Thunderbird accidents

I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982

[Dudley Henriques]

> wrote in message
.. .
> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982

Why do you seek this information?

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired

[Tex Houston]

> wrote in message
.. .
> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982

Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidents" "Indian Springs"

Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidenys" "Laughlin"

See how simple life is?

Tex

[Mike Marron]

>"Tex Houston" > wrote:

>See how simple life is?

Pompous ****.

-Mike Marron

[Tex Houston]

"Tex Houston" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> .. .
> > I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents.
Any
> > information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
> >
> > F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> > Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> > Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982
>
> Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidents" "Indian Springs"
>
> Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidenys" "Laughlin"
>
> See how simple life is?
>
> Tex

Sorry...the correct spelling is "Accidents" on the last entry. Wonder if my
spell checker disregards anything in quotes?

Tex

[Mike Marron]

>"Tex Houston" > wrote:

>Sorry...the correct spelling is "Accidents" on the last entry.

As if. As if anyone gives a ****.

>Wonder if my spell checker disregards anything in quotes?

Pompous Texass ****.

-Mike Marron

[Hugh Jimancock]

I saw Thunderbird #6 hit the dirt today at Mountain Home Air Force Base, in
Idaho. Pretty spectacular.

Pilot made it out OK.

It looked like he either lost engine, or had a flight control failure. He
was coming out of the first loop right after takeoff. Might have been coming
in too low too quick, but he punched out at 100', so I kinda doubt it was
that.

As an F-16 crew chief for 9 years, it was pretty shocking to see.



> wrote in message
.. .
> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982
>
>

[Juvat]

Hugh Jimancock posted:

>I saw Thunderbird #6 hit the dirt today at Mountain Home Air Force Base, in
>Idaho. Pretty spectacular.

That deserves a "wow!"

>Pilot made it out OK.

Great news!

>Might have been coming in too low too quick,
> but he punched out at 100', so I kinda doubt it was
>that.

Who knows at this point? Perhaps the jet was OK and he recognized he
wouldn't pull out, or thought he couldn't pull out...bottom line, he's
alive.

Juvat

[Thomas Schoene]

"Hugh Jimancock" > wrote in message

> I saw Thunderbird #6 hit the dirt today at Mountain Home Air Force
> Base, in Idaho. Pretty spectacular.
>
> Pilot made it out OK.

A very short news article:

http://www.kbcitv.com/x5154.xml?ParentPageID=x5157&ContentID=x46394&Layout=K
BCI.xsl&AdGroupID=x5154

There is some video, but it doesn't show the crash, just the four-ship
takeoff and the aftermath of the #6 crash. All you can really see is a big
cloud of black smoke.

--�
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

[Juvat]

Just as a follow up , there is home video of the TB Diamond takeoff,
and then the fireball (no image of the solo inflight) here from KBCI
Boise. http://tinyurl.com/nd1g

Juvat

[Juvat]

Actual footage of ejection...starts with F-16 in the last quarter of
the loop, pilot ejected in what looks like approaching a level
attitude...tail slightly low but the velocity vector was still below
the horizon

KBTV.com...http://www.ktvb.com/

Juvat

[Vee-One]

"Hugh Jimancock" > wrote in message
...
> I saw Thunderbird #6 hit the dirt today at Mountain Home Air Force Base,
in
> Idaho. Pretty spectacular.
>
> Pilot made it out OK.
>
> It looked like he either lost engine, or had a flight control failure. He
> was coming out of the first loop right after takeoff. Might have been
coming
> in too low too quick, but he punched out at 100', so I kinda doubt it was
> that.
>
> As an F-16 crew chief for 9 years, it was pretty shocking to see.
>
>
>
Another link to a Yahoo story...............

http://story.news.yahoo.com/newstmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=718&e=9&u=/ap/20030915/ap_on_re_us/brf_air_show_crash

[Hugh Jimancock]

Yeah, my bad on the "loop" call - it was a split-s.

/Whacks self in head with clue bat....


"Juvat" > wrote in message
...
> There are two links on the page to video, the top link shows the
> F-16's steep climbout, rolls over for a Split-S [correcting my
> impression that he was performing loop]...then the mushing bottom part
> of the maneuver...
>
> Juvat

[Juvat]

There are two links on the page to video, the top link shows the
F-16's steep climbout, rolls over for a Split-S [correcting my
impression that he was performing loop]...then the mushing bottom part
of the maneuver...

Juvat

[Mike Marron]

>Juvat > wrote:

>Actual footage of ejection...starts with F-16 in the last quarter of
>the loop, pilot ejected in what looks like approaching a level
>attitude...tail slightly low but the velocity vector was still below
>the horizon

>KBTV.com...http://www.ktvb.com/

Based on what I could see in the video, the F-16 was climbing
out after takeoff and then performed a split-ess with half-aileron
roll entry into a dive back towards the runway. Pilot did a nice job
and was in command 'till he ejected.

