Thunderbirds crash video
12-15-2003, 01:41 PM
#56
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bellerose,
NY
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Look how low
To realdeal:
Thanks for posting this image! Since my computer doesn't read mpgs this still is the only chance I had to see an image of this event. Note that there are many interesting details of this shared at
http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=P...iewtopic&t=126
Earl Heron
http://www.jjetspress.com
Thanks for posting this image! Since my computer doesn't read mpgs this still is the only chance I had to see an image of this event. Note that there are many interesting details of this shared at
http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=P...iewtopic&t=126
Earl Heron
http://www.jjetspress.com
12-15-2003, 03:07 PM
#57
My Feedback: (24)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fond du Lac,
WI
Posts: 2,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Look how low
Earl is right on with F-16.net thread.......
On Page 7 of the thread, the post by Stricklin's former C.O., LtC. Bert Dreher at the 1st Fighter Squadron sums it up quite succinctly.....he did incorrect math for the field elevation setting his apex altitude....and his ground backup didn't notice the error as Stricklin called out his altitude at the apex.....and he pulled it off without injury to himself or spectators......just another 30 million or so added to the Thunderbird budget.....
Still a nasty couple of mistakes that would probably cost most airline captains and CO's their job i.e. trashing their bird.....I know that when those 2 North Central Airlines dudes broke out of the low overcast and landed their DC-9 at 4500 ft Runway 36 at Fond du Lac, rather than 6500 ft Runway 36 at Oshkosh, 18 miles due north, their wings were clipped before they hit the tarmac....flew in a special crew to fly the plane back out.....and they didn't even put a scratch on the plane or passengers....
The f.16.net thread, as well as the F-16 Aerodynamic Reads in Code One Magazine are excellent resources......as is the 1 hour program on Discovery Wings program that chronicles allot of the flight testing of the Fly by Wire.....Convincingly demonstrates that an F-16 that has departed slow is no place you want to be without Hal backing you up...shows one of the test pilots regaining control from a stall without HAL, taking up most of 25.000 ft before finally recovering from a stall entered from a vertical upline, then pitchover, followed by the departure.....in cockpit video shows one wild ride....
Tom
On Page 7 of the thread, the post by Stricklin's former C.O., LtC. Bert Dreher at the 1st Fighter Squadron sums it up quite succinctly.....he did incorrect math for the field elevation setting his apex altitude....and his ground backup didn't notice the error as Stricklin called out his altitude at the apex.....and he pulled it off without injury to himself or spectators......just another 30 million or so added to the Thunderbird budget.....
Still a nasty couple of mistakes that would probably cost most airline captains and CO's their job i.e. trashing their bird.....I know that when those 2 North Central Airlines dudes broke out of the low overcast and landed their DC-9 at 4500 ft Runway 36 at Fond du Lac, rather than 6500 ft Runway 36 at Oshkosh, 18 miles due north, their wings were clipped before they hit the tarmac....flew in a special crew to fly the plane back out.....and they didn't even put a scratch on the plane or passengers....
The f.16.net thread, as well as the F-16 Aerodynamic Reads in Code One Magazine are excellent resources......as is the 1 hour program on Discovery Wings program that chronicles allot of the flight testing of the Fly by Wire.....Convincingly demonstrates that an F-16 that has departed slow is no place you want to be without Hal backing you up...shows one of the test pilots regaining control from a stall without HAL, taking up most of 25.000 ft before finally recovering from a stall entered from a vertical upline, then pitchover, followed by the departure.....in cockpit video shows one wild ride....
Tom
12-15-2003, 04:03 PM
#58
RE: Look how low
Still a nasty couple of mistakes that would probably cost most airline captains and CO's their job i.e. trashing their bird
1. These pilots are the best among the best ;
2. When flying aerobatics with an F16, you are BY FAR more liable to dig your aircraft than when you fly a B757 or whatever...
Only few people have the ability o/ are asked to enter the thunderbirds team... That does not mean these pilots won't do any error, an error is always possible, ...
12-15-2003, 05:55 PM
#59
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bellerose,
NY
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Another interesting thread of a historical nature:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...mi.net&rnum=16
Earl Heron
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...mi.net&rnum=16
Earl Heron
12-16-2003, 08:36 AM
#60
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: , AE
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
I'm not a regular poster on this site, but I just wanted to fill you all in on that altimeter discussion w/the F-16. I'm an F-16 Avionics Technician at Spangdahlem AB in Germany.
