T-6 accident [Archive] - AviationBanter

Big John

November 18th 07, 08:22 PM

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>
>> Can you assess the problem?
>
>What, with my browser or the accident?
>
>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
>He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
>around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
>loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
>the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
>sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
>early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>
>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
>my youtube fun!
>
>
>
>Bertie

Bertie

I made some comments on another post on this accident which was before
the video of the accident was posted.

I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.

1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.

2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before roll
started. Again good technique.

3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
or very slightly nose down.

4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should have
allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.

5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
of flight.

6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
line of flight.

7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.

8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
extra aileron.

9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
bird down.

10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.

Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened from
start to finish.

Big John

Kyle Boatright

November 18th 07, 08:37 PM

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>
>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>
>>What, with my browser or the accident?
>>
>>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
>>He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
>>around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
>>loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
>>the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
>>sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
>>early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>>
>>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
>>my youtube fun!
>>
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
>
> Bertie
>
> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was before
> the video of the accident was posted.
>
> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>
> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>
> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before roll
> started. Again good technique.
>
> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
> or very slightly nose down.
>
> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should have
> allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>
> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
> of flight.

Is there any evidence that he fed in pro-roll rudder in addition to some
elevator? That would explain both the nose dropping during the roll and the
rather abrupt course change.

>
> 6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
> bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
> with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
> line of flight.
>
> 7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
> slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>
> 8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
> extra aileron.
>
> 9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
> didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
> bird down.
>
> 10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
> until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>
> Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened from
> start to finish.
>
> Big John

Dale[_3_]

November 18th 07, 08:40 PM

In article >,
"Darkwing" <theducksmailATyahoo.com> wrote:

>
> No it is an F14 doing a high speed pass just above the deck, then it banks
> and a just explodes. It is kind if surreal like a Hollywood plane crash.

The airplane just blew up. As I remember the engine came apart. This
was on one of the Discovery Channel programs where they spent a bunch of
time on a carrier.

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 18th 07, 08:47 PM

Big John > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>
>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>
>>What, with my browser or the accident?
>>
>>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the
>>horizon. He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he
>>continued around in the now awkward position of having to prevent
>>further altitude loss with excessive neg G which slowed him
>>considerably and further skewed the airplane's. The exit half was a
>>classic dish. Everybody does 'em sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a
>>roll that's going to produce one early enough to abandon it. This guy
>>didn't.
>>
>>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>>out of my youtube fun!
>>
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
>
> Bertie
>
> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was before
> the video of the accident was posted.
>
> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>
> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>
> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before roll
> started. Again good technique.
>
> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
> or very slightly nose down.
>
> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should have
> allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>
> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
> of flight.
>
> 6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
> bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
> with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
> line of flight.
>
> 7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
> slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>
> 8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
> extra aileron.
>
> 9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
> didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
> bird down.
>
> 10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
> until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>
> Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened from
> start to finish.

OK, it's kind of hard to see it in relation to he horizon for a lot of
the roll. My own feeling is the nose was down too far during the first
quarter and then he was well to nose low during the inverted portion and
knew it, pushed hard and drew some drag, then panicked and tried to get
out with hard top rudder too early and pulled hard as soon as he passed
90 deg roll on the back side. It's been a while, but it;s a classic
student panic recovery from a botched roll.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 18th 07, 08:48 PM

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
:

>
> "Big John" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble
>>>>> with Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>>
>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>>
>>>What, with my browser or the accident?
>>>
>>>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the
>>>horizon. He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he
>>>continued around in the now awkward position of having to prevent
>>>further altitude loss with excessive neg G which slowed him
>>>considerably and further skewed the airplane's. The exit half was a
>>>classic dish. Everybody does 'em sometimes.... Trick is to recognise
>>>a roll that's going to produce one early enough to abandon it. This
>>>guy didn't.
>>>
>>>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>>>out of my youtube fun!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was
>> before the video of the accident was posted.
>>
>> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>>
>> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>>
>> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before
>> roll started. Again good technique.
>>
>> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>> or very slightly nose down.
>>
>> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should
>> have allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>>
>> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
>> of flight.
>
> Is there any evidence that he fed in pro-roll rudder in addition to
> some elevator? That would explain both the nose dropping during the
> roll and the rather abrupt course change.
>

doubt it or he would have turned into the ground pretty quickish. just
not enough top rudder would be my guess.

Bertie
>

WJRFlyBoy

November 18th 07, 09:26 PM

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

> WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>
>> Can you assess the problem?
>
> What, with my browser or the accident?

lol

> The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
> He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
> around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
> loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
> the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
> sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
> early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.

I later saw your post re: equipment failure.

> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
> my youtube fun!
>
> Bertie

Orbit Downloader
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 18th 07, 09:50 PM

WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:

>
>> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>> out of my youtube fun!
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Orbit Downloader

Thanks I'll have a look

Bertie

Big John

November 18th 07, 09:58 PM

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 20:48:25 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
:
>
>>
>> "Big John" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble
>>>>>> with Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>>>
>>>>What, with my browser or the accident?
>>>>
>>>>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the
>>>>horizon. He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he
>>>>continued around in the now awkward position of having to prevent
>>>>further altitude loss with excessive neg G which slowed him
>>>>considerably and further skewed the airplane's. The exit half was a
>>>>classic dish. Everybody does 'em sometimes.... Trick is to recognise
>>>>a roll that's going to produce one early enough to abandon it. This
>>>>guy didn't.
>>>>
>>>>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>>>>out of my youtube fun!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bertie
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was
>>> before the video of the accident was posted.
>>>
>>> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>>> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>>>
>>> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>>> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>>>
>>> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before
>>> roll started. Again good technique.
>>>
>>> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>>> or very slightly nose down.
>>>
>>> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>>> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should
>>> have allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>>>
>>> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>>> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
>>> of flight.
>>
>> Is there any evidence that he fed in pro-roll rudder in addition to
>> some elevator? That would explain both the nose dropping during the
>> roll and the rather abrupt course change.
>>
>
>doubt it or he would have turned into the ground pretty quickish. just
>not enough top rudder would be my guess.
>
>Bertie
>>

Bertie

Reading all the posts and going back to and looking at strip again a
number of times, it is obvious that he put in a lot of up elevator at
the 270 degrees of roll. This is what turned the bird 90 degrees hard
port.

He also kept aileron in and bird continued to roll to almost a wings
level attitude before it hit the ground flat and ............

What he was thinking and trying to do I don't know. If he had
continued his roll to wings level and then up elevator he probably
would have just cleared the ground. Or if he had rolled another 45
degrees past the 270 and then hard up elevator he would have made it
ok.

It's easy to make surmises after the fact but my comments 'could'
explain what we can see in strip.

I just don't see a dish out.

End posting on this thread.

Big John

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 18th 07, 10:09 PM

Big John > wrote in
:
>
> Bertie
>
> Reading all the posts and going back to and looking at strip again a
> number of times, it is obvious that he put in a lot of up elevator at
> the 270 degrees of roll. This is what turned the bird 90 degrees hard
> port.
>
> He also kept aileron in and bird continued to roll to almost a wings
> level attitude before it hit the ground flat and ............
>
> What he was thinking and trying to do I don't know. If he had
> continued his roll to wings level and then up elevator he probably
> would have just cleared the ground. Or if he had rolled another 45
> degrees past the 270 and then hard up elevator he would have made it
> ok.
>
> It's easy to make surmises after the fact but my comments 'could'
> explain what we can see in strip.

Oh I don't doubt you, mostly I'm just thinking out loud.
>
> I just don't see a dish out.
>
> End posting on this thread.
>

Kay, thanks for that. I'm just trying to get my head back into the
frame.
I think it comes down to experience and training. When the **** hits the
fan your brain is reduced to something like reptilian proportians and
the only way you're going to do the right thing is if you have done it a
thousand times before and done it the right way and the wrong way..

Bertie

K l e i n

November 19th 07, 12:13 AM

On Nov 18, 2:26 pm, WJRFlyBoy > wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> > WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
> :
>
> >> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> >>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
> >>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
> >>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>
> >> Can you assess the problem?
>
> > What, with my browser or the accident?
>
> lol
>
> > The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
> > He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
> > around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
> > loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
> > the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
> > sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
> > early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>
> I later saw your post re: equipment failu
>
> > The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
> > my youtube fun!
>
> > Bertie
>
> Orbit Downloader
> --
> Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

What I see is: first half of roll looks fine; but - as he hits the
wings level inverted position, the nose is starting to drop. At this
point of the roll, he should be pushing. But he's starting to pull,
then he pulls some more as he goes through the 3rd quarter of the
roll, causing it to turn 90 degrees and fly into the ground. Only
thing that can make it turn like that is up elevator. Also, I don't
see any top rudder (right) which would have helped hold the nose up.
Basically, the same control movements would produce a 90 degree
rolling turn, inverted to upright, outside roll. I've done lots of
these on purpose and its really hard not to lose altitude. Sadly, he
didn't have any altitude availble to lose.

K l e i n

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 19th 07, 12:51 AM

K l e i n wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2:26 pm, WJRFlyBoy > wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
>>> :
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>> What, with my browser or the accident?
>> lol
>>
>>> The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
>>> He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
>>> around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
>>> loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
>>> the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
>>> sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
>>> early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>> I later saw your post re: equipment failu
>>
>>> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
>>> my youtube fun!
>>> Bertie
>> Orbit Downloader
>> --
>> Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
>
> What I see is: first half of roll looks fine; but - as he hits the
> wings level inverted position, the nose is starting to drop. At this
> point of the roll, he should be pushing. But he's starting to pull,
> then he pulls some more as he goes through the 3rd quarter of the
> roll, causing it to turn 90 degrees and fly into the ground. Only
> thing that can make it turn like that is up elevator. Also, I don't
> see any top rudder (right) which would have helped hold the nose up.
> Basically, the same control movements would produce a 90 degree
> rolling turn, inverted to upright, outside roll. I've done lots of
> these on purpose and its really hard not to lose altitude. Sadly, he
> didn't have any altitude availble to lose.
>
> K l e i n
Just back pressure coming off the backside of the roll wouldn't have
yawed him in like that. Back pressure held in through the second knife
edge would have TURNED him in on his wingtip. He literally yawed himself
sideways coming off the back side and hit flat. I'm guessing he held in
the left (top) rudder and never made the rudder switch through inverted
then let it dish out with the now bottom rudder yawing him off the roll
axis as he came on through knife edge on the way down. Looked to me like
a classic mis-application of controls starting at inverted.

