Formation Flying

[Slick]

Is there an etiquette to formation flying? Is there a book or list of
general rules to follow?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Kyle Boatright]

"Slick" > wrote in message ...
> Is there an etiquette to formation flying? Is there a book or list of
> general rules to follow?
>
>

There is some good information in the book and videos at the following link.

http://www.buildersbooks.com/flying_skills_sport.htm

KB

[Dudley Henriques]

The EAA recommends the T34 Formation Manual and pushes it' for civilian
formation flying. I totally agree with EAA on this and find the
standardization procedures to be conducive to the flight safety issues
involved with formation.
I recommend this path to everyone who asks about this issue.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)
"Slick" > wrote in message ...
> Is there an etiquette to formation flying? Is there a book or list of
> general rules to follow?
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
> =----

[Blanche]

I believe the Bonanza Society uses the T34 material as the basis for
its formation flight class. That's the one everyone must take (or
similar course) before they're allowed to do the formation flight
into Oshkosh each years.

[Eric Rood]

The T-34 manual on that website is practically useless.
The best book available to the general public that I have found is
"Every Man A Tiger". It contains two or three chapters devoted to
formation flying and safety. Included is a formation briefing form.
Anyone who flies close formation will tell you that it is hard work.

> "Slick" > wrote in message ...
>>Is there an etiquette to formation flying? Is there a book or list of
>>general rules to follow?

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> There is some good information in the book and videos at the following link.
> http://www.buildersbooks.com/flying_skills_sport.htm

[Dudley Henriques]

This is correct. I believe the Bonanza Society has it's own program, but it
takes heavily from the T34 Manual and so states in it's own formation
material.
Dudley
"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
>I believe the Bonanza Society uses the T34 material as the basis for
> its formation flight class. That's the one everyone must take (or
> similar course) before they're allowed to do the formation flight
> into Oshkosh each years.
>

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Blanche > wrote:

> I believe the Bonanza Society uses the T34 material as the basis for
> its formation flight class. That's the one everyone must take (or
> similar course) before they're allowed to do the formation flight
> into Oshkosh each years.


The bonanza and T-34 use the same points to line up (intersection of
inboard trailing edge of the aileron and second(?) cowl latch. That will
give you a 45 degree line.

The Yak Assn. and Swift Assn. also have their similar versions of the
manual.

Yes, there IS a definite etiquette to formation flying and MUST be
adhered to. I agree with Dudley on this, as it i mandatory that all
members of a formation know and adhere to the agreed-upon rules of the
flight.

Formation flying can be a lot of fun (and hard work, too) and will
enhance your flying skills.

[Kyle Boatright]

"Eric Rood" > wrote in message
...
> The T-34 manual on that website is practically useless.

Hmm, considering that it is THE most referenced resource when you talk with
the various amateur formation groups, I'd say "useless" is simply wrong.
The T-34 manual is the basis for most of the amateur formation training
clinics that are held every year. It gives pilots a common set of terms and
procedures, as well as a common set of visual signals that are used for
communicating within a formation without creating a bunch of radio chatter.

KB

[Dudley Henriques]

You are correct about the T34 Manual.
Also, the T34 Manual is recognized and recommended by every competent source
on formation flying in aviation. What makes it so useful for General
Aviation is that it stresses a SIMPLE formation doctrine instead of covering
all the possibilities and concentrates on just the formations that will be
useful for getting planes and pilots to the destinations together and in one
piece, then doing a simple formation display, which is the very essence of
General Aviation formation flying .
The T34 Manual is good enough for EAA, and good enough for Bob Hoover, and
it's good enough for me, and I've flown and taught a LOT of formation!! :-))
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)


"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Eric Rood" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The T-34 manual on that website is practically useless.
>
> Hmm, considering that it is THE most referenced resource when you talk
> with the various amateur formation groups, I'd say "useless" is simply
> wrong. The T-34 manual is the basis for most of the amateur formation
> training clinics that are held every year. It gives pilots a common set
> of terms and procedures, as well as a common set of visual signals that
> are used for communicating within a formation without creating a bunch of
> radio chatter.
>
> KB
>
>
>

[jsmith]

Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really
important information.
If you can get your hands on the US Navy T-34C manual, you will have
something practical.

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> You are correct about the T34 Manual.
> Also, the T34 Manual is recognized and recommended by every competent source
> on formation flying in aviation. What makes it so useful for General
> Aviation is that it stresses a SIMPLE formation doctrine instead of covering
> all the possibilities and concentrates on just the formations that will be
> useful for getting planes and pilots to the destinations together and in one
> piece, then doing a simple formation display, which is the very essence of
> General Aviation formation flying .
> The T34 Manual is good enough for EAA, and good enough for Bob Hoover, and
> it's good enough for me, and I've flown and taught a LOT of formation!! :-))
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
> dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
> (take out the trash :-)

>>"Eric Rood" > wrote in message
>>>The T-34 manual on that website is practically useless.

