Warbird Abuse?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


FlyboyJ,

The L-29 / 39's sound A LOT like a Tweet (T-37). 1950's jet engine technology at it's finest, unhampered by progress. The astounding thing about that cast iron engine was it's ability to ingest birds with no ill effects.

In the OV-10 response was pretty good as long as you had a comparable plane to wingman (prop advantage). F-15's with F100-100 engines were pretty good, but when we got the F100-220 (FADEC equipped) it got even better.

Cheers,
Biff
 
At a Farnborough Air Show ( early '90) there were, as final show, a Spitfire and a Tornado pulling G's in formation.......
I can't describe with words my feelings.....
 
Dave very well articulates what I also commented in the various FB posts on this subject. To Greg's comparison with Bob Hoover flying displays - Hoover NEVER did a stunt like Snodgrass. Hoover stayed above the airfield and away from the crowds and parked aircraft.

I saw Hoover perform some extremely dangerous (to the ordinary medium skill pilot) when he was doing serious work for NAA/USAF during the early/mid 50's when the primary NAA birds were the F-86 and F-100 (like an 8 point precision roll along Eglin Main where the wing in the 12 and 6 O'clock position was no more than 50 feet off the concrete. If something happened to him or the aircraft, then he would be the only casualty.

I respect Snodgrass's ability - but not his judgment, nor do I trust completely a 70 year old airframe, many of which have been bent and repaired with unknown inspections in critical areas for fatigue stress and cracks. If he F--ks up I would prefer that his ass is the only one that is busted. In addition, the owner of the bird will more likely than not be facing litigation judgments far in excess of his net worth.

I am entirely in agreement with Dave and Evan on this matter and feel the FAA will sooner or later rapidly increase restrictions on warbird airshows even if that type flying is eliminated.
 
Out of interest, what is the minimum crowd line distance over in the States?

Low passes are great and all, but if people more than one row from the front can't see properly, what's the point?
 
GregP said:
It might have been better not to be so close to the golf cart ... that he didn't hit.
Click to expand...
And on the same token, I have driven for decades on highways, being seperated from oncoming traffic by a yellow line and a few feet.

Until that one time...

And there in lies my point. All the great smiles, pats on the back and awesome stories of "you should have seen the time when..." come to a sudden stop when something goes terribly wrong.

There is a long and sad list of pilots who are not with us anymore, who for one reason or another, didn't make that one last manouver that meant the difference between a great run and a tragic end.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree here, but I understand what you are saying and would not disagree too hard that Dale might should have been a bit higher. I would have been ... but it's great to see a real pro doing a great job, too.

I never got very close to people when doing RC airshows ...
 
Guys,

It is all about perceived danger. On the road, an act is either safe or dangerous, it is black and white. In the air, aviators need to judge a situation at that given moment, and act. One's perceived danger is taken in another's stride. In the airshow/competition circuit, I have seen dozens of what I would consider dangerous acts or 'moments of madness', not as extreme as this, but at the end of the day, each pilot has his own world. I have friends who go down to the aeroclub and fly a Cessna on a fair weather day, nothing any worse, once or twice a month. Capable pilots, safe, efficient, as far as taking the wife or a friend up for a local jaunt. However, there are countless techniques and concepts that I employ in my flying which leave a few of them speechless (and I am not talking about low flying or 'buzz n breaks' or ego stuff like that), just efficient ways of doing things, safely. However, , equally have friends who are far far more experienced than me, one has 38,000hrs, only 1/4 of which is airline time, who does things that I simply could not contemplate, ever.

This doesn't make that particular pilot 'dangerous', although plenty of aeroclub pilots have labeled him this when I have been within ear shot (I keep my thoughts to myself at the airfield). It is all about perception. One of my colleagues in the aerobatic scene (twice the amount of aerobatic time and competition flying) as me, pulled some stunts a couple of years ago at a training camp I was hosting at a friend's private airfield. He does have an enormous ego, well known for it, unfortunately what he was doing was simply not appropriate and I pulled him up for it in a direct and strongly worded email without insulting him or using pathetic language. It got the point across.