--
Dudley Henriques

Morgans[_2_]

November 19th 07, 02:08 AM

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote
>
> doubt it or he would have turned into the ground pretty quickish. just
> not enough top rudder would be my guess.

I looked at the rudder position as he completed the first 90 degrees of the
roll, and it looked like the rudder was completely neutral. Did you see
that, too?
--
Jim in NC

Morgans[_2_]

November 19th 07, 02:18 AM

"Darkwing" <theducksmailATyahoo.com> wrote
>>>
>>> What is the deal with the first crash shown in this video?
>>> Overstressed the aircraft and it came apart? Very strange.
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=CnN9iIvVVto

Catastrophic uncontained engine failure, is what I remember about that
clip.
--
Jim in NC

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 19th 07, 02:31 AM

Morgans wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote
>> doubt it or he would have turned into the ground pretty quickish. just
>> not enough top rudder would be my guess.
>
> I looked at the rudder position as he completed the first 90 degrees of the
> roll, and it looked like the rudder was completely neutral. Did you see
> that, too?

Rudder deflection isn't as much as one might imagine during a roll. Most
pilots are used to looking at their own rudder deflection on the ground
as they check the rudder throw each way. In a roll, with dynamic
pressure on the rudder, it actually deflects very little to produce the
desired effect.
The flatness of his rotation off his roll axis between knife edge and
impact would seem to indicate a bottom rudder producing yaw. If it was
back pressure applied too early, assuming he had kept in the rolling
aileron, as he continued to roll into knife edge and the nose came down,
the back pressure would produce turn that should result in the impact
being at the left wingtip rather than the flat rotation he seemed to
experience prior to impact.
Dudley

--
Dudley Henriques

Jay Honeck

November 19th 07, 05:34 AM

> No it is an F14 doing a high speed pass just above the deck, then it banks
> and a just explodes. It is kind if surreal like a Hollywood plane crash.-

Go here for some detail on this unusual incident:

http://alexisparkinn.com/military_videos.htm

Scroll down to "F14A Tomcat Explosion" to view both the video and read
several explanations of what might have caused the explosion.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 19th 07, 09:11 AM

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote
>>
>> doubt it or he would have turned into the ground pretty quickish.
>> just not enough top rudder would be my guess.
>
> I looked at the rudder position as he completed the first 90 degrees
> of the roll, and it looked like the rudder was completely neutral.
> Did you see that, too?

Yah, really hard to see with those blurry you tube things, but that's what
it looked like, but what Dudley says makes sense. I think he went al lizard
brained and started thrashing rather than flying the airplane through the
error as he should have.

Bertie

Darkwing

November 20th 07, 02:45 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
...
>> No it is an F14 doing a high speed pass just above the deck, then it
>> banks
>> and a just explodes. It is kind if surreal like a Hollywood plane crash.-
>
> Go here for some detail on this unusual incident:
>
> http://alexisparkinn.com/military_videos.htm
>
> Scroll down to "F14A Tomcat Explosion" to view both the video and read
> several explanations of what might have caused the explosion.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Thanks Jay that definitely answered my question.

Bela P. Havasreti[_2_]

November 20th 07, 02:50 AM

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:22:58 -0600, Big John >
wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>wrote:
>
>>WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>
>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>
>>What, with my browser or the accident?
>>
>>The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
>>He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
>>around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
>>loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
>>the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
>>sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
>>early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>>
>>The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
>>my youtube fun!
>>
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
>
>Bertie
>
>I made some comments on another post on this accident which was before
>the video of the accident was posted.
>
>I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>
>1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>
>2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before roll
>started. Again good technique.
>
>3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>or very slightly nose down.
>
>4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should have
>allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>
>5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
>of flight.
>
>6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
>bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
>with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
>line of flight.
>
>7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
>slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>
>8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
>extra aileron.
>
>9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
>didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
>bird down.
>
>10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
>until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>
>Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened from
>start to finish.
>
>Big John

If I recall correctly, the pilot of the accident aircraft borrowed
that T-6 for the accident flight (his T-6 was down for maintenance,
something like that...). The story went that his T-6 had the "high
throw" aileron bellcranks, but the borrowed / accident T-6 did not.

Bela P. Havasreti

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 03:32 AM

Bela P. Havasreti wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:22:58 -0600, Big John >
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble with
>>>>> Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>> What, with my browser or the accident?
>>>
>>> The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the horizon.
>>> He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but he continued
>>> around in the now awkward position of having to prevent further altitude
>>> loss with excessive neg G which slowed him considerably and further skewed
>>> the airplane's. The exit half was a classic dish. Everybody does 'em
>>> sometimes.... Trick is to recognise a roll that's going to produce one
>>> early enough to abandon it. This guy didn't.
>>>
>>> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess out of
>>> my youtube fun!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was before
>> the video of the accident was posted.
>>
>> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>>
>> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>>
>> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before roll
>> started. Again good technique.
>>
>> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>> or very slightly nose down.
>>
>> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should have
>> allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>>
>> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off line
>> of flight.
>>
>> 6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
>> bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
>> with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
>> line of flight.
>>
>> 7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
>> slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>>
>> 8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
>> extra aileron.
>>
>> 9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
>> didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
>> bird down.
>>
>> 10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
>> until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>>
>> Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened from
>> start to finish.
>>
>> Big John
>
> If I recall correctly, the pilot of the accident aircraft borrowed
> that T-6 for the accident flight (his T-6 was down for maintenance,
> something like that...). The story went that his T-6 had the "high
> throw" aileron bellcranks, but the borrowed / accident T-6 did not.
>
> Bela P. Havasreti

The 6 had 2 choices of bell cranks on the ailerons. One was a 29up/15
down and the other a straight 15/15 if I recall.

If the accident pilot was used to the roll rate and roll inertia
resulting from a roll set initiated at his usual entry airspeed
(aileron dynamic pressure) and rolled the borrowed aircraft with the
asymmetrical aileron setup this could possibly explain a great deal to
me as a display pilot.
For a given airspeed, the aileron drag produced by the 29/15 setup would
not have been what he was instinctively expecting and that could easily
have spooked him as the roll commenced causing the control
mis-application and confusion that seemed obvious from the crash.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 04:39 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bela P. Havasreti wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:22:58 -0600, Big John >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble
>>>>>> with Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>>> What, with my browser or the accident?
>>>>
>>>> The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the
>>>> horizon. He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but
>>>> he continued around in the now awkward position of having to
>>>> prevent further altitude loss with excessive neg G which slowed him
>>>> considerably and further skewed the airplane's. The exit half was a
>>>> classic dish. Everybody does 'em sometimes.... Trick is to
>>>> recognise a roll that's going to produce one early enough to
>>>> abandon it. This guy didn't.
>>>>
>>>> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>>>> out of my youtube fun!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was
>>> before the video of the accident was posted.
>>>
>>> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>>> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>>>
>>> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>>> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>>>
>>> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before
>>> roll started. Again good technique.
>>>
>>> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>>> or very slightly nose down.
>>>
>>> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>>> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should
>>> have allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>>>
>>> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>>> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off
>>> line of flight.
>>>
>>> 6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
>>> bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
>>> with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
>>> line of flight.
>>>
>>> 7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
>>> slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>>>
>>> 8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
>>> extra aileron.
>>>
>>> 9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
>>> didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
>>> bird down.
>>>
>>> 10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
>>> until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>>>
>>> Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened
>>> from start to finish.
>>>
>>> Big John
>>
>> If I recall correctly, the pilot of the accident aircraft borrowed
>> that T-6 for the accident flight (his T-6 was down for maintenance,
>> something like that...). The story went that his T-6 had the "high
>> throw" aileron bellcranks, but the borrowed / accident T-6 did not.
>>
>> Bela P. Havasreti
>
> The 6 had 2 choices of bell cranks on the ailerons. One was a 29up/15
> down and the other a straight 15/15 if I recall.
>
> If the accident pilot was used to the roll rate and roll inertia
> resulting from a roll set initiated at his usual entry airspeed
> (aileron dynamic pressure) and rolled the borrowed aircraft with the
> asymmetrical aileron setup this could possibly explain a great deal to
> me as a display pilot.
> For a given airspeed, the aileron drag produced by the 29/15 setup
> would not have been what he was instinctively expecting and that could
> easily have spooked him as the roll commenced causing the control
> mis-application and confusion that seemed obvious from the crash.

Absolutely. It would have been like flying an almost entirely different
airplane. There's a lesson there, alright..

