C-17 Down on Elmendorf

[B52gator]

Opinions vary.

Id like to know how far you think in 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

Chuck,

All great points and I don't disagree..how far do you take it? You're in the know far more than I, what is your opinion? Does it stop with the aircrew? You can't burn everyone in the chain, I know that. My only point is could someone have prevented it from happening? Could a fellow crewdog, supervisor, etc have stepped in and stopped what was going on? Again, my opinion only, but if leadership knowingly ignored what was going on, are they not just as responsible? If it was a free-lance/cowboy thing that was done without prior knowledge, then fine, let it be. But rules and regs are there for a reason and it is on leadership to ensure that the operators are following them...not trying to "put on a good show." I am fully aware this can happen anywhere and isn't limited to a specific airframe or base. It is a sh!tty situation and I feel for the C-17 community and the AF as a whole.

Edited December 19, 2010 by b52gator

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

Chuck,

All great points and I don't disagree..how far do you take it? You're in the know far more than I, what is your opinion? Does it stop with the aircrew? You can't burn everyone in the chain, I know that. My only point is could someone have prevented it from happening? Could a fellow crewdog, supervisor, etc have stepped in and stopped what was going on? Again, my opinion only, but if leadership knowingly ignored what was going on, are they not just as responsible? If it was a free-lance/cowboy thing that was done without prior knowledge, then fine, let it be. But rules and regs are there for a reason and it is on leadership to ensure that the operators are following them...not trying to "put on a good show." I am fully aware this can happen anywhere and isn't limited to a specific airframe or base. It is a sh!tty situation and I feel for the C-17 community and the AF as a whole.

i think the real question is "who knew". Anyone who knew and did nothing is definitely liable for the mishap and should be fired. Then there's the second, more difficult question of "who SHOULD HAVE known?". I think the OG and the WG/CC probably fall under that, since they are ultimately responsible for their airplanes. Unless there's some systematic problem in the whole unit, rarely does a single aircraft mishap rise further than the wing level.

Of course this is all speculation on my part, I'm nothing more than a spectator trying to learn lessons to apply to my own flying as far as this is concerned.