Snowbird replacement aircraft

[Inverted2]

I bet Trudy announces something soon. Every day he comes out at 11:00 am like a coo coo clock he spends another billion on something. He can just print more money and buy the new jets and everything will be just fine.

How about you try putting on some big boy pants and stop whining like a child?
Borderline pathetic.

We’ll all be whining in a few years when the reality of Turd 2’s reckless spending kicks in. Trust me.

[AirFrame]

The timing of this thread is extremely eerie.

You spelled "coincidental" wrong.

Personally I don't think they would lose anything by going to a prop-driven trainer. Having seen acts by two propellor-driven trainer equipped crews (Brazilians and Italians, I think?) I think the acts were very similar to the Snowbirds in terms of scale and in terms of bringing a larger number of airplanes into the sky at once. Bigger jets will mean needing more airspace and a larger act. Part of the appeal of the Snowbirds is that they do a compact show, manoeuvers are closer to see and more impressive to the crowd. 9 Tucanos painted in Snowbird colours would be excellent.

[AirFrame]

I've never heard a kid say to their parents, "I want to fly a subsonic aircraft designed in the mid-1950's."

Never been around a kid who became a Snowbird pilot then, eh? Many of them say that they saw the Snowbirds perform at an airshow once and wanted to do that ever since. As a kid they had no idea the jet was subsonic or designed in the mid-1950's, nor did they care, and i'm sure they still don't. It's really not about the plane.

And having attended airshow briefings with the Snowbirds, Blue Angels, Thunderbirds, and others in the room, I can tell you that the other teams respect what the Snowbirds can do with those subsonic aircraft designed in the 1950's. It's not easy, but they make it look like it is.

[EI-EIO]

We’ll all be whining in a few years when the reality of Turd 2’s reckless spending kicks in. Trust me.

the juvenile namecalling aside, CPI is down 0.2pc in April and governments are borrowing at 1% or less over 30 year periods (e.g. Ireland's 30 year issue at 0.79% on the 14th). If you want to get a politicially sensitive procurement done, doing so during a torrent of other spending is probably the time to do so. Supporters of the Canadian military who want them to get suitable equipment for their roles should consider that if you are willing to hate the Liberals and NDP whether they spend on the military or not, then polticial calculus will mean their approach in the future will be "not", especially given the gong show that is the current slate of CPC leadership candidates.

[leftoftrack]

why would they buy a new airframe? The aircraft commander fucked up royally. engine failure should not equal stall into spin into a spiral into a house. Its not the planes fault this turned out the way it did. Please don't spend a billion of my tax dollars on a frame that will end up the same way when handling an emergency incorrectly.

[AuxBatOn]

Allright, let’s wrap up the investigation. We’re done. leftoftrack found the cause of the accident.

[Donald]

Allright, let’s wrap up the investigation. We’re done. leftoftrack found the cause of the accident.

Phrased a little differently:

Arguably, what should be one of the best trained pilots in Canada, crashed a very well maintained aircraft, after experiencing what is most likely the most trained failure scenario. Much like airline pilots training V1 cuts and rejected takeoffs, I *assume* that Snowbird pilots would frequently train for an engine failure just at or after rotation. This result will bring the question of whether this operation can safely continue, barring another factor that isn’t known yet.

I agree that not all the facts are known or publicized yet, but it’s not as if a weekend warrior was flying. This was the “best of the best”.

[TT1900]

why would they buy a new airframe? The aircraft commander fucked up royally. engine failure should not equal stall into spin into a spiral into a house. Its not the planes fault this turned out the way it did. Please don't spend a billion of my tax dollars on a frame that will end up the same way when handling an emergency incorrectly.

Have you called DFS to offer your extensive knowledge and experience with both the Tutor and conducting accident investigations? Here’s the number: 1-888-927-6337. Just let them know you’ve already cracked the case and they can grab a beer.

[leftoftrack]

why would they buy a new airframe? The aircraft commander fucked up royally. engine failure should not equal stall into spin into a spiral into a house. Its not the planes fault this turned out the way it did. Please don't spend a billion of my tax dollars on a frame that will end up the same way when handling an emergency incorrectly.

Have you called DFS to offer your extensive knowledge and experience with both the Tutor and conducting accident investigations? Here’s the number: 1-888-927-6337. Just let them know you’ve already cracked the case and they can grab a beer.

it'll take them 6 weeks to get the metallurgical results from the engine manufacturer, another 6 weeks to come up with wording that say's the Commander of the aircraft royally fucked up. but in 3 months come back to this post after their inital report is issued, and tell me I'm wrong

[Gino Under]

Many posters have good ideas regarding the Snowbirds.