Bertie
>

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 05:21 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bela P. Havasreti wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:22:58 -0600, Big John >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> WJRFlyBoy > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:12:31 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the one I mean to post Dudley. Was having some trouble
>>>>>>> with Youtube due to a plug-in I think..
>>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7eYhlm9FJ8
>>>>>> Can you assess the problem?
>>>>> What, with my browser or the accident?
>>>>>
>>>>> The T-6 passed 90 deg (and even earlier) with his nose below the
>>>>> horizon. He could have rolled back and saved it at that point, but
>>>>> he continued around in the now awkward position of having to
>>>>> prevent further altitude loss with excessive neg G which slowed him
>>>>> considerably and further skewed the airplane's. The exit half was a
>>>>> classic dish. Everybody does 'em sometimes.... Trick is to
>>>>> recognise a roll that's going to produce one early enough to
>>>>> abandon it. This guy didn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> The You tube extension add-on, I have no idea, but it's made a mess
>>>>> out of my youtube fun!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>> I made some comments on another post on this accident which was
>>>> before the video of the accident was posted.
>>>>
>>>> I have looked at the strip probably 50 times and can't come up with
>>>> what I believe is a accurate analysis of what all happened and why.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Bird was in a shallow dive and picking up airspeed, above cruise,
>>>> when strip starts. This is a good entry technique.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Bird bottomed out and nose was raised above the horizon before
>>>> roll started. Again good technique.
>>>>
>>>> 3. After first 90 degrees of roll nose had dropped to at least level
>>>> or very slightly nose down.
>>>>
>>>> 4. After 180 degrees of roll nose was definitely below the horizon.
>>>> Not in a dive but shallow enough that continuing roll rate should
>>>> have allowed completion of roll before bird hitting ground.
>>>>
>>>> 5. After 270 degrees of roll bird made almost a square corner port
>>>> turn and shortly after hit the ground almost flat 90 degrees off
>>>> line of flight.
>>>>
>>>> 6. It did not look to me like he dished out but I don't know why the
>>>> bird made the rapid 90 degree turn off line of flight. My experience
>>>> with dish out of roll, in T-6, bird ended up at max 30 degrees off
>>>> line of flight.
>>>>
>>>> 7. Assuming video strip was real time, the roll was a pretty rapid
>>>> slow roll. My slow rolls were about half the roll rate of this bird.
>>>>
>>>> 8.Roll was against torque, which would have slowed roll down without
>>>> extra aileron.
>>>>
>>>> 9.Either you or Dudley talked about G forces slowing bird down. I
>>>> didn't see any large angle of attack which would be required to slow
>>>> bird down.
>>>>
>>>> 10. Looking at bird in video, I didn't see any reduction in airspeed
>>>> until about the time it made the 90 degree turn before impact.
>>>>
>>>> Lots of comments but can't give a hard analysis of what happened
>>>> from start to finish.
>>>>
>>>> Big John
>>> If I recall correctly, the pilot of the accident aircraft borrowed
>>> that T-6 for the accident flight (his T-6 was down for maintenance,
>>> something like that...). The story went that his T-6 had the "high
>>> throw" aileron bellcranks, but the borrowed / accident T-6 did not.
>>>
>>> Bela P. Havasreti
>> The 6 had 2 choices of bell cranks on the ailerons. One was a 29up/15
>> down and the other a straight 15/15 if I recall.
>>
>> If the accident pilot was used to the roll rate and roll inertia
>> resulting from a roll set initiated at his usual entry airspeed
>> (aileron dynamic pressure) and rolled the borrowed aircraft with the
>> asymmetrical aileron setup this could possibly explain a great deal to
>> me as a display pilot.
>> For a given airspeed, the aileron drag produced by the 29/15 setup
>> would not have been what he was instinctively expecting and that could
>> easily have spooked him as the roll commenced causing the control
>> mis-application and confusion that seemed obvious from the crash.
>
> Absolutely. It would have been like flying an almost entirely different
> airplane. There's a lesson there, alright..
>
>
> Bertie
>
With this information, I honestly believe this is what got him. The
asymmetrical cranks would buffet the ailerons in a full stick throw and
from the film, he had considerable aileron in play judging from the roll
rate I saw. If he got "unexpected" results from the lateral stick throw
and felt some aileron buffet he wasn't expecting, this combination could
have produced the exact result we saw on the film.
Low altitude rolls are one area of flight where if you begin feeling
something out of place during the roll, it could easily kill all but the
most highly disciplined display pilot. Even then, it could be a crap
shoot picking a result.
You try to prepare for everything in your training as a display pilot,
but there's always the unexpected. If that happens, even professionals
can get that split second brain freeze where you try desperately to sort
it out in the nano-second you have to do that.
My guess is that this poor guy just got a split second behind what had
to be done and the airplane started flying him instead of the other way
around.
It happens, and I've seen it happen to some of the finest pilots I've
ever known.
Sad fact of life in this venue unfortunately.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 05:42 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in news:a5WdnagX4-ZL89
:

>>
> With this information, I honestly believe this is what got him. The
> asymmetrical cranks would buffet the ailerons in a full stick throw and
> from the film, he had considerable aileron in play judging from the roll
> rate I saw. If he got "unexpected" results from the lateral stick throw
> and felt some aileron buffet he wasn't expecting, this combination could
> have produced the exact result we saw on the film.

I can see one result that would come from the assymetric ailerons. the
right aileron would have been producing more drag than he was used to and
dragging his nose to the left (our perspective) which would have been
skewing him that way even as he was leaving inverted flight. It also would
have been pulling the nose down around the first 90 deg. It had to have
been confusing when the usual amount of rudder wasn't doing it for him. The
last bit looks to me as if there's an awful lot of skidding going on, but I
have to say, even looking at it over and over it all happens so quickly
it's really hard to see aht's going on.

> It happens, and I've seen it happen to some of the finest pilots I've
> ever known.
> Sad fact of life in this venue unfortunately.
>

Yeah, I think I'll be loeaving low alt stuff out at this stage....

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 06:15 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

> Yeah, I think I'll be loeaving low alt stuff out at this stage....
>
> Bertie

I'm glad to hear this.

Counting our friends on the jet teams both here in the states and over
seas, and considering the professional civilian demonstration pilots my
wife and I have known personally throughout my career over the last 50
odd years, we have lost 32 of these friends and associates to low
altitude display flying.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 06:34 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I think I'll be loeaving low alt stuff out at this stage....
>>
>> Bertie
>
> I'm glad to hear this.
>
> Counting our friends on the jet teams both here in the states and over
> seas, and considering the professional civilian demonstration pilots my
> wife and I have known personally throughout my career over the last 50
> odd years, we have lost 32 of these friends and associates to low
> altitude display flying.

Yipes. I had no intention of getting back into the low stuff anyway. I'm
definitely not tough enough to go outside like I used to and it'd take
years to get my mental muscles up to scratch as well. I'd nevr be as quick
as I was at 25 anyway.
It's really tempting to do low level aerobatics when you get proficient
enough not to bust your imaginary floor at altitude. After all, you want
everybody to see what a genius you are! But all it takes is one little
thing to throw you off and that's it.
I loved doing it when I did it, but nothing left to prove now.

Bertie

Viperdoc

November 20th 07, 01:20 PM

Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.

I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple of airshows
when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the airplane, to do things
a little higher, and not as aggressively. People still ask him about what
happened to his green airplane! (Everything he owns is red)

It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement that were
very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving. Let's face it- the
best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make a lot of smoke and noise,
and do variations of wingovers and cubans- nothing more.

Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in this
environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair playing on a computer
and pretending.

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 02:27 PM

"Viperdoc" > wrote in
et:

> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>
> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple of
> airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
> (Everything he owns is red)
>
> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement that
> were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving. Let's face
> it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make a lot of smoke
> and noise, and do variations of wingovers and cubans- nothing more.

and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall seeing
one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite airplanes to
watch, though.
>
> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in this
> environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair playing on a
> computer and pretending.
>
>

You're just trying to excite Anthony now.

>

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 02:38 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
> et:
>
>> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>>
>> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple of
>> airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
>> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
>> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
>> (Everything he owns is red)
>>
>> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement that
>> were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving. Let's face
>> it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make a lot of smoke
>> and noise, and do variations of wingovers and cubans- nothing more.
>
> and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall seeing
> one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite airplanes to
> watch, though.
>> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in this
>> environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair playing on a
>> computer and pretending.
>>
>>
>
> You're just trying to excite Anthony now.
>
>
>
Ed Mahler did a low altitude T6 routine before his PJ260 DAYS.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 02:42 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I think I'll be loeaving low alt stuff out at this stage....
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> I'm glad to hear this.
>>
>> Counting our friends on the jet teams both here in the states and over
>> seas, and considering the professional civilian demonstration pilots my
>> wife and I have known personally throughout my career over the last 50
>> odd years, we have lost 32 of these friends and associates to low
>> altitude display flying.
>
>
> Yipes. I had no intention of getting back into the low stuff anyway. I'm
> definitely not tough enough to go outside like I used to and it'd take
> years to get my mental muscles up to scratch as well. I'd nevr be as quick
> as I was at 25 anyway.
> It's really tempting to do low level aerobatics when you get proficient
> enough not to bust your imaginary floor at altitude. After all, you want
> everybody to see what a genius you are! But all it takes is one little
> thing to throw you off and that's it.
> I loved doing it when I did it, but nothing left to prove now.
>
>
> Bertie

I'm with you. I'm content to sit by the fire like an old dog and relax.
It's time for the new guys coming up to have their shot. I help where
and when I can, but I've no desire to go back.
I've earned the rest!
:-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 03:07 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>> et:
>>
>>> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>>>
>>> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple of
>>> airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
>>> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
>>> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
>>> (Everything he owns is red)
>>>
>>> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement
>>> that were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving.
>>> Let's face it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make a
>>> lot of smoke and noise, and do variations of wingovers and cubans-
>>> nothing more.
>>
>> and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall
>> seeing one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite
>> airplanes to watch, though.
>>> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in this
>>> environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair playing on a
>>> computer and pretending.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You're just trying to excite Anthony now.
>>
>>
>>
> Ed Mahler did a low altitude T6 routine before his PJ260 DAYS.
>

Never saw that, Only his PJ. He's one of four that I know that died doing
aerobatics, of course. What a shame..

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 03:56 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>>> et:
>>>
>>>> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>>>>
>>>> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple of
>>>> airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
>>>> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
>>>> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
>>>> (Everything he owns is red)
>>>>
>>>> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement
>>>> that were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving.
>>>> Let's face it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make a
>>>> lot of smoke and noise, and do variations of wingovers and cubans-
>>>> nothing more.
>>> and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall
>>> seeing one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite
>>> airplanes to watch, though.
>>>> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in this
>>>> environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair playing on a
>>>> computer and pretending.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You're just trying to excite Anthony now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Ed Mahler did a low altitude T6 routine before his PJ260 DAYS.
>>
>
> Never saw that, Only his PJ. He's one of four that I know that died doing
> aerobatics, of course. What a shame..
>
>
> Bertie
>
Yup...rough business.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 04:15 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>>>> et:
>>>>
>>>>> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>>>>>
>>>>> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple
>>>>> of airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
>>>>> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
>>>>> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
>>>>> (Everything he owns is red)
>>>>>
>>>>> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement
>>>>> that were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving.
>>>>> Let's face it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make
>>>>> a lot of smoke and noise, and do variations of wingovers and
>>>>> cubans- nothing more.
>>>> and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall
>>>> seeing one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite
>>>> airplanes to watch, though.
>>>>> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in
>>>>> this environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair
>>>>> playing on a computer and pretending.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> You're just trying to excite Anthony now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Ed Mahler did a low altitude T6 routine before his PJ260 DAYS.
>>>
>>
>> Never saw that, Only his PJ. He's one of four that I know that died
>> doing aerobatics, of course. What a shame..
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Yup...rough business.
>

For those of you who don't know who he was he was one of the great
aerobatic pilots of the 60s/70s. He flew a Parsons Joslin 260 designed
by Nick D'Appuzzo who I also knew as a kid. Think big Skybolt if you
don't know what the airplane is.
Ed was going to do a routine for a local news station's cameras
somewhere in north Jersey but found a damaged tail brace wire on the
walkaround. The PJ had a dual set, so he took the rod off on the other
side and took off anyway. As soon as he put a load on the stab, it
failed and he was killed.
I still can't believe he did it.

