11/12/2022 - Texas Raiders and P-63 King Cobra collide

[Xray]

A "Figure 8" pattern, as mentioned above, is a common way to get aircraft in front of the spectators faster. For example the Kates, in the Pearl Harbor reenactment, fly past, then do a "duster turn" to get back on the show line for the appropriate direction. Kates are lined up on different sides of the runway (if there is one parallel to the crowd), depending on their direction of flight.

Its not the pattern I thought was unusual, but having two separate figure 8 tracks one within the other.
But points taken, we all know something went terribly wrong but I am not implying show staff was incompetent or reckless.

[RyanShort1]

Ok, why are you even viewing this thread then, to read up on all the condolences ?

Sent you a DM. Cheers.

[Randy Haskin]

Its not the pattern I thought was unusual, but having two separate figure 8 tracks one within the other.

Yes, that would be quite odd.

That should give you some reason for suspicion of the "analysis" that is being presented in these videos.

[bluehawk15]

It would not be unusual to have overlapping figure eight patterns when there are altitude blocks that are different. Even with those in place, some pilots have been known to bust their altitude when making the turns.

[RyanShort1]

That should give you some reason for suspicion of the "analysis" that is being presented in these videos.

I haven't seen one video yet that I fully agree with having been there. It was crazy, for instance, when Dan G / Probabble Cause conflated the "Bomber Parade" with "Warbirds on Parade" down in Lancaster which is something COMPLETELY different.

Last edited by RyanShort1 on Wed Nov 16, 2022 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

[Scott Rose]

When these things happen it is inevitable that people speculate and try to understand the situation. I get that and I want to know too.
But understand this, assigning blame is not our job. We are spectators, either directly or indirectly and we have no ability to KNOW anything.
Any speculation or comments will be done in a respectful manner or there will be repercussions.

These men were doing what they love and what we love too. I would have flown with any of them.
Respect their memories and learn from this tragedy.

[StangStung]

When these things happen it is inevitable that people speculate and try to understand the situation. I get that and I want to know too.
But understand this, assigning blame is not our job. We are spectators, either directly or indirectly and we have no ability to KNOW anything.
Any speculation or comments will be done in a respectful manner or there will be repercussions.

These men were doing what they love and what we love too. I would have flown with any of them.
Respect their memories and learn from this tragedy.

Agree.

People will talk, so best that the forum is one where a respectful conversation can be had. I've learned a bit more about how airshows operate through this thread.

Also, I've taken this knowledge to more general forums where I hear the knee jerk public reactions of "we shouldn't fly these old planes" or "we shouldn't have airshows." With the knowledge I've acquired here, and other places, I'm more credibly able to persuade others outside our community that this should not be an old planes/airshow ending event.

Thanks for providing a good forum to have this conversation Scott.

[bluehawk15]

Thank you, StangStung, for trying to educate the general public on different forums about what we do, love, and why we do it.

[p51]

Any speculation or comments will be done in a respectful manner or there will be repercussions.

I'm seeing warnings like this everywhere this is being discussed, but I'm not seeing anyone making nasty comments or anything beyond reasonable speculation. Certainly, not here (knock on wood). I'd think many folks here have either flown in such shows, flown the planes themselves, and most likely have seen enough shows to have an idea what might have gone wrong here, well beyond the layman.
I've yet to see anything disrespectful here, and I think it's important for anyone even peripherally in flying these planes to have an awareness as to what could go wrong. For someone, learning the lesson from the official FAA results might be too late between now and when the report is issued.
A reasonable dialogue when (sadly, not 'if') things like this happen might save lives in the interim.
I have, however, seen a lot of people ready to be 'triggered' by anything that might upset them in any way, as I saw the same when the '909' incident occurred. Thankfully, I've seen very little of that here, either, but we live in a world where people desperately want to see something they can complain about.
This discussion seems to be quite civil and constructive to me.

[JohnB]

Thankfully, I've seen very little of that here, either, but we live in a world where people desperately want to see something they can complain about.
This discussion seems to be quite civil and constructive to me.

I agree, and I'm a bit surprised.
Admittedly, I have not gone looking for comments from some of the YouTube bomb throwers/namecallers, the tone here has been very respectful. Maybe it's because more than a few members here are air show pilots or involved in the warbird industry, and appreciate the gravity of the situation.

[Matt Gunsch]

One question that I have not seen asked, Why were there 5 people on the 17 ? When I was crewing Sentimental Journey, when it was a necessary crew only flight, it was a crew of 3, Pilot, Co-pilot and Flight engineer. I saw one person in the nose in the taxi out video, something that we did not allow to be occupied during take off.

[Randy Haskin]

One question that I have not seen asked, Why were there 5 people on the 17 ? When I was crewing Sentimental Journey, when it was a necessary crew only flight, it was a crew of 3, Pilot, Co-pilot and Flight engineer. I saw one person in the nose in the taxi out video, something that we did not allow to be occupied during take off.

Currently, CAF has scanners that are required crew. On the B-24 the min crew is 4, which includes one scanner. On the B-29 the min crew is 6, which includes 3 scanners.

I don't know with certainty what the CAF B-17 min crew is, but I'm assuming it is 2 scanners.

From the CAF's flight operations regulation CAFR 60-1:

Screen Shot 2022-11-16 at 12.51.21.png (27.5 KiB) Viewed 7717 times

[wendovertom]

I review the topic because I to, want to learn from the accident. But I have to be honest, every time I do, I just want to barf and go weep in a corner. What a loss of crews and planes.

Tom P.

[steve dickey]

Another question thats not been asked is how big was the airshow "box". Could this be a factor?, a smaller box cause confliction? Tighter turn's required? I don't remember how many years they've been having airshows at Dallas Executive but it seemed to work in the past?

[lmritger]

Another question thats not been asked is how big was the airshow "box". Could this be a factor?, a smaller box cause confliction? Tighter turn's required? I don't remember how many years they've been having airshows at Dallas Executive but it seemed to work in the past?

This is a very good question. I assume there is an FAA covered zone in place for the duration of the airshow, just as we have over at the Military Aviation Museum for the Warbirds show, and I know for a fact the FAA does not screw around with any zone violations - I've been told by Museum staff it is a TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR FINE... PER VIOLATION. So there is significant incentive to the aircrews to stay within said "box". One thing I've wondered is just how big that zone is around Dallas Executive, and whether there was a sufficient safety margin to allow for multiple tracks within the "box" which would allow for some degree of deviation without busting the limits.

Setting aside for a moment the gut-wrenching sadness at the enormity of these losses, I do want to say thanks to the knowledgeable folks who have shared detailed information on how airshows are planned and executed. I've learned quite a bit from these exchanges.

Respectfully,

Lynn