wonder if he was wearing a bone dome?
The first accident I witnessed was a T-34C at Mildenhall a few months before the SF-260. I had a very clear memory of the sequence of events for twenty five years - then just two years ago I read a synopsis of the accident report which differed markedly from my recollection.
Both accidents not only highlight the inherent potential dangers of low level aeros but, I'd suggest, also the folly of deviating from the planned/briefed display. If the SF-260 pilot had stuck to a base of 300ft he might be around today. The T-34 had completed his display but agreed to fill in a gap in the programme - the accident happened very shortly after take off...
The first accident I witnessed was a T-34C at Mildenhall a few months before the SF-260. I had a very clear memory of the sequence of events for twenty five years - then just two years ago I read a synopsis of the accident report which differed markedly from my recollection.
Both accidents not only highlight the inherent potential dangers of low level aeros but, I'd suggest, also the folly of deviating from the planned/briefed display. If the SF-260 pilot had stuck to a base of 300ft he might be around today. The T-34 had completed his display but agreed to fill in a gap in the programme - the accident happened very shortly after take off...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
TREADIGRAPH.
In the case of the SF260, the cause of the injuries, propabaly more than anything else, would be head injuries caused by a very sudden deceleration, which wearing a bone dome would not alleiviate.
I too saw the T.34C accident at Mildenhall. Sadly the first of 11 over the years. I have always felt very guilty about it, because, during his original display, which I didn't feel was flown particularly well [only a PPL myself, but have seen much display flying], I remarked to my friend that I wasn't too impressed. On his next take-off, to fill in,he inverted at about 600 feet. I remarked to my friend 'I bet the guy in the back is having kittens in there'. Ten seconds later, as you know, he killed himself and his pax. Chryptic remark by me. Should have kept my mouth shut.
In the case of the SF260, the cause of the injuries, propabaly more than anything else, would be head injuries caused by a very sudden deceleration, which wearing a bone dome would not alleiviate.
I too saw the T.34C accident at Mildenhall. Sadly the first of 11 over the years. I have always felt very guilty about it, because, during his original display, which I didn't feel was flown particularly well [only a PPL myself, but have seen much display flying], I remarked to my friend that I wasn't too impressed. On his next take-off, to fill in,he inverted at about 600 feet. I remarked to my friend 'I bet the guy in the back is having kittens in there'. Ten seconds later, as you know, he killed himself and his pax. Chryptic remark by me. Should have kept my mouth shut.