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 04:48 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>>>>> et:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bottom line: the guy screwed up, and it cost him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I loaned my Decathlon to a great friend, who used it in a couple
>>>>>> of airshows when his was down. He had the sense, not knowing the
>>>>>> airplane, to do things a little higher, and not as aggressively.
>>>>>> People still ask him about what happened to his green airplane!
>>>>>> (Everything he owns is red)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It sounds like the guy in the video made some errors in judgement
>>>>>> that were very, very costly, in a business that is unforgiving.
>>>>>> Let's face it- the best a T-6 is going to do in an airshow is make
>>>>>> a lot of smoke and noise, and do variations of wingovers and
>>>>>> cubans- nothing more.
>>>>> and they look great doing it, too. Now you mntion it I can't recall
>>>>> seeing one doing a slow roll down low. Still one of my favorite
>>>>> airplanes to watch, though.
>>>>>> Why push it when the costs of a screw up are so high? Flying in
>>>>>> this environment is a lot different from sitting in a chair
>>>>>> playing on a computer and pretending.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> You're just trying to excite Anthony now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ed Mahler did a low altitude T6 routine before his PJ260 DAYS.
>>>>
>>> Never saw that, Only his PJ. He's one of four that I know that died
>>> doing aerobatics, of course. What a shame..
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>
>> Yup...rough business.
>>
>
> For those of you who don't know who he was he was one of the great
> aerobatic pilots of the 60s/70s. He flew a Parsons Joslin 260 designed
> by Nick D'Appuzzo who I also knew as a kid. Think big Skybolt if you
> don't know what the airplane is.
> Ed was going to do a routine for a local news station's cameras
> somewhere in north Jersey but found a damaged tail brace wire on the
> walkaround. The PJ had a dual set, so he took the rod off on the other
> side and took off anyway. As soon as he put a load on the stab, it
> failed and he was killed.
> I still can't believe he did it.
>
>
> Bertie
>

I can't either. I was dumbstruck when we heard what had happened. Ed
knew better than to do that. He was always aggressive with his approach
to aerobatics, but he knew the score, and he knew g loads.
We all assumed there was some kind of pressure involved, or perhaps a
tight time schedule. The rub of it is that all of us knew that it was
exactly this kind of thing that gets you killed.
Ed's reason for not waiting will always remain one of life's great
unanswered questions for me.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 05:38 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:
>>
>
> I can't either. I was dumbstruck when we heard what had happened. Ed
> knew better than to do that. He was always aggressive with his approach
> to aerobatics, but he knew the score, and he knew g loads.
> We all assumed there was some kind of pressure involved, or perhaps a
> tight time schedule. The rub of it is that all of us knew that it was
> exactly this kind of thing that gets you killed.
> Ed's reason for not waiting will always remain one of life's great
> unanswered questions for me.
>
>

the word around was he said the he had "flown with worse" . Good lesson in
that. If someone like that can screw up what about us mere mortals?
That airplane was always immaculate. It's not like he was a shirt-tail out
kind of guy.

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 05:50 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>> I can't either. I was dumbstruck when we heard what had happened. Ed
>> knew better than to do that. He was always aggressive with his approach
>> to aerobatics, but he knew the score, and he knew g loads.
>> We all assumed there was some kind of pressure involved, or perhaps a
>> tight time schedule. The rub of it is that all of us knew that it was
>> exactly this kind of thing that gets you killed.
>> Ed's reason for not waiting will always remain one of life's great
>> unanswered questions for me.
>>
>>
>
> the word around was he said the he had "flown with worse" . Good lesson in
> that. If someone like that can screw up what about us mere mortals?
> That airplane was always immaculate. It's not like he was a shirt-tail out
> kind of guy.
>
>
> Bertie
>
>
>

"Flown with worse" in the business isn't a positive trait to posess and
can end up being a fast trip to a hole in the ground. Unfortunately in
Ed's case, it ended that way.
My job has always been to keep pilots alive in the acro environment. I
have to say that I never used Ed as a positive example. His kind of
aggression toward aerobatics was just beyond my comfort limit.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 06:06 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>>
>
> "Flown with worse" in the business isn't a positive trait to posess
> and can end up being a fast trip to a hole in the ground.
> Unfortunately in Ed's case, it ended that way.
> My job has always been to keep pilots alive in the acro environment. I
> have to say that I never used Ed as a positive example. His kind of
> aggression toward aerobatics was just beyond my comfort limit.
>

Interesting. As a kid I always thought he had it cracked. He didn't do
instruction AFAIK, but if he did I would have been there...
He used to roll inverted on takeoff as soon as he had clearance and his
flying was always pretty energetic, allright. I got to see him practice a
good bit and it was always very tidy, but in retrospect, as you say, he was
agressive compared to many. I have to say, as a young fellow I emulated a
lot of his stuff, and it was a major shock when he bought it. I suppose
your view of him would have been from the opposite end of the spectrum back
then!

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 20th 07, 08:56 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> "Flown with worse" in the business isn't a positive trait to posess
>> and can end up being a fast trip to a hole in the ground.
>> Unfortunately in Ed's case, it ended that way.
>> My job has always been to keep pilots alive in the acro environment. I
>> have to say that I never used Ed as a positive example. His kind of
>> aggression toward aerobatics was just beyond my comfort limit.
>>
>
> Interesting. As a kid I always thought he had it cracked. He didn't do
> instruction AFAIK, but if he did I would have been there...
> He used to roll inverted on takeoff as soon as he had clearance and his
> flying was always pretty energetic, allright. I got to see him practice a
> good bit and it was always very tidy, but in retrospect, as you say, he was
> agressive compared to many. I have to say, as a young fellow I emulated a
> lot of his stuff, and it was a major shock when he bought it. I suppose
> your view of him would have been from the opposite end of the spectrum back
> then!
>
>
> Bertie

I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out even
without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro and
doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT simple!

The pilots who make it all the way through a career in display flying
are worth watching as they have common behavior and habit patterns worth
emulating for those considering entering this venue.

Most have common traits that are recognizable to even the untrained eye.
The pilots who last in the display acro business develop early on, an
attitude of respect for the venue that borders on a kind of fanaticism.
These are the pilots who, when tempted to do a roll on takeoff by the
local airport crowd on a Sunday morning as they get ready to go cross
country to do an air show somewhere, simply smile and respectfully
decline. It's not the place....and it's not the time. They realize that
there's a self imposed "ritual" they have to go through with themselves
before executing aerobatics at low altitude and doing low acro without
this "mental tuning up " can spell real trouble.
This is why, as the number one rule I passed on to all acro the acro
pilots, especially display pilots, who got close enough to me to hear my
voice I always stressed;
"Never.....EVER....do anything with an airplane that someone asks you to
do unless you yourself are mentally and physically prepared to do
it....AND it's YOUR CALL!!"

This sounds simple enough, but you would be absolutely amazed how easy
it is to slip into doing something with an airplane because this person
or that one is watching.
Ego and complacency are high on the list of potential killers for
aerobatic pilots.
Lord only knows what made a pilot of Ed's caliber weaken his horizontal
stabilizer to match the other weakened side, then go fly hard maneuvers
for the camera.

What is completely puzzling to me and always will remain a puzzle to me
is that most any inexperienced pilot, even a student , if
asked whether THEY would have done what Ed did that day, and flown that
airplane on that day, at that time, for that purpose, would probably
instinctively say that they wouldn't have done it.

At least in this those of us in the business of flight safety were left
a lesson to pass on to new pilots.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 11:28 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>
> I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out
> even without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro
> and doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
> conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
> Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT
> simple!
>

I'm a bit confused as to what you mean here, unless it's that some
aerobatic pilots have notions about ourselves above our station.

> The pilots who make it all the way through a career in display flying
> are worth watching as they have common behavior and habit patterns
> worth emulating for those considering entering this venue.
>
> Most have common traits that are recognizable to even the untrained
> eye. The pilots who last in the display acro business develop early
> on, an attitude of respect for the venue that borders on a kind of
> fanaticism. These are the pilots who, when tempted to do a roll on
> takeoff by the local airport crowd on a Sunday morning as they get
> ready to go cross country to do an air show somewhere, simply smile
> and respectfully decline. It's not the place....and it's not the time.
> They realize that there's a self imposed "ritual" they have to go
> through with themselves before executing aerobatics at low altitude
> and doing low acro without this "mental tuning up " can spell real
> trouble. This is why, as the number one rule I passed on to all acro
> the acro pilots, especially display pilots, who got close enough to me
> to hear my voice I always stressed;
> "Never.....EVER....do anything with an airplane that someone asks you
> to do unless you yourself are mentally and physically prepared to do
> it....AND it's YOUR CALL!!"

Hm, yes. I never thougth this through before, but it rings true. I'm
never shy about a little showing off and I think most pilots are like
that, but I never liked being cajoled into doing something but I'm
uncertain as to whether that was because I have some sort of inate
wisdom or because I'm an anarchist at heart.

>
> This sounds simple enough, but you would be absolutely amazed how easy
> it is to slip into doing something with an airplane because this
> person or that one is watching.
> Ego and complacency are high on the list of potential killers for
> aerobatic pilots.
> Lord only knows what made a pilot of Ed's caliber weaken his
> horizontal stabilizer to match the other weakened side, then go fly
> hard maneuvers for the camera.

Yeah, it's a funny thing about ego. Without a sizable dose you're almost
as much of a menace in any kind of high performance flying as the guy
who has to much. My own experience has been a roller coaster of over and
under confidence of decreasing intensity throughout as I found my level
of competence and it's corresponding level of confidence. These ups and
downs never stopped, only decreased in amplitue and, I believe, have led
to a habit of constant self appraisel that has served me well in just
about any flying disciplne. IOW, experiece has eventually won out but I
was lucky to have acquired it!
>
> What is completely puzzling to me and always will remain a puzzle to
> me is that most any inexperienced pilot, even a student , if
> asked whether THEY would have done what Ed did that day, and flown
> that airplane on that day, at that time, for that purpose, would
> probably instinctively say that they wouldn't have done it.

