Snowbirds down

Two Snowbirds collided today while training.
Link is he

http://www.canada.com/national/story...43fe-87db-946b
440d7045



--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

"tony roberts" wrote in message news:nospam-50703B.18411310122004@shawnews...
Two Snowbirds collided today while training.
Link is he

http://www.canada.com/national/story...b-946b440d7045




That's a shame...These guys fly a great show...

Really a sad day....

These guys fly a 9 plane formation, STAYING TOGETHER IN A CHANGING
FORMATION for 13 minutes at the show opening. Because the Tudor can
fly lower and slower than the fighters, the show is "center stage" for
the audience.

Rather than speed & power, it is like a delicate ballet that can bring
tears to the eyes of veteran pilots, the ones who can appreciate the
extreme difficulty of what they are doing, and the stress of being on
the outside of a rolling NINE plane formation.....

They will continue on after this , just like all the teams must do.

Condolences to them & their families.

Dave


On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 02:55:59 GMT, "Blueskies"
wrote:


"tony roberts" wrote in message news:nospam-50703B.18411310122004@shawnews...
Two Snowbirds collided today while training.
Link is he

http://www.canada.com/national/story...b-946b440d7045




That's a shame...These guys fly a great show...

Dave wrote in
:

[ ... ]
They will continue on after this , just like all the teams must do.
[ ... ]
Dave

I hope you are right. The government has been trying to disband them for a
few years. There was enough public outcry last time that they backed off.
This morning's paper says that following the crash our defense minister is
already talking about shutting them down again.

Rob

In article ,
Dave wrote:
Really a sad day....

These guys fly a 9 plane formation, STAYING TOGETHER IN A CHANGING
FORMATION for 13 minutes at the show opening. Because the Tudor can
fly lower and slower than the fighters, the show is "center stage" for
the audience.

The Snowbirds and the Blue Angels were both at Salinas this year again.

The difference between the two teams is like night and day. The
Snowbirds are right in front of you the entire time. The Blue
Angels come by at high speed and then take three counties to turn
around and line up for their next pass. What the Blue Angels (and
Thunderbirds) do is amazing, but not no where near as interesting
as watching the Snowbirds fly.

With nine planes to work with, the Snowbirds can do some interesting
formations. They do one where they form a Canada Goose and another
where they a heavy bomber (two planes one each 'wing' with smoke on).

Some pictures from the Salinas Airshow are at:
http://www.panix.com/~jac/salinas2004/

John
--
John Clear - http://www.panix.com/~jac

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Really a sad day....

These guys fly a 9 plane formation, STAYING TOGETHER IN A CHANGING
FORMATION for 13 minutes at the show opening. Because the Tudor can
fly lower and slower than the fighters, the show is "center stage" for
the audience.

Rather than speed & power, it is like a delicate ballet that can bring
tears to the eyes of veteran pilots, the ones who can appreciate the
extreme difficulty of what they are doing, and the stress of being on
the outside of a rolling NINE plane formation.....

They will continue on after this , just like all the teams must do.

Condolences to them & their families.

Dave

I had the pleasure to fly an aerobatic evaluation on the Tutor with Greg
Bruneau in the #10 bird, by invitation of the Snows back in 75.
You are absolutely correct about the format of their show. From the
beginning, Col O.B.Phillip's vision for the team was that they do a show
"close" to the people; and I don't mean in proximity; but in the
identification" aspect. The Snowbird show in my opinion is one of the
finest pieces of precision formation aerobatics done in front of the
public. It's extremely difficult to perform, takes tremendous skill, and
no group in the world flies a finer demonstration.
Hopefully, there will be something learned from this tragedy as there is
something learned whenever a crash occurs like this. It's been my
experience that the team will continue once the detractors have their
say and things quiet down. The Snows carry a message of friendship for
Canada wherever they go, and are an invaluable asset to the National
interest of Canada.

Sic Transit Gloria Mundi

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
for email; take out the trash

I just saw the news of a loss of one of our snowbirds during a training
excersise near Moose Jaw. It is truly a sad day, I have grown to love the
snowbirds.
The downed pilot was from Tswassen (sp) a few minutes drive from my home. My
condolences go out to his family.
From the video footage of the crash site I am guessing that they were not
flying the tutor jet that they normaly fly at airshows but rather this new
turbine powerd Harvard trainer that I have seen in a video.