-Mike Marron

[John Doe]

How about the one today ?

> wrote in message
.. .
> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982
>
>

[Darrell A. Larose]

Mike Marron ) writes:
>>"Tex Houston" > wrote:
>
>>See how simple life is?
>
> Pompous ****.
>
Why? The info is easy to find, so I guess people need their hands held all
the time? Great education system.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Darrell A. Larose" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Marron ) writes:
> >>"Tex Houston" > wrote:
> >
> >>See how simple life is?
> >
> > Pompous ****.
> >
> Why? The info is easy to find, so I guess people need their hands held all
> the time? Great education system.

Tex provides correct information, local newsgroup troll attacks.

By the way Maron, what sock were you before you posted as Maron?

[Marc Reeve]

> wrote:

> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967

Pilot: Capt. Merrill McPeak
Problem: Wings came off during high-G pullup.
Pilot ejected safely.

(McPeak became Chief of Staff of the USAF in 1990, a position he held
until his retirement in 1994.)

> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981

The only 1981 accident I can find is September 8, 1981 in Cleveland.
Post-show, flight leader Col. D.L. Smith was killed when his T-38
ingested several birds on takeoff. He and his crew chief ejected, but
his parachute did not open. (The crew chief survived.)

There was an F-16 crash at Hill AFB in August of '81, but the
Thunderbirds weren't yet flying F-16s.

> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982

What's to say? It was determined that the leader's (Maj. Norm Lowry)
aircraft sustained a mechanical malfunction that caused it to crash
(failure to pull up after completing a loop), and the three other
members of the diamond (Capt. Willie Mays, Capt. Joseph "Pete" Peterson,
and Capt. Mark Melancon), being focused on the leader, followed him in.
I seem to recall that there might have been a loose bolt in Major
Lowry's stick that had caused the stick to jam at just the wrong time.

At any rate, that was the end of the Thunderbirds flying T-38s - they
transitioned to F-16s for the 1983 season.

-Marc

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

[SA]

Hi

I did a quick search for Thunderbirds accidents, and found this webpage:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2003/aug/28/515537091.html
which isn't about Thunderbirds accidents, but does mention that:

"While there were 36 major accidents that killed 24 Thunderbird pilots
between 1953 and 1981, there have been no fatalities and only one minor
accident since the 1982 tragedy -- a fact in which Creech took great pride."

I had no idea that there had been so many accidents involving the
Thunderbirds.
Was this because the pushed relativly "unreliable" planes of the 60's and
70's to (and beyond) their limits, or did they simply have a long string of
bad luck??

Does anyone know is other display teams have suffered a similar accident
rate?

Regards
Søren Augustesen
----------------------
Søren Augustesen
Email:
WWW: http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/soren_augustesen/index.html

> skrev i en meddelelse
.. .
> I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents. Any
> information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
>
> F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982
>
>

[Juvat]

Marc Reeve posted:

>What's to say? It was determined that the leader's (Maj. Norm Lowry)
>aircraft sustained a mechanical malfunction that caused it to crash
>(failure to pull up after completing a loop),...
>I seem to recall that there might have been a loose bolt in Major
>Lowry's stick that had caused the stick to jam at just the wrong time.

I believe the Board put the blame on a "bob-weight" that effected the
feel of the stick forces...no jamming that I recall. I was an
additional duty safety guy in my squadron, and briefed it. The T-38
FAIPs in the sqdn were skeptical (to put it mildly) of the "official"
explanation.

ISTR that the Accident Board also found that the Formation was lower
than briefed/expected at the apex of the "over the top" maneuver being
flown, and the findings speculated they could have pulled out if...

Sad day none the less.

Juvat

[Ed Rasimus]

Juvat > wrote:

>Marc Reeve posted:
>
>>What's to say? It was determined that the leader's (Maj. Norm Lowry)
>>aircraft sustained a mechanical malfunction that caused it to crash
>>(failure to pull up after completing a loop),...
>>I seem to recall that there might have been a loose bolt in Major
>>Lowry's stick that had caused the stick to jam at just the wrong time.
>
>I believe the Board put the blame on a "bob-weight" that effected the
>feel of the stick forces...no jamming that I recall. I was an
>additional duty safety guy in my squadron, and briefed it. The T-38
>FAIPs in the sqdn were skeptical (to put it mildly) of the "official"
>explanation.
>
>ISTR that the Accident Board also found that the Formation was lower
>than briefed/expected at the apex of the "over the top" maneuver being
>flown, and the findings speculated they could have pulled out if...
>

You've got that right. I was at Holloman in Fighter Lead-In at the
time. As the only operator of T-38s in TAC, the 479th wing was tasked
for the "pilot member" and the "Flying Safety Officer member" of the
accident board.