Well, I suppose there comes a point where your knowledge allows you to
see through certain practices that are laid down for the simple minded
that can be reasonably circumvented. Problem is, a little knowledge is a
dangerous thing in a case like this. It's not like flying an airplane
with a flat battery or something like that.
in the film about your Buddy, Douglas Bader, he's credited with
repeating often something his instructor told him and that was "rules
are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools".
Trick is to live long enough to become a wise man..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 20th 07, 11:47 PM

"Viperdoc" > wrote in news:474364d1$0$32502
:

> Several years ago there was a low time pilot in our area with a new
> Commander, who crashed and died with three others on board. It turns out
> that he tore the wings off while rolling the plane.
>
> It comes down to the famous last words of "let me show you this!"
>
>
>

Yeah, some tit did that on the way home from Sun n Fun this year in a
Baron. First aerobatic lesson, self taught in a Baron with pax.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070427X00463&key=1
This is just a mind blowing accident. Sure you can do aerobatics in a non-
aerobatic airplane ( he had apparently become enthralled with the Twin
Beech performance at Sun n Fun) but how does someone even imagine he can
make the leap into aerobatic flight this way?

Bertie

Jim Logajan

November 21st 07, 12:08 AM

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
> news:474364d1$0$32502 :
>
>> Several years ago there was a low time pilot in our area with a new
>> Commander, who crashed and died with three others on board. It turns
>> out that he tore the wings off while rolling the plane.
>>
>> It comes down to the famous last words of "let me show you this!"
>
> Yeah, some tit did that on the way home from Sun n Fun this year in a
> Baron. First aerobatic lesson, self taught in a Baron with pax.
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070427X00463&key=1
> This is just a mind blowing accident.

Wow. That pilot didn't make an isolated foolish mistake - the historical
evidence indicates he was a fool from the beginning to the end. The tragedy
is that four others died along with the fool.

Found this AOPA article on the accident with the apt title "What was he
thinking?":

http://www.aopa.org/asf/asfarticles/2007/sp0707.html

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 12:14 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out
>> even without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro
>> and doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
>> conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
>> Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT
>> simple!
>>
>
> I'm a bit confused as to what you mean here, unless it's that some
> aerobatic pilots have notions about ourselves above our station.

It's simple really. Pilots exist for the most part as a specialized
group. Even loners are part of the "group"

By definition, flying is an acquired skill obtained through knowledge
and experience. The "group" recognizes those who can do things with an
airplane others in the group can't do. It's a natural pecking order
where the ability to perform aerobatics rates highly among many in the
group. This isn't to say that aerobatic pilots are better than others in
the group, but rather that the ability to perform aerobatics and fly
certain aircraft can be a "respected position" in the flying community.
Knowing this is practically unavoidable if one exists in the flying
community as a pilot.
It's quite natural therefore, (right or wrong), that SOME pilots
acquiring aerobatic skills tend toward envisioning themselves as being
"a step up" in the pecking order. If not recognized by an individual
pilot when and if this happens for it's potential toward the development
of false confidence, the situation can be a real problem for some
individuals.
The trick of course is for the acrobatically competent pilot to
recognize that part of the price for that "step up" in the pecking order
is a dual responsibility to accept aerobatics and the dangers associated
with them with the respect they are due and as well make every attempt
to instill that same respect in other pilots.

This is nothing more really, than a pedantic way of saying that pilots
acquiring aerobatic skills need to acquire aerobatic responsibility as
well. The two are inseparable and the first without the latter will kill
you dead. The residual of all this is that without responsibility, what
you do can influence someone else and possibly kill them dead as well.

>
>> The pilots who make it all the way through a career in display flying
>> are worth watching as they have common behavior and habit patterns
>> worth emulating for those considering entering this venue.
>>
>> Most have common traits that are recognizable to even the untrained
>> eye. The pilots who last in the display acro business develop early
>> on, an attitude of respect for the venue that borders on a kind of
>> fanaticism. These are the pilots who, when tempted to do a roll on
>> takeoff by the local airport crowd on a Sunday morning as they get
>> ready to go cross country to do an air show somewhere, simply smile
>> and respectfully decline. It's not the place....and it's not the time.
>> They realize that there's a self imposed "ritual" they have to go
>> through with themselves before executing aerobatics at low altitude
>> and doing low acro without this "mental tuning up " can spell real
>> trouble. This is why, as the number one rule I passed on to all acro
>> the acro pilots, especially display pilots, who got close enough to me
>> to hear my voice I always stressed;
>> "Never.....EVER....do anything with an airplane that someone asks you
>> to do unless you yourself are mentally and physically prepared to do
>> it....AND it's YOUR CALL!!"
>
>
> Hm, yes. I never thought this through before, but it rings true. I'm
> never shy about a little showing off and I think most pilots are like
> that, but I never liked being cajoled into doing something but I'm
> uncertain as to whether that was because I have some sort of innate
> wisdom or because I'm an anarchist at heart.

We'll have to share a few Jack Daniels' sometime and discuss this in
more depth
:-)
>
>> This sounds simple enough, but you would be absolutely amazed how easy
>> it is to slip into doing something with an airplane because this
>> person or that one is watching.
>> Ego and complacency are high on the list of potential killers for
>> aerobatic pilots.
>> Lord only knows what made a pilot of Ed's caliber weaken his
>> horizontal stabilizer to match the other weakened side, then go fly
>> hard maneuvers for the camera.
>
> Yeah, it's a funny thing about ego. Without a sizable dose you're almost
> as much of a menace in any kind of high performance flying as the guy
> who has too much. My own experience has been a roller coaster of over and
> under confidence of decreasing intensity throughout as I found my level
> of competence and it's corresponding level of confidence. These ups and
> downs never stopped, only decreased in amplitude and, I believe, have led
> to a habit of constant self appraisal that has served me well in just
> about any flying discipline. IOW, experience has eventually won out but I
> was lucky to have acquired it!

This is a perfectly normal process. I went through it as well.
(Remember, I probably own the most widely publicized buzz job in
aviation history :-)
The trick is to recognize it early on and control it which I'm sure both
of us managed to do.

>> What is completely puzzling to me and always will remain a puzzle to
>> me is that most any inexperienced pilot, even a student , if
>> asked whether THEY would have done what Ed did that day, and flown
>> that airplane on that day, at that time, for that purpose, would
>> probably instinctively say that they wouldn't have done it.
>
>
> Well, I suppose there comes a point where your knowledge allows you to
> see through certain practices that are laid down for the simple minded
> that can be reasonably circumvented. Problem is, a little knowledge is a
> dangerous thing in a case like this. It's not like flying an airplane
> with a flat battery or something like that.

As it turned out, this was unfortunately true.

> in the film about your Buddy, Douglas Bader, he's credited with
> repeating often something his instructor told him and that was "rules
> are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools".
> Trick is to live long enough to become a wise man..
>
> Bertie

Douglas did have a way with words. Once to a group of paraplegic
children he visited in a hospital;

“Don't listen to anyone who tells you that you can't do this or that.
That's nonsense. Make up your mind you'll never use crutches or a stick,
then have a go at everything. Go to school, join in all the games you
can. Go anywhere you want to. But never, never let them persuade you
that things are too difficult or impossible.”

Ya gotta love the guy!! :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 12:19 AM

Jim Logajan wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>> news:474364d1$0$32502 :
>>
>>> Several years ago there was a low time pilot in our area with a new
>>> Commander, who crashed and died with three others on board. It turns
>>> out that he tore the wings off while rolling the plane.
>>>
>>> It comes down to the famous last words of "let me show you this!"
>> Yeah, some tit did that on the way home from Sun n Fun this year in a
>> Baron. First aerobatic lesson, self taught in a Baron with pax.
>> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070427X00463&key=1
>> This is just a mind blowing accident.
>
> Wow. That pilot didn't make an isolated foolish mistake - the historical
> evidence indicates he was a fool from the beginning to the end. The tragedy
> is that four others died along with the fool.
>
> Found this AOPA article on the accident with the apt title "What was he
> thinking?":
>
> http://www.aopa.org/asf/asfarticles/2007/sp0707.html

This is almost always the case with these incidents. It's seldom a one
shot deal decided on the spur of the moment. Many of the pilots caughtup
in these things have a "history". Many times it's just that old; "I
could be Bob Hoover if only I had the chance".
Unfortunately, these people never quite realize until it's way too late
that the word "chance" should really be read as "experience"

