For the military aircraft buffs ...
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: Ace on 14 Dec 2009 17:51 On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:29:02 +1100, Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:11:47 +0100, Ace <b.rogers(a)ifrance.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:52:27 +1100, Kevin Gleeson >><kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:54:07 -0000, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> wrote: >> >>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sknyliv_airshow_disaster >>>> >>>>On June 24, 2005, a military court sentenced pilot Volodymyr Toponar and >>>>co-pilot Yuriy Yegorov to fourteen and eight years in prison, >>>>respectively. The court found the two pilots and three other military >>>>officials guilty of failing to follow orders, negligence and violating >>>>flight rules. >> >>>Wonder what the violated orders were? >>>"You vill not crash zis aircraft". Which I think is a given. >>>Or had they deliberately tried the maneouvre too low to the ground? >> >>Possibly unauthorised manoeuvres, certainly performing said manoeuvres >>in the direction of the crown, which I believe is the first rule of >>Air Shows. > >I think it only became in the direction of the crowd once the wingtip >clipped the ground. Not so. OK, think about it the other way round - he should only have been doing these stunts facing _away_ from the crowd, so such an event, with a <90deg re-direction, should have no possibility of impact the crowd. >As for the comment about copilot, he is usually running radio and >weapons systems and navigating. I doubt he'd have much input into low >level (or even high level) combat maneouvres. Back seat driver >syndrome. I'm happy to be presented with evidence to the contrary, Really? Well I'm sure the relevant authorities will be keen to hear your opinions. Me, I'd tend to assume that they, unlike us, would have had access to all the evidence.
From: Kevin Gleeson on 14 Dec 2009 18:23 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:51:14 +0100, Ace <b.rogers(a)ifrance.com> wrote: >On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:29:02 +1100, Kevin Gleeson ><kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: > >>On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:11:47 +0100, Ace <b.rogers(a)ifrance.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:52:27 +1100, Kevin Gleeson >>><kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >>> >>>>On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:54:07 -0000, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> wrote: >>> >>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sknyliv_airshow_disaster >>>>> >>>>>On June 24, 2005, a military court sentenced pilot Volodymyr Toponar and >>>>>co-pilot Yuriy Yegorov to fourteen and eight years in prison, >>>>>respectively. The court found the two pilots and three other military >>>>>officials guilty of failing to follow orders, negligence and violating >>>>>flight rules. >>> >>>>Wonder what the violated orders were? >>>>"You vill not crash zis aircraft". Which I think is a given. >>>>Or had they deliberately tried the maneouvre too low to the ground? >>> >>>Possibly unauthorised manoeuvres, certainly performing said manoeuvres >>>in the direction of the crown, which I believe is the first rule of >>>Air Shows. >> >>I think it only became in the direction of the crowd once the wingtip >>clipped the ground. > >Not so. OK, think about it the other way round - he should only have >been doing these stunts facing _away_ from the crowd, so such an >event, with a <90deg re-direction, should have no possibility of >impact the crowd. To mee it looked like the maneouvre was taking place parrallel to the crowd, along the line of the runway. You're not suggesting the should to touch and goes at right angles to the runway (yeah, I know, a touch and go is a totally different thing than what they were up to here). >>As for the comment about copilot, he is usually running radio and >>weapons systems and navigating. I doubt he'd have much input into low >>level (or even high level) combat maneouvres. Back seat driver >>syndrome. I'm happy to be presented with evidence to the contrary, > >Really? Well I'm sure the relevant authorities will be keen to hear >your opinions. Me, I'd tend to assume that they, unlike us, would have >had access to all the evidence. I don't have opinions one way or the other on that one. My understanding is the PIC has control of maneouvres the aircraft undertakes. Sure they have to work as a team, but at the timeframes these decisions are taken, I can't see how it can come down to anything but the pilot's miscalculation. If he was ordered to do it, he also miscalculated by obeying those orders. -- Kevin Gleeson
From: 'Hog on 14 Dec 2009 18:48 Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: > I don't have opinions one way or the other on that one. My > understanding is the PIC has control of maneouvres the aircraft > undertakes. Sure they have to work as a team, but at the timeframes > these decisions are taken, I can't see how it can come down to > anything but the pilot's miscalculation. If he was ordered to do it, > he also miscalculated by obeying those orders. Can he kick the pilot in the kidneys? I'm quite surprised they didn't get lynched on the ground. -- 'Hog
From: Kevin Gleeson on 15 Dec 2009 06:47 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:48:34 -0000, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: >Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: > >> I don't have opinions one way or the other on that one. My >> understanding is the PIC has control of maneouvres the aircraft >> undertakes. Sure they have to work as a team, but at the timeframes >> these decisions are taken, I can't see how it can come down to >> anything but the pilot's miscalculation. If he was ordered to do it, >> he also miscalculated by obeying those orders. > >Can he kick the pilot in the kidneys? I doubt he'd be able to lift his foot off the cockpit floor under those G's, let alone kick anything :-P >I'm quite surprised they didn't get lynched on the ground. Yeah - I noticed the guy walk up and pat him on that back and make sure he was OK. Not sure how to handle that. I think most people would have been in shock. It's not as if he did it deliberately. To be quite honest I'm amazed he managed to get out; things went wrong very low. Zero/zero systems obviously work very well these days. -- Kevin Gleeson
From: Grimly Curmudgeon on 18 Dec 2009 18:09
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Scraggy" <scraggy(a)abuseisgoodforyou.org.be> saying something like: >Funny you should mention that Sukhois, like what WUN wants, are quite good >at that. > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IT&hl=it&v=H64xyAfWGBU Grew some air. |