C-17 Down on Elmendorf

[Skitzo]

Just got the SIB breifing today, to reiterate you need to demand this from your safety shop. Good presentation, sobering.

[Butters]

Full AIB is available now.

AIB

[Longhorn15]

Recently saw the full animation with CVR...chilling. Any flyer that thinks this isn't relevant to their platform needs to consider a new profession.

[flyguy2181]

The Air Force Crimes is now mentioning by name who was flying the airplane, who was the copilot and who the SO was. Talk about a harsh opening line....."xxxx flew C-17 Globemasters beyond their limits to entertain crowds, routinely ignoring cockpit stall warnings as he maneuvered the aircraft in and out of danger. The 34-year-old demonstration pilot was teaching others to do the same...."

I think it's a shame that the AF crimes just did. Words cannot express my anger.

I'm sorry for the families that have to read stuff like that

Edited December 18, 2010 by flyboy2181

[ExBoneOSO]

The Air Force Crimes is now mentioning by name who was flying the airplane, who was the copilot and who the SO was. Talk about a harsh opening line....."xxxx flew C-17 Globemasters beyond their limits to entertain crowds, routinely ignoring cockpit stall warnings as he maneuvered the aircraft in and out of danger. The 34-year-old demonstration pilot was teaching others to do the same...."

I think it's a shame that the AF crimes just did. Words cannot express my anger.

I'm sorry for the families that have to read stuff like that

Was that info SIB-only data? If it was, then the AF Times was way out of line printing privileged info (not that the AF Times isn't usually out of line...)

[Guest Alarm Red]

Was that info SIB-only data? If it was, then the AF Times was way out of line printing privileged info (not that the AF Times isn't usually out of line...)

Since safety messages do not contain names of aircrew at all, ever, then I think it's safe to say that it's not "SIB-only data" as you refer to it. Second, it sounds like you are confused in thinking that the entirety of a safety message is privileged information. Contact your safety officer for a refresher if it's unclear to you where safety privilege applies.

The Air Force Crimes is now mentioning by name who was flying the airplane, who was the copilot and who the SO was. Talk about a harsh opening line....."xxxx flew C-17 Globemasters beyond their limits to entertain crowds, routinely ignoring cockpit stall warnings as he maneuvered the aircraft in and out of danger. The 34-year-old demonstration pilot was teaching others to do the same...."

I think it's a shame that the AF crimes just did. Words cannot express my anger.

I'm sorry for the families that have to read stuff like that

I'm no fan of the AF Times, but I also never bought into the idea that someone gets a pass on their mistakes if they die because of them. The guy messed up and it wound up costing four lives. You're not exempt from having your actions scrutinized just because they were ultimately causal to your own death. If one or all of them had survived but the circumstances of the accident were the same, the tone of this discussion would be wildly different.

Ultimately, it directly concerns the taxpayers who owned the jet, thus the public report. There are also lessons all of us can learn from, hence the safety report.

We're all professionals and should be able to maintain respect for fallen comrades while preserving accountability and discussing safety lessons.

[Butters]

Dear Air Force Times,

YOU SUCK!

Seems these dickheads used their super detective skills to determine who was sitting where from the flying histories listed in the AIB. Then a few short poorly written paragraphs later they state that

The aircraft slammed nose first into the ground at 9,000 feet per second.

HOLY SHIT, 9,000 ft/sec that is just about 6,136.3636364 mi/h.

Awesome journalism.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Butters

[Truman08]

Dear Air Force Times,

YOU SUCK!

I'd agree. I thought that the article was written with poor tact. Yes, it's important that aircrews study this mishap and learn from the mistakes that were made, but the AF Times article was horribly written. Another reason why anything I read from them, I always take it with a grain of salt. It's almost like they're purposely making an attempt to lay blame in this accident. Yes, the public accident report clearly states the circumstances as to how and why the mishap occurred, but when AF Times takes it to the "next level" as to make it a point to say exactly who sat where, I think that it was unnecessary. Just my $0.02

Truman08

[Steve Davies]

Was that info SIB-only data? If it was, then the AF Times was way out of line printing privileged info (not that the AF Times isn't usually out of line...)

