Let’s start over - Mooney caravan incident

[Ragsf15e]

Re: wake turbulence & wingtip vortices 

In general, formation positions and references are designed for specific airframes and take into consideration both wingtip vortices and prop/jet wash.  Anyone flown a glider and “box the wash”?  Anyway, vortices and prop wash definitely exist and can be a problem if you’re out of position and end up in them.  They do not suddenly move an airplane forward however.  Generally they cause turbulence and/or a rolling motion.  If you stay in position you should not be in either.

I’ve flown lots of “close trail” which is slightly below and 1-2 ship length behind lead.  When refueling, you’re actually under the tail (overlapping airframes) but then tankers mostly don’t maneuver more than 30 degrees bank.  Anyway, in close trail practice in a HP prop plane, we did 90 degrees bank lazy 8s and barrel rolls.  We trained hard, so the pilots were very current.  Students learn it fast though and were generally competent in a couple of flights. They were not allowed to do it solo because the instructor in lead couldn’t see them.

What makes close trail tough is lack of visual cues.  If you’re forward or aft in fingertip, it’s obvious to everyone.  In close trail, lead looks a little bigger or smaller, but your perspective makes that pretty difficult to judge, especially for those with less experience.  Closure in close trail is extremely difficult to judge.  In fact, we basically taught lead to set power and never change it.

So, my old school, grouchy fighter pilot says anytime a wingman hits lead, it’s the wingman’s fault.  My newer age civilian pilot says that if lead made large unplanned power changes (or speedbrakes), he might be (somewhat) at fault.  Let the NTSB decide.

Edited August 27, 2019 by Ragsf15e

[carusoam]

7 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Some people are not going to like what I say, but I'll say it anyway.

This formation arrival stuff as presently constituted is just plain nuts.

I don't fly formation with people I barely know and have not trained VIGOROUSLY  with and I mean not briefings, not flying formation with someone else, not "I know the ground rules". I mean hours of practice. Sure they do it in the military after lots of training, very high standardization and lets face it a Mooney is not maneuverable like an F-16.

 

 

 

It’s a slippery slope...

agree, don’t agree...

The choice is to be involved, or not be involved...  that is up to the PICs...

Taken to the next level... GA is dangerous...

Lets not go down the path from which we can’t return...

Try to focus on ways to minimize risk...

in this case, minimize risks associated while flying in formation...

 

As far as maneuverability goes...

A Mooney is really maneuverable compared to the much heavier F16 that moves at much higher speeds... and carry tremendous amounts of momentum...

 

For better results... Keep it positive!

Best regards,

-a-

[GeeBee]

I think you all need to go back and re-read what I wrote. 

Look, yes your local chapter has embraced formation flying. You practice and train with the same guys, in the same airplanes. As I said in my OP, that is the way you do it. What we have right now in these "caravan arrivals" is a group of people who have briefed, but not flown much together very much but know "the rules of the road" so to speak. Knowing is not execution and execution is not proficiency when you don't do it over and over again. Further is the practice relevant? Sure you can fly formation but now add the stress of a NOTAM'd arrival procedure and you got more plates in the air. It is like how often airline pilots come to grief on their retirement flight. Sure you can fly the airplane, sure you can do a low approach gear up, sure you can, but add the emotion of the moment and things go wrong, fast. Point is this, formation flight, with unfamiliar squadron mates into a high threat environment requires a higher level of formation flying skill that I don't see in a lot of these "caravans" which is why I won't participate.

Because it has not  yet happened? I don't know what to say to that in a safety forum. That is just really flawed in the world of safety. I haven't crashed in 28,000 hours and 50 years of flying, but tomorrow is a whole new day with its own risks and threats. Closing the barn door safety, is not my idea of safety. Safety is pro-active not reactive.

What WAS the catastrophic result? That is not the question. The question is what COULD have been the result  and how do you minimize that risk. Just because you tickled the tiger's tail does not mean it won't eat you next time, ask Roy Horn.

 

[carusoam]

GB...

Its what you wrote...

i read it twice.

“This formation arrival stuff as presently constituted is just plain nuts.” -GB...

 

you are right...

“Some people are not going to like what I say, but I'll say it anyway.” -GB...

 

Did you mean something else?

 

Is formation only for people with your experience?

 

or you have so much experience your are afraid to be part of this type of activity?

As far as I can tell... you don’t like the activity and are poking at the people that do.

Try to leave the poking out, stay focused on the issues...

It is not easy to write so everybody can understand what you mean...

