• 49 Ship formation fly-by

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:11 pm**

After thinking about it for a while, I have changed
my opinion.

I think it's just great when civilians with little or no
formal training or qualifications attempt formation flying!

Two small airplanes carrying skydivers collided over Superior at dusk Saturday, causing the lead plane to break into pieces, with debris falling across a swath of southern sections of town.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/ ... id/282465/

“We were just kind of lucky ..."

That's the way to do it! Good job!!

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:31 pm**

Colonel Sanders wrote:I think it's just great when civilians with little or no formal training or qualifications attempt formation flying!

Good thing the 49 pilots in the original story that started this thread were all FAST-qualified as formation pilots.

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 6:04 pm**

Reminds me. I had never picked up a guitar before,
and last weekend I took a course where I learned a
few chords and how to strum.

Now I'm ready to play Carnegie Hall!

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:14 pm**

Colonel Sanders wrote:Reminds me. I had never picked up a guitar before, and last weekend I took a course where I learned a few chords and how to strum.

I guess you needed something to pass the time while you were on sabbatical from AvCanada?

I don't understand why you can't comprehend that 49 people could learn to competently fly formation, nor why you would immediately assume that the training these 49 have received is inadequate. Is it just because you weren't hired to train them?

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:28 pm**

It's hilarious that you think that formation
can be taught during a weekend course

http://www.pittspecials.com/movies/outsideloop.wmv

Now, I don't know as much about aviation as you do
(after all you're an RV pilot) but one of these days,
that huge formation of amateurs is going to go horribly
wrong.

Wait for it.

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:41 pm**

Colonel Sanders wrote:It's hilarious that you think that formation can be taught during a weekend course

It's hilarious that you assume a weekend course is all these guys had before they started. I don't understand why you would assume that.

The two Pitts' in that video start out nicely line abreast, but on the downline one of them is acute (or the other got sucked). Looks a little sloppy. But I guess that's okay... Formations with small numbers of planes flown by experts never go wrong. Just ask the French Connection, the Thunderbirds, the Snowbirds, etc.

Sh*t can happen to anyone, even those who think they're immune to it. That includes both RV pilots looking to improve their skills, and Pitts pilots with 1000's of hours under their belts. I'm aware of it. Are you?

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:43 pm**

Please feel free to stop by any time in person
and show me how it should be done

You've done lots of formation aerobatics at
the surface - plenty of it outside, I am sure

Hey, what types do you have on your SAC?

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:50 pm**

Colonel Sanders wrote:After thinking about it for a while, I have changed
my opinion.

I think it's just great when civilians with little or no
formal training or qualifications attempt formation flying!

Really??

Some of the best moments of humanity have come together with astounding amounts of risk. Good thing you weren't there to scold the Wright Bro's for attempting to do something dangerous, we might all be driving busses or piggy-backing on roller skates (with helmets and goggles of course). I think this formation flight was awesome, I wish I could have been there to watch in in real life!! Even better, I would have loved to have been one of the pilots flying!!

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:56 pm**

astounding amounts of risk

Reminds me. Here are some photos of Andrew
Phillip's funeral, which we hosted:

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:02 pm**

FAST training is not a weekend course.

For me it started with 10 hrs of dual taught by an X snowbird X RCAF QFI. After 25 hrs of practice to get a wingman qual I had to pass a check ride by another X RCAF instructor who after retiring from the RCAF was the lead for a 9 ship aerobatic act. I also have to re-qualify by means of a check ride in a 4 ship formation every year.

Formation flying like low level aerobatics is tremendously unforgiving of incapacity or neglect. Seeing the video shows only a small part of the total flight and to my eyes is not long enough to ascertain whether the flight, in total, was conducted safely or not. To judge the overall safety and indeed sanity of this flight one would IMO, have to know the background of all the pilots, what level of briefing and working up was taken before assembling all 49 airplanes and how safely the join up and break up of the formation was.

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:10 pm**

RV Formation:

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-r ... 0o0018.asp

After departing Lindsay, Ontario, C-GNDY and 2 other aircraft (an RV-9A and another RV-7A, hereafter known as the lead) joined in formation and climbed to 9500 feet above sea level (asl).

C-GNDY had a video camera mounted inside the cockpit and was filming the other 2 aircraft. After a short period of time, the RV-9A left the formation and headed toward Bancroft, Ontario, while C-GNDY and the lead continued toward Smith Falls, Ontario.

The 2 aircraft descended to about 3600 feet asl. C-GNDY was in a right echelon formation behind the lead. The pilots agreed that C-GNDY would film the lead during some aerobatic manoeuvres, which began with a sudden pitch up and a steep right bank. They were followed by a series of tight turns, partial rolls, climbs and descents.

At some point during the manoeuvres, the lead lost all contact with C-GNDY and subsequently began a search for the aircraft. The lead radioed the RV-9A and together the 2 aircraft searched for, but could not locate, C-GNDY. The 2 aircraft flew to Smith Falls, Ontario, and called the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre (JRCC). C-GNDY was located by JRCC at 2220 1 near Wolfe Lake, Ontario, approximately 11 nautical miles (nm) north of Madoc, Ontario.

Andrew Phillips was 2 hangars down from he,
and he's dead now, after that RV formation flight.

Sh*t can happen to anyone. I'm aware of it. Are you?

You might say that.

