Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The USAF still has C-130s from 1954? Surely they've been replaced by later produced C-130 models?In USAF service, by order of the oldest:
C-130 (1954)
No - they've been replaced.The USAF still has C-130s from 1954? Surely they've been replaced by later produced C-130 models?
Didn't some of those older ones get transferred to the USFS and some State Forestry departments?No - they've been replaced.
Actually some private operators (Aero Union) picked them up. Some with disastrous resultsDidn't some of those older ones get transferred to the USFS and some State Forestry departments?
I know the Forest Service has some P-3s still in service.
Further to my previous post about the Battle of Britain memorial flight. When formed in 1957 it had one Hurricane, the last airworthy Hurricane in the RAF and one Spitfire. The Lancaster didn't become airworthy and part of the flight until 1973, although it had permission to fly in 1967. The BBMF now has 6 Spitfires, 2 Hurricanes, a Lancaster and a C-47. There are far more of these aircraft flying now than there were 40-50 years ago, which should be borne in mind when looking at accident stats.
And you know this how? Have you attended one of their briefings?Yes, but the BBMF have incredibly skilled, very high hours military pilots, who train relentlessly, and an incredibly tight display regime that would never tolerate planes on intersecting paths.
I just hope that in the pursuit of my bliss, whatever that is, I don't endanger others. I felt terrible for that B-17 crew, they were just flying on a steady course, enjoying the moment, and trusting that the other aircraft nearby would not fatally collide with them. I ride a motorcycle and I know that's dangerous - I'm okay taking that personal risk for myself, but I'd never forgive myself if through poor control of my motorcycle I killed not only myself, but other users of the road.
I suppose that's government restrictions and laws around speed limits, crash barrier design and use, seatbelts, air bags, crumple zones, back up cameras, daytime running lights and likely soon lane departure warnings.
I don't think it was a matter of "not functioning," the unit in the P-63 didn't record flight data from what I understand but I'll stand to be corrected.- the recorder on the P-63 was not functioning. (was anything else not functioning?)
This measurement wasn't altitude, it was horizontal distance from the crowd line.What stands out is the assertions that -
- the Bomber group was assigned a higher altitude (1000ft) than the Fighter group (500ft) (and suggests this is unusual for an airshow?)
AFAK they are all RAF pilots but their displays especially those with the Lancaster rarely involve more than a fly past, the whole idea of the BBMF is to keep them flying so that many people can see them, not see fantastic displays of pilot skill and coordination.Yes, but the BBMF have incredibly skilled, very high hours military pilots, who train relentlessly, and an incredibly tight display regime that would never tolerate planes on intersecting paths.
I was going to say that. 1000ft is the normal circuit altitude.This measurement wasn't altitude, it was horizontal distance from the crowd line.
They were flying along and then Trey weren't flying anymore. Nobody should have been flying in a pancake mode. Air boss screwed up. Sum up doneHey, can you sum it up, Gumby? It's oh-bed-thirty for me and a busy day tomorrow. TIA if you can.