--
Dudley Henriques

K l e i n

November 21st 07, 12:26 AM

On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote :
>
>
>
> > I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out
> > even without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro
> > and doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
> > conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
> > Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT
> > simple!
>
> I'm a bit confused as to what you mean here, unless it's that some
> aerobatic pilots have notions about ourselves above our station.
>
>
>
>
>
> > The pilots who make it all the way through a career in display flying
> > are worth watching as they have common behavior and habit patterns
> > worth emulating for those considering entering this venue.
>
> > Most have common traits that are recognizable to even the untrained
> > eye. The pilots who last in the display acro business develop early
> > on, an attitude of respect for the venue that borders on a kind of
> > fanaticism. These are the pilots who, when tempted to do a roll on
> > takeoff by the local airport crowd on a Sunday morning as they get
> > ready to go cross country to do an air show somewhere, simply smile
> > and respectfully decline. It's not the place....and it's not the time.
> > They realize that there's a self imposed "ritual" they have to go
> > through with themselves before executing aerobatics at low altitude
> > and doing low acro without this "mental tuning up " can spell real
> > trouble. This is why, as the number one rule I passed on to all acro
> > the acro pilots, especially display pilots, who got close enough to me
> > to hear my voice I always stressed;
> > "Never.....EVER....do anything with an airplane that someone asks you
> > to do unless you yourself are mentally and physically prepared to do
> > it....AND it's YOUR CALL!!"
>
> Hm, yes. I never thougth this through before, but it rings true. I'm
> never shy about a little showing off and I think most pilots are like
> that, but I never liked being cajoled into doing something but I'm
> uncertain as to whether that was because I have some sort of inate
> wisdom or because I'm an anarchist at heart.
>
>
>
> > This sounds simple enough, but you would be absolutely amazed how easy
> > it is to slip into doing something with an airplane because this
> > person or that one is watching.
> > Ego and complacency are high on the list of potential killers for
> > aerobatic pilots.
> > Lord only knows what made a pilot of Ed's caliber weaken his
> > horizontal stabilizer to match the other weakened side, then go fly
> > hard maneuvers for the camera.
>
> Yeah, it's a funny thing about ego. Without a sizable dose you're almost
> as much of a menace in any kind of high performance flying as the guy
> who has to much. My own experience has been a roller coaster of over and
> under confidence of decreasing intensity throughout as I found my level
> of competence and it's corresponding level of confidence. These ups and
> downs never stopped, only decreased in amplitue and, I believe, have led
> to a habit of constant self appraisel that has served me well in just
> about any flying disciplne. IOW, experiece has eventually won out but I
> was lucky to have acquired it!
>
>
>
> > What is completely puzzling to me and always will remain a puzzle to
> > me is that most any inexperienced pilot, even a student , if
> > asked whether THEY would have done what Ed did that day, and flown
> > that airplane on that day, at that time, for that purpose, would
> > probably instinctively say that they wouldn't have done it.
>
> Well, I suppose there comes a point where your knowledge allows you to
> see through certain practices that are laid down for the simple minded
> that can be reasonably circumvented. Problem is, a little knowledge is a
> dangerous thing in a case like this. It's not like flying an airplane
> with a flat battery or something like that.
> in the film about your Buddy, Douglas Bader, he's credited with
> repeating often something his instructor told him and that was "rules
> are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools".
> Trick is to live long enough to become a wise man..
>
> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I feel that the IAC competition environment and practice for
competition is a relatively safe way to do aerobatics. The reasons
are:
1) when you practice a contest sequence, it is not impromptu, but
rather, it is a carefully planned flight;
2) the contest sequences are looked over by your peers (or your
betters) for sanity and safety;
3) you have a reasonable hard deck appropriate to your level of
equipment and experience;
4) you know that breaking the hard deck at a contest gets you major
penalties and/or disqualification;
5) nobody ever wins by flying lower than the other guy or by giving
the judges a scare.

When I start messing around with non-competition figures, I move up at
least 1K ft, depending on what it is. When I do these, it is for me,
not for anybody on the ground who might be looking. I do these
figures one at a time with repositioning between them.

The statistics look pretty good too. Nobody has died doing an
aerobatic sequence in front of judges here in the US in a very long
time. Practice accidents happen occassionally but probably due to
breaking one or more of the above rules.

10's,
K l e i n

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 12:37 AM

Jim Logajan > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>> news:474364d1$0$32502 :
>>
>>> Several years ago there was a low time pilot in our area with a new
>>> Commander, who crashed and died with three others on board. It turns
>>> out that he tore the wings off while rolling the plane.
>>>
>>> It comes down to the famous last words of "let me show you this!"
>>
>> Yeah, some tit did that on the way home from Sun n Fun this year in a
>> Baron. First aerobatic lesson, self taught in a Baron with pax.
>> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20070427X00463&key=1
>> This is just a mind blowing accident.
>
> Wow. That pilot didn't make an isolated foolish mistake - the
> historical evidence indicates he was a fool from the beginning to the
> end. The tragedy is that four others died along with the fool.
>
> Found this AOPA article on the accident with the apt title "What was
> he thinking?":
>
> http://www.aopa.org/asf/asfarticles/2007/sp0707.html
>

Worse than I imagined. I dunno. I suppose seeing a guy doing aerobatics
in a beech 18 could lead you to believe it's as easy as it looks. If I
ruled the world everybody would get some aerobatics as a matter of
course. Obviously, this would probably cause more problems than it would
solve in the real world, but I find it a bit frightening to think of how
few pilots out there don't understand loading, wind gradient and myriad
other odds and ends which are all mentioned in the jeppeson private
pilot courses, but aren;t really taught.
hell, most instructors don't understand them. If this guy had even an
inkling as to what's involved in doing a slow roll in a heavily loaded
Baron he'd probably still be here.
I suppose what I'm really saying is flying needs more of an extended
family approach to things. If someone who knew what they were doing were
able to take this guy up in an aerobatic airplane and just let him try
to do a roll on his own but under supervision, he'd soon wake up. It
might give him a bit of respect for a wide range of things, in fact.

Call me a dreamer, I won't care.

Bertie

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 01:01 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out
>>> even without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro
>>> and doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
>>> conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
>>> Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT
>>> simple!
>>>
>>
>> I'm a bit confused as to what you mean here, unless it's that some
>> aerobatic pilots have notions about ourselves above our station.
>
>
> It's simple really. Pilots exist for the most part as a specialized
> group. Even loners are part of the "group"
>
> By definition, flying is an acquired skill obtained through knowledge
> and experience. The "group" recognizes those who can do things with an
> airplane others in the group can't do. It's a natural pecking order
> where the ability to perform aerobatics rates highly among many in the
> group. This isn't to say that aerobatic pilots are better than others
> in the group, but rather that the ability to perform aerobatics and
> fly certain aircraft can be a "respected position" in the flying
> community. Knowing this is practically unavoidable if one exists in
> the flying community as a pilot.
> It's quite natural therefore, (right or wrong), that SOME pilots
> acquiring aerobatic skills tend toward envisioning themselves as
> being "a step up" in the pecking order. If not recognized by an
> individual pilot when and if this happens for it's potential toward
> the development of false confidence, the situation can be a real
> problem for some individuals.
> The trick of course is for the acrobatically competent pilot to
> recognize that part of the price for that "step up" in the pecking
> order is a dual responsibility to accept aerobatics and the dangers
> associated with them with the respect they are due and as well make
> every attempt to instill that same respect in other pilots.
>
> This is nothing more really, than a pedantic way of saying that pilots
> acquiring aerobatic skills need to acquire aerobatic responsibility as
> well. The two are inseparable and the first without the latter will
> kill you dead. The residual of all this is that without
> responsibility, what you do can influence someone else and possibly
> kill them dead as well.

OK, I understand what you meant now. You jes dinda write it sa good the
furst time.
Yes, absolutely. We had a very good group in PA and showing off, within
reason and under the watchful eye of the top chicken was fairly normal,
until one day, when a student pilot (and I mean a student pilot) did an
inverted low pass over the field in a ****ing glider!
Now it wasn't all that low, but still!
The lid was put on any more showboating on weekends. Low level stuff was
treated less casually from that day onwards dispaly practice was always
seen as something that had to have at least tacit approval from the
airfield operator.
!!"
>>
>>
>> Hm, yes. I never thought this through before, but it rings true. I'm
>> never shy about a little showing off and I think most pilots are like
>> that, but I never liked being cajoled into doing something but I'm
>> uncertain as to whether that was because I have some sort of innate
>> wisdom or because I'm an anarchist at heart.
>
> We'll have to share a few Jack Daniels' sometime and discuss this in
> more depth

You're preaching to the choir anyway. I've cone to realise most, if not
all of this stuff, in one form or another through exposure to some very
good guys and some very bad experiences.
Also, I drink Jameson.

>
> This is a perfectly normal process. I went through it as well.
> (Remember, I probably own the most widely publicized buzz job in
> aviation history :-)
> The trick is to recognize it early on and control it which I'm sure
> both of us managed to do.

Well, if anone ever really learned to control it completely theyh
probably wouldn't do it at all!
The only safe ship never leaves the harbour and all that.
>
>
>
>
> Douglas did have a way with words. Once to a group of paraplegic
> children he visited in a hospital;
>
> “Don't listen to anyone who tells you that you can't do this or
> that.
> That's nonsense. Make up your mind you'll never use crutches or a
> stick, then have a go at everything. Go to school, join in all the
> games you can. Go anywhere you want to. But never, never let them
> persuade you that things are too difficult or impossible.”
>
> Ya gotta love the guy!! :-))
>

Did he ever talk abuot his accident to you?

From what little I know about it, (the movie) he crashed a Bulldog doing
a hotdog low alt roll.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 01:06 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>
> This is almost always the case with these incidents. It's seldom a one
> shot deal decided on the spur of the moment. Many of the pilots
> caughtup in these things have a "history". Many times it's just that
> old; "I could be Bob Hoover if only I had the chance".
> Unfortunately, these people never quite realize until it's way too
> late that the word "chance" should really be read as "experience"
>

And experience should be read as "I'm a very experienced pilot, just try
and not be with me while I'm having one of my experiences"

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 01:24 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in

> Did he ever talk abuot his accident to you?
>
> From what little I know about it, (the movie) he crashed a Bulldog doing
> a hotdog low alt roll.
>
>
>
> Bertie
>
Yes, we discussed it several times. He was always open and honest about
what happened. He was at Woodley on a cross country in the Bulldog and
got into it big time with some civvy pilots hanging out in the field
flight shack. Douglas had a bit of a rep as an aerobatic pilot and was
prone to demonstrating that on a moment's notice I'm afraid :-)
Anyway, Douglas told me the Bulldog was a mess to handle and was
restricted to over 1000 feet for acro. At first he declined when they
asked him for a roll over the field but they apparently ****ed him off
(his words on the matter :-)
Anyway, he took off and came around low and slow rolled it. He caught
his left tip and the rest is history.
I never heard DB make any excuses at all for what happened. In fact, his
word on it to me was "Dudley my boy, I simply bollocked it up" We never
did agree on the definition of "bollocked" :-) He said colonials would
never understand the King's English :-)
Douglas was never a man to shirk anything. He said he screwed it up and
I could tell from the way he said it that he meant EXACTLY what he said.
Hell...later on when he took over the Canadian Squadron, he grabbed a
fighter the first day he was there on the job as the new CO and put on a
show the old timers STILL talk about. They say the roll he did that day,
with his two tin legs on board, was about as low as the first one that
day in the Bulldog!
Unbelievable character, and one of the finest, most outspoken and
downright tenacious right on guys you could ever hope to meet on the planet.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 01:25 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> This is almost always the case with these incidents. It's seldom a one
>> shot deal decided on the spur of the moment. Many of the pilots
>> caughtup in these things have a "history". Many times it's just that
>> old; "I could be Bob Hoover if only I had the chance".
>> Unfortunately, these people never quite realize until it's way too
>> late that the word "chance" should really be read as "experience"
>>
>
> And experience should be read as "I'm a very experienced pilot, just try
> and not be with me while I'm having one of my experiences"
>
>
> Bertie
>
>

That indeed works for some people :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 02:09 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>
>> Did he ever talk abuot his accident to you?
>>
>> From what little I know about it, (the movie) he crashed a Bulldog
>> doing a hotdog low alt roll.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
> Yes, we discussed it several times. He was always open and honest
> about what happened. He was at Woodley on a cross country in the
> Bulldog and got into it big time with some civvy pilots hanging out in
> the field flight shack. Douglas had a bit of a rep as an aerobatic
> pilot and was prone to demonstrating that on a moment's notice I'm
> afraid :-) Anyway, Douglas told me the Bulldog was a mess to handle
> and was restricted to over 1000 feet for acro. At first he declined
> when they asked him for a roll over the field but they apparently
> ****ed him off (his words on the matter :-)
> Anyway, he took off and came around low and slow rolled it. He caught
> his left tip and the rest is history.