Best regards,

-a-

[Yetti]

2 hours ago, thinwing said:

 and professionalism 

I think given the current results, we have tossed out professionalism as a antidote for swapping paint.   Or are you proposing that a lack of professionalism was the cause of bending things in the Mooney case?

[Bob_Belville]

GeeBee, I am having difficulty processing your posts. 

• Who are you?
• Your profile is missing any information at all.
• Do you own a Mooney? What model? For how long? Where are you based? 
• What's your flying background and experience?
• Should we assume you're making comments about formation flying in Mooneys based upon your own experience and qualifications?
• Perhaps you're a low time pilot trolling? How do we know?    
• In many contexts anonymous comments are automatically discarded. IMHO that's a best practice in most forums. 

[thinwing]

4 minutes ago, Yetti said:

I think given the current results, we have tossed out professionalism as a antidote for swapping paint.   Or are you proposing that a lack of professionalism was the cause of bending things in the Mooney case?

Was just pointing out how professional this EAA group flys there RV s at airshows.They flew a formation at Camarillo just last week.

[M016576]

1 hour ago, carusoam said:

As far as maneuverability goes...

A Mooney is really maneuverable compared to the much heavier F16 that moves at much higher speeds... and carry tremendous amounts of momentum...

Sorry -A-... a Mooney is a lot of things compared to a fighter- but “maneuverable” isn’t one of them.  It’s exceptionally stable instead, which in my books of far more important for a plane of its mission.

the piece you’re missing is that a fighter, while heavier, has a far higher thrust to weight ratio, better wing loading, hydraulically actuated flight controls, and provisions for both aerobatic and inverted flight.

I can fly a fighter in formation using my thumb and index finger..., an F-15 can roll 360 degrees (aileron roll) in a single second, and can execute an instantaneous turn in excess of 20 degrees a second.  

my mooney in formation takes continuous FORCE on the controls (they are heavy), rolls VERY slowly (because it’s designed to be stable, not maneuverable), and takes a full minute to turn 360 degrees.  Power response is OK, but you do not have much excess power available, compared to a fighter- which has tons (factors of 2+ times if you count afterburner),  of excess power available at normal close formation speeds.  A mooney does have a smaller turn radius than some fighters (but not a faster turn rate...). but that’s about it from a maneuverability standpoint.

[steingar]

17 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Because it has not  yet happened? I don't know what to say to that in a safety forum. That is just really flawed in the world of safety. I haven't crashed in 28,000 hours and 50 years of flying, but tomorrow is a whole new day with its own risks and threats. Closing the barn door safety, is not my idea of safety. Safety is pro-active not reactive.

This reasoning borders on incoherence.  If you continue to have good flying habits the odds on you crashing are actually fairly low.  If you actually follow the NOTAM at Oshkosh your chances of being in a midair are also quite low.  I'm just a low time screwball pilot probably flying too much airplane and I've made it in safely 18 times.

My guess is you've never done it, have never read the NOTAM, and really don't know a damn thing about it.

Edited August 28, 2019 by steingar

[carusoam]

Job,

Can you pull a 180° turn within the confines of the Hudson River with a F15?  

The Hudson can be near a mile wide in some places...

This is our local fly way next to NYC...

To get the U-turn without a high bank... keeping control of the speed is good...

 

Steep turns @1k’ over the Hudson in an F15 may draw some attention...! 

Best regards,

-a-

[M016576]

19 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Steep turns @1k’ over the Hudson in an F15 may draw some attention...! 

How about 500’ through a canyon?

Edited August 27, 2019 by M016576

[carusoam]

Definitely gets your attention!  

best regards,

-a-

[skydvrboy]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Point is this, formation flight, with unfamiliar squadron mates into a high threat environment requires a higher level of formation flying skill that I don't see in a lot of these "caravans" which is why I won't participate.

How do you know their level formation flying skill if you don't participate?  Have you gone on a ride-along and decided the pilots weren't skilled enough for you to join?  I don't understand.

[GeeBee]

Who am I? One thing I am not is a "low time pilot" trolling. Besides 28K hours and 50 years experience, a BS degree in Aero and a Masters in Aviation Safety and Security, I have been a DPE and an LCA. Now I am retired. I bought the Mooney to support my transport needs in support some familial health issues.

Thank you MO1676 for clarifying for people who think a Mooney is maneuverable compared to a jet fighter. Guys I've flown a jet fighter that MO1676 would consider a "dog" (Israeli Super Phantom, the F-15 cleaned our clock by the way). The Mooney is not even close. 

Look guys I am not against formation flying! I am not against practicing formation flying. I am against unproficient formation flying in situations that demand more of the pilot than normal operations such as arriving as KOSH. 

