Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: oakranger on November 25, 2008, 05:47:02 PM
-
OMG, I didn't think this huge bomber can pull moves like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related)
-
I love the B52s...
(http://www.thewaxfactor.com/images/B-52s-The-B-52s-189569.jpg)
Oh, wait... Nevermind... :D
-
Rock Lobster!
-
i saw him make that turn and im like "oh toejam, that guy is dead"
-
OMG, I didn't think this huge bomber can pull moves like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related)
It can't. That's why they're dead.
-
The guy who posted that video on youtube commented that he thought the B-52 pilot must have been a superb stick and rudder pilot. My opinion is that he was exactly the opposite. He was a terrible pilot, and he had gotten away with a lot of stuff from pure dumb luck. He was probably a buff pilot because his poor skills and terrible attitude were likely recognized in pilot training and that may have kept him out of a fighter cockpit.
I reached this conclusion from two things - First, several of the maneuvers are so inherently dangerous and abusive of the airframe that only a terrible pilot would routinely do them. He must have had absolutely no concept that what he was doing was so horribly stupid. Second, his absolute disregard for policy, procedures, and regulations points to the the kind of pilot who is unteachable. Mediocre skills and an unteachable attitude does not equal good stick and rudder pilot in my book.
Considering his fate, it's almost a shame he didn't end up in fighters. That way he would have only killed himself and it probably would have happened earlier in his career so our nation wouldn't have invested so much money in his training.
He must have had some innate ability as a pilot, but as a fighter pilot and experienced instructor pilot, I would rate him as a merely mediocre stick and rudder pilot with a dangerous know-it-all attitude. These attitudes are mercilessly stomped out during training the second they are recognized, but it's obvious that sometimes a bad apple slips through.
If I sound harsh, well too bad. Part of my job is ensuring our newest pilots don't end up like this guy and I have nothing good to say about him, his career, or the circumstances and decisions that led to the mishap (starting with him getting his wings in the first place). I admit that it is 20/20 hindsight, but a pilot that poorly disciplined with that poor of a grasp of aerodynamics should have never graduated pilot training.
-
I work with a couple of B-52 guys and the scuttlebutt is that the pilot had a reputation for doing risky stupid stuff. So much so that his crew refused to fly with him. On the fatal flight, the squadron commander flew right seat with him to demonstrate his trust. The story goes that the last words on the black box were the squadron commander saying something to the extent of "you squealing idiot, you killed us all."
That's the story. Take it with a grain of salt, since it was told to me by pilots. ;)
-
Do you really think that the AF would let him fly that bomber like that. If i was the CO of that base, i would told him to land that bird. When i first saw that video, the only thing came in mind is the stress on them wings.
-
I'm still a bit amazed that this particular pilot was allowed to stay behind the stick (yoke) long enough to end up like this. Apparently, he was a real hotheat know-it-all, that was out to prove he should have been selected for fighters. In a previous sortie, apparently he overstressed another -52's skin so badly that they replaced 500 or so rivets.
The sad thing, like eagl already said, was that he took 3 other people to their graves....where, had he been in a single seat stick, only his stupid arse would have bought the farm.
-
Double post.
-
I'm still a bit amazed that this particular pilot was allowed to stay behind the stick (yoke) long enough to end up like this. Apparently, he was a real hotheat know-it-all, that was out to prove he should have been selected for fighters. In a previous sortie, apparently he overstressed another -52's skin so badly that they replaced 500 or so rivets.
The sad thing, like eagl already said, was that he took 3 other people to their graves....where, had he been in a single seat stick, only his stupid arse would have bought the farm.
It does impress me a bit that the airframe didn't fail throughout any of those manuevers. The resulting crash was due to low altitude stall.... these things happen when you get slow then radically alter your lift parameters.... ie tilt your wings perpendicular to the freaking ground at under 200 feet AGL and just under the
An EMPTY B52 has a T/W ratio of .73.....
-
Read the incident analysis here (http://s92270093.onlinehome.us/CRM-Devel/resources/paper/darkblue/darkblue.htm): it shows how human relationships can make well-designed procedures and regulations to fail.