The initial accident report came back as "pilot error" in that Major
Lowry allowed the formation to continue the maneuver after being at a
lower than required altitude at the top of the loop, thereby letting
the aircraft proceed to a point from which safe recovery was not
possible.

When briefed to General Creech, his comment was "Thunderbirds don't
make pilot errors." He directed that they come back with something
else. The second attempt introduced the "bob-weight" explanation. The
catch was that with 160 AT-38s on the flight line at Holloman, no one
had ever encountered the bob-weight before.

I flew F-4s with Norm Lowry in the 401st TFW at Torrejon. He was a
first rate fighter pilot and it is unfortunate that he was lost in
such a manner.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038

[John A. Weeks III]

In article >, SA
> wrote:

> "While there were 36 major accidents that killed 24 Thunderbird pilots
> between 1953 and 1981, there have been no fatalities and only one minor
> accident since the 1982 tragedy -- a fact in which Creech took great pride."

Well, there was at least one fatality since 1982. A member of the
public crashed an auto through the airport gate and rammed one of
the F-16's as it was parked. I recall that the F-16 nose gear
collapsed in the impact, and the jet fell on the car, killing
the driver. I didn't look up the date, but I do recall this happening
at Selfridge in Michigan in the mid to late 90's.

-john-

--
================================================== ==================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ==================

[Dudley Henriques]

"Juvat" > wrote in message
...
> Marc Reeve posted:
>
> >What's to say? It was determined that the leader's (Maj. Norm Lowry)
> >aircraft sustained a mechanical malfunction that caused it to crash
> >(failure to pull up after completing a loop),...
> >I seem to recall that there might have been a loose bolt in Major
> >Lowry's stick that had caused the stick to jam at just the wrong time.
>
> I believe the Board put the blame on a "bob-weight" that effected the
> feel of the stick forces...no jamming that I recall. I was an
> additional duty safety guy in my squadron, and briefed it. The T-38
> FAIPs in the sqdn were skeptical (to put it mildly) of the "official"
> explanation.
>
> ISTR that the Accident Board also found that the Formation was lower
> than briefed/expected at the apex of the "over the top" maneuver being
> flown, and the findings speculated they could have pulled out if...
>
> Sad day none the less.
>
> Juvat

The investigation was conducted at Holloman. Rog Parrish, Canterbury, and
others were involved. the FSO came from the 479th TFTW. It was a good and
truthful investigation. These people were first rate officers. Their initial
conclusions were VERY hard for them to submit, but they did the right thing.
They told the truth!! Their initial report was bounced by Creech and sent
back down for "further review". Creech insisted they "look again for another
reason"!! "Thunderbirds don't make mistakes" he said!!! The bob weight crap
was in the "revised" report sent back up to TAC. EVERYBODY knew it was bull
****!!! Creech accepted it immediately!
I'll tell you this much and you can take it to the bank! Norm didn't have a
"bob weight problem". There IS NO F*****G bobweight on the T38!!! Every
Thunderbird I know believes Norm simply blew the loop, and from my own
personal experience with low altitude vertical recoveries, and with personal
knowledge of the T38 in this environment specifically, I can tell you that
this is exactly what happened. From the Thunderbirds viewpoint, specifically
from an ex leader of the team who will remain nameless here for obvious
reasons, "It was a line abreast loop. When they went in I knew immediately
that lead impacted last...not FIRST!!!!!". And he was right. Anyone familiar
with the mechanics of a line abreast loop recovery lead foul up while flying
as a member of a jet acro team would know IMMEDIATELY the implication of
this simple fact!! It showed that way on the video tape taken at the com
trailer, but the tape vanished!!!!
Let me put it another way if I can. Creech isn't really the most popular guy
at the Thunderbird reunions....if you get my drift!!

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired

[Guy Alcala]

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Let me put it another way if I can. Creech isn't really the most popular guy
> at the Thunderbird reunions....if you get my drift!!

Seeing as how he died August 26th, I don't think that will be an issue anymore:

http://tbaa.org/gen_creech.htm

Guy

[Dudley Henriques]

"Guy Alcala" > wrote in message
. ..
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> > Let me put it another way if I can. Creech isn't really the most popular
guy
> > at the Thunderbird reunions....if you get my drift!!
>
> Seeing as how he died August 26th, I don't think that will be an issue
anymore:
>
> http://tbaa.org/gen_creech.htm
>
> Guy

Excuse me. That should have read, "He WASN'T the most popular guy at the
Thunderbird reunions. My somewhat "limited" connections with him died many
years ago, obviously before he did!
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired

[Juvat]

Ed Rasimus posted:

>The initial accident report came back as "pilot error" ...

That was pretty much the attitude when everybody looked at the details
of the Final report...especially the T-38 FAIPs.

