Leaderboard

I ended up buying it, flew it home from Iowa the other week. Insurance $980/year, hangar $230/month, and however much MX ends up costing. Far from the best performer on the airfield but still faster than a J3 Cub, had to keep flaps down for this one to keep up with me.

So I have never met matmacwc in person. But hearing that we lost him made me cry. He was extremely kind and helpful, always answered my questions, reassured me to try again when I was ready to quit. I just got picked up as pilot on the Active duty UPT board, but I can’t stop reflecting on how great a person he was to take the time to talk to me when there was nothing in it for him. Since I can’t message him and say thank you, I am saying it out here - loud and public. If there is a soul and god, may yours rest in heaven! RIP sir!

Suit and Tie is fine.

ACSC taught me that a growler is a strike asset with bombs. Those bastards have been holding their cards close this whole time! Thanks for the learning AU!

IMO your assessment of the condition of this micro-fleet is hyperbolic. The only tangent where I somewhat part company with @HuggyU2 is the seat argument. Retrofitting a measly orphaned detachment of tutors with basic martin bakers, a seat already afforded to and serviced by the Canadians on their entire CT-156 fleet (our T-6 II) is not an economic indignity. They chose to cheap out. That said, I'm not suggesting they need Hornets, at all. I am curious as to what you think should be in order here. All that said, the pilot punched out too late for the old seats, the video is clear as day on that. There was plenty of time to punch out in the envelope of the old seat; that was a decision-making error, that wasn't on the airplane. Unfortunately it cost the pax her life, and maybe the pilot's medical ability to strap into another airplane again, maybe even walk. So I split the baby on this one. Are the snowbirds toast? They don't have to be. It's a matter of financial appetite as to whether or not they keep their show team. If they're that tight that they can't either put two dozen MB seats on those spam cans, or alternatively spare half a detachment of CT-155s to keep the show going, then I guess they don't need the recruitment shtick all that badly. Time will tell.

Pyro was my student (Cadet, ERAU ROTC Prescott) and I returned for his commissioning 23 years ago. He stood out as one of the brightest, kindest and most engaging people I'd ever known. Over the years, we stayed in touch and visited often; the last time being at his final role call at his AZ ANG unit last year. Remarkable but not surprising, the outpouring of admiration, respect and affection displayed by the standing room only crowd, many who'd traveled great distances, and included 2 General officers. An inspirational, larger-than-life type, he became a mentor to my son, taking him up in the -16 sim, giving him a tour of the flight line and ultimately guidance and advice throughout ROTC and UPT. We were able to attend the beautiful ceremony for Matt, and as expected, countless friends and fellow admirers came from all corners to pay their respects. Matt may have been a student at one point, but I probably learned more from him. Nickel on the grass

The heads of the major pilot unions are speaking at a conference today. If there is any interest in hearing what they are saying to people outside the industry I can pass along some notes.

The pilot shortage in the AF and Navy won't exist much longer if there are no options on the backend for pilots nearing the end of their ADSC other than staying in. I suspect it is going to get much harder but I wouldn't worry about it. Focus on what you can control, get your scores up, get more hours in, more work experience, stay physically fit, etc. Not worth stressing on factors you can't control.

Update: FPP published a review of the crash footage with Robert Mitchell (former Snowbird pilot/commander interviewed in the above link): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl7qOY2-o_Y

@sartoreabram @CavGuy @Lisenbyjacob the Columbus 135 unit application window has been extended and updated on Bogidope. Thanks for the responses.

Related and informative to the subject of the Snowbirds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFba_vsL6Os Breakdown of the interview: TABLE OF CONTENTS: 0:04:43 - Guest introduction 0:08:31 - About Snowbirds 0:10:29 - About their aeroplanes 0:20:36 - Logistics 0:26:42 - Social skills 0:29:55 - Self-criticism and team work 0:33:46 - Typical demonstration program 0:35:45 - Escape Manuveres 0:39:15 - Crucial qualities of a military pilot 0:41:34 - Joining Snowbirds, progressing, staying focused 0:47:53 - Role of the lead 0:52:02 - The accident 0:56:09 - Replacement and responsibility 0:59:25 - Other performances aside from airshows 1:01:23 - Debriefs and self-improvement Listeners' Questions 1:03:12 - Particular trimming for flying in formations 1:05:06 - Possible replacements for CT-114 Tutor 1:07:06 - Official approvals of the aerobatics program 1:08:26 - Costs involved 1:09:25 - What it's like to fly the Tutor compared to more modern aircraft 1:10:32 - How long does it take a new member to learn flying demo 1:12:28 - Which other aerobatics team would he like to fly with 1:14:06 - Source of spare parts Wrap Up 1:15:57 - Future plans (aviation in film) 1:20:21 - The facts are not out but the CT-114 is NOT inherently unsafe, antiquated or inappropriate for it's role as a demonstration aircraft.