If you and your mates can formation fly proficiently, go for it! If you have little to no knowledge about the other guy you need to reconsider the operation, until you are confident in the entire formation's skill level. From the very low level preps that I have seen most these "caravans" do I walk away shaking my head. I see verbal briefings substitute for what should be actual practice a lot, and that scares the bujeesus out of me. 

"

This reasoning borders on incoherence.  If you continue to have good flying habits the odds on you crashing are actually fairly low.  If you actually follow the NOTAM at Oshkosh your chances of being in a midair are also quite low.  I'm just allow time screwball pilot probably flying too much airplane and I've made it in safely 18 times.

My guess is you've never done it, have never read the NOTAM, and really don't know a damn thing about it.

Let me ask you a simple question. How do you assess and mitigate risk in your flying operation or do you consider "good habits" enough? (and yes I have flown into KOSH three times during Air Venture so I know a few things about it)

 

[gsxrpilot]

10 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Look guys I am not against formation flying! I am not against practicing formation flying. I am against unproficient formation flying in situations that demand more of the pilot than normal operations such as arriving as KOSH. 

If you and your mates can formation fly proficiently, go for it! If you have little to no knowledge about the other guy you need to reconsider the operation, until you are confident in the entire formation's skill level. From the very low level preps that I have seen most these "caravans" do I walk away shaking my head. I see verbal briefings substitute for what should be actual practice a lot, and that scares the bujeesus out of me. 

So I guess we're good then. You're not gonna fly formation with us and we wouldn't have you on our wing either.

On the other hand, I'd have @Bob_Belville on my wing anytime anywhere. And that goes for all qualified and current Caravan pilots.

[M016576]

There is nothing inherently unsafe with formation flying, no more so than the other two types of flying (Visual references... or Instrument references)- so long as all all the pilots involved are proficient in the practice.

3 types for flight:

Visual- using the earth as your attitude reference

instrument- using your instrument panel as your attitude reference

formation- using another aircraft as your attitude reference.

 

so, with that mind...

if two aircraft run into each other while engaging in formation flight- the midair is due to pilot error in some capacity, so long as the underlying formation positions themselves are proven to have safe clearances.

The reason that it is pilot error, is that a *safe* formation position accounts for potential disruptions of airflow., turbulence, etc.

every time I’ve heard of a mid air occurring during formation flight, a safety investigation occurs as well, to ensure that the pilots are being trained properly and have safe practices.

it is possible, as the mooney caravan doesn’t have quite the sample size of instruction and flight hours in formation that the military has, that their formation positions are not designed with enough clearance to provide safe separation in the event of “natural phenomenon.”  ***I can’t say , though, as I don’t know*** Either way, it’s worth an evaluation of the positions for wing tip clearance, vertical offset, and procedural operations- it’s a great learning opportunity at the very least, and it’s possible that maybe something will be discovered that could be done safer or better.  Accidents happen, luckily we all get to learn from this one, and I bet it will make us all safer pilots.

Nothing is inherently dangerous about formation flight, any more so than the two other types of flight and I really hope to one day join in with the professionals that organize, host and fly In the formation clinics for mooney’s and the mooney caravan.  Their work and efforts not only raise awareness for the mooney brand, but help to build the mooney community, and make me proud and excited to be a mooney owner.

[Ragsf15e]

5 hours ago, M016576 said:

How about 500’ through a canyon?

Well that’s just plain dangerous!  Look closely, there’s only 1 aircrew!  It’s an F15c, they think low level is anything below 10,000’!  Now if it was an E model, then it’s just fine...

[M016576]

7 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Well that’s just plain dangerous!  Look closely, there’s only 1 aircrew!  It’s an F15c, they think low level is anything below 10,000’!  Now if it was an E model, then it’s just fine...

Turns out you can fly safely with no WSO, no gps, one pilot and no radalt at “500’ “ and 400+ kts after all   (It’s amazing how “old school” the light gray is)

Now that I’m in the 35, and *actually know* how low I am... it’s funny to compare reality with perception.

Edited August 28, 2019 by M016576

[carusoam]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

. 

Look guys I am not against formation flying! I am not against practicing formation flying. I am against unproficient formation flying in situations that demand more of the pilot than normal operations such as arriving as KOSH. 

 

Why didn’t you make your point... without all the other negativity?

It just sounded like you were saying you have the skill... but nobody else does...

That just sounds unfriendly on any forum...

Even the NASA forum...

lighten up Frances, or we’ll never get to the part of sharing the details we need to fly formation safely. 