>When briefed to General Creech, his comment was "Thunderbirds don't
>make pilot errors." He directed that they come back with something
>else.

The good general was also known to "red line" Lts and Capts that
crashed jets. A co-worker jumped out of an F-16 at Nellis as a 1Lt,
Creech had him grounded and shipped out, he went to WC-130s. The cause
turned out to be IIRC, Tower Shaft failure, the first incident. After
Creech retired, the criminal was allowed back in Vipers. He just
retired from the CO ANG.

Hey, thanks for the tip, genius!

If you took your own advice, you'd see that there is very little out there.
Are you always this sharp or was this just a good day?

"Tex Houston" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> .. .
> > I am looking for information on the following Thunderbird accidents.
Any
> > information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
> >
> > F-100D breakup at Laughlin AFB in 1967
> > Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981
> > Diamond crash at Indian Springs in 1982
>
> Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidents" "Indian Springs"
>
> Go to www.google.com and enter "Thunderbirds" "Accidenys" "Laughlin"
>
> See how simple life is?
>
> Tex
>
>
>
>
>

[Marc Reeve]

John A. Weeks III > wrote:

> In article >, SA
> > wrote:
>
> > "While there were 36 major accidents that killed 24 Thunderbird pilots
> > between 1953 and 1981, there have been no fatalities and only one minor
> > accident since the 1982 tragedy -- a fact in which Creech took great
> > pride."
>
> Well, there was at least one fatality since 1982. A member of the
> public crashed an auto through the airport gate and rammed one of
> the F-16's as it was parked. I recall that the F-16 nose gear
> collapsed in the impact, and the jet fell on the car, killing
> the driver. I didn't look up the date, but I do recall this happening
> at Selfridge in Michigan in the mid to late 90's.
>
They were only counting Thunderbirds fatalities on that page, not Joe
Drunken Driver (not that the two are mutually exclusive).

-Marc

--
Marc Reeve
actual email address after removal of 4s & spaces is
c4m4r4a4m4a4n a4t c4r4u4z4i4o d4o4t c4o4m

[Mark]

Rumor had it that Creech personally had the one and only videotape of the
accident.

Mark


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> "Juvat" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Marc Reeve posted:
> >
> > >What's to say? It was determined that the leader's (Maj. Norm Lowry)
> > >aircraft sustained a mechanical malfunction that caused it to crash
> > >(failure to pull up after completing a loop),...
> > >I seem to recall that there might have been a loose bolt in Major
> > >Lowry's stick that had caused the stick to jam at just the wrong time.
> >
> > I believe the Board put the blame on a "bob-weight" that effected the
> > feel of the stick forces...no jamming that I recall. I was an
> > additional duty safety guy in my squadron, and briefed it. The T-38
> > FAIPs in the sqdn were skeptical (to put it mildly) of the "official"
> > explanation.
> >
> > ISTR that the Accident Board also found that the Formation was lower
> > than briefed/expected at the apex of the "over the top" maneuver being
> > flown, and the findings speculated they could have pulled out if...
> >
> > Sad day none the less.
> >
> > Juvat
>
> The investigation was conducted at Holloman. Rog Parrish, Canterbury, and
> others were involved. the FSO came from the 479th TFTW. It was a good and
> truthful investigation. These people were first rate officers. Their
initial
> conclusions were VERY hard for them to submit, but they did the right
thing.
> They told the truth!! Their initial report was bounced by Creech and sent
> back down for "further review". Creech insisted they "look again for
another
> reason"!! "Thunderbirds don't make mistakes" he said!!! The bob weight
crap
> was in the "revised" report sent back up to TAC. EVERYBODY knew it was
bull
> ****!!! Creech accepted it immediately!
> I'll tell you this much and you can take it to the bank! Norm didn't have
a
> "bob weight problem". There IS NO F*****G bobweight on the T38!!! Every
> Thunderbird I know believes Norm simply blew the loop, and from my own
> personal experience with low altitude vertical recoveries, and with
personal
> knowledge of the T38 in this environment specifically, I can tell you that
> this is exactly what happened. From the Thunderbirds viewpoint,
specifically
> from an ex leader of the team who will remain nameless here for obvious
> reasons, "It was a line abreast loop. When they went in I knew immediately
> that lead impacted last...not FIRST!!!!!". And he was right. Anyone
familiar
> with the mechanics of a line abreast loop recovery lead foul up while
flying
> as a member of a jet acro team would know IMMEDIATELY the implication of
> this simple fact!! It showed that way on the video tape taken at the com
> trailer, but the tape vanished!!!!
> Let me put it another way if I can. Creech isn't really the most popular
guy
> at the Thunderbird reunions....if you get my drift!!
>
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/CFI
> Retired
>
>

[Dudley Henriques]

"Mark" > wrote in message
. ..
> Rumor had it that Creech personally had the one and only videotape of the
> accident.
>
> Mark

Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing.
Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team.
His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my
knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape
since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me
have a VERY good idea what happened to it.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired

[Mike Marron]

>"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:

>Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire thing.
>Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team.
>His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To my
>knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape
>since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me
>have a VERY good idea what happened to it.