-
eagl, what also was a factor, probably THE biggest factor, is the practice of "officer favoritism", something that is almost never talked about. This particular pilot, according to discussions I've seen regarding this accident, had a long history of bucking the rules and regulations flying the BUFF's, but nothing was done. I'm pretty sure it was the officer corps taking care of their own, which, I am not stating is something you do or condone, but I know you know what I am talking about. I saw it all too often in the Navy and never understood how they expect to hold the enlisted personnel to a high standard and then turn around and do the opposite. I know rank has it's privilege, but to not do anything about an officer who so clearly has no regard for flight rules and regulations ultimately led to the deaths of all onboard this flight.
-
BBS is acting weird for me, sorry for the multiple post.
I'm still a bit amazed that this particular pilot was allowed to stay behind the stick (yoke) long enough to end up like this. Apparently, he was a real hotheat know-it-all, that was out to prove he should have been selected for fighters. In a previous sortie, apparently he overstressed another -52's skin so badly that they replaced 500 or so rivets.
The sad thing, like eagl already said, was that he took 3 other people to their graves....where, had he been in a single seat stick, only his stupid arse would have bought the farm.
It does impress me a bit that the airframe didn't fail throughout any of those manuevers. The resulting crash was due to low altitude stall.... these things happen when you get slow then radically alter your lift parameters.... ie tilt your wings perpendicular to the freaking ground at under 200 feet AGL and just above the Vs for the aircraft....
An EMPTY B52 has a T/W ratio of .73..... meaning once you're in deep sht.... your boots aren't big enough to get out.
-
I'm probably mistaken but I think the pilot was the squadron commander and, as shown in the clip, he had been doing things like this for some time.
I'm trying to find where I read the write up on the crash and pilot. I'll be back if I can find it.
(there's always wiki....)
wrongway
-
I always liked this video. Talk about a big plane doing some crazy stuff. Half way through the video they pull into the vertical, roll inverted over the top and pull back down into the vertical, then roll out.
Course this plane was designed to be able to do those sorts of things. Talked to one pilot at an airshow and he said the B1-B flys like a heavy F-4 Phantom with a smoother ride.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdUeP7ROq-U&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdUeP7ROq-U&feature=related)
-
I'm probably mistaken but I think the pilot was the squadron commander and, as shown in the clip, he had been doing things like this for some time.
I'm trying to find where I read the write up on the crash and pilot. I'll be back if I can find it.
(there's always wiki....)
wrongway
Yes do. I just cant imagine that the AF would aloud any bodyd to fly that bomber like that.
-
Interesting read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairchild_Air_Force_Base_B-52_crash
-
I'm probably mistaken but I think the pilot was the squadron commander and, as shown in the clip, he had been doing things like this for some time.
I'm trying to find where I read the write up on the crash and pilot. I'll be back if I can find it.
(there's always wiki....)
wrongway
Actually he wasn't. He did manage to kill his squadron CO in the crash though.
Killed in the crash were Lt Col Arthur "Bud" Holland, the Chief of the 92d Bomb Wing Standardization and Evaluation branch. Lt Col Holland, an instructor pilot, was designated as the aircraft commander and was undoubtedly flying the aircraft at the time of the accident. 4 The copilot was Lt Col Mark McGeehan, also an instructor pilot and the 325th Bomb Squadron (BMS) Commander. There is a great deal of evidence that suggests considerable animosity existed between the two pilots who were at the controls of Czar 52..
-
So this Holland was a bad apple that just got his hand slap to nothing happening for breaking a lot of flight regulations. This who thing could have been prevented if the Wing COs grounded him permanently.
Imagine how he would be if he was in AH. LOL, he wouldnt last long.
-
Do you really think that the AF would let him fly that bomber like that. If i was the CO of that base, i would told him to land that bird. When i first saw that video, the only thing came in mind is the stress on them wings.
Not only do they "allow" it but USAF used to train B-52 crews to fly exactly like that.
What you are seeing are the actual low level nuclear weapon attacks which were developed back in the days, "my days", before standoff weapons and cruise missiles were available. "At least some of the video".
