I One of the accounts under accident or incidents describs a landing in Wastington that could have easily resulted in the death of the Harold Wilson.
Damn those competent VC10 drivers!!!!
My thoughts as he messed up the turn at the western end of the field was that he was flying it like a Jet. I actually mentioned this to some Dutch visitors that I was talking to. And I was not the only forum member who had these thoughts as we watched
But IIRC Bill Murton was an instructor pilot on Grob Herons and with the FAAHF for 3 years – when was the last time he was in a jet?? I just cant understand your analogy.
No, he thought for a moment he was in a Harrier. He was not performing an Aerobatic routine, he was well away from the airfield positioning for another sedate pass down the field. This accident demonstrates as others have already said that there is an element of risk in just flying these aircraft. A Derry turn does not constitute an aerobatic routine for an aircraft such as the Firefly
???? First sentence means what exactly????
So if a (say) VC10 performs a derry turn would that be aerobatic?? A derry turn requires the aircraft to roll through the inverted. For me inverted flight = aerobatic.
I thought at the time of the Firefly crash that Aerobatics in some warbirds should be stopped and more gentle routines flown its fair to say the Firefly did not crash in a Aerobatic manoeuvre but it was due to losing speed through the display,.
The Firefly was initiating a roll and lost control at the inverted – how much more aerobatic do you want to get!?
Well Hell,
I we have a FAA Safty guy right at the runway making sure things are safe.
.
Hmmm.. a FAA saft guy!! presume he was watching the Yak???
Well there you go – bags and bags of room. I know a guy who regularly levels out at a mere 3 feet. 😉
Well I hope you continue to know him, flying like that the chances are not good! :rolleyes:
Yes, precisely my point. They still lost an aircraft – albeit temporarily as it was restored at great expense – despite their ‘safer’ display routines. Thus their routines, careful as they are, do not prevent 100% of all accidents. Nothing can.
I really dont think you grasp what Im trying to say ;
BBMF in 35 years of DISPLAY flying – no loss
As for ‘inches’, from all accounts it is rather more than that (and to the person who asked, no I do not know the exact altitude difference between camera position and aircraft).
This is a quote from the guy who took the video –
“Dan McCue took to the air once again in the Yak-9. Dan flew the Yak better than Sean Carroll flies his Yak, but I prefer Sean’s Yak over Dan’s, in terms of paint scheme. As I stated earlier, Dan flew the Yak very aggressively – coming down on the deck numerous times, with one that was a little too low. From my vantage point, Dan came out of a looping maneuver as if he did not have control of the aircraft and recovered with merely inches to spare between the plane and the ground. However, that’s not entirely true, since Andrews has a drainage ditch between the two runways and by the altitude that Dan came in at, he still had at least five feet working for him. After that close encounter, Dan landed the Yak.”
“down on the deck numerous times” – the clock was ticking……
He was (quote) “5 feet” Damien – thats 60 inches!!!
[QUOTE=DamienB]People who prefer to see aeros are ‘strange’? Well we all have our opinions I guess.
No you said some people you know call the bbmf boring – thats who I am calling strange!
QUOTE=DamienB]I enjoy the BBMF and more dynamic routines from similar types equally as I’m just happy to hear a Merlin roaring round the sky but it does not surprise me or strike me as strange that others prefer a more entertaining high energy display. As for the BBMF having done it for 35 years with no loss – well I do recall a certain Hurricane needing a bit of work after a nasty fire! And no aeros involved at all that time.
But not DURING a display or as the result of reckless flying!!! How can you compare an aircraft post display rtb, suffering an engine problem and carrying out a safe emergency landing with this video that could have shown a fatal disaster but for a few inches of ground effect!!??
Good points Paul – it does rather ask the question of how many people in an airshow crowd actually think a ‘flat’ display is ‘boring’ ? These sites draw on the comments of enthusiasts – does the public really care about the type of flying as long as it’s safe and they enjoy the viewing the aircraft?
Absolutely!! Do the paying punters care? I find that repeated vertical manouveres takes the aircraft away from the crowd and it suddenly becomes a dot in the sky – after all they’re all spitfires to Mr & Mrs Jo Bloggs and one dot is the same as the next one. Combining what punters and enthusiasts want isnt difficult – safe,close fly bys with plenty of bank to show topsides!!
Kodak, you are correct the aircraft in question is an F58, if I can figure it out I’ll post a picture. The story I had heard was that the squadron had permission to paint the aircraft for 24 hours after which it had to revert to normal colours. Seems like a shed load of work for 1 day. I think the jet did 2 flights in the scheme.
I rather like the idea of having a really lairy jet to compete with Jonathon’s. something along the lines of the graffitti Hunter would be cracking. (there’s enough Hunters painted in boring camo colours to keep the purists happy!)
Yes please then !! I dont like civvy schemes on former miltary aircraft!! For instance the cvix looks awful and AFAIC theres no where near enough Hunters in accurate camo to go round!! IMHO guys, IMHO!!!
So if we painted VETA in the same tiger scheme as was applied to one of the Swiss air force machines (J-4030?), would that count?
No, being as VETA is a T7 and J-4030 is an F58 of the ex Patrouille Suisse.
I cant recall seeing a piccy a tiger Hunter but would love to see some shots, but I bet it was a single seater.
The red/white of 4FTS is very eye catching and would make a great accompanyment to Delta’s Gnat and a standard scheme JP(if there are any left!!??) Or, an ETPS scheme or even the unique T12 green & white!?? Anything thats authentic is fine by me!
Actually a few people I know refer to them as ‘The Battle of Boring’ for that very reason. And I notice their routines late last season and in practices for this year’s season are much more dynamic.
Well we all have our stranger collection of friends Damien!
Boring (not IMHO) – but still here 30+ years later! – The proof is in the pudding.
certainly a bit more dynamic but not vertical- indeed they opened the Sunday show at the last FL and a few derrys were inluded along with the customary barrel roll.
It does’nt count as a representative ex Swiss Air force machine painted in a civvy blue scheme – ditto G-VETA IMHO – Tiger scheme!!??? aaaarrghh no!!
Would the Swiss graffitti hunter count as a representative machine?
Of course – its an exact copy of an Air Force retirement scheme!
Doesnt count as what??
Its a Hunter its ex Swiss its as rare as a healthy Burger King and its flying.
I say bring it on.
It does’nt count as a representative ex Swiss Air force machine painted in a civvy blue scheme – ditto G-VETA IMHO – Tiger scheme!!??? aaaarrghh no!!
Built like a T34?
Definitely not the Beech Mentor. He would have lost his wings for sure and ended up as a big fireball. The Mentors have had a load of structural failures in recent years and people have died – they’ve been popular at giving ‘Top Gun’ combat experience flights to pilots and enthusiasts alike. I wouldn’t want to get in one and pull a whole lot of G.
YR
T34 – another UK airshow fatality – Mildenhall 1983, too low on a stall turn…..