In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
what is the significance of that statement?

-Mike Marron

[Mark]

Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes
attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation
flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path,
but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead....

Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day

Mark


"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
>
> >Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire
thing.
> >Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team.
> >His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To
my
> >knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape
> >since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me
> >have a VERY good idea what happened to it.
>
> In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
> last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
> what is the significance of that statement?
>
> -Mike Marron
>
>
>

[Mike Marron]

>Mark" > wrote:
>>"Mike Marron" > wrote:

>>In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
>>last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
>>what is the significance of that statement?

>Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes
>attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation
>flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight path,
>but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to lead....

>Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day

Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was
there any chance of survival had they punched out?

-Mike Marron

[Dudley Henriques]

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
>
> >Al King was on the com trailer that day and he video taped the entire
thing.
> >Video taping each practice session is SOP for the team.
> >His tape was turned in when it was "requested" by TAC as was his duty. To
my
> >knowledge, neither Al, or anyone else for that matter has seen that tape
> >since....and I personally know a dozen ex-Thunderbirds who along with me
> >have a VERY good idea what happened to it.
>
> In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
> last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
> what is the significance of that statement?
>
> -Mike Marron


The line abreast loop is the only formation that the team used in the T38
where the other pilots are looking back over their shoulder to maintain
proper sight picture/position. In this situation, in the Talon, you can't
see anything forward of the flight path, even by scanning forward with the
eyes.
With the practice area in the middle of a bowl with irregular terrain all
around as it is at Indian Springs, even looking through the leader at the
horizon would give no clue to anyone but lead as to where the bottom was.
Contrary to popular belief that all positions but lead stay glued on a
single point during a maneuver, actually what happens is that a "paint" on a
position point is held, but peripheral vision is used as well, and a fairly
clear peripheral sight picture can be obtained at various times by the two
wings and slot. In the other formation positions, pilots can, and do in fact
actually scan the entire instrument panel (fuel status, airspeed, power
setting, etc.) and "peek" forward to see the ground coming up. It's not that
you don't trust lead, it's simply that over time, you become so proficient
at what you're doing, that you have the luxury of taking a "peek" on
occasion if you choose to do so. This is no doubt contrary to what you have
heard, but you can take it to the bank from me; this is exactly how it's
done!
Why did lead hit last? Because HE was the ONLY ONE who knew they weren't
going to make it and he made one last attempt to avoid ground impact. It's
THAT simple!! Keep in mind that when you are on the back side of a loop,
aiming for a 50 to 100 foot bottom at 400 to 425KIAS, keeping it round while
trying to be smooth for the guys in the formation, the only difference
between a perfect bottom and a catastrophic bottom is the snap of a finger
in elapsed time.
The final report said that Norm was a highly experienced fighter pilot, had
many hours and practice loops under his belt, had complete situational
awareness about him and had all the attributes/qualities of a great leader.
ALL THIS IS TRUE. It is also said by the "official report", that at the top
of the maneuver, in the float at .5g, a foreign object lodged itself in the
artificial feel system thereby giving Lowery the appropriate feel when he
pulled on the stick but not the stab travel commensurate with the feel of
the pull. It was so insidious they said, that Lowery was not aware of the
developing hazard until it was too late to recover. In addition, he hit last
because with the impending crash ahead, the adrenaline rush allowed him to
break the stab loose and fly a few more feet before impact.
This is the key if you want to understand what REALLY happens in formation
acro and not the bull**** that most people believe happens in an acro team
formation. The kicker is this. In formation acro, you don't live in a ONE
CUE WORLD!!!!! Period!!!!! When you initiate a stick pull, a NUMBER OF CUES
tell you all is well or all is not! Norm Lowery was NOT a one cue pilot!!!
He was much too good for that. When he initiated the pull out of the float,
he had the feel of the stick, the compression of his butt, the nose rate
increasing it's track along the ground, the g meter showing increasing g,
the airspeed increasing in line with what he was looking for, and so on.
Can the powers that be have it both ways? On one hand, Norm was
"experienced", had "complete situational awareness", and "leadership
skills".
On the other, he allowed only ONE CUE to develop into a tragic accident.
I don't think so!! And why did they follow.......because there might have
been some concern with one of the new pilots having a position problem, all
else in the maneuver was presumed to be normal by the other pilots just
prior to impact.
Also, there was no "go exploded call". It's SOP for the team that if lead
loses his radios, both VHF and UHF, and no transmission from him is made at
the expected times, #2 calls exploded and the maneuver is terminated. There
was no such call made.
All indications to me would point to Lowery impacting last for the reasons
I've just given, and NOT for the reasons given in the final report.
I hope this information has been helpful.
All the best,
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired

[Mark]

One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't have
a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho is
good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without the
specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was
possible.

