Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:22 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2021 4:01 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 6:11 pm
Posts: 1911
Location: Pacific Northwest USA, via North Florida
StangStung wrote:
The "I know things, and I want you to know I know them, but I'm not going to tell" variety of post always leads to more questions.
Yep, and forums like this are filled with those posts.
Heck, if you go back far enough in my own posts, maybe I dropped one of two of them as well.

_________________
Life member, 91st BG Memorial Association
Owner, 1944 Willys MB #366014
Former REMF (US Army, O3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:31 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 1168
Location: Marietta, GA
JohnH wrote:
Don’t know what owner has control means. Do you have control when you wreck your car and your ins co takes possession after it pays you off? They paid him off and own the wreck. It’s their call. They are now the owner of the wreck .


I was only relating what I tremembered. Maybe the owner purchased the wreckage from the insurance company. Dunno.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2021 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:49 pm
Posts: 862
Firebird wrote:
wasn't this more to do with it being a fatal and the relatives of the pilot involved were trying or requesting the wreck destroyed so it couldn't be rebuilt?

If they're not the owners, what say do they have in the outcome or disposition of the aircraft? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 21, 2021 7:39 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:38 pm
Posts: 2628
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
If they had liability insurance only, then wouldn't they keep the airframe? If they had full coverage, I think they may still be able to buy it from the insurance company. There are plenty of people that would be interested in an airplane that an be rebuilt.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:30 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am
Posts: 2295
menards wrote:
I think lawyers have officially ruined everything, everywhere. No one chooses to ditch when there are other viable options. Safe to assume that the Avenger was low and slow when the engine stopped making power. Even with no forward or downward visibility, you still going to site your landing spot and put it down, just like you would during your emergency training in a Cherokee. I think the guy is fine, no third party has any claim or loss.


This sheds some light where it most likely isn't welcome:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=mVFwYqueJ58

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 6:26 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 1933
Location: Meriden,Ct.
ZRX61 wrote:
menards wrote:
I think lawyers have officially ruined everything, everywhere. No one chooses to ditch when there are other viable options. Safe to assume that the Avenger was low and slow when the engine stopped making power. Even with no forward or downward visibility, you still going to site your landing spot and put it down, just like you would during your emergency training in a Cherokee. I think the guy is fine, no third party has any claim or loss.


This sheds some light where it most likely isn't welcome:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=mVFwYqueJ58


WOW.... :shock:

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 622
ZRX61 wrote:
menards wrote:
I think lawyers have officially ruined everything, everywhere. No one chooses to ditch when there are other viable options. Safe to assume that the Avenger was low and slow when the engine stopped making power. Even with no forward or downward visibility, you still going to site your landing spot and put it down, just like you would during your emergency training in a Cherokee. I think the guy is fine, no third party has any claim or loss.


This sheds some light where it most likely isn't welcome:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=mVFwYqueJ58


Does it? As far as I know Gryder never talked to Terry or Boggs, but he sure threw them under the bus pretty quick. It is really sad when aviation eats its own for Youtube views. I found it a bit scary that so many commenters on his Youtube just bought everything he said without any critical thinking or for that matter evidence. Maybe that demonstrates why we are in the state we are as a nation.

Full disclosure, I know Terry, like him a lot, and have talked to him about this accident. I went to the crash area and saw the airplane the day it arrived back in Titusville. I don't believe he would provide me false information, so until I see some proof that what Gryder says is the truth, I am not gonna buy it. I am also prepared to accept reality if I have misunderstood the facts. One thing you should also know about Terry, he barely survived a take off fire in a TBM back in 2009. He has skin grafts over 40% of his body. Do you think he would take the risks Gryder accused him of for an airshow?

This accident does need to be discussed and dissected among warbird operators, but the way this was done with the conjecture and incendiary language demonstrates to me that someone must have an axe to grind. I would suggest if you want true analysis of accidents you watch Scott Perdue's Flywire. He hasn't done the TBM but he did do the Collings B-17. No nonsense, no insults and no self promotion.