From my little insignificant perch I’ll start with the Conservative and Liberal governments of years gone by. Neither escapes blame for their neglect and inadequate funding of our armed forces. They simply aren’t interested in funding our military at the required level. Never were and never will be. Is it too much to ask for a little more for our forces than what’s required? (Rhetorical)

The Turdo Liberals of today are no more interested in supporting our military than their predecessors. Look at this unexpected pandemic. Imagine it was something that dragged us into a war. What would our preparedness really look like and which of these clowns would duck, dodge, and weave the challenging questions that would have to be asked regarding Canada’s ability to defend itself, never mind providing any significant contribution to a war effort. Isn’t that part of the reason we have a military in the first place?
Talking F-18s, F-16s, or Hawks, isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

Don’t forget our military’s role of recent years.
Snow shovelling.
Sandbagging during floods.
Working in old age homes.
Peacekeeping.
Recovering stranded Canadians who were told to stay home before this pandemic really got up to speed.
Using our bases as quarantine facilities (God bless those based in Trenton who skirted exposure)
Tells us everything we need to know about our governments view of our military.

It’s a waste of time asking any Canadian government for killing machines? Especially if the Aussies have “newer” old F-18s for sale. If that doesn’t say “Hey! Our front line aircraft need upgrading”, I don’t know what does.
I’d like to see the ‘birds’ live on. Personally, the Hawk makes sense to me. A tutor for a tutor. Accidents will happen whether or not a Snowbird replacement aircraft is ancient, old, new, or modern. Even the latest and greatest can end up in a smoking hole debris field.
If we’re going to have a military then we should support it. To me, that should mean something more than lip service and community service.

Gino Under

[Zaibatsu]

Come on. Are you going to wait for the report to find out if the plane crashed, too?

Undisputed facts:

The aircraft did stall.

The aircraft did spin.

You can wait for the report, but I can already tell you that those will be findings.

Unless the aircraft suffered from a centre of gravity issue or lack of control continuity, only the pilot is responsible for it departing controlled flight.

The engine failure will likely be maintenance error or mechanical failure and will be the root cause of the crash but will not contribute to how it was handled.

No disrespect to the pilot. That’s the worst case scenario for just about everyone. You play the hand you are dealt, revert to your training, and when it’s real life not simulator or training nobody and I mean nobody is perfect.

[tsgarp]

Harper had allocated 775M to replace the Tutors, Trudeau cancelled this in 2018

Is 775M anywhere near enough to buy 12-13 replacement jets plus parts for a demo team?

I'm honestly not sure, just used to seeing much larger numbers when procuring new military hardware.

What did the jets from down under cost Trudeau?

T-6s are around 10m USD each. Not sure what would be needed in terms of spares.

Don’t be surprised if you see the Snowbird replacement merged with, or added onto, another program like Future Fighter Lead-in Training or Future Aircrew Training. It would take advantage of economies of scale.

[Gino Under]

Zaibatsu

Wow!!..
Well, I shall certainly expect to sit in speculative judgement of you one day. In fact, when you do “buy the farm” I’ll let the CTSB know there’s no need for a follow up investigation because you will have simply fuctup. Nothing to it. No missing link. No Swiss cheese model. No contributing factors. Save the money. Move along.
Got it.

Gino

[tsgarp]

What's the point of an air demonstration team these days anyway? I could certainly understand the necessity during the Cold War in-so-far as continuing and assisting recruitment.

Why are we spending tax dollars on it now? The manned fighter is yesterdays concept. Why are we risking lives of pilots and civilians on the ground? There could have been a 7 year old on a bike under that wreckage.

There is little a pilot in an aircraft can do that can't be done by drones or space surveillance.

To answer your questions in order:

Air demonstration teams serve the same purpose as orchestras, art galleries and the Olympics.

Manned fighters will change, but they aren’t going away anytime soon. Drones look good right now because we haven’t fought anyone even remotely close to our abilities since Desert Storm I. If you want to know what would happen if we relied on drones to fight a peer or near peer nation look up the incident where the Russians shot down a Georgian drone about 10 years back.

The pilots are all volunteers. That 7 year old could just as easily be under a chunk of ice that detaches from a faulty lav valve on a ‘67.

A manned aircraft can operate without electronic navigation and when communications with the controlling agency are jammed. A satellite follows a set path and is highly visible and predicable to many potential adversaries. A manned aircraft can show up anywhere, anytime.

[schnitzel2k3]

Harper had allocated 775M to replace the Tutors, Trudeau cancelled this in 2018

Is 775M anywhere near enough to buy 12-13 replacement jets plus parts for a demo team?

I'm honestly not sure, just used to seeing much larger numbers when procuring new military hardware.

What did the jets from down under cost Trudeau?

T-6s are around 10m USD each. Not sure what would be needed in terms of spares.

Don’t be surprised if you see the Snowbird replacement merged with, or added onto, another program like Future Fighter Lead-in Training or Future Aircrew Training. It would take advantage of economies of scale.

Thank you!

