Maurus
The Great Gazoo
Obviously it was a well formulated number. They ask for more money and the show doesn't even go on and they lose out. Overall, the show is actually a good investment.
Who Should be Able to Fly Airshows?
- Thread starter Murdoughnut
- Start date
cmill
Cold Ass Honky
I'll be completely honest. I dont have any documentation. What I do have is a pretty good idea of the type of changes you would like to see though. This is based on nothing else than your post. I'm sure you're a really cool guy to have a beer with, and I would always be willing to do so, but somehow I get the idea I would rather have a tazer shoved up my ass than to talk about our diverging view points.
Pilotforhire587
Lycra Man
Seggy feels no pain.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Here is the thing dude. I was asking some questions concerning the aspects of the NTSB Report and when I FINALLY got my answers, my views did change some of my view of Air Races and Air Shows. My line of questioning came directly from reading the NTSB Report. I was educated and my view did change.
With you, people have explained things, yet you don't seem to listen. Your view point doesn't change even with education about the topic.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
See my point above. If one has a diverging view from mine, I am open to being educated about the topic. My line of questioning was derived from the NTSB Report concerning the Reno Air Race. Someone did take the time to educate me and I am looking at things differently than I was yesterday at this time.
It is easy to say 'you are wrong', but harder to give an education on why one is wrong.
ryan1234
Desensitized Member
To answer your original question...
As others have said, Air Racing and Air Shows are two completely different animals altogether. Someone also mentioned that military pilots are cut from a different cloth. That is somewhat true.... there are different cloths of military pilots as well (not all are great or safe). It may sound weird, but generally in the air show business, experience really doesn't matter as much as everyone would like it to. Experienced guys still die. Military multi-crew aircraft still have air show accidents. Accidents in the air show community are a statistical certainty. The community is very, very close knit and every death hurts.... but it happens... last year was a particularly bad year.
TwoTwoLeft mentioned the ACE card system. If my memory serves me right, I'm pretty sure all military demo teams actually need an ACE card to do aerobatics in waivered airspace. All the demo guys I know had 250' ACE cards. It's not an easy process...especially to keep going past 800'.
The boxes are set up to direct energy outward of the crowd line... there are different lines and corners. Each morning of an air show begins with very informative brief. The Air Boss usually does the brief and, generally speaking, each person sitting in that brief is committed to flying the best, safest show they possibly can. Emergency Procedures are hashed out over and over again. Weather and communication are dwelled on for a long time as well. If you ever sit in on an air show brief, you'd probably be very impressed with the planning, organization, and safety that goes into it.
Getting back to the actual FAA airmen certification on the L-39 and other jet warbirds....
Your friend who was reading the manual sounds like a •. Sure there are rich dudes that buy these, but the very fact that they want someone there to show them the ropes is indicative of something good. You can't just get a wet private and go take a check ride in an L-39. It's not like a normal "Type Rating". The FAA came up with a matrix of requirements specifically for surplus military aircraft that are different for former military pilots and pure civilian pilots. There are few examiners for the L-39, and the examiners are very, very experienced guys that usually only do check rides because they like doing it and want to contribute to the safety of the jet warbird group... they're not doing it for the money or some power/control trip. The guy I did my L-39 check ride with was a very, very accomplished F-15 pilot who was also the test pilot for the SU-27 when Pride aircraft brought them over. He's type rated in many, many aircraft and a fantastic pilot. He also literally wrote a manual for the L-39 that is more in-depth than the typical Czech or NAF manuals in circulation around here. He holds you to a higher standard than any other examiner before. Sure the check ride is ATP / Type Rating PTS level... but throw in some SFOs and other stuff that you won't find on most other check rides. The goal is constantly getting better and more proficient, growing as a pilot through airmanship.
The mechanics are generally the most knowledgable and specialized people you'll ever meet. Nearly each one I've met (and I've been around a lot) knows more about the L-39 and other military surplus / warbirds that most A&Ps could hope to know about their particular machine.
Don't know if that helped to answer your question any... And again, this is separate than Air Racing.
rframe
pǝʇɹǝʌuı
You'd probably get more useful dialogue and be taken more seriously in the future if you open a conversation seeking education rather than making prescriptions... Your initial post was "I think there does need to be a harder look at experience of those flying in these airshows" and "Was it REALLY important to make all those mods to those types of airplanes", when it was pretty clear that you were rather ignorant of both airshow pilot requirements and air racing.
Pilotforhire587
Lycra Man
I think we are all guilty of this from time to time.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Planes crash. Cars crash, too. And don't think for a second that most of the mouthbreathers who show up for an airshow aren't secretly hoping for something to OMG about. If you want a visual spectacle that's Safe, I recommend Competitive Gardening.
killbilly
Vocals, Lyrics, Triangle, Washboard, Kittens
I think ALL of us can do with a reminder that tone matters. A lot. I have to continually remind myself of this.
