![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition rate
among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows? I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then there was the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there is the Firefly. I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect with no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical failure. However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips that we see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to hell for one reason or another. The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty much parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like a high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact occurred. I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive and callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a mechanical failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error. I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well qualified and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question, however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with little margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong? I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a dozen flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to minimize risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban Eight or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to know that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by. I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents and try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should be eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to make a decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not. My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by this post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies occur for a reason and they should be addressed. Paul Varga |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"F7FTCAT" wrote in message
... Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition rate among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows? I think it's more a matter of their being more of these aircraft flying in the UK. I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then there was the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there is the Firefly. There have also been many other accidents involving warbirds outside of the UK. I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect with no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical failure. And despite all efforts it is inevitable that some will be lost, as tragic as that will be. However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips that we see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to hell for one reason or another. Most seem to involve some level of aerobatics or "low margin" flying. The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty much parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like a high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact occurred. Whatever it was, it looked like he was going to be too low for my liking regardless. Of course, I'm the first to admit I'm no expert on these matters but it did look a little low. I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive and callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a mechanical failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error. It involves humans, there will be mistakes at some stage. I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well qualified and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question, however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with little margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong? The key issue here is that no matter how much we love to see these historic aircraft fly they a historically significant, often rare, often quite aged. For those reasons we cannot afford to loose them (including the lives of those who fly and maintain them). I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a dozen flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to minimize risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban Eight or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to know that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by. Somewhere a line has to be drawn. No aerobatics or very limited aerobatics with big safety margins. I love aerobatics but would rather watch a warbird do a safe moderate altitude moderate speed pass than watch in terror as one is pushed to the limit............or worse. Yes, the limitations are not hard and will vary from aircraft to aircraft etc. I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents and try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should be eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to make a decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not. Whilst the organisers always want a safe event, they also want some spectacle. Leave the spectacle of aerobatics to more modern aircraft. My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by this post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies occur for a reason and they should be addressed. It's hard to explain all my thoughts on the matter here but at the end of the day we need to be taking greater care of these historic aircraft and perhaps should do more to avoid aerobatics. Keep them flying but please don't push them. The Raven |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly?
Rare? I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get cheap. Richard The Raven wrote: "F7FTCAT" wrote in message ... Am I imagining things or does there seem to be a pretty high attrition rate among the really rare airplanes at some of these UK airshows? I think it's more a matter of their being more of these aircraft flying in the UK. I mean there was the P-38, P-63, Mosquito, the Me-109 (Black 6), then there was the Sea Fury on the golf course and the Sea Fury on the beach. Now there is the Firefly. There have also been many other accidents involving warbirds outside of the UK. I am certainly not trying to infer that we here in the states are perfect with no losses. There is plenty of blame to go around for pilot error here that causes the loss of men and machine as well as the inevitable mechanical failure. And despite all efforts it is inevitable that some will be lost, as tragic as that will be. However, correct me if I am wrong (and I could be!!) but the news clips that we see of these airplanes "going in" all seem to involve either low level aerobatic maneuvers gone wrong or "grass cutting" low passes that go to hell for one reason or another. Most seem to involve some level of aerobatics or "low margin" flying. The clip I saw on the Firefly looked like the pilot dished out of the bottom end of a loop or something and went in pretty much parallel to the ground, "a pancake