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:23 pm**

For me it started with 10 hrs of dual taught by an X snowbird X RCAF QFI. After 25 hrs of practice to get a wingman qual

35 hours of formation training is pretty light.

I know this won't apply to the RV pilots, but for
the rest of us, it takes years of training and constant
practice to be safe.

Most people here might think that 100 hours
of formation time is a lot. Get back to me when
you have 1,000 hours of formation time.

For many decades, people have treated low
altitude aerobatics, and formation, with contempt.

Most of them are dead now.

Posted: **Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:44 pm**

Colonel Sanders wrote:Andrew Phillips was 2 hangars down from he,
and he's dead now, after that RV formation flight.

To be completely accurate, he's dead after flying an airplane beyond Vne with unbalanced control surfaces. The fact that he did it while flying formation is beside the point.

More to the point, yes, one RV crashed while flying formation with another. To date, i'd hazard a guess that there are a lot more airshow pilots with 1000's of hours of experience who died flying low-level aerobatics, than there are dead RV pilots who crashed while flying non-aerobatic, ceremonial, straight-and-level formations (like the 49-ship flight in the original post).

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 5:38 am**

Looking forward to you stopping by and showing us
all here how it's done! I always appreciate the chance
to fly with a God of Aviation like you or Fern Villeneuve
or Rob Holland:

Congratulations on the surface SAC with the formation
endorsement, by the way. That's quite an accomplishment!
Takes the rest of us around 10 years to develop that
level of skill, which an RV pilot can pick up in a weekend.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:40 am**

You keep mentioning surface SAC's and formation endorsements, none of which are necessary to fly non-aerobatic formation, which is what these 49 airplanes were doing.

Congratulations on getting your AvCanada ban lifted, looks like you're well on your way to another one!

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 9:57 am**

So daytime formation flying is dangerous even after passing a comprehensive course; but flying to 100 feet ILS minimums; at night; should be no big deal and endorsed for any weekend warrior?

Not sure I get that at all.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 12:51 pm**

Reality doesn't matter to this crowd.

As long as your feelings aren't hurt, it doesn't
matter if you crash.

Airframe: We are looking forward to your visit here!

I will arrange Fern Villeneuve to be here at the same
time, I am sure there is much that he can learn from
you as well.

If you let me know what date you will be arriving,
I will contact Rob Holland and try to get him here
too, so he can avail himself of your wealth of
knowledge, skill and experience when it comes
to formation flying.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:08 pm**

Eventually you might clue in that *my* experience, skill, and knowledge were not in question here. You keep bringing it up to attack me, as though it matters.

It's the experience, skill, and knowledge of the 49 pilots in the initial post that you called into question, with only your natural arrogance (nay, ignorance) to support it. I really don't care if you think you're packing the kind of tackle that you'd normally expect to find swinging about between the hindlegs of a Grand National winner. Somewhere on the internet i'm sure there's a place for that though.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:30 pm**

So your position is that experience, skill and knowledge
"does not matter" when it comes to qualifying an opinion?

The internet was certainly a great invention for someone
like you. I am tremendously amused that you think that
a true statement of your level of experience, skill and
knowledge, you considerto be "an attack".

PS Remember, let me know when you are going to stop
by and show us all how "it's really done" in the real world.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:32 pm**

To be fair, CS, I consider myself a competent for formation pilot. I can definately safely and effectiveqly fly formation as a wingman and as a lead (close form). The largest close formation I have been part of was a 10-ship of fast jets.

As a lead, I am able to safely lead multiple aircraft and precicely hit a time on target for whatever (I have done my fair share of fly-bys for events, including one in Colorado with a 12 000 ft drop from the IP to the target and manage to hit TOT while keeping my wingmen with me. So, I don't think it's a stretch to say I am safe and competent.

If I flew 100 hours of close form in my life, that's good. My training consisted of 6 dual missions during Basic Flying Training, 6-7 more during advanced and 2-3 during my Hornet OTU, for a total of maybe 20 hours.

It's not about how many hours you got. It's about the quality of those hours. If someone gets 35 hours of training from a Snowbird, I'd say that guy is certainly safe and probably effective.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:37 pm**

It's not about how many hours you got

With all due respect M, consider contacting Eric Clapton
and Mark Knopfler and telling them that.

If you ever read . Yeager's autobiography, the answer
he would give people when they asked him how he got to
be a good pilot: "I flew more than everybody else".

Mistakes in formation are horribly expensive. I can only
apologize for wanting to raise the bar, above a weekend
course.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:41 pm**

Flying 10 000 times the same hour doesn't make you a better pilot though... Different type of flying will have a different impact on your recency. And your initial training will have a huge impact on how you are going to develop.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:58 pm**

I have never met the master of any trade
or skill who has not practiced constantly
for decades.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENJlmnqxZUQ

Can't learn to do that in a weekend. Don't
care how good your teacher is.

In my experience, all the greats are self-taught,
despite their poor training.

Talk to me about the career of the greatest RCAF
fighter pilot in the last 75 years - George Beurling.

Did he get to be the best because he recieved the
best training the RCAF could give him?

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:00 pm**

Not talking about being a master. Talking about being safe and effective.

Posted: **Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:02 pm**

Now we're talking about grading hamburger vs steak.

Did Robin Olds and John Boyd get to be so good, because
of the superior training that they received?

49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by

Re: 49 Ship formation fly-by