Interesting how things work.... Today I met Thom Richard who flies the #38 P-51 Mustang. It is another HEAVILY race aircraft. It was the former Breitling bird. Conta-rotating props... Cool bird. Going to be @ DVT until Friday am.. ANYWAYS... I asked about why FSDO doesn't need notice of modifications. EXPERIMENTAL aircraft. Same as the RV in the garage. What changes have been made? His answer,
"Jimmy always operated outside of the rules. The rules that we in place worked. But when Jimmy played outside of the rules, nobody said anything. Jimmy "was being Jimmy". He was a "cowboy". The most significant problem was that Jimmy used the race track as his testing area. All of the other racers, per the rules, were required to test outside of Reno, first, prove the modification worked, and THEN fly it at Reno. So what changed?, I asked. It got to be more cumbersome, and difficult. And expensive. At $3500 an hour to operate Precious Metal, the prop modification required;
1. To be test flown 3 times to prove airworthiness. Once, done responsibly, worked before.
2. A special waver was required for above 250 below 10. One short notice, as Reno dictated the additional tests less than a week prior to departure for Reno.
3. FSDO had to be notified of the flight, but not the nature of the modification. ??!!
I think that the RARA got a wake up call in applying rules evenly across the board.
Outside of these changes, the others have been minor, and have not really affected the racers in a significant capacity.
///AMG
Well-Known Member
I don't think that military experience would add a whole lot to the airshow gig. We do a lot of high intensity dynamic flying, but that generally doesn't involve flying precision formation aerobatics. What it would give someone a leg up on would be high performance fast jet flying, and of course a career worth of formation flying. I'd think that the eager to learn monkey could also pick up these skills, military or not. That said, I'd be all ears and open mind if I were to ever learn to fly one of these old jets. My daily driver is complex, but I guarantee it is a lot easier to fly than any of these old jets, and probably a lot more forgiving of mistakes. Hats off to these guys, especially the ones who fly old single engine jets without ejection seats.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the in depth response. This is what I was looking for originally concerning Air Shows. In your experience have you seen less Air Shows occuring year after year because of financial issues?
ryan1234
Desensitized Member
From my limited experience, the prior-military thing can add a lot to the air show environment. It isn't so much in the way of hands and feet... more of the whole organizational-training perspective. It can be dangerous though, I've seen very, very accomplished military pilots become extremely complacent once outside the rule-structure of the military.
Riddle me this, Mr. Seggy,
If you've had the same conversation, why was your takeaway that the pilots are
1. Incompetent / poorly trained/ not capable of performing at a high level (You would agree it wasn't a competency issue with Jimmy Leeward, rather an attitude issue?)
2. That sweeping rule changes and more stringent oversight are necessary if #1 is true?
You can Wiki Jimmy Leeward and determine for yourself if he was "competent" to be flying a race plane. I vote "Yes", but I'm not the most trustworthy voice of reason, or the brightest bulb in the lamp.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
GX
1) No, I would say the crash pilot DID NOT have the competency or proficiency to fly the airplane. This based on the fact of his machismo attitude. We have come such a long way CRM wise in aviation and to have someone 'outside the rules being himself' in such a high performance airplane not listening to others, it was only a matter of time something like this happened. From what I am told the no all Air Race Pilots are like this so please don't think I am lumping all Air Race Pilots together.
2) Yes, I would say that the rules are necessary. There is something missing in your discussion that I am not at liberty to post, but was a needed change. This needed change helps to quell the machismo attitude if demonstrated down the road.
1) No, I would say the crash pilot DID NOT have the competency or proficiency to fly the airplane. This based on the fact of his machismo attitude. We have come such a long way CRM wise in aviation and to have someone 'outside the rules being himself' in such a high performance airplane not listening to others, it was only a matter of time something like this happened. From what I am told the no all Air Race Pilots are like this so please don't think I am lumping all Air Race Pilots together.
2) Yes, I would say that the rules are necessary. There is something missing in your discussion that I am not at liberty to post, but was a needed change. This needed change helps to quell the machismo attitude if demonstrated down the road.
For a guy to solo in a T-6 at age 14, and start racing at Reno while you were still twinkling in the sky, probably before your dad was looking at porn to be called "not competent" and "not proficient" is disingenuous on your part. I'd pay money to see you say this stuff to Bob Odegaard, Ed Newberg, and Tiger Destefani.
Don't bother looking those names up. They never flew an Airbus, or even spend much time in a terminal, and as such, are "beneath you".
Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but honestly, you have so many opinions about something you know NOTHING about. As I suggested earlier, this is not the place to get "educated". Get out of your 121 cockpit, and go spend some time at a local GA airport. You need a dose of aviation reality.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Just because someone has been flying for tens of thousands of hours doesn't mean they have good CRM skills. I am going off what ryan1234 said in his post here...
So there is a lot of CRM going on at an Air Show. Now, an Air Race I am sure there are similar briefings and discussions. If you have a 'cowboy' as you said, isn't someone going to get hurt through their lack of competency in CRM Procedures? Yes I am sure he can fly circles around me. Fine. Whatever. I don't care how his aviation nut sack dropped. However, if one doesn't play well with others, that shows a lack of proficiency and competency in the overall pilot. Also I wasn't the first person to relate 'machismo' and 'aviation' together.
Why are you trying to make this an airline vs. GA thing? Also, I didn't just start flying an Airbus in the airline environment. I betcha it would surprise you what my first 'airliner' was.
So you are saying this forum isn't the place to learn? Shouldn't we always be learning in aviation and continuing our aviation education?