When it comes to the VAC I don't know too much about it, I met a bunch of the folks after this accident. Most of the movers and shakers are long time professional aviators who have flown about everything. They don't need to cut corners to fly the VAC stuff, they have already done it. The stuff that Gryder is talking about took place way back years ago and the management is pretty much all different from what I can tell. Just like it is all different at the CAF and many others. I can't speak to what happened in the past...but it just seems like a long term hit job to bring forth stuff that happened a decade ago. I wonder if Gryder would appreciate it if someone made a incendiary and sarcastic video about his famous incident with a DC-3 involving the local police department for the world to dissect his mistake, if it was one?

Guys, the warbird movement has got to stop eating their own. Mistakes are gonna happen and we need to strive to clean them up but this video does nothing to do that except further the cause of those who would like to ground us. Gryder talks a good game on the video, but really, why the derogatory language and constant insults in the video? He certainly isn't clean and I am reminded of the Biblical phrase 'he who has no sin can cast the first stone.' I would ask you to all step back and wait to see what the facts are before riding the bandwagon on this video. And while you are at, investigate the man making the video and find out what many in the community really think about him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:26 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am
Posts: 2295
Tim Savage wrote:
Does it? As far as I know Gryder never talked to Terry or Boggs, but he sure threw them under the bus pretty quick. It is really sad when aviation eats its own for Youtube views. I found it a bit scary that so many commenters on his Youtube just bought everything he said without any critical thinking or for that matter evidence. Maybe that demonstrates why we are in the state we are as a nation.

Full disclosure, I know Terry, like him a lot, and have talked to him about this accident. I went to the crash area and saw the airplane the day it arrived back in Titusville. I don't believe he would provide me false information, so until I see some proof that what Gryder says is the truth, I am not gonna buy it. I am also prepared to accept reality if I have misunderstood the facts.

It would appear to be factual that the TBM was pissing so much smoke he was asked if it had a smoke system (by the Air Boss?) & 22 minutes passed between being first told about the smoke & ditching it. There are pics of it smoking while in formation before it entered the display box.
With that said, it's possible that the crews in the other VAC aircraft didn't quite get the message across about how badly it was smoking. I think if someone had said "It's bad, get it on the ground" then he would have done so PDQ.

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 622
ZRX61 wrote:
Tim Savage wrote:
Does it? As far as I know Gryder never talked to Terry or Boggs, but he sure threw them under the bus pretty quick. It is really sad when aviation eats its own for Youtube views. I found it a bit scary that so many commenters on his Youtube just bought everything he said without any critical thinking or for that matter evidence. Maybe that demonstrates why we are in the state we are as a nation.

Full disclosure, I know Terry, like him a lot, and have talked to him about this accident. I went to the crash area and saw the airplane the day it arrived back in Titusville. I don't believe he would provide me false information, so until I see some proof that what Gryder says is the truth, I am not gonna buy it. I am also prepared to accept reality if I have misunderstood the facts.

It would appear to be factual that the TBM was pissing so much smoke he was asked if it had a smoke system (by the Air Boss?) & 22 minutes passed between being first told about the smoke & ditching it. There are pics of it smoking while in formation before it entered the display box.
With that said, it's possible that the crews in the other VAC aircraft didn't quite get the message across about how badly it was smoking. I think if someone had said "It's bad, get it on the ground" then he would have done so PDQ.


If it is factual, where is the evidence of the 22 minutes? I may have missed it because he says it but doesn't back it up with proof that Terry knew about smoke for 22 minutes, does he? And he never talked to him. Is there a tape of the other pilots informing him? If so, why didn't Gryder play the audio? He wouldn't be able to see it from the cockpit. I am not trying to be obstinate, but we are taking what Gryder says as fact. Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't? Wouldn't Gryder want to explore the whole scenario with the people involved if it wasn't just a hit job?

I was at the show at show center the day after the accident, right in front of Wade's stand (the one who asked about the smoke system). If the TBM came across show center like the rest of the acts did and then started to fly the orbit in the box, it MIGHT have been most expedient to fly the orbit the way he did and head towards Patrick which was the divert field and aligned with the path of the second pass. Turning and going to KCOI would have put him over very populated areas. I don't know for sure if that was the thinking and I didn't ask. It is all going to come down to timeline on when he knew, given the normal time to delay to start processing what it is going on and what to do.