No. Based on the information in the AIB, it's very easy to deduce who was sitting where and who was actually at the controls.

While I would not have 'named and shamed' in the way that the AF Times has, I also think that guys here have to be pragmatic about the fact that it is going to happen.

[AZwildcat]

Air Force Times

[GearMonkey]

AIB report makes me wonder if there were any close calls at previous airshows.

[Skitzo]

Wouldn't be suprised if Lt Katie Rolling wrote this article.

[Butters]

AIB report makes me wonder if there were any close calls at previous airshows.

Yes

Watch 20100719162905.mpg

From: mfreyhol | July 21, 2010 | 2,046 views

Now google other C-17 demo profiles and compare.

Edited December 19, 2010 by Butters

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

Yes

Watch 20100719162905.mpg

From: mfreyhol | July 21, 2010 | 2,046 views

Now google other C-17 demo profiles and compare.

oh wow... the pitch on that video looks even steeper than the mishap video.

[HuggyU2]

oh wow... the pitch on that video looks even steeper than the mishap video.

If we're looking at the same video, the pitch is pretty level. What are you talking about?

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

If we're looking at the same video, the pitch is pretty level. What are you talking about?

I was referring to the initial pitch after rotation. They push over and look to be about completely stalled

[DeHavilland]

The AF Times may suck and they can't do math very well, but the report stands on its own merits. A guy knowingly disregarded the rules, rules meant to protect all and he took 3 others to their deaths. Harsh, but those are the facts. Who else did he train with "his" technique? Guys that give lip service to the rules rarely kill just themselves. I have seen many military accidents over the years where a pilot did not stop until he killed himself and other innocent passengers and crew. Tragic loss, but if everyone can learn from this and just one "free lancer" is stopped, some good can come from it.

[zrooster99]

The AF Times may suck and they can't do math very well, but the report stands on its own merits. A guy knowingly disregarded the rules, rules meant to protect all and he took 3 others to their deaths. Harsh, but those are the facts. Who else did he train with "his" technique? Guys that give lip service to the rules rarely kill just themselves. I have seen many military accidents over the years where a pilot did not stop until he killed himself and other innocent passengers and crew. Tragic loss, but if everyone can learn from this and just one "free lancer" is stopped, some good can come from it.

There's a process for that-that doesn't include the AF Times. Those that need to learn from it already have access to the pertinent information. This story was totally gratuitous and to me constitutes gossip, or journalistic rubbernecking. It's people who know jack shit about flying editorializing for an audience who also knows jack shit about it.

Edit: Sorry, meant to say "the fucking AF Times".

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

There's a process for that-that doesn't include the AF Times. Those that need to learn from it already have access to the pertinent information. This story was totally gratuitous and to me constitutes gossip, or journalistic rubbernecking. It's people who know jack shit about flying editorializing for an audience who also knows jack shit about it.

Edit: Sorry, meant to say "the fucking AF Times".

the whole article stunk of a tone of "rogue pilot gets what's coming to him". It was very poorly written and borderline disrespectful. I understand the guy screwed up and killed himself and three others; but he still has a family that is grieving, and dragging his name through the mud for the sake of making him look bad does nothing but add to their grief.

[arg]

I'm wondering what was said in the crew beief.

[Butters]

I'm wondering what was said in the crew beief.

Why? If you can't tell what was said during the crew brief after reading all 34 pages of the AIB you really don't need to know.

[B52gator]

As much as I hate to say it, especially because I knew the pilot in question, it was only a matter of time. After seeing videos like this, it is obvious it wasn't the first time the jet was flown like this.

https://www.youtube.com/user/mfreyhol#p/a/u/1/mEXeluarrqo

EDIT: I'm an idiot today, can't seem to figure out how to embed the video.