One of the best shows to watch while drinking at the squadron bar is a CSO and a NAV arguing about who was the most important/toughest/coolest job between the two. And how the other guy couldn’t handle it... Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Unfortunately for many that just won't ever be a realistic option. That said, if you can make it happen, it makes this job such an awesome gig. I live an hour from the employee lot, 8 minutes from the Guard and 30-45 minutes from all of my family...better lucky than good! It's why I would much rather go to our lowest paying category to stay in my current base than commute to stay on higher paying categories. What 2020 said above is spot on. I'd much rather be furloughed than be forced to commute to be a plug on a NB in NYC. I don't expect it will, but if it came to that, I'd probably take a voluntary furlough. Between part-time pay, my rentals and other side income opportunities, I'd rather not commute to sit in a crashpad in NYC for a year. It's events like this that illustrate the words I pass to all my buddies who think they'll ever go to airlines. If you're considering the airlines, do it ASAP, don't screw around for years making a decision. A few friends scoffed and said "the airlines are not for them," and even gave me a rash of shit about going to the airlines. Fast forward 3 years and suddenly they decided the airlines, in fact, ARE for them...and they're suddenly not giving me shit lol. So now they're 3,000 number junior to me and looking at either commuting to NYC or possibly being furloughed. I'm expecting to just be bumped back to a narrow body in my current base. Of course some delayed to get closer to an AGR pension, which I get to an extent. But this situation will be a boon for those who were just outside 5 years to go to an AGR pension.

PreContact, I'd like to see a post in YOUR words, not an eight-year old article posted without comment. Can you summarize? I am very aware of the RCAF and the Department of National Defence's discussions about the future of the team for the past decade How does THIS mishap relate to YOUR position that they should be grounded? Nickel on the grass for Jenn.

Wanna fly a formation landing still but big blue cut you off?

Perpetual war is not the bug, it's the feature. The mission is pork barrel baby, we're just the patsies. There's a few people in life I'd take a bullet for, none of them currently populate our 3 branches of federal government.

You'll want that done. Most units like to hire folks whose records can at least promote to major. Without PDE, you'll be virtually unable to promote. Caveat: I'm active duty. I know folks on the reserve/guard side and this is what I've heard from them.