I agree it all comes down to communication and the urgency of that communication. I don't believe for a second as Gryder alludes that 'the show must go on' despite a potential mechanical problem. That is just inflammatory.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:49 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 1524
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Mr. "Hit And Run" here injects a lot of inflammatory commentary in his video, but he's very correct about one thing: it was nothing more than sheer luck that the TBM didn't hit anyone when it went in the drink, and if he had, the resulting outcry would negatively impact EVERYONE in the historical aviation community. (His video reminds me of an old Onion article: "The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point")

Leaving the ad hominems aside, the following allegations seem to be significant decision point failures:

- None of the VAC pilots attended the mandatory preflight briefing. If true, why not? Mandatory means exactly that. If I skip mandatory meetings at work, I've got some explaining to do.
- The engine was visibly smoking for 22 minutes, by his count. That's a LONG time. Wouldn't that show up as a potential oil pressure issue?
- The air boss asked about the smoking aircraft and was told it was NOT a smoke system. If true, this should have been a huge red flag, and from a command perspective, is just jaw-dropping... why didn't the air boss contact the pilot and tell him to land when he found out the aircraft was spewing smoke when it's not supposed to?
- The pilot's decision to proceed with the display despite having been informed he was smoking by other aircraft while in the assembly area - again, if true, that's an indefensible decision, compounded by the decision to make a second pass. Was his radio working - did he hear the call about the smoke? Could he hear the air boss? Did the air boss have any communication with him during the flight regarding the smoke?

Credit where due, he's a d@mned skillful pilot - he ditched that TBM as perfectly as possible, but he did it close inshore, in the midst of swimmers, instead of further offshore, which was apparently covered in the briefing which he allegedly didn't attend.

There are a lot of highly skilled and experienced pilots who post on this board whose input and opinions I respect, and I'm well aware of how easily egos can get bruised in this community, so unlike Gryder I'm trying to give some room for the benefit of the doubt. But if those allegations are true - and it shouldn't be hard to verify via transcripts, etc - then this was an entirely avoidable scenario which only missed becoming a headline-grabbing tragedy by a matter of literal inches based on where the TBM eventually splashed down. And if the folks in positions of responsibility within our community don't strongly and publicly address and take steps to rectify such issues, then outside agencies like the FAA are going to step in, and it's not going to end well for ANYONE.

Respectfully,

Lynn


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:01 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:06 pm
Posts: 1656
Location: Baltimore MD
I am not one to advocate suppressing information, but the youtube piece was a total hit piece and I would advocate it be removed from this thread. Yes, there is information there. Yes, the individual has direct knowledge of some relevant information. However, the construction and reading of a false, fabricated FAA document on the open airwaves has questionable motives and should call into question the soundness of the individual's whole 22-some minute piece. I have no connection with the individual who produced the youtube piece or the Valiant Air Command. I do have a brief acquaintance with Terry Rush. But a fabrication like that video moves the whole discussion into a direction which is dangerous like the whole Warbird Adventures/FAA administrative action debacle.

No matter your level of involvement with warbirds, or expertise, or actual pedigrees working or operating them, I am not in any insinuating that you should not have an opinion. But I am advocating that you responsibly voice it.

_________________
REMEMBER THE SERGEANT PILOTS!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:04 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:06 pm
Posts: 1656
Location: Baltimore MD
I am not one to advocate suppressing information, but the youtube piece was a total hit piece and I would advocate it be removed from this thread. Yes, there is information there. Yes, the individual has direct knowledge of some relevant information. However, the construction and reading of a false, fabricated FAA document on the open airwaves has questionable motives and should call into question the soundness of the individual's whole 22-some minute piece. I have no connection with the individual who produced the youtube piece or the Valiant Air Command. I do have a brief acquaintance with Terry Rush. But a fabrication like that video moves the whole discussion into a direction which is dangerous like the whole Warbird Adventures/FAA administrative action debacle.

No matter your level of involvement with warbirds, or expertise, or actual pedigrees working or operating them, I am not in any way insinuating that you should not have an opinion. But I am advocating that you responsibly voice it.