There -is- altitude information displayed on the HUD, and it can be switched between RALT (Radar Altimeter,) Baro Altimeter, or auto-select. The Baro-altimeter on the HUD is not corrected for baro. pressure.
The standard, primary altimeter sits on the front console, and it can be switched between electric mode (Fed from the Inertial Navigation System) and Barometric Pressure mode, fed from the central air data computer. In Baro mode, there is a little dial right on the face of the alt that lets you input the baro pressure. To quote Johng:
"Because F-16 's weren't spec'd for airshow performance. They are multirole single-seat fighters, which means pilot workload needs to be managed. The heat of combat is no place to tune in ATIS for the latest alti setting. THis is getting quite hypothetical to argue about though.
Hey, for all I know the HUD may have a separate AGL function displayable on the HUD. Maybe it does have a good 'ol std altimeter. WHatever."
That is true. The pilot usually gets his ATIS info while he's still sitting there running up all his systems prior to take-off. In the heat of combat, which for an F-16 is usually in small chunks of time (i.e. a bombing run, or an AGM-88 launch over a SAM site) there would be no need to reset your baro pressure. There won't be a drastic change in baro pressure in a short period of time, and a small change in baro pressure would equate to a minor error in displayed altitude. I don't know about you, but whether or not it says 50' AGL or 60' AGL, that's too darn low
Dave
There -is- altitude information displayed on the HUD, and it can be switched between RALT (Radar Altimeter,) Baro Altimeter, or auto-select. The Baro-altimeter on the HUD is not corrected for baro. pressure.
The standard, primary altimeter sits on the front console, and it can be switched between electric mode (Fed from the Inertial Navigation System) and Barometric Pressure mode, fed from the central air data computer. In Baro mode, there is a little dial right on the face of the alt that lets you input the baro pressure. To quote Johng:
"Because F-16 's weren't spec'd for airshow performance. They are multirole single-seat fighters, which means pilot workload needs to be managed. The heat of combat is no place to tune in ATIS for the latest alti setting. THis is getting quite hypothetical to argue about though.
Hey, for all I know the HUD may have a separate AGL function displayable on the HUD. Maybe it does have a good 'ol std altimeter. WHatever."
That is true. The pilot usually gets his ATIS info while he's still sitting there running up all his systems prior to take-off. In the heat of combat, which for an F-16 is usually in small chunks of time (i.e. a bombing run, or an AGM-88 launch over a SAM site) there would be no need to reset your baro pressure. There won't be a drastic change in baro pressure in a short period of time, and a small change in baro pressure would equate to a minor error in displayed altitude. I don't know about you, but whether or not it says 50' AGL or 60' AGL, that's too darn low
Dave
12-16-2003, 09:29 AM
#61
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bellerose,
NY
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Hi Dave:
Thanks for your reply. Posts 23, 27, 57 seem more credible than those in this thread that refer to altimeter settings.
Earl
Thanks for your reply. Posts 23, 27, 57 seem more credible than those in this thread that refer to altimeter settings.
Earl
12-16-2003, 11:42 AM
#62
My Feedback: (34)
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
This whole discussion is somewhat pointless. People have spoken to the pilot, who said he simply miscalculated the apex altitude for the maneuver. He flew it exactly as he planned, he just planned wrong. Having flown hundreds of hours of aerobatics though, with a fair amount of low altitude flying, I have a problem with part of his decision making.
He stated he was 1000' low on the initial pull. When he rolled inverted and started the pull through the loop, it should have been VERY apparent to him that he was too low. The visual cues at 1500' vs 2500' are VERY different and he should have recognized the error immediately and simply aborted the loop and rolled wings level. Yes it would screw up the show timing.. but he'd still be flying. According to people I've spoken with, he could have aborted the loop all the way to 70 degrees inverted nose down.. nearly vertical.. and still come away clean. Once past 70 degrees.. he was going to crash.
As for the aircraft behaviour.. The bottom of the loop was nothing more than a 25 unit alpha 'limit pull'. In other words.. the FCS gave him 25 units alpha and nothing more. The leading edge devices droop on a hard pull like this to increase the camber of the wing, creating more lift. In high speed flight, they actually reflex to reduce drag at high mach.
