Snowbird crash May 17, 2020

Aircraft Accident & Crash Investigation Topics
User avatar
Colonel
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
Location: Over The Runway

People think I'm pretty much the stupidest person in Canada to ever strap on an airplane, but ...

He didn't have his entry gate for the dumbbell maneuver.

See, if he was over the runway at the surface at 500 knots and pulled the throttle to idle, he
could have exchanged his massive kinetic energy to potential energy and done the turn back.

Height = Velocity squared / 2G

But he was probably closer to 150 knots with negligible height when the RPM died.

I know I'm really stupid, but he simply didn't have the energy to perform the maneuver, and
that was known from the start. He's an airshow pilot. He knows what a top gate is, and what
an entry gate is. This fundamental knowledge keeps us alive.

What was his entry gate for the dumbbell? 350 knots? 300 knots? Without it, he's ejecting,
because the physics says he can't complete the maneuver.

Top gate. Entry gate. Math & physics.

I know, I'm really stupid. How many years have I been ranting about gates for aerobatic
maneuvers at low altitude?

Fun Fact: If you are at 1000 mph at the surface at the Primose Lake Range, and the throttle
goes to idle, you can glide up to 30,000 feet and do an approach and landing to Cold Lake
without touching the throttle again.

Ask any TC Inspector to demonstrate it to you. They're the hottest sticks in Canada, I am told.

Here's a simple one for you. Driving down the runway at the surface at 120 mph, I would never
dream of pulling for an inside loop, because I don't have the energy to attain my top gate - ask
Marcus Paine about that. My entry gate for an inside loop is 160 mph at the surface at sea level,
I like 180 mph.

Pop Quiz: Let's say I ignore my entry gate and pull for an inside loop at 120 mph from the
surface. I will be dangerously low and will not make my top gate for the inside loop. What
must be done at that point, in order to survive?

Entry gate, Top gate. I know when I left Canada the average IQ rose significantly, but there
isn't much new there, is there?


As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.
John Swallow
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:21 am

With a bang seat, you don't even consider attempting "The Possible Turn" back to the departure runway. It's a non-starter.

As for the 'antiquated ejection seat', t'aint so. The seat I used just shy of sixty years ago in an F-86 was rated at 200 feet, 90 knots, and level flight. Outside those parameters and all bets were off.

The Tutor seat has been modified and now uses a rocket instead of a shot gun shell. As I understand it, it's parameters are 60 feet, 60 knots, and level flight. Not quite "Zero-Zero" but quite respectable.

J
User avatar
Colonel
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
Location: Over The Runway

Not sure I understand. The pilot is being hailed as a "hero" because he
turned left towards a residential area instead of ejecting straight ahead
and letting that antique go into the river off the end of the runway.

It must be my age, because I just can't keep up with these insane narratives,
like when Hairdo Dolly said he was going to take away all your rifles because
the police in NS said they couldn't protect the citizens from crazy people.

Too surreal for me. Maybe all this crazy shit makes sense to the CBC.
As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.
User avatar
Liquid_Charlie
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:36 pm
Location: Sioux Lookout On.
Contact:

Like most things now the media is controlling the majority of the insights and grooming them to what they feel it's all about. It's like I watched the end of a Mayday program and they stated that the 73 years ended in the river because of iced over pitot tubes -- are you fucking kidding me -- It was a combination of fucked up pilots not pushing the thrust to the firewall instead of being sucked in by erroneous EPR and not looking at the primary N1 gauge. N1 is king -- damn a little drift from a forgetful white hair guy -- haha --

It will be interesting to see how this goes with the snow bird team once all the group hugs stop. Some news already zeroing in on the aged aircraft, which we know that old aeroplanes can be safe and functional but with low level passes and such they need the updated equipment with modern escape systems just to widen the safety aspect, Pierre junior can just add that to his drunken spending spree. Easy peezy --

I'm one of those strange people who really wouldn't walk across the street to watch an air show with teams like the snow birds but if I hear the snarl of a propeller and the smell of av gas I get an immediate erection and chuck I'll expect your take on that one your old whore -- :mrgreen:
"black air has no lift - extra fuel has no weight"
John Swallow
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:21 am

Didn't see where he was hailed as a 'hero'. But the last thing you consider if you have EFATO in a jet where seconds make the difference between success or failure is where the airplane is going to fetch up if you step over the side. The old "He stayed with the aircraft to steer it away from the high school" is just media blather...

And I'm one of those people with a foot in both camps: I'd watch a jet formation team AND a piston formation team with equal enjoyment.
mcrit
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:13 am

The standard pre-take off brief in the Harvard II went something like this “...any fire feather failure below 180 kts or xxxx feet and we eject, any failure above that we zoom climb and assess” (might have got the numbers wrong, it’s been a few years). My understanding was that the Snowbirds do a similar brief. It really looked like he was zooming for low key (that is pretty much the instinctive response to an engine failure under those conditions). It also looks like he had the engine failure very close to the zoom/eject decision point,
User avatar
Scudrunner
Site Admin
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:18 am
Location: Drinking Coffee in FBO Lounge
Contact:

Didn't Harper earmark 700 million for new jets ?
BAE Hawks where the word on the street.

note the same pitch up as the Snowbird Tutor


I would advocate Viking or anyone other than Bombardier licencing a Canadian built version or my idea taking a L59 pimping that shit or even dare I say buying some Boeing T-7.
But Trudeau will consider the gender of the Aircraft builders and rule that because of majority of the personnel assembling have not achieving gender parity so due to the carbon footprint of jets no more snowbirds.
5 out of 2 Pilots are Dyslexic.
User avatar
Colonel
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
Location: Over The Runway

The irony here ...

For 20 years, TC shit on me about carrying passengers. Repeated threats
and letters in the mail threatening licence suspension. Arlo actually told me
I couldn't give flight instruction because the student was a passenger, and I
couldn't carry passengers.

Fast forward to this. Carrying passengers in antique jets.

The irony.
As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.
John Swallow
Posts: 167
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:21 am

"Carrying passengers in antique jets"

But, you know the difference... ;)
User avatar
Colonel
Posts: 2433
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
Location: Over The Runway

"They weren't vintage motorcycles when I started riding them!"
As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post