[linecrew]

"Key moments in the Snowbirds crash"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGS3dmuPlPo

[linecrew]

why would they buy a new airframe? The aircraft commander fucked up royally. engine failure should not equal stall into spin into a spiral into a house. Its not the planes fault this turned out the way it did. Please don't spend a billion of my tax dollars on a frame that will end up the same way when handling an emergency incorrectly.

Have you called DFS to offer your extensive knowledge and experience with both the Tutor and conducting accident investigations? Here’s the number: 1-888-927-6337. Just let them know you’ve already cracked the case and they can grab a beer.

it'll take them 6 weeks to get the metallurgical results from the engine manufacturer, another 6 weeks to come up with wording that say's the Commander of the aircraft royally fucked up. but in 3 months come back to this post after their inital report is issued, and tell me I'm wrong

Sooo...with a full tank of gas behind you, two people onboard and (what seems like) a total loss of engine power, then zooming to try and turn airspeed into altitude, what would have been the non-fucked up solution you would have applied? Certainly if you can call out this pilot as having made colossal errors, you would possess enough superior knowledge to be able to tell us exactly what you would have done...and don't just give us a cop-out, obvious answer that you wouldn't stall the plane because you weren't in that cockpit and can't possibly know all of the factors that lead to this accident.

[leftoftrack]

Have you called DFS to offer your extensive knowledge and experience with both the Tutor and conducting accident investigations? Here’s the number: 1-888-927-6337. Just let them know you’ve already cracked the case and they can grab a beer.

it'll take them 6 weeks to get the metallurgical results from the engine manufacturer, another 6 weeks to come up with wording that say's the Commander of the aircraft royally fucked up. but in 3 months come back to this post after their inital report is issued, and tell me I'm wrong

Sooo...with a full tank of gas behind you, two people onboard and (what seems like) a total loss of engine power, then zooming to try and turn airspeed into altitude, what would have been the non-fucked up solution you would have applied? Certainly if you can call out this pilot as having made colossal errors, you would possess enough superior knowledge to be able to tell us exactly what you would have done...and don't just give us a cop-out, obvious answer that you wouldn't stall the plane because you weren't in that cockpit and can't possibly know all of the factors that lead to this accident.

Aviate-Navigate-Communicate

Im thinking the first mistake he made was pitching to turn airspeed into altitude. maitain the altitude you have hold for best glide and start picking the spot your life depends on. No sense in burning off the energy you have to see options that you wont make cause you have no more energy.

Runway centerline on both runways have water for 10 miles straight ahead, so pull a sully and be invited to a superbowl. if it doesn't look good well you leave.

What you don't do, is pull to the chest and at the apex kick hard left rudder over a residential neighborhood. Im not sure how you look at that video and think that was fine or that was normal method of dealing with an emergency. Im sorry that this accident happened, and sure we can wait for a report to tell us what the video showed us. Do we need to though?

[TT1900]

Im thinking the first mistake he made was pitching to turn airspeed into altitude. maitain the altitude you have hold for best glide and start picking the spot your life depends on. No sense in burning off the energy you have to see options that you wont make cause you have no more energy.

Proof of complete ignorance.

[Jet Jockey]

There are a few things to consider about any replacement aircraft for the Snowbirds.

First, is cost and the ability to fund it. With lots of deferred equipment acquisitions on the horizon (CF18 replacement) a lot of $ will be tied up. And that is to say nothing of the $250 billion that the COVID response is going to pile onto the national debt. IMHO, there is no money available to buy replacement aircraft.

Second, the Tutors, in the big picture, cost almost next to nothing to operate. The aircraft are long since bought and paid for, there are tons of spare aircraft and parts sitting in Mountain View, and that the biggest cost is the maintainers that are doing the maintenance in Moose Jaw. Fuel burn is a fraction of any replacement aircraft.

Third, while Sunday's accident was an enourmous tragedy one cannot let that event interfere with rational thought. As an example, let's say the Snowbirds get a Hawk replacement - another single engine aircraft - and it has a similar engine failure just after take-off. There is no guarantee that the same scenario would not have unfolded. If avoiding an accident involving an engine failure is to replace one single engine aircraft with another at great cost, you have accomplished nothing. And, as I have pointed out on another thread, while the airframe is nominally almost 60 years old the engines are relatively new and are still in production to satisfy the 500+ T38's the USAF still flies that use the same, basic engine. It is of note that none of the Tutor accidents are a result of the 60 year old airframe failing; they all seem to be engine related.

A better ejection seat? The new models are quite large and likely would not fit into the Tutor cockpit. And even if they did, an engineering program to support a 12 operational aircraft fleet is tough to justify.

Finally, I would submit that if there was not a fatality in this accident (and the margin between being a successful and unsuccessful ejection in this case being in the order of seconds), this accident like the one in October would not be as big an issue nor the replacement of the Tutor be such an issue.

Couldn't agree more.