This chap with the Mustang, clearly is in a zone beyond most others, maybe some ego maybe not, I don't know him so I have no idea. Personally, I like to see these aircraft flown professionally and with margin, but still somehow, with a bit of wow factor - not hard to do with these sorts of aeroplanes! So my perception, is that he is definitely cutting things far too fine. That is just my opinion though. The concern I have, is that many have been killed cutting their margins too slim. There are never winners when there is an accident.

Yakflyer
 
Hi gumbyk,

Not sure of the minimum safe distance but, at least in the U.S.A., we have a "do not cross" double yellow line on all airports that you are not supposed to cross unless you are in contact with the tower and have permission. If you do, you get a Federal runway incursion write up that isn't pleasant. In our airshow, the crowd is back about 50 - 75 feet from the "do not cross" line, mosrtly so we have room to taxi plane for the airshow.


Hi Yakflyer,

If there is anyone qualified to fly a warbird as he does, it's Dale Snodgrass. You might try looking at some videos of his airshow performances as well as some of his military flying. They're on the internet easily available. I'm not an apologist for Dale, I just like seeing him fly when I can. He can do anything he wants that both the air boss and warbird owner approve and it's fine with me. I don't have any say in his maneuvers whatsoever. I usually see them in videos well after the event has happened.

Here's a pic of Dale flying an F-14 down the side of a carrier:

 
Last edited:
To an extent this is surely the effect of the telephoto lens; take an photograph of the F-14 from 1000m away then the crowd, which is say 900m, away looks almost as if its virtually the same distance. Nevertheless one of the Navy men in uniform seems to be protecting his ears, but then the other, seems to be using binoculars. The Bank angle looks well over 60 degrees maybe 70, so resolving a few vectors suggests they are pulling at least 2G more likely 3G. What I thought was dirty paint is I think vapor condensing in the low pressure region above the wing.
 
Last edited:

Found it in an FAA AC. It's between 500 and 1500 ft, depending on the size and speed and manoeuvres of the aircraft. Given this, the only real risk is to the pilot and aircraft (as long as all manoeuvres are away from the crowd line).

Here in NZ, we have a 100ft minimum altitude for all events (with a couple of exceptions), but our minimum distance to crowd is less (250 to 720 ft).

That low fly-past, and close to the crowd is dangerous, but at a suitable distance from the crowd, the risk to spectators is minimised. We have had a couple of pilots try to do this sort of thing, but at NZ distance from the crowd line. They weren't/aren't invited back.
 


Still think it's a telephoto lens? The pic above is a different one but the pass is just as close.

It wasn't a telephoto lens at all. The distance from the carrier is rather well known to a lot of people. It was VERY close ... he was temporarily grounded for the pass immediately above because he didn't have permission for a close-in pass. He DID have permission for the first pic and it was a good one.
 
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ said:
I served 6 years in the USNR, there was one former F-14 maintainer in my work center who was there and saw it. Greg is quite correct in the outcome.
Click to expand...

I accept that. If it was a long distance shot from a telephoto lens then the spectators heads and that of the two Tomcat crew (allowing for the helmets) would have been about the same; however they are not the same, the spectator heads are much larger which means the camera was relatively close to the spectators. Telephoto lens's can create that illusion however, though I'm not a photo analyst.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Most numerous surviving ww2 warbird type?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
wlewisiii
M
The Gooney as a Warbird
Replies
0
Views
951
MIflyer
M
Warbirds Over Pearl Harbor
Replies
6
Views
929
Tkdog
T
Warbird you regret the most that there isn't a single surving example of?
5 6 7
Replies
127
Views
11K
Hardlydank
Warbird Rides
Replies
17
Views
4K
YF12A
Y
Menu
Log in
Register