Yeah, that's exactly how it's represented in the movie.

> I never heard DB make any excuses at all for what happened. In fact,
> his word on it to me was "Dudley my boy, I simply bollocked it up" We
> never did agree on the definition of "bollocked" :-) He said colonials
> would never understand the King's English :-)

You;re in luck! I can help you there.

******** de-mystified.

His example... "********ed it up", you already know. but he could have
also said " I made a ******** of it" and it's likely he exclaimed
"********" as his wing touched the runway. Pretty much just **** or ****
in US english.
If someone were to tell you something of which you doubt the veracity
you might say to him "that's ********" in fact it's pretty much a
direct substitute for bull**** or horse ****.
Yet another use is "He's a ********" which is pretty much a straight
swap (or swop of one prefers) for ******* or similar.
You can also give or recieve a bollocking. This roughly translates into
getting a new one torn. Past tense, bollocked.
You can also be ********ed, which means you are very tired. This is not
so common as it more common to say "I'm knackered" which means wrecked,
but ********ed can also be used in more extreme cases of knackeredness.
Can also mean getting drunk in some circles, though that's usually
getting ****ed as I'm sure you know.
And last but not least when some ******** makes a ******** of something
the best think to do is to kick him square in the ********.

Also spelled Bollox and Bollix. If there;s a difference between the
three I'm not aware of it.

I think that's fairly accurate, though it's more than likely some
******** will come along and correct me.

> Douglas was never a man to shirk anything. He said he screwed it up
> and I could tell from the way he said it that he meant EXACTLY what he
> said. Hell...later on when he took over the Canadian Squadron, he
> grabbed a fighter the first day he was there on the job as the new CO
> and put on a show the old timers STILL talk about. They say the roll
> he did that day, with his two tin legs on board, was about as low as
> the first one that day in the Bulldog!
> Unbelievable character, and one of the finest, most outspoken and
> downright tenacious right on guys you could ever hope to meet on the
> planet.
>
Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway but
own up.
Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
aircraft.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 02:10 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> This is almost always the case with these incidents. It's seldom a
>>> one shot deal decided on the spur of the moment. Many of the pilots
>>> caughtup in these things have a "history". Many times it's just that
>>> old; "I could be Bob Hoover if only I had the chance".
>>> Unfortunately, these people never quite realize until it's way too
>>> late that the word "chance" should really be read as "experience"
>>>
>>
>> And experience should be read as "I'm a very experienced pilot, just
>> try and not be with me while I'm having one of my experiences"
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>
> That indeed works for some people :-)

Works for me! Although I'll happily listen to other;s experiences as well.

Bertie

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 02:23 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :

> Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway but
> own up.
> Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
> aircraft.
>
>
> Bertie

It's been a mess over there for sure. That last Hurricane was a real shame.
I lost three friends in the UK in unrelated accidents in the last
several years. Ted Girdler (ex- Red Arrow 1972 was killed several years
ago doing a show, and Ormond Hayden-Bailee was killed several years ago.
Both were in the old IFPF as charter members. Hoof Proudfoot dug a hole
at Duxford with a P38 doing a double roll. Another first rate display
pilot gone.
The list gets larger every year it seems.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 02:37 AM

K l e i n wrote:
> On Nov 20, 4:28 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote :
>>
>>
>>
>>> I think a lot of us who come up with the "aerobatics bug" start out
>>> even without realizing it in some cases that knowing how to fly acro
>>> and doing it sets us apart from the "average" pilot. It's a falsely
>>> conceived premise at best that some actually never shed .
>>> Those who don't are usually the ones who end up dead. It's THAT
>>> simple!
>> I'm a bit confused as to what you mean here, unless it's that some
>> aerobatic pilots have notions about ourselves above our station.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> The pilots who make it all the way through a career in display flying
>>> are worth watching as they have common behavior and habit patterns
>>> worth emulating for those considering entering this venue.
>>> Most have common traits that are recognizable to even the untrained
>>> eye. The pilots who last in the display acro business develop early
>>> on, an attitude of respect for the venue that borders on a kind of
>>> fanaticism. These are the pilots who, when tempted to do a roll on
>>> takeoff by the local airport crowd on a Sunday morning as they get
>>> ready to go cross country to do an air show somewhere, simply smile
>>> and respectfully decline. It's not the place....and it's not the time.
>>> They realize that there's a self imposed "ritual" they have to go
>>> through with themselves before executing aerobatics at low altitude
>>> and doing low acro without this "mental tuning up " can spell real
>>> trouble. This is why, as the number one rule I passed on to all acro
>>> the acro pilots, especially display pilots, who got close enough to me
>>> to hear my voice I always stressed;
>>> "Never.....EVER....do anything with an airplane that someone asks you
>>> to do unless you yourself are mentally and physically prepared to do
>>> it....AND it's YOUR CALL!!"
>> Hm, yes. I never thougth this through before, but it rings true. I'm
>> never shy about a little showing off and I think most pilots are like
>> that, but I never liked being cajoled into doing something but I'm
>> uncertain as to whether that was because I have some sort of inate
>> wisdom or because I'm an anarchist at heart.
>>
>>
>>
>>> This sounds simple enough, but you would be absolutely amazed how easy
>>> it is to slip into doing something with an airplane because this
>>> person or that one is watching.
>>> Ego and complacency are high on the list of potential killers for
>>> aerobatic pilots.
>>> Lord only knows what made a pilot of Ed's caliber weaken his
>>> horizontal stabilizer to match the other weakened side, then go fly
>>> hard maneuvers for the camera.
>> Yeah, it's a funny thing about ego. Without a sizable dose you're almost
>> as much of a menace in any kind of high performance flying as the guy
>> who has to much. My own experience has been a roller coaster of over and
>> under confidence of decreasing intensity throughout as I found my level
>> of competence and it's corresponding level of confidence. These ups and
>> downs never stopped, only decreased in amplitue and, I believe, have led
>> to a habit of constant self appraisel that has served me well in just
>> about any flying disciplne. IOW, experiece has eventually won out but I
>> was lucky to have acquired it!
>>
>>
>>
>>> What is completely puzzling to me and always will remain a puzzle to
>>> me is that most any inexperienced pilot, even a student , if
>>> asked whether THEY would have done what Ed did that day, and flown
>>> that airplane on that day, at that time, for that purpose, would
>>> probably instinctively say that they wouldn't have done it.
>> Well, I suppose there comes a point where your knowledge allows you to
>> see through certain practices that are laid down for the simple minded
>> that can be reasonably circumvented. Problem is, a little knowledge is a
>> dangerous thing in a case like this. It's not like flying an airplane
>> with a flat battery or something like that.
>> in the film about your Buddy, Douglas Bader, he's credited with
>> repeating often something his instructor told him and that was "rules
>> are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools".
>> Trick is to live long enough to become a wise man..
>>
>> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I feel that the IAC competition environment and practice for
> competition is a relatively safe way to do aerobatics. The reasons
> are:
> 1) when you practice a contest sequence, it is not impromptu, but
> rather, it is a carefully planned flight;
> 2) the contest sequences are looked over by your peers (or your
> betters) for sanity and safety;
> 3) you have a reasonable hard deck appropriate to your level of
> equipment and experience;
> 4) you know that breaking the hard deck at a contest gets you major
> penalties and/or disqualification;
> 5) nobody ever wins by flying lower than the other guy or by giving
> the judges a scare.
>
> When I start messing around with non-competition figures, I move up at
> least 1K ft, depending on what it is. When I do these, it is for me,
> not for anybody on the ground who might be looking. I do these
> figures one at a time with repositioning between them.
>
> The statistics look pretty good too. Nobody has died doing an
> aerobatic sequence in front of judges here in the US in a very long
> time. Practice accidents happen occassionally but probably due to
> breaking one or more of the above rules.
>
> 10's,
> K l e i n
I agree with this. The way acro competition is handled by the pilots and
support people involved with it is in my opinion excellent and indeed as
safe a path through aerobatics as one will find anywhere.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 02:38 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>
>
>> Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway
>> but own up.
>> Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
> It's been a mess over there for sure. That last Hurricane was a real
> shame. I lost three friends in the UK in unrelated accidents in the
> last several years. Ted Girdler (ex- Red Arrow 1972 was killed several
> years ago doing a show, and Ormond Hayden-Bailee was killed several
> years ago. Both were in the old IFPF as charter members. Hoof
> Proudfoot dug a hole at Duxford with a P38 doing a double roll.
> Another first rate display pilot gone.
> The list gets larger every year it seems.

eah, I saw Proubfoot display that -38 and I have to say I was less than
impressed. Loops were done with precious little room and he was doing
fairly low rolls pointed right at the crowd. This was at the 50th anniv
of D-day so was June 1994, about a year before he crashed it. I also
recently saw that RN guy who keeps crashing airplanes display a
Skyraider. To be fair he didn;t get as low as I've seen him do in the
past, but still, it all just didn;t look right and I thought it was all
kind of pointless, especailly since the airplane was fairly ugly anyway!