_________________
REMEMBER THE SERGEANT PILOTS!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 10:18 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 1524
Location: Williamsburg, VA
Forgotten Field wrote:
I am not one to advocate suppressing information, but the youtube piece was a total hit piece and I would advocate it be removed from this thread. Yes, there is information there. Yes, the individual has direct knowledge of some relevant information. However, the construction and reading of a false, fabricated FAA document on the open airwaves has questionable motives and should call into question the soundness of the individual's whole 22-some minute piece. I have no connection with the individual who produced the youtube piece or the Valiant Air Command. I do have a brief acquaintance with Terry Rush. But a fabrication like that video moves the whole discussion into a direction which is dangerous like the whole Warbird Adventures/FAA administrative action debacle.

No matter your level of involvement with warbirds, or expertise, or actual pedigrees working or operating them, I am not in any insinuating that you should not have an opinion. But I am advocating that you responsibly voice it.


This is a sound and well-stated position.

The number of axes he decided to grind in his video was rather eye-opening... he was absolutely h3ll-bent on spraying verbal napalm all over the VAC as an organization, and I think that's a prime example of what someone earlier mentioned as the aviation community "eating it's own". There are ways to highlight and address such important issues without coming off as arrogant and offensive, but it seems Gryder is not interested in any of them, which is a shame.

Lynn


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:13 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 10:18 pm
Posts: 3258
Location: Phoenix, Az
[quote
- None of the VAC pilots attended the mandatory preflight briefing. If true, why not? Mandatory means exactly that. If I skip mandatory meetings at work, I've got some explaining to do.
- The engine was visibly smoking for 22 minutes, by his count. That's a LONG time. Wouldn't that show up as a potential oil pressure issue?
- The air boss asked about the smoking aircraft and was told it was NOT a smoke system. If true, this should have been a huge red flag, and from a command perspective, is just jaw-dropping... why didn't the air boss contact the pilot and tell him to land when he found out the aircraft was spewing smoke when it's not supposed to?
- The pilot's decision to proceed with the display despite having been informed he was smoking by other aircraft while in the assembly area - again, if true, that's an indefensible decision, compounded by the decision to make a second pass. Was his radio working - did he hear the call about the smoke? Could he hear the air boss? Did the air boss have any communication with him during the flight regarding the smoke?
[/quote]
At Oshkosh, if you do not attend the briefing you do not fly PERIOD. I was spotter in T-6 lead for 9 years and I was required to attend the briefing and I had to attend the first timers brief.


Oil pressure would not show an issue if it was say the blower seal, until the oil tank was empty, by then you would have the classic decreasing oil pressure and increasing oil temp. as the engine started to tear itself apart.

The pilots decision to keep flying when informed there was smoke is something I don't get, when you have smoke, when normally you shouldn't have any, your engine is no longer happy and it is soon to be no longer your friendly R-2600, but one that is going to make your day very unhappy.

As far as the pilot having a show must go on attitude, I have seen it and it resulted in a gear up landing after he had a hard time getting the gear to retract, But he did get to fly in the show.

as far as communications with the TBM directly, it depends, if he was part of a flight, the flight itself might be on one frequency and the flight lead is talking to the show boss on a different frequency.

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:38 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 6:11 pm
Posts: 1911
Location: Pacific Northwest USA, via North Florida
lmritger wrote:
Mr. "Hit And Run" here injects a lot of inflammatory commentary in his video, but he's very correct about one thing: it was nothing more than sheer luck that the TBM didn't hit anyone when it went in the drink, and if he had, the resulting outcry would negatively impact EVERYONE in the historical aviation community.

This, I think, is the key thing. I don't think it would impact people so much as crush them in place.
Think on it if you haven't; not too long after the 909 debacle, another jock that might come across to the FAA/NTSB as one of those, "running rough? Nah, she'll hold" types puts down a TBM into gaggle of kids out swimming and makes what happened to Vic Morrow and those two kids from that UH-1 seem like nothing in comparison.
I shudder at the very thought of it happening, far more so than for what would happen next.
The railroad preservation community had their own wake-up call at Gettysburg on 1995, when the steam locomotive version of no oil happened. Only the design of the boiler prevented the back end from exploding and blowing the entire boiler off the frame (and killing everyone in the cab). This made the NTSB aware of the 'bubba' operations out there in the US. After that, regulations got very stringent and now it's tough to get a steam engine running in this country.
I think the same thing is coming very soon for warbirds.

_________________
Life member, 91st BG Memorial Association
Owner, 1944 Willys MB #366014
Former REMF (US Army, O3)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kalamazookid and 88 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group