While the accident lies on the AC, I don't think leadership should get away unscathed. There is no way they didn't know about this (this inicident is eerily similar to Bud and Czar 52). I'm not a pilot, never was, and I have been out (STS) for two years...so my expertise is limited and my opinion doesn' t mean dick, but it doesn't take a genius to realize that this sh!t was way illegal and was eventually going to get someone killed. At the same time, if this had been going on for awhile, it is on the other crewmembers to speak up. In the Czar 52 incident, several Navs and Cos spoke up about Bud but were ignored by leadership and called "pussies" by him. As a RN, I had to push an issue up the chain due to repeated blatant violations of B-52 regs by a certain pilot. On more than one occasion, I thought we were really going to fall out of the sky (stalls and overbanks). I tried to keep it at the buddy level talking to the pilot in question, but to no avail. So I had to push it up the chain. Call me a ######, a rat, whatever, but there is no need for that kind of sh!t in a non-combat situation. Lives are on the line...not just the dudes in the plane. This incident is a vital learning lesson for ALL aviators. If you haven't yet, highly recommend you read the Czar 52 report "Darker Shades of Blue." Very good read about epic fails at all levels. Be safe and smart out there fellas.

https://www.crm-devel...ue/darkblue.htm

Edited December 19, 2010 by b52gator

[TrainerModel]

9000 ft/sec (AF times number) = 5332kts, 6136mph, or Mach 8.1 (STD)

...retards

[sky_king]

9000 ft/sec (AF times number) = 5332kts, 6136mph, or Mach 8.1 (STD)

...retards

It's possible. I saw it on wikileaks.

[Chuck17]

As much as I hate to say it, especially because I knew the pilot in question, it was only a matter of time. After seeing videos like this, it is obvious it wasn't the first time the jet was flown like this.

https://www.youtube.com/user/mfreyhol#p/a/u/1/mEXeluarrqo

While the accident lies on the AC, I don't think leadership should get away unscathed. There is no way they didn't know about this (this inicident is eerily similar to Bud and Czar 52).

Opinions vary.

Id like to know how far you think it should go? Who should get the axe? Sq/CC? After all it was his people, right? But which Sq/CC? If you read the report you will note that it was an ANG training line, with 3 out of 4 ANG crewmembers. So should the ANG Sq/CC get the axe? Or the active duty Sq/CC? Or both?

What about OGV? OGV was the OPR for the airshow program. Do you can the Chief of OGV? What if Chief of OGV at Elmendorf is a fighter guy? Do you fire him? Or do you limit it to the C-17 Stan-Eval pilot at OGV? Do you then fire the active duty Chief of C-17 Stan-Eval because the ANG one is dead? How much is enough?

Lets see how deep this rabbit hole goes...

Do you fire the OG/CC? After all, OGV works for him. Oh wait, there are TWO OG/CC's involved! Do you fire the ANG one too? Is it a matter of oversight of programs or of iron? The OG was scheduled to fly on this very flight and jumped off when an F-22 took the barrier that afternoon. How close of a call was that?! But that's lack of oversight I guess huh? The guy's not dead, so lets find him at fault and fire him too...

It was a USAF 3rd Wing asset that was destroyed... so do you fire the Active Duty Wg/CC? Or do you fire both the ANG Wg/CC and the Active Duty one? One is a BGen, the other just got notified of his pending promotion. Does that factor in?

Go further... The Wg had an ASEV last year. Was the Airshow program inspected? Regardless of the answer to that question, do you fire the inspectors at PACAF and AMC? How much blood is enough?

I had a discussion this week that I ended abruptly with an old friend of mine over this matter. He is a SE dude at a MAF superbase and is of the opinion that the entire leadership chain needs to be removed. Really? Should we expect that? How far is the USAF going to take it?

Don't lose the forest for the trees... and don't think for a minute that this couldn't happen at any MAF base or otherwise. History has proven that not to be the case.

C17

Edited December 20, 2010 by Chuck17