Mark

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >Mark" > wrote:
> >>"Mike Marron" > wrote:
>
> >>In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
> >>last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
> >>what is the significance of that statement?
>
> >Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and makes
> >attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation
> >flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight
path,
> >but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to
lead....
>
> >Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day
>
> Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was
> there any chance of survival had they punched out?
>
> -Mike Marron
>
>

[Dudley Henriques]

Ejection would have been impossible without a "go exploded call" and none
was given, either by lead, or by number 2 which would have been normal
procedure had a problem been detected at any point during the maneuver .
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI
Retired
"Mark" > wrote in message
m...
> One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't
have
> a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho
is
> good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without
the
> specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was
> possible.
>
> Mark
>
> "Mike Marron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >Mark" > wrote:
> > >>"Mike Marron" > wrote:
> >
> > >>In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
> > >>last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
> > >>what is the significance of that statement?
> >
> > >Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and
makes
> > >attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for formation
> > >flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight
> path,
> > >but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to
> lead....
> >
> > >Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day
> >
> > Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was
> > there any chance of survival had they punched out?
> >
> > -Mike Marron
> >
> >
>
>

[Mark]

Certainly one needs to make the attempt.... even in the world's best
ejection seat!!!!!!! So as you point out, the technical question of whether
it would or would not have been successful is moot.

vr

Mark


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> Ejection would have been impossible without a "go exploded call" and none
> was given, either by lead, or by number 2 which would have been normal
> procedure had a problem been detected at any point during the maneuver .
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/CFI
> Retired
> "Mark" > wrote in message
> m...
> > One would have to see the tape to answer your questions. T-38 doesn't
> have
> > a 'high performance' seat as you see today (the latest accident in Idaho
> is
> > good example of current day ejection seats). Hard to say (again without
> the
> > specifics of videotape analysis) to determine if successful ejection was
> > possible.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > "Mike Marron" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > >Mark" > wrote:
> > > >>"Mike Marron" > wrote:
> > >
> > > >>In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
> > > >>last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
> > > >>what is the significance of that statement?
> > >
> > > >Lead realizes not going to make it thru the bottom of the loop and
> makes
> > > >attempt to increase G from the 'normal' moderate Gs used for
formation
> > > >flying to a max performance pull. Wingmen react to change in flight
> > path,
> > > >but delay in response (and G) means they impact slightly prior to
> > lead....
> > >
> > > >Not a pretty notion, but that's possibly how it transpired that day
> > >
> > > Interesting. At what point in the loop did lead increase G and was
> > > there any chance of survival had they punched out?
> > >
> > > -Mike Marron
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Mike Marron]

>"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
>>"Mike Marron" > wrote:

>>In a previous post, you commented that the lead impacted the ground
>>last. For those of us who have no formation aerobatics experience,
>>what is the significance of that statement?