hit" if you will. It almost looked like a high speed stall as he was pulling out with a recovery initiated as impact occurred. Whatever it was, it looked like he was going to be too low for my liking regardless. Of course, I'm the first to admit I'm no expert on these matters but it did look a little low. I am sure that there are those that will brand my remarks as insensitive and callous but accidents like this do happen for a reason. Barring a mechanical failure of some sort, the primary reason is pilot error. It involves humans, there will be mistakes at some stage. I am sure that the Royal Navy Pilot flying the aircraft was very well qualified and a fine pilot and on any given day his skill levels matched or exceeded those of any other warbird pilot on the circuit. The thing I do question, however, is why does it appear that these airplanes are being put through moderate to strenuous aerobatic maneuvers at very low altitudes with little margin for escape if the maneuver goes wrong? The key issue here is that no matter how much we love to see these historic aircraft fly they a historically significant, often rare, often quite aged. For those reasons we cannot afford to loose them (including the lives of those who fly and maintain them). I myself love to see warbirds fly and I do enjoy seeing aerobatics as well.However, I do feel that airplanes of which there may be less than a dozen flying in the world should be flown as gently as possible so as to minimize risk. I can enjoy watching a P-63 without having to see it do a vertical pull-up off the deck. I can enjoy a Firefly without seeing it do a Cuban Eight or a loop. I do not have to see grass clippings in the intake of a P-38 to know that it is impressive on a high speed fly-by. Somewhere a line has to be drawn. No aerobatics or very limited aerobatics with big safety margins. I love aerobatics but would rather watch a warbird do a safe moderate altitude moderate speed pass than watch in terror as one is pushed to the limit............or worse. Yes, the limitations are not hard and will vary from aircraft to aircraft etc. I hope the officiating parties undertake a review of these past accidents and try to determine if there is a common denominator. If there is, it should be eliminated, if possible, so that the airshow committee doesn't have to make a decision every year as to "whether the show should continue" or not. Whilst the organisers always want a safe event, they also want some spectacle. Leave the spectacle of aerobatics to more modern aircraft. My condolences to the pilot's family and for anyone that takes offense by this post, please accept my heartfelt apology. Unfortunately, these tragedies occur for a reason and they should be addressed. It's hard to explain all my thoughts on the matter here but at the end of the day we need to be taking greater care of these historic aircraft and perhaps should do more to avoid aerobatics. Keep them flying but please don't push them. The Raven |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Richard Lamb" wrote in message
... We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly? Rare? I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get cheap. Airworthy? -- The Raven http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3 ** President of the ozemail.* and uunet.* NG's ** since August 15th 2000. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() The Raven wrote: "Richard Lamb" wrote in message ... We're talking about a T3A Fire Fly? Rare? I know where there are 30 or 40 you can get cheap. Airworthy? With IO-540's in them? I don't think so! -- The Raven http://www.80scartoons.co.uk/batfinkquote.mp3 ** President of the ozemail.* and uunet.* NG's ** since August 15th 2000. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Fairey Firefly...not a Slingsby.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ahh. Copy that.
Vern wrote: Fairey Firefly...not a Slingsby. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have only just got to this debate. I was on HMS Victorious 1966 to 1967
when we bought this aircraft. We paid, I believe £120 for it, but that could have been £160. The memory goes with the passage of time. We brought it back from Sydney to Singapore, and from there the RAF shipped it back to UK in a Herk. I helped to pay for it and over the years I have told people that I owned a little bit of it whenever I saw it flying. When it crashed it was like losing an old and dear friend. Very upsetting. I met the pilot 2 years ago when he flew a Swordfish to Sherburn in Elmet, Yorkshire, where it was built, for an annual pilgramage. He bought with him a CD rom of Royal Navy aircraft for an add on to Combat Flight Simulator. I fly it regularly. If you get the chance, get a copy. However, I would always want to see aircraft where they should be....in the air. We know accidents will happen, but there will always be pilots to fly them and public to watch them. Sorry for going on, but I was just thinking about the times I sat in its cockpit on passage to Singapore, shooting down the enemy with gay abandon. I was only young you understand. Hub & Diane Plott wrote in message ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/c...re/3061391.stm here is a link |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:13:04 +0000, Joseph Wilkinson wrote:
I have only just got to this debate. I was on HMS Victorious 1966 to 1967 when we bought this aircraft. We paid, I believe £120 for it, but that could have been £160. The memory goes with the passage of time. We brought it back from Sydney to Singapore, and from there the RAF shipped it back to UK in a Herk. I helped to pay for it and over the years I have told people that I owned a little bit of it whenever I saw it flying. When it crashed it was like losing an old and dear friend. Very upsetting. I met the pilot 2 years ago when he flew a Swordfish to Sherburn in Elmet, Yorkshire, where it was built, for an annual pilgramage. Hub & Diane Plott wrote in message ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/c...re/3061391.stm here is a link As a younger (we can all dream!)aviation follower I read your message and of course our thoughs must go to the families and friends of the crew at this time - a sad loss. I could not let the chance go by to thank your group for doing their bit to save this aircraft, at least I got to see one fly which is more than can be said loads of other aircraft. Nick |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Plane down - NASCAR team plane crashes... | Chuck | Piloting | 10 | October 28th 04 12:38 AM |
Navy probes crashes of 4 jets | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | March 31st 04 11:44 PM |
Air Force plane crashes in Nevada desert | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | March 17th 04 09:36 PM |
Military jet crashes near Marine base in Miramar; 4 feared dead | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | March 11th 04 09:20 PM |
Houston crashes | Big John | Piloting | 8 | December 11th 03 07:35 PM |