Best regards,

-a-

[Shadrach]

6 hours ago, Bob_Belville said:

GeeBee, I am having difficulty processing your posts. 

• Who are you?
• Your profile is missing any information at all.
• Do you own a Mooney? What model? For how long? Where are you based? 
• What's your flying background and experience?
• Should we assume you're making comments about formation flying in Mooneys based upon your own experience and qualifications?
• Perhaps you're a low time pilot trolling? How do we know?    
• In many contexts anonymous comments are automatically discarded. IMHO that's a best practice in most forums. 

I think his real name is Clark Kent. While he (I just assumed his gender) prefers to remain anonymous, he’s happy to showcase that he’s just retired from being one of the best, most credentialed, most experienced aviators in the country if not the world. He also seems to have a very educated take on the caravan even though as far I can tell no one from  the caravan knows who he is.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Shadrach

[gsxrpilot]

9 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Why didn’t you make your point... without all the other negativity?

It just sounded like you were saying you have the skill... but nobody else does...

That just sounds unfriendly on any forum...

Even the NASA forum...

lighten up Frances, or we’ll never get to the part of sharing the details we need to fly formation safely. 

Best regards,

-a-

Stick around @GeeBee, there are another 24,224 pithy posts where this one came from. 

I have some very close friends flying F35's among other equipment in the IDF. A few of them have been in my Mooney... while in formation. They learned what it's like to fly formation without  an additional $90 mil in performance at their fingertips.

[Yetti]

Drama, personalities....   So what can be  changed so that no paint is swapped in formation.   So FAST Card.  Do those expire? are there currency requirements?

[Amelia]

I’ve done the Fisk Arrival several times. :yikes: I participated in the very early Mooney mass arrival once, (swore never again) and the Mooney formation mass arrival several years ago, and despite my lack of expertise or fighter pilot quals, found the training, support, and the seriousness of purpose to be excellent. Never did I risk bumping into anyone, mirabile dictu.

My take away is that under the most carefully controlled laboratory conditions, “stuff” happens. Furthermore, nobody got hurt. Those involved probably were terribly chagrined, so why continue to rub it in? We have all had stuff happen, even our most expert, I dare say. The job now is to calmly and openly talk about how to even further minimize risks going forward. 

[steingar]

12 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Let me ask you a simple question. How do you assess and mitigate risk in your flying operation or do you consider "good habits" enough? (and yes I have flown into KOSH three times during Air Venture so I know a few things about it)

My abject apologies.  Folks who complain about stuff like this often do so from ignorance.

My risk assessment goes like this: I've analyzed the things that most commonly bring pilots to grief.  If I don't do those things, the odds of my coming to grief are reduced.  For example, lots of pilots have crashed because they flew into bad weather.  I avoid reduced visibility like the plague, and own't go near it until or unless I have  the IR.  Lots of pilots have run out of gas.  I always keep lots on board.

I think the biggest thing is I always remember that I'm a low time ham-fisted pilot, and try and keep things well within my envelope.  Where I think your argument lacks merit is you see  danger in the Oshkosh approach, but in fact there's been one mid air collision that I know of in the whole history of the event.  That's really good.  It suggests to me the the NOTAM works.

What I worry about flying into Oshkosh is what kills pilots there, getting too slow and stalling out in the pattern.  So I keep my speed up as much as I can.  I had  big worry this last one, I was following a Cessna at 80 mph.  That's only 13 mph above my clean stall speed, not a big margin.  

I have to admit, the last few approaches to Oshkosh have been far more harmum scarum than the first dozen or so.  Last two years I've had to contend with slow speeds and lots of unexpected traffic.  If this becomes the new norm I may have to rethink this whole thing.  You're right about one thing.  Just because there hasn't been midair doesn't mean there won't be one.

[GeeBee]

A couple of years ago, a friend of mine who is a dispatcher sat on a jump seat and watched as a crew on a departing 767 lost center system hydraulics (the big one) and skillfully executed the checklists, performed a manual gear extension, electric flap extension, and returned for landing. He commented to the crew, "Wow you guys must fly a lot together". They responded that this flight was the first time they ever met.

When you fly formation, you are no longer "single pilot". Yes, your airplane is, but you are a crew. The airline crew, the military pilot are all trained in multi-pilot operations in a highly standardized curriculum that demands their adherence to the crew or squadron concept under pain of being dismissed. There are few weaknesses in adherence. Ever play doubles tennis with a player you never played with before? While you both know the rules, you still do not function at 100% because you do not know your fellow player's strengths and weaknesses. Which is why training formation with the group is so very important especially where the training lacks consequences for inadherence.