>The line abreast loop is the only formation that the team used in the T38
>where the other pilots are looking back over their shoulder to maintain
>proper sight picture/position. In this situation, in the Talon, you can't
>see anything forward of the flight path, even by scanning forward with the
>eyes.
>With the practice area in the middle of a bowl with irregular terrain all
>around as it is at Indian Springs, even looking through the leader at the
>horizon would give no clue to anyone but lead as to where the bottom was.
>Contrary to popular belief that all positions but lead stay glued on a
>single point during a maneuver, actually what happens is that a "paint" on a
>position point is held, but peripheral vision is used as well, and a fairly
>clear peripheral sight picture can be obtained at various times by the two
>wings and slot. In the other formation positions, pilots can, and do in fact
>actually scan the entire instrument panel (fuel status, airspeed, power
>setting, etc.) and "peek" forward to see the ground coming up. It's not that
>you don't trust lead, it's simply that over time, you become so proficient
>at what you're doing, that you have the luxury of taking a "peek" on
>occasion if you choose to do so. This is no doubt contrary to what you have
>heard, but you can take it to the bank from me; this is exactly how it's
>done!
>Why did lead hit last? Because HE was the ONLY ONE who knew they weren't
>going to make it and he made one last attempt to avoid ground impact. It's
>THAT simple!! Keep in mind that when you are on the back side of a loop,
>aiming for a 50 to 100 foot bottom at 400 to 425KIAS, keeping it round while
>trying to be smooth for the guys in the formation, the only difference
>between a perfect bottom and a catastrophic bottom is the snap of a finger
>in elapsed time.
>The final report said that Norm was a highly experienced fighter pilot, had
>many hours and practice loops under his belt, had complete situational
>awareness about him and had all the attributes/qualities of a great leader.
>ALL THIS IS TRUE. It is also said by the "official report", that at the top
>of the maneuver, in the float at .5g, a foreign object lodged itself in the
>artificial feel system thereby giving Lowery the appropriate feel when he
>pulled on the stick but not the stab travel commensurate with the feel of
>the pull. It was so insidious they said, that Lowery was not aware of the
>developing hazard until it was too late to recover. In addition, he hit last
>because with the impending crash ahead, the adrenaline rush allowed him to
>break the stab loose and fly a few more feet before impact.
>This is the key if you want to understand what REALLY happens in formation
>acro and not the bull**** that most people believe happens in an acro team
>formation. The kicker is this. In formation acro, you don't live in a ONE
>CUE WORLD!!!!! Period!!!!! When you initiate a stick pull, a NUMBER OF CUES
>tell you all is well or all is not! Norm Lowery was NOT a one cue pilot!!!
>He was much too good for that. When he initiated the pull out of the float,
>he had the feel of the stick, the compression of his butt, the nose rate
>increasing it's track along the ground, the g meter showing increasing g,
>the airspeed increasing in line with what he was looking for, and so on.
>Can the powers that be have it both ways? On one hand, Norm was
>"experienced", had "complete situational awareness", and "leadership
>skills".
>On the other, he allowed only ONE CUE to develop into a tragic accident.
>I don't think so!! And why did they follow.......because there might have
>been some concern with one of the new pilots having a position problem, all
>else in the maneuver was presumed to be normal by the other pilots just
>prior to impact.
>Also, there was no "go exploded call". It's SOP for the team that if lead
>loses his radios, both VHF and UHF, and no transmission from him is made at
>the expected times, #2 calls exploded and the maneuver is terminated. There
>was no such call made.
>All indications to me would point to Lowery impacting last for the reasons
>I've just given, and NOT for the reasons given in the final report.
>I hope this information has been helpful.

Most excellent post. Thanks!

-Mike Marron

[Ed Rasimus]

"Mark" > wrote:

>Certainly one needs to make the attempt.... even in the world's best
>ejection seat!!!!!!! So as you point out, the technical question of whether
>it would or would not have been successful is moot.
>
>vr
No, the question is not moot. Once the formation had passed
approximately 45 degrees below the horizon inverted on the back side
of the loop, they were out of the ejection seat envelope for the T-38
seat. As they passed through vertical nose-down, 90 degrees, they were
committed to a pull-through in some direction, even with a "break"
call. Again, they were passed the point of no return.

The T-38 ejection seat was good, but not "zero-zero"--it required some
forward velocity at ground level, with no downward vector to guarantee
survival. In a downward flight vector, the window narrows
considerably. Below a couple of thousand feet with a committed
downward flight path, nothing good is still in the option bag.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038

[Darin Ninness]

"John A. Weeks III" > wrote in message >...
> In article >, SA
> > wrote:
>
> > "While there were 36 major accidents that killed 24 Thunderbird pilots
> > between 1953 and 1981, there have been no fatalities and only one minor
> > accident since the 1982 tragedy -- a fact in which Creech took great pride."
>
> Well, there was at least one fatality since 1982. A member of the
> public crashed an auto through the airport gate and rammed one of
> the F-16's as it was parked. I recall that the F-16 nose gear
> collapsed in the impact, and the jet fell on the car, killing
> the driver. I didn't look up the date, but I do recall this happening
> at Selfridge in Michigan in the mid to late 90's.

Good friend of mine was the Chief of Police at Selfridge when that
happened. My faulty memory says 1993-1994. The driver was a dependent
who had been over at the Navy Club (Mole Hole) tossing a few back,
apparently, and in the middle of the night, instead of taking his car
thru the Navy Club parking lot toward the perimeter road, he drove out
onto the ramp (the Mole Hole is the old tanker alert facility.. its
literally right on the edge of the ramp), took a taxiway across the
runway and down another taxiway to where the T-birds were parked.
(They were on a taxiway away from all the other airshow aircraft for
security reasons) The roving sentry reported that the car didn't have
any lights on and he didn't even see it approaching until the last
second when he heard the motor revving up.

In true military fashion, **** ran downhill when it was time to assign
blame, so my friend the chief of police got axed instead of the
general in charge of the base. Even though they'd placed a higher
level of security on the T-Birds aircraft than they normally call for,
and that the sentries couldn't have done anything in time to stop that
car even if they'd been locked and loaded and there had been 10 of
them out there.

That was pretty messed up, however.