Gary
Soon to be pilot (soon)
CYNJ


"tony roberts" wrote in message
news:nospam-50703B.18411310122004@shawnews...
Two Snowbirds collided today while training.
Link is he

http://www.canada.com/national/story...43fe-87db-946b
440d7045



--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

"Rob McDonald" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote in
:

[ ... ]
They will continue on after this , just like all the teams must do.
[ ... ]
Dave

I hope you are right. The government has been trying to disband them for a
few years. There was enough public outcry last time that they backed off.
This morning's paper says that following the crash our defense minister is
already talking about shutting them down again.


The Minister's actual terminology was something like "will re-evaluate the
program". They have always been "grounded" following any accident, I
believe, until the investigation is done.

The Minister's remarks were in response to the usual probing by mindless
reporters bringing up the aging hardware, 10 million annual cost, and past
accidents (like 5 deaths since 1971, now doing 60 shows a year.). In the
chronology, the media even included a pilot killed in a car accident, just
to fatten it up (that would make 6).

The cost has always been a thorn for the Government, but I am hoping his
words were so the media would have something to take away, while at the same
time being code for "business as usual once the investigation is done".

The problem is that even some military grumble that this is not a *military*
unit, and they are right, it isn't. It is pure PR that the military happens
to fund and staff. But we have to believe that sane people in the
Government of Canada and their Military will realize that their 10 Mil is
buying a lot more REAL National PR pride... than that other PR project we
know so well:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...ational/Canada
The 250 million that went into thin air could have funded them for the next
25 years.

Hi Gary

Not certain but I believe that they were flying the Tudors.
I saw references in the media about the traditional colours on the
wreckage, and also questions raised about the age of the aircraft.
What does age of the aircraft have to do with it - except to the media?
The way they are inspected and parts replaced no one can fault their
maintenance.
We have had several visits to Kelowna of the new turbine powered Harvard
trainer (which we all thought was a Pilatus - cool aircraft) but they
were all dark blue/black..
I'm just hoping now that they allow the Snowbirds to keep flying.


Tony
C-GICE



I just saw the news of a loss of one of our snowbirds during a training
excersise near Moose Jaw. It is truly a sad day, I have grown to love the
snowbirds.
The downed pilot was from Tswassen (sp) a few minutes drive from my home. My
condolences go out to his family.
From the video footage of the crash site I am guessing that they were not
flying the tutor jet that they normaly fly at airshows but rather this new
turbine powerd Harvard trainer that I have seen in a video.

Gary
Soon to be pilot (soon)
CYNJ


"tony roberts" wrote in message
news:nospam-50703B.18411310122004@shawnews...
Two Snowbirds collided today while training.
Link is he

http://www.canada.com/national/story...43fe-87db-946b
440d7045



--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE




--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Icebound wrote:
The Minister's remarks were in response to the usual probing by
mindless
reporters bringing up the aging hardware, 10 million annual cost, and
past
accidents (like 5 deaths since 1971, now doing 60 shows a year.). In
the
chronology, the media even included a pilot killed in a car accident,
just
to fatten it up (that would make 6).

Ignoring the car accident, we're looking at 5 fatal accidents over the
course of 33 years, with a team of what, 11 pilots in any given year?
That's less than 400 pilot-years, and 5 fatalities. So what we're
looking at is a flying activity where even the most experienced pilots
(1300 hours in military jets is the MINIMUM to be considered) have less
than a 99% chance of surviving any single year. By contrast, there are
around 600,000 pilots in the US, and less than 600 fatalities (not all
pilots) annually.

Looking at it from another perspective, 60 shows a year (less in the
past) and 9 airplanes (less in the past) is AT BEST still well under
100,000 total hours flown, including repositioning flights. The Nall
report shows an overall GA fatality rate of 1.33 per 100,000 hours.
These guys managed 5 in less than 100,000.

One has to wonder why, given no-expense-spared training and
maintenance, and using only the most capable and experienced pilots,
this demonstration team can't even match the depressing statistics of
GA as a whole. Now I'm pretty comfortable with the idea that safety
isn't the most important thing - not even as important as putting on a
good show for the crowd - but before you rush to the defense of the
Snowbirds saying it should be business as usual after the
investigation, be sure you're comfortable with that too, because the
numbers don't lie - they're not a safe operation by any reasonable
measure.

The problem is that even some military grumble that this is not a
*military*
unit, and they are right, it isn't.

I enjoy watching a good aerobatic demonstration as much as the next
guy, and I'm quite willing to pay for the privilege (and have) but as a
taxpayer I too would question whether millions of tax dollars should be
spent on an activity that is demonstrably dangerous and of no military
value. Plenty of aerobatic demonstration teams exist without taxpayer
support - why can't this one?

Michael