Re: UK Firefly crashes

[F7FTCAT]

Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition rate
among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows?

I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then there was
the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there is the
Firefly.

I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect with
no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that
causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical
failure.

However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips that we
see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level
aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to hell
for one reason or another. The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot
dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty much
parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like a
high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact
occurred.

I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive and
callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a mechanical
failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error.

I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well qualified
and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded
those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question,
however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through
moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with little
margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong?

I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as
well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a dozen
flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to minimize
risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical
pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban Eight
or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to know
that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by.

I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents and
try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should be
eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to make a
decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not.

My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by this
post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies occur
for a reason and they should be addressed.

Paul Varga

[The Raven]

"F7FTCAT" > wrote in message
...
> Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition
rate
> among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows?

I think it's more a matter of their being more of these aircraft flying in
the UK.

> I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then
there was
> the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there
is the
> Firefly.

There have also been many other accidents involving warbirds outside of the
UK.

> I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect
with
> no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that
> causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical
> failure.

And despite all efforts it is inevitable that some will be lost, as tragic
as that will be.

> However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips
that we
> see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level
> aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to
hell
> for one reason or another.

Most seem to involve some level of aerobatics or "low margin" flying.

> The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot
> dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty
much
> parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like
a
> high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact
> occurred.

Whatever it was, it looked like he was going to be too low for my liking
regardless. Of course, I'm the first to admit I'm no expert on these matters
but it did look a little low.

> I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive
and
> callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a
mechanical
> failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error.

It involves humans, there will be mistakes at some stage.

> I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well
qualified
> and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded
> those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question,
> however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through
> moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with
little
> margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong?

The key issue here is that no matter how much we love to see these historic
aircraft fly they are: historically significant, often rare, often quite
aged. For those reasons we cannot afford to loose them (including the lives
of those who fly and maintain them).

> I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as
> well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a
dozen
> flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to
minimize
> risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical
> pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban
Eight
> or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to
know
> that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by.

Somewhere a line has to be drawn. No aerobatics or very limited aerobatics
with big safety margins. I love aerobatics but would rather watch a warbird
do a safe moderate altitude moderate speed pass than watch in terror as one
is pushed to the limit............or worse.

Yes, the limitations are not hard and will vary from aircraft to aircraft
etc.

> I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents
and
> try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should
be
> eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to
make a
> decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not.

Whilst the organisers always want a safe event, they also want some
spectacle. Leave the spectacle of aerobatics to more modern aircraft.

>
> My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by
this
> post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies
occur
> for a reason and they should be addressed.

It's hard to explain all my thoughts on the matter here but at the end of
the day we need to be taking greater care of these historic aircraft and
perhaps should do more to avoid aerobatics. Keep them flying but please
don't push them.

The Raven

[Richard Lamb]

We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly?

Rare?

I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get
cheap.

Richard


The Raven wrote:
>
> "F7FTCAT" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition
> rate
> > among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows?
>
> I think it's more a matter of their being more of these aircraft flying in
> the UK.
>
> > I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then
> there was
> > the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there
> is the
> > Firefly.
>
> There have also been many other accidents involving warbirds outside of the
> UK.
>
> > I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect
> with
> > no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that
> > causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical
> > failure.
>
> And despite all efforts it is inevitable that some will be lost, as tragic
> as that will be.
>
> > However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips
> that we
> > see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level
> > aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to
> hell
> > for one reason or another.
>
> Most seem to involve some level of aerobatics or "low margin" flying.
>
> > The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot
> > dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty
> much
> > parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like
> a
> > high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact
> > occurred.
>
> Whatever it was, it looked like he was going to be too low for my liking
> regardless. Of course, I'm the first to admit I'm no expert on these matters
> but it did look a little low.
>
> > I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive
> and
> > callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a
> mechanical
> > failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error.
>
> It involves humans, there will be mistakes at some stage.
>
> > I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well
> qualified
> > and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded
> > those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question,
> > however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through
> > moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with
> little
> > margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong?
>
> The key issue here is that no matter how much we love to see these historic
> aircraft fly they are: historically significant, often rare, often quite
> aged. For those reasons we cannot afford to loose them (including the lives
> of those who fly and maintain them).
>
> > I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as
> > well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a
> dozen
> > flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to
> minimize
> > risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical
> > pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban
> Eight
> > or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to
> know
> > that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by.
>
> Somewhere a line has to be drawn. No aerobatics or very limited aerobatics
> with big safety margins. I love aerobatics but would rather watch a warbird
> do a safe moderate altitude moderate speed pass than watch in terror as one
> is pushed to the limit............or worse.
>
> Yes, the limitations are not hard and will vary from aircraft to aircraft
> etc.
>
> > I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents
> and
> > try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should
> be
> > eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to
> make a
> > decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not.
>
> Whilst the organisers always want a safe event, they also want some
> spectacle. Leave the spectacle of aerobatics to more modern aircraft.
>
> >
> > My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by
> this
> > post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies
> occur
> > for a reason and they should be addressed.
>
> It's hard to explain all my thoughts on the matter here but at the end of
> the day we need to be taking greater care of these historic aircraft and
> perhaps should do more to avoid aerobatics. Keep them flying but please
> don't push them.
>
> The Raven

