A warbird taxiing behind me in my homebuilt with limited visibility
would be an un-nerving experience indeed. Especially after what just
happened. Being that we are the inventors, and constructors we are,
I may just construct a whip type mast with a flag on top that the
warbird driver can see in front of his face. Like dune buggies use so
they can see the next one comming from below the dunes. I could have a
mount for it inside, like a fishing pole holder, and just need to
figure out how to stow it. (make it telescopic?) Or maybe the EAA
could provide them, and hand it to the flagman right before takeoff.
Give them to anyone taxiing in front of a warbird. The canopy would
have to be back of course to use it, but it's feasable. There's no way
to make a small plane in front of a plane like an Avenger visible
unless you get something up to where he can see it. I don't trust the
all the guys taxiing warbirds. Some have the money, but not the
experience to really be safe in the things. But many are plenty
experienced. But in an accident like this one, experience may not help
you see something that's out of your field of vision. Remember the
USAir 737 in LA that landed on top of the Metroliner. They couldn't
see it either, and there was no lack of experience there. But some
changes need to be made to prevent a repeat type of accident.
If you can think of a better idea, post it.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:00:05 GMT, Ernest Christley
wrote:

And all of it is neither here nor there. I used to drive a big truck,
and 18-wheeler as moving van. 18 wheels down through residential
neighborhoods. The number one rule was "If you don't know you're clear,
you don't move." Period. No guessing. No thinking. No hoping and no
wishing. Either you can see you're clear through mirrors or sticking
your head out the window, or you have your partner get out and sight for
you. If you don't have a partner, you set the parking brake and take a
walk around the truck.

The pilot knew the airplane had visibility issues, and he knew he would
be in crowded environment. It's his responsibility, plain and clear.
Oshkosh organizers are fully culpable for not requiring that he observe
the simplest safety rule. This isn't something that's limited to
aviation. Anytime you have large equipment moving in a crowded
environment, you will see extra precautions taken. Anytime a forklift
is moving something at the HomeDepot, they'll post two guards to keep
people back. It's my opinion that the Oshkosh organizers should be held
responsible for criminal negligence, and Uncle Tom should be whipped at
high noon for the crude and audacious remark that "this will not detract
from the success of the convention."

Not the fact that this was allowed to occur, but it was allowed to
happen in such a glaringly stupid fashion, without the first modicum of
the normal safeguards that you would see at any large convention is a
serious black eye on Warbirds, GA aircraft, the EAA, and especially
Oshkosh. Whether it is true or no, this just screams to the world that
we're all a bunch of reckless yahoos. Most of us aren't, but just try
to convince Joe Public of that when the biggest convention of GA
aircraft in the world doesn't practice safety measures that would be
strictly enforced at the county fair.

----
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."