One other thing I really want to restate.. People said he maneuvered the aircraft away from the crowdline for safety. This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE, and I can prove it. Watch the cockpit video. On the pull into the climb, he is very clearly on runway heading. As he is rounding out the bottom of the 5/8 loop, he is some 20 degrees off runway heading pointed away from the crowd. Having seen the T-birds fly on many occasion, this is NOT the standard practice. This manuever should exit show center on runway heading. Somewhere in the 5/8 loop, after recognizing a problem, he purposely flew the airplane away from the crowd, and then again using his head.. he banged out rather than ride it in trying to 'save it'. That.. is where thinking ends.. and training, and training, and training takes over..
He stated he was 1000' low on the initial pull. When he rolled inverted and started the pull through the loop, it should have been VERY apparent to him that he was too low. The visual cues at 1500' vs 2500' are VERY different and he should have recognized the error immediately and simply aborted the loop and rolled wings level. Yes it would screw up the show timing.. but he'd still be flying. According to people I've spoken with, he could have aborted the loop all the way to 70 degrees inverted nose down.. nearly vertical.. and still come away clean. Once past 70 degrees.. he was going to crash.
As for the aircraft behaviour.. The bottom of the loop was nothing more than a 25 unit alpha 'limit pull'. In other words.. the FCS gave him 25 units alpha and nothing more. The leading edge devices droop on a hard pull like this to increase the camber of the wing, creating more lift. In high speed flight, they actually reflex to reduce drag at high mach.
One other thing I really want to restate.. People said he maneuvered the aircraft away from the crowdline for safety. This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE, and I can prove it. Watch the cockpit video. On the pull into the climb, he is very clearly on runway heading. As he is rounding out the bottom of the 5/8 loop, he is some 20 degrees off runway heading pointed away from the crowd. Having seen the T-birds fly on many occasion, this is NOT the standard practice. This manuever should exit show center on runway heading. Somewhere in the 5/8 loop, after recognizing a problem, he purposely flew the airplane away from the crowd, and then again using his head.. he banged out rather than ride it in trying to 'save it'. That.. is where thinking ends.. and training, and training, and training takes over..
12-16-2003, 01:22 PM
#63
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Deland,
FL
Posts: 1,928
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Well, I suppose it is pointless, but I agree that the pilot maneuvered to avoid the crowd. However, it was done from the beginning of the maneuver, as if it was a pre-planned cheat. As soon as he rolls inverted, it is obvious that he is not wings-level inverted, but 5-10 degrees off well before the nose goes below the horizon. Watch the video carefully.
01-26-2004, 08:56 PM
#64
My Feedback: (6)
RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Check this photo out of the ejection!!! If anyone wants the full res version, e-mail you e-mail address to [email protected] , please no PMs (takes longer).
01-27-2004, 02:42 AM
#69
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: green valley,
AZ
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Thanks for the link. I refuse to use Real-Piece-Of-S$%& player, so I guess I wont be seeing it
Trumpetjet hows that Sophia treating you? I love all turbines- new, old, obsolete etc
That is kero burning right with the electric oil pump?
Trumpetjet hows that Sophia treating you? I love all turbines- new, old, obsolete etc
That is kero burning right with the electric oil pump?
01-27-2004, 01:44 PM
#70
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Clifton,
NJ
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Hi,
Here's a link to the two video's and the cause of the crask.
http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/s...ad.php?t=58696
BRG,
Jon
Here's a link to the two video's and the cause of the crask.
http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/s...ad.php?t=58696
BRG,
Jon
01-27-2004, 03:15 PM
#73
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Clifton,
NJ
Posts: 1,859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Rick,
Just checked, it works OK for me. The link will get you to a thread at frugals world about the crash. At the end there are two links, one for the cockpit and the other a ground video.
If it still's not working, try www.frugalsworld.com and select Falcon 4 forum and then you'll see the thread.
Jon
Just checked, it works OK for me. The link will get you to a thread at frugals world about the crash. At the end there are two links, one for the cockpit and the other a ground video.
If it still's not working, try www.frugalsworld.com and select Falcon 4 forum and then you'll see the thread.
Jon
02-11-2004, 12:09 AM
#75
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: macedon, NY
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RE: Thunderbirds crash video
Hey guys, my name is Jeff. I run Colegrove Aviation Media. I noticed i was getting a bucnh of refers from this forum so i decided to post in here. I will be updating the site with new videos and images tomorrow. I will post the thunderbirds crash again. Right now there is a video called "Motorin" up on the site. Anyone here know my brother, he goes by the name "Scole" on this board?