NIN

[Mark]

Here's a link for you..... speaks to incident in '92

http://makeashorterlink.com/?E3BA22DE5

Mark


"Darin Ninness" > wrote in message
...
> "John A. Weeks III" > wrote in message
>...
> > In article >, SA
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > "While there were 36 major accidents that killed 24 Thunderbird pilots
> > > between 1953 and 1981, there have been no fatalities and only one
minor
> > > accident since the 1982 tragedy -- a fact in which Creech took great
pride."
> >
> > Well, there was at least one fatality since 1982. A member of the
> > public crashed an auto through the airport gate and rammed one of
> > the F-16's as it was parked. I recall that the F-16 nose gear
> > collapsed in the impact, and the jet fell on the car, killing
> > the driver. I didn't look up the date, but I do recall this happening
> > at Selfridge in Michigan in the mid to late 90's.
>
> Good friend of mine was the Chief of Police at Selfridge when that
> happened. My faulty memory says 1993-1994. The driver was a dependent
> who had been over at the Navy Club (Mole Hole) tossing a few back,
> apparently, and in the middle of the night, instead of taking his car
> thru the Navy Club parking lot toward the perimeter road, he drove out
> onto the ramp (the Mole Hole is the old tanker alert facility.. its
> literally right on the edge of the ramp), took a taxiway across the
> runway and down another taxiway to where the T-birds were parked.
> (They were on a taxiway away from all the other airshow aircraft for
> security reasons) The roving sentry reported that the car didn't have
> any lights on and he didn't even see it approaching until the last
> second when he heard the motor revving up.
>
> In true military fashion, **** ran downhill when it was time to assign
> blame, so my friend the chief of police got axed instead of the
> general in charge of the base. Even though they'd placed a higher
> level of security on the T-Birds aircraft than they normally call for,
> and that the sentries couldn't have done anything in time to stop that
> car even if they'd been locked and loaded and there had been 10 of
> them out there.
>
> That was pretty messed up, however.
>
> NIN

[Mike Beede]

In article . net>, Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> Also, there was no "go exploded call".

I assume from context that this means "fly in different directions and
we'll sort it out later." Is that roughly correct?

Thanks,

Mike Beede

[Earl Watkins]

> > Accident a Hill AFB in May (?) 1981


On May 9 1981 Capt. Nick Hauck was killed durring a performance at
Hill AFB. He was flying a T-38. Capt R.D. Evans returned to fill the
position.

THUNDERBIRDS KILLED WHILE SERVING ON THE TEAM

NAME POSITION AIRCRAFT DATE

Capt. George Kevil Solo F-84G 12/13/54
Capt. Bob Rutte Solo F-100C 9/26/57
Capt. C. D. Salmon Solo/Slot F-100C 03/12/59
Capt. J. R. Crane Narrator F-100C 07/27/60
Maj. Robert Fitzgerald Cmdr/Ldr F-100F 04/06/61
Capt. George Nail Narrator F-100F 04/06/61
Capt. Gene Devlin Left Wing F-105B 05/09/64
Maj. Frank Leithen Exec Officer F-100F 10/12/66
Capt. Robert Morgan Solo F-100F 10/12/66
Capt. Jack Thurman Solo F-100D 01/09/69
Maj. Joe Howard Right Wing F-4E 06/04/72
Capt. Jerry Bolt Slot F-4E 12/21/72
Capt. Charlie Carter Narrator T-38A 07/25/77
Capt. Nick Hauck Solo T-38A 05/09/81
Lt. Col. D. L. Smith Cmdr/Ldr T-38A 09/08/81
Maj. Norm Lowry Cmdr/Ldr T-38A 01/18/82
Capt. Willie Mays Left Wing T-38A 01/18/82
Capt. Pete Peterson Right Wing T-38A 01/18/82
Capt. Mark Melancon Slot T-38A 01/18/82


CWO Floyd Pulley Eng. Officer C-123 10/08/58
MSgt. Boyd Lambreth Chief Inspector C-123 10/08/58
SSgt. John Bishop Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
SSgt. George Blanchard Engines C-123 10/08/58
SSgt. Charles Hillhouse Flight Chief C-123 10/08/58
SSgt. Robert Myers Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
SSgt. George Stevens Electrician C-123 10/08/58
A1C Elmer Houseman Jr. Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
A1C Richard Lashley Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
A1C Don Seaney Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
A2C Jerry Adams Crew Chief C-123 10/08/58
A2C Adrian Gayther Radio C-123 10/08/58
TSgt. John Lesso Flight Engineer C-123 10/08/58
TSgt. Chuck Lynn Crew Chief F-4E 12/21/72

[Dudley Henriques]

"Mike Beede" > wrote in message
...
> In article . net>, Dudley
Henriques > wrote:
>
> > Also, there was no "go exploded call".
>
> I assume from context that this means "fly in different directions and
> we'll sort it out later." Is that roughly correct?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Beede

Basically that's correct. It's a briefed and practiced maneuver for each
position.
DH