Bertie
>
>
>

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 03:18 AM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>
>>> Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway
>>> but own up.
>>> Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
>>> aircraft.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> It's been a mess over there for sure. That last Hurricane was a real
>> shame. I lost three friends in the UK in unrelated accidents in the
>> last several years. Ted Girdler (ex- Red Arrow 1972 was killed several
>> years ago doing a show, and Ormond Hayden-Bailee was killed several
>> years ago. Both were in the old IFPF as charter members. Hoof
>> Proudfoot dug a hole at Duxford with a P38 doing a double roll.
>> Another first rate display pilot gone.
>> The list gets larger every year it seems.
>
>
> eah, I saw Proubfoot display that -38 and I have to say I was less than
> impressed. Loops were done with precious little room and he was doing
> fairly low rolls pointed right at the crowd. This was at the 50th anniv
> of D-day so was June 1994, about a year before he crashed it. I also
> recently saw that RN guy who keeps crashing airplanes display a
> Skyraider. To be fair he didn;t get as low as I've seen him do in the
> past, but still, it all just didn;t look right and I thought it was all
> kind of pointless, especailly since the airplane was fairly ugly anyway!
>
>
> Bertie
>>
>>
>
First lesson 101 for display flying;

The crowd is split between those who don't appreciate the difference
between 500 feet and 50 feet, and those who do appreciate the difference
are the ones you don't need to please.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 06:10 AM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>
>>>> Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway
>>>> but own up.
>>>> Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
>>>> aircraft.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> It's been a mess over there for sure. That last Hurricane was a real
>>> shame. I lost three friends in the UK in unrelated accidents in the
>>> last several years. Ted Girdler (ex- Red Arrow 1972 was killed
>>> several years ago doing a show, and Ormond Hayden-Bailee was killed
>>> several years ago. Both were in the old IFPF as charter members.
>>> Hoof Proudfoot dug a hole at Duxford with a P38 doing a double roll.
>>> Another first rate display pilot gone.
>>> The list gets larger every year it seems.
>>
>>
>> eah, I saw Proubfoot display that -38 and I have to say I was less
>> than impressed. Loops were done with precious little room and he was
>> doing fairly low rolls pointed right at the crowd. This was at the
>> 50th anniv of D-day so was June 1994, about a year before he crashed
>> it. I also recently saw that RN guy who keeps crashing airplanes
>> display a Skyraider. To be fair he didn;t get as low as I've seen him
>> do in the past, but still, it all just didn;t look right and I
>> thought it was all kind of pointless, especailly since the airplane
>> was fairly ugly anyway!
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>>
>>>
>>
> First lesson 101 for display flying;
>
> The crowd is split between those who don't appreciate the difference
> between 500 feet and 50 feet, and those who do appreciate the
> difference are the ones you don't need to please.
>

Well, looks like he might have finally learned that, or the CAA finally
put the skids on him.
I mentioned my friend that's displaying there now. He was telling me
about His certification. He's very disciplined and prepares extremely
well for his shows. He was telling me that the examiner or whatever he'd
be called there commented that his is the direction they would like to
go, so obviously they've also realised things have to change. Mind you,
this was before the Hurricane accident so maybe not.
I think the problem there is that people are easily bullied by the likes
of Beattie, the CAA included. I knew an RAF pilot, for instance. The man
shouldn't have been let anywhere near any kind of airplane. Even a chuck
glider was well beyond this guy, but he spoke proper and managed to pile
up bull**** and so rose to a very high position in the RAF. After he
left he became a management pilot at a big UK airline. Well, for a
while. After a series of incidents someone eventually figured out that
he was useless and he was eventaully hounded out of the place, but in
the meantime , whew!

Bertie

>

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

November 21st 07, 03:37 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>> Cool. Not a lot you can do when you leave a wreck somewhere anyway
>>>>> but own up.
>>>>> Wonder what he'd make of his countrymen's craze for burying vintage
>>>>> aircraft.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>> It's been a mess over there for sure. That last Hurricane was a real
>>>> shame. I lost three friends in the UK in unrelated accidents in the
>>>> last several years. Ted Girdler (ex- Red Arrow 1972 was killed
>>>> several years ago doing a show, and Ormond Hayden-Bailee was killed
>>>> several years ago. Both were in the old IFPF as charter members.
>>>> Hoof Proudfoot dug a hole at Duxford with a P38 doing a double roll.
>>>> Another first rate display pilot gone.
>>>> The list gets larger every year it seems.
>>>
>>> eah, I saw Proubfoot display that -38 and I have to say I was less
>>> than impressed. Loops were done with precious little room and he was
>>> doing fairly low rolls pointed right at the crowd. This was at the
>>> 50th anniv of D-day so was June 1994, about a year before he crashed
>>> it. I also recently saw that RN guy who keeps crashing airplanes
>>> display a Skyraider. To be fair he didn;t get as low as I've seen him
>>> do in the past, but still, it all just didn;t look right and I
>>> thought it was all kind of pointless, especailly since the airplane
>>> was fairly ugly anyway!
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>>>
>> First lesson 101 for display flying;
>>
>> The crowd is split between those who don't appreciate the difference
>> between 500 feet and 50 feet, and those who do appreciate the
>> difference are the ones you don't need to please.
>>
>
> Well, looks like he might have finally learned that, or the CAA finally
> put the skids on him.
> I mentioned my friend that's displaying there now. He was telling me
> about His certification. He's very disciplined and prepares extremely
> well for his shows. He was telling me that the examiner or whatever he'd
> be called there commented that his is the direction they would like to
> go, so obviously they've also realised things have to change. Mind you,
> this was before the Hurricane accident so maybe not.
> I think the problem there is that people are easily bullied by the likes
> of Beattie, the CAA included. I knew an RAF pilot, for instance. The man
> shouldn't have been let anywhere near any kind of airplane. Even a chuck
> glider was well beyond this guy, but he spoke proper and managed to pile
> up bull**** and so rose to a very high position in the RAF. After he
> left he became a management pilot at a big UK airline. Well, for a
> while. After a series of incidents someone eventually figured out that
> he was useless and he was eventaully hounded out of the place, but in
> the meantime , whew!
>
>
> Bertie
>
>
This kind of thing happens.

There are a lot of us out here who are and were connected with display
flying who "talk" to each other via email all the time. Many of us in
this loop are still active. Some are air show people; some are military;
some are race pilots some are Red Bull pilots. We're in no way
"official", but we communicate all the time. Official or not, we have a
deep reach into official channels in several countries and much of what
we discuss safety wise ends up implemented in some way into the way
things are done.
My own personal feelings about air show safety have evolved somewhat
from my active days as a pilot. The safety issues are very real and are
deserving of constant attention by the display community.
I for one don't have all the answers. I keep active and at least have a
small voice in the matter.
Anyway, it keeps me hopping sometimes :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 21st 07, 03:52 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

>>
> This kind of thing happens.
>
> There are a lot of us out here who are and were connected with display
> flying who "talk" to each other via email all the time. Many of us in
> this loop are still active. Some are air show people; some are
> military; some are race pilots some are Red Bull pilots. We're in no
> way "official", but we communicate all the time. Official or not, we
> have a deep reach into official channels in several countries and much
> of what we discuss safety wise ends up implemented in some way into
> the way things are done.
> My own personal feelings about air show safety have evolved somewhat
> from my active days as a pilot. The safety issues are very real and
> are deserving of constant attention by the display community.
> I for one don't have all the answers. I keep active and at least have
> a small voice in the matter.
> Anyway, it keeps me hopping sometimes :-))
>

Well, the hopping bit is good anyway!

Bertie

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

November 21st 07, 11:31 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Also, I drink Jameson.

In moderation most of the time...

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

November 21st 07, 11:43 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> His example... "********ed it up", you already know. but he could have
> also said " I made a ******** of it" and it's likely he exclaimed
> "********" as his wing touched the runway. Pretty much just **** or ****
> in US english.
> If someone were to tell you something of which you doubt the veracity
> you might say to him "that's ********" in fact it's pretty much a
> direct substitute for bull**** or horse ****.
> Yet another use is "He's a ********" which is pretty much a straight
> swap (or swop of one prefers) for ******* or similar.
> You can also give or recieve a bollocking. This roughly translates into
> getting a new one torn. Past tense, bollocked.
> You can also be ********ed, which means you are very tired. This is not
> so common as it more common to say "I'm knackered" which means wrecked,
> but ********ed can also be used in more extreme cases of knackeredness.
> Can also mean getting drunk in some circles, though that's usually
> getting ****ed as I'm sure you know.
> And last but not least when some ******** makes a ******** of something
> the best think to do is to kick him square in the ********.
>
> Also spelled Bollox and Bollix. If there;s a difference between the
> three I'm not aware of it.
>
> I think that's fairly accurate, though it's more than likely some
> ******** will come along and correct me.

Never mind the ********, here's the bunyip!

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 22nd 07, 06:48 AM

Rich Ahrens > wrote in news:4744bfdc$0$27496$804603d3
@auth.newsreader.iphouse.com:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Also, I drink Jameson.
>
> In moderation most of the time...
>
Most of the time..

I'll drink anything in a pinch, though. Had som Sliebowitz (sp?) there a
few weeks ago. Like lighter fluid, but makes you nice and warm inside,
alright.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]

November 22nd 07, 06:51 AM

Rich Ahrens > wrote in
ouse.com:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> His example... "********ed it up", you already know. but he could
>> have also said " I made a ******** of it" and it's likely he
>> exclaimed "********" as his wing touched the runway. Pretty much just
>> **** or **** in US english.
>> If someone were to tell you something of which you doubt the veracity
>> you might say to him "that's ********" in fact it's pretty much a
>> direct substitute for bull**** or horse ****.
>> Yet another use is "He's a ********" which is pretty much a straight
>> swap (or swop of one prefers) for ******* or similar.
>> You can also give or recieve a bollocking. This roughly translates
>> into getting a new one torn. Past tense, bollocked.
>> You can also be ********ed, which means you are very tired. This is
>> not so common as it more common to say "I'm knackered" which means
>> wrecked, but ********ed can also be used in more extreme cases of
>> knackeredness. Can also mean getting drunk in some circles, though
>> that's usually getting ****ed as I'm sure you know.
>> And last but not least when some ******** makes a ******** of
>> something the best think to do is to kick him square in the ********.
>>
>> Also spelled Bollox and Bollix. If there;s a difference between the
>> three I'm not aware of it.
>>
>> I think that's fairly accurate, though it's more than likely some
>> ******** will come along and correct me.
>
> Never mind the ********, here's the bunyip!
>
Xachery!

And one more, "He thinks he's the ********" Which is the commonly
shortened version of "thinks he's the dog's bolocks" , the dog's
******** being a superlative.
A good car can be the dog's ********, for instance.

Such a subtle and wonderful culture.

Bertie