The air force is also looking at the purchase of a new trainer for fighter pilots, according to a report in late June in the U.S. publication Flightglobal. No cost was provided for that potential purchase. Dan Dempsey, a former Snowbirds commanding officer and team leader, said the air force’s decision to start moving on a replacement aircraft was welcome news. “This is a very, very positive development,” said Mr. Dempsey, a retired lieutenant colonel. He said there are always going to be budget pressures on the Canadian Forces, but he pointed out that a new aircraft will last the team for another 30 or 40 years. “Yes, it’s not a hard-core combat capability, but it is an essential, and in my mind integral, component of the Canadian Forces because recruiting and public relations are always going to be vital.” But spending $755-million on new aircraft for the Snowbirds is an extravagance, says Steve Staples of the Rideau Institute, the Ottawa research and communications group. “The Snowbirds, while entertaining, are a luxury at a time when people are losing their jobs, the economy is hurting and the government is in debt,” said Mr. Staples, who argues that too much is being spent on the military. “It’s a huge cost for air show entertainment.” The air force has put in place a maintenance contract that will cover the Snowbirds aircraft until 2020. In February the government awarded a contract to IMP Aerospace in Halifax to maintain the military’s fleet of 25 CT-114 Tutor aircraft, the RCAF email to Postmedia News said. The three-year contract is for routine preventive maintenance and repairs, with the work taking place at Canadian Forces Base Trenton, Ont. After that the contract has the provision to be renewed annually over seven years, each time for a one-year period. The planes have been in the Canadian Forces inventory since 1963 and have been used by the Snowbirds team since 1971. In the past the air force has examined leasing aircraft for the Snowbirds. It also looked at, but rejected, a suggestion to substitute the CF-18 fighter aircraft for the Tutors. Using CF-18s would increase the ability of the Snowbirds to perform around the world but reduce their availability for smaller venues in Canada that have runways too short to accommodate the jets, the air force concluded. In addition, the CF-18s would be 20 times more expensive to operate than the Tutors. From 2016: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snowbirds-tutor-jets-replacement-1.3689876 Military studies extending life of Snowbird aircraft 20 years past retirement The military's aging fleet of Tutor Snowbird jets could remain in flight until 2030 — two decades past their scheduled retirement date, according to documents obtained by CBC News under an Access to Information request. The Royal Canadian Air Force show team, the Snowbirds, perform the diamond formation pass over the Peace Tower during Canada Day celebrations on Parliament Hill on July 1, 2016. (Justin Tang/Canadian Press) The military's aging fleet of Tutor jets flown by the Snowbirds demonstration team could remain in flight until 2030 — two decades past the scheduled retirement date. Documents obtained by CBC News under an Access to Information request show the Department of National Defence is studying the feasibility of keeping the Canadian-built CT-114 Tutors in operation until 2025 and 2030, despite some "significant concerns" about the aircraft. CBC camera flies with Snowbirds Fighter jet debate rages Sajjan consults on CF-18 replacement The aerobatic show team thrills spectators by swirling the skies in precise formations, demonstrating the superior skills of pilots commanding the planes. But there have also been serious safety incidents in the past, ranging from seatbelt malfunctions to fiery fatal crashes. The 1960s-era jets were set to retire in 2010, but that date was extended 10 years, despite an internal 2003 report that warned of escalating technical, safety and financial risks and urged the fleet be replaced "immediately." Little progress in replacement More than 13 years later, there has been little progress in procuring new planes. A report from the fall of 2014 cleared the fleet as "technically airworthy," but noted "significant" concerns, including some caused by financial restraints. "Repairs have been reduced to bare bones (one year support) necessitating to put main items in repairable reserves and depleting our stock levels to nothing," it reads, adding this has the effect of creating "more robbing actions and additional maintenance costs." It also noted a "lag in data analysis/reporting" was causing the Snowbirds 431 Squadron to continue flying aircraft "with an unknown condition." A briefing note for the air force, also released under Access to Information, said the department is carrying out a robust life-expectancy extension study to "validate" the option of using the Tutors beyond 2020 to ensure an "uninterrupted" capacity. "Maintaining a military air demonstration team is considered to be a government-mandated requirement," said the memo, written when the Conservatives were in office. Pushing the retirement planes to 2030 would make some of them roughly 67 years old at that point. The life-extension study is expected to be complete by the end of 2016, but the most recent Defence Acquisition Guide, a public listing of anticipated procurements, suggests the contract award and replacement delivery could be between 2026 and 2036. Tutor 'extremely reliable' Retired lieutenant-colonel Dan Dempsey, a former Snowbird pilot who has written a book about Canada's military air show history, said the Tutors have proven extremely reliable over the years. The planes, used as training aircraft until 2000, are tested by technical experts who leave "no stones unturned" to ensure structural integrity, he said. While Dempsey would have liked to see earlier steps to replace the fleet — and have it in place for Canada's 150th birthday next year — he suggested 2025 is a "reasonable limit" as budget cuts pushed the procurement behind other operational priorities. "I'm not surprised this has happened. It's a little disappointing, but I think the main thing is that everybody recognizes the importance of the Snowbirds to the country, to the Canadian Forces, to the RCAF," he said. "And therefore the desire is to keep these flying as long as necessary until a new aircraft can be purchased, and I think that's a very positive thing." Kim Nossal, a professor with the Queen's University Centre for International and Defence Policy, sees no problem with extending the lifespan, since most accidents involving Tutors have resulted from risky manoeuvres or pilot error, not aging parts. "As long as the aircraft has updates and refits, you can extend the life of an airframe however long you like," he said. "The real risk for the demonstration team is what they end up doing — the kind of performances they put on." Snowbirds showcase never-before-seen footage from belly of plane 0:58 Retired colonel Paul Maillet, a former RCAF planner, says the concern is less about safety than value for money. He doesn't believe the demonstration team adds to the operational capacity of the military other than to entertain and help recruit — functions other military planes could fulfil, he said. Scrap Snowbirds? At a time of tight budgets, he questions if the Snowbirds should remain a funding priority. "You start to cut non-essential things to fund essential things," he said. "Basically, it's recruiting, it's public relations stuff.… and does the taxpayer want to pay for that?" According to figures provided by National Defence, hourly operational costs are $14,350 and the total annual cost to run the squadron is $4.3 million. Retired lieutenant-general Lloyd Campbell, former chief of the air staff, said the fleet is relatively economical and he believes Canadians would be disappointed if the Snowbirds were grounded. "They're a tremendously unifying national organization that Canadians find appealing," he said. "They're a great recruiting tool, but the whole question of should we keep them, can we afford them … that is really less military in nature and more political and national in scope. Is this something Canadians want? If so, how do we make it affordable, how do we make it safe?" A spokeswoman for Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said the Liberal government remains committed to the Snowbirds, noting the life-expectancy study will help guide the decision-making process for a replacement fleet. "We have full confidence in the RCAF's ability to ensure aircraft reliability going forward, while our government will continue to build Canada's defence capabilities to ensure our men and women in uniform have safe, reliable equipment," said Renée Filiatrault. 'Safe and effective' aircraft A RCAF spokesman said the number of aircraft grounded due to safety or maintenance concerns varies from day to day and is managed by maintenance crews to meet airworthiness standards. "The CT-114 is a safe and effective aircraft," Maj. Scott Spurr said in an email. "DND is dedicated to ensuring that the fleet will remain effective until the fleet is retired. The Snowbirds, and the entire RCAF, maintains a robust flight safety and airworthiness program to ensure the safety of the public, as well as our personnel and aircraft." The famous Snowbirds touch down at the Cold Lake Airshow to show off their stuff.0:58