[The Raven]

"Richard Lamb" > wrote in message
...
> We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly?
>
> Rare?
>
> I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get
> cheap.

Airworthy?


--
The Raven
http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3
** President of the ozemail.* and uunet.* NG's
** since August 15th 2000.

[Richard Lamb]

The Raven wrote:
>
> "Richard Lamb" > wrote in message
> ...
> > We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly?
> >
> > Rare?
> >
> > I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get
> > cheap.
>
> Airworthy?
>

With IO-540's in them? I don't think so!
> --
> The Raven
> http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3
> ** President of the ozemail.* and uunet.* NG's
> ** since August 15th 2000.

[Vern]

Fairey Firefly...not a Slingsby.

[Richard Lamb]

Ahh. Copy that.

Vern wrote:
>
> Fairey Firefly...not a Slingsby.

[Joseph Wilkinson]

I have only just got to this debate. I was on HMS Victorious 1966 to 1967
when we bought this aircraft.
We paid, I believe £120 for it, but that could have been £160. The memory
goes with the passage of time.
We brought it back from Sydney to Singapore, and from there the RAF shipped
it back to UK in a Herk.
I helped to pay for it and over the years I have told people that I owned a
little bit of it whenever I saw it flying. When it crashed it was like
losing an old and dear friend. Very upsetting.
I met the pilot 2 years ago when he flew a Swordfish to Sherburn in Elmet,
Yorkshire, where it was built, for an annual pilgramage. He bought with him
a CD rom of Royal Navy aircraft for an add on to Combat Flight Simulator. I
fly it regularly. If you get the chance, get a copy.
However, I would always want to see aircraft where they should be....in the
air.
We know accidents will happen, but there will always be pilots to fly them
and public to watch them.
Sorry for going on, but I was just thinking about the times I sat in its
cockpit on passage to Singapore, shooting down the enemy with gay abandon. I
was only young you understand.


Hub & Diane Plott > wrote in message
...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/3061391.stm
> here is a link
>
>
>

[ngilder]

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:13:04 +0000, Joseph Wilkinson wrote:

> I have only just got to this debate. I was on HMS Victorious 1966 to
> 1967 when we bought this aircraft.
> We paid, I believe £120 for it, but that could have been £160. The
> memory goes with the passage of time.
> We brought it back from Sydney to Singapore, and from there the RAF
> shipped it back to UK in a Herk.
> I helped to pay for it and over the years I have told people that I
> owned a little bit of it whenever I saw it flying. When it crashed it
> was like losing an old and dear friend. Very upsetting. I met the pilot
> 2 years ago when he flew a Swordfish to Sherburn in Elmet, Yorkshire,
> where it was built, for an annual pilgramage.
>
>
> Hub & Diane Plott > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/3061391.stm here is a
>> link
>>
>>
>>
As a younger (we can all dream!)aviation follower I read your message and
of course our thoughs must go to the families and friends of the crew at
this time - a sad loss. I could not let the chance go by to thank your
group for doing their bit to save this aircraft, at least I got to see one
fly which is more than can be said loads of other aircraft. Nick