> "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
>>Hmm, considering that it is THE most referenced resource when you talk
>>with the various amateur formation groups, I'd say "useless" is simply
>>wrong. The T-34 manual is the basis for most of the amateur formation
>>training clinics that are held every year. It gives pilots a common set
>>of terms and procedures, as well as a common set of visual signals that
>>are used for communicating within a formation without creating a bunch of
>>radio chatter.

[Dudley Henriques]

"jsmith" > wrote in message
...
> Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
> Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
> The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really important
> information.
> If you can get your hands on the US Navy T-34C manual, you will have
> something practical.

You miss the entire point. The objective in creating a SAFE formation
program for use by civilians was SIMPLICITY, exactly the aspect of this
program you seem to be having a problem with.
The T34 formation program was designed specifically to be used by pilots
without military training....the average Joe so to speak. In this respect,
simplicity was job one!
The last thing you want in a formation program for GA pilots is more
information than is actually needed to keep everyone safe. By keeping the
suggested formations to a select few, and making movement between them
simple and consistent, the T34 Manual serves a very useful purpose.
A lot of thought by some of the world's leading pilots went into the
development of the T34 Formation program, and the proof of it's worth is
it's extensive and almost exclusive use in the aviation community.
No one will argue with you that the military programs are more extensive and
complete, but extensive isn't the key word when dealing with civilian
pilots....SAFETY is the word.
As I said, pilots like Bob Hoover have signed off on the program as written,
and in fact have taken an active part in promoting it. In fact, it was the
input of pilots like Hoover that dictated the safest procedure for civilian
pilots should reflect EXACTLY what is found in the T34 Formation Manual.
Hell, I have right here with me staring me in the puss on the shelf, some of
the most extensive formation training material ever printed; Air Force;
Navy; Naval Test Pilot school; Empire Test Pilot School; you name it, I have
it!! Believe me, I would not want to take a bunch of civilians in dissimilar
aircraft and put them together in formation using these advanced techniques.
They're WAY too complex for civilians.
I've flown fighting wing with a hard turning lead without having to go in
trail. I've flown loose duce in a dissimilar pair. I've flown formation with
the Canadian Snowbirds; but when it comes to flying in formation with
general aviation pilots, trust me, I'm much more comfortable with these guys
having been taught how to fly a strong right fingertip four the right way,
than I would be with the same bunch being trained in ALL phases of formation
procedure.
When it comes to civilian pilots and formation flying, especially when
dissimilar aircraft are involved, SIMPLICITY beats Complexity for general
safety every time!!
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)

[Dave Stadt]

"jsmith" > wrote in message
...
> Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
> Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
> The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really
> important information.

My T-34 package included a video which is what provided most of the
information. The manual is just a reference which I do not believe was
meant to serve as a stand alone document.

[Dudley Henriques]

This is correct. The video and the manual were meant to be used together as
a system. The manual alone is simply a reference source. The info is there,
but to get the complete picture, you do need the video.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)
"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "jsmith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
>> Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
>> The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really
>> important information.
>
> My T-34 package included a video which is what provided most of the
> information. The manual is just a reference which I do not believe was
> meant to serve as a stand alone document.
>
>
>

[jsmith]

That's exactly my point Dudley.
I am not argueing about the content of the program as it is taught.
Only that the manual by itself is not sufficient.
For that matter, it should not be called a manual at all.
My interpretation of the OP's question was a self contained manual.

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> This is correct. The video and the manual were meant to be used together as
> a system. The manual alone is simply a reference source. The info is there,
> but to get the complete picture, you do need the video.
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
> dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
> (take out the trash :-)
>
>>"jsmith" > wrote in message
>>>Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
>>>Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
>>>The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really
>>>important information.

> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>>My T-34 package included a video which is what provided most of the
>>information. The manual is just a reference which I do not believe was
>>meant to serve as a stand alone document.

[Dudley Henriques]

I would definitely agree with this. The "manual" was meant to be used simply
as a reference guide for the entire T34 Formation package which of course
includes the video. As a stand alone, the manual, as you are correctly
saying doesn't contain nearly the information contained in other general
sources of information on formation flying.
DH
"jsmith" > wrote in message
...
> That's exactly my point Dudley.
> I am not argueing about the content of the program as it is taught.
> Only that the manual by itself is not sufficient.
> For that matter, it should not be called a manual at all.
> My interpretation of the OP's question was a self contained manual.
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>> This is correct. The video and the manual were meant to be used together
>> as a system. The manual alone is simply a reference source. The info is
>> there, but to get the complete picture, you do need the video.
>> Dudley Henriques
>> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
>> Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
>> dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
>> (take out the trash :-)
>>
>>>"jsmith" > wrote in message
>>>>Okay, maybe useless is the wrong word.
>>>>Grossly inadequate is more descriptive.
>>>>The manual by itself is too basic and leaves out too much really
>>>>important information.
>
>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>>>My T-34 package included a video which is what provided most of the
>>>information. The manual is just a reference which I do not believe was
>>>meant to serve as a stand alone document.
>