The B-52 approaches the target, say an ICBM site, at a very high subsonic speed under the radar, "you saw the bomb bay doors open on some of the buffs and even saw a practice bomb tossed out in one flight". Using the Buffs own radar to track the target the buff does a high G climb releasing the B-61, or B-83, nuclear weapon at the preset altitude. The weapon has a special drag parachute which slows it down drastically as the Buff does a radical 180% to escape the effects of the blast. Ive also seen many a F-4 Phantom practice this radical maneuver. We used to practice the whole shebang. Pulling "dummy" specials out, convoying to a hot flight line, loading onto the aircraft, then launching the aircraft. The entire time on the clock and the attack aircraft would go on the mission using the same tactics as if a hot launch.
So this isn't "stunt flying". This is specific training for special weapons delivery. My guess is they still train for it because we still have free fall weapons of this type in inventory.
No doubt this Pilot pulled a bonehead stunt here with the crash. But this type of low level bomb release tactics is specifically trained for.
-
wiki article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairchild_Air_Force_Base_B-52_crash
-
Interesting that he ejected knowing he was going down. I don't think he told any one else because I am sure they would have all tried if they knew what was about to happen.
-
It was the co-pilot that had a moment of clarity...albeit too late to save him.
-
OMG, I didn't think this huge bomber can pull moves like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU&feature=related)
I want one....
-
eagl, what also was a factor, probably THE biggest factor, is the practice of "officer favoritism", something that is almost never talked about. This particular pilot, according to discussions I've seen regarding this accident, had a long history of bucking the rules and regulations flying the BUFF's, but nothing was done. I'm pretty sure it was the officer corps taking care of their own, which, I am not stating is something you do or condone, but I know you know what I am talking about. I saw it all too often in the Navy and never understood how they expect to hold the enlisted personnel to a high standard and then turn around and do the opposite. I know rank has it's privilege, but to not do anything about an officer who so clearly has no regard for flight rules and regulations ultimately led to the deaths of all onboard this flight.
I can't/won't discuss some of that because the info I have on those topics came from the non-releasable safety report, not the accident report. I'll let it go with the comment that a bunch of people were justifiably fired after this incident and the wiki linked above is fairly thorough.
-
you sound like you know a lot about the issue.
-
you sound like you know a lot about the issue.
Eagl is a RL USAF fighter pilot (now an instructor if I'm right). He wasn't good enough to fly B-52s so he had to fly those slow-assed F15s :aok
-
Not only do they "allow" it but USAF used to train B-52 crews to fly exactly like that.
What you are seeing are the actual low level nuclear weapon attacks which were developed back in the days, "my days", before standoff weapons and cruise missiles were available. "At least some of the video".
The B-52 approaches the target, say an ICBM site, at a very high subsonic speed under the radar, "you saw the bomb bay doors open on some of the buffs and even saw a practice bomb tossed out in one flight". Using the Buffs own radar to track the target the buff does a high G climb releasing the B-61, or B-83, nuclear weapon at the preset altitude. The weapon has a special drag parachute which slows it down drastically as the Buff does a radical 180% to escape the effects of the blast. Ive also seen many a F-4 Phantom practice this radical maneuver. We used to practice the whole shebang. Pulling "dummy" specials out, convoying to a hot flight line, loading onto the aircraft, then launching the aircraft. The entire time on the clock and the attack aircraft would go on the mission using the same tactics as if a hot launch.
So this isn't "stunt flying". This is specific training for special weapons delivery. My guess is they still train for it because we still have free fall weapons of this type in inventory.
No doubt this Pilot pulled a bonehead stunt here with the crash. But this type of low level bomb release tactics is specifically trained for.
Rich, with all due respect, "Flip or Toss Bombing" is not the same as pulling wingovers with a 250,000 lb aircraft. The high G pullup was not the issue. The wings perpendicular to the ground at Vs min..... definately more of an issue in an aircraft that has a max thrust to weight of .70 fully unloaded.
-
Rich, with all due respect, "Flip or Toss Bombing" is not the same as pulling wingovers with a 250,000 lb aircraft. The high G pullup was not the issue. The wings perpendicular to the ground at Vs min..... definately more of an issue in an aircraft that has a max thrust to weight of .70 fully unloaded.
Yeah I know. Thats why I mentioned the stupid "stunt" separatly. I gave the video one very quick look see and I believe I also saw legitimate special weapon delivery training as well.
-
Just a quick question to anyone who might know, doesn't the '52 have any sort of stall warning/ stick shaker arrangement? Not that it would have prevented it. TIA
-
This is taught in just about every CRM class that I have been in for the past 12 years. Dangerous attitudes behind the stick are just as deadly as bullets or missiles. No body wants to be "that guy" to speak up about someone....but usually all it take is one person to step fwd and others soon follow. I got to Fairchild a little bit after the accident and folks still had strong feelings.
-
Well, i am sure a lot of people who are surrounded the situation have Strong feeling about it. for one, people have die, people where court marshal, and a 100 million dollare plan going down by irresponsible pilot can bring a lot of emtions.
-
Well, I am sure a lot of people surrounding the situation have strong feelings. People died, others were court marshaled as well as the loss of a 100 million dollar plane due to irresponsible piloting can provoke a lot of emotions.
Fixed... or at least kinda cleaned up... :salute
-
Yea, i know
-
I'm probably mistaken but I think the pilot was the squadron commander and, as shown in the clip, he had been doing things like this for some time.
I'm trying to find where I read the write up on the crash and pilot. I'll be back if I can find it.
(there's always wiki....)
wrongway
Link is already posted... the guy was an idiot
-
Yeah I know. Thats why I mentioned the stupid "stunt" separatly. I gave the video one very quick look see and I believe I also saw legitimate special weapon delivery training as well.
There was a low level weapons delivery run, but it wasn't a special weapon, or a simulated special weapon either. I know exactly what the *special weapons* and *simulated special weapons* look like since I used to load them.
-
I doubt they could precision drop a "special" on a target that small. Far as I know the gravity bombs were unguided with retard parachutes. The impact radius is probly fairly large compared to a airshow fly zone. Didnt they call that maunuever the "idiot loop"?
Race
-
Here's a far funnyer mishap: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5-FNGuJxuo&NR=1
-
Another interesting aspect of this accident that points to systemic causal factors is the fact that there was a Class A mishap at the same airbase (Fairchild) in March of 1987 involving a KC 135 doing simulated low-level refueling type maneuvers with a Buff while practicing for yet another airshow. I believe that a determination was made that wake turbulence was involved in the accident. One interesting side light of the tanker accident, and I think I remember this right, was that one of the tanker aircrew arrived too late for the accident flight but was, nonetheless, killed on the ground while sitting in his car in the parking lot.
-
To expand on this a little we are looking at an accident where it is clear the guy was an idiot. In my safety philosophy, though, this conclusion is not a satisfactory explanation for a couple of reasons. The first is that it allows us to dismiss the mishap as an aberration. The second is that it does not contain an element of correctability. If we approach it like that we have to conclude that the accident is unavoidable because as Ron White likes to point out: "You can't fix stupid." Whenever I hear the words "pilot error" in connection with an accident I cringe. There is no element of correctablilty in "pilot error". In order to fix anything we need to know if it was because the pilot was not properly trained, or tired, or drunk etc.
So starting from the premise of "You can't fix stupid." we have to examine the command structure which allowed the situation to exist and for that pilot to flourish (as Tony Kern does in his excellent examination of the accident). The fact that there was a similar accident at the same airfield under similar conditions 7 years prior to this one is relevant.
It is not unheard of for the military to release one politically correct report for public consumption and keep contradictory conclusions "in-house". An excellent example is the Kara Hultgren accident. Publically she was praised while the Navy's in-house assessment was critical of her.
-
I doubt they could precision drop a "special" on a target that small. Far as I know the gravity bombs were unguided with retard parachutes. The impact radius is probly fairly large compared to a airshow fly zone. Didnt they call that maunuever the "idiot loop"?
Race
You don't need a whole lot of precision with a *special* weapon. ;)
-
LOL....no close is good enough for all but a smallest tactical weapons.
Race
-
This incident was actually a case study in poor leadership at Air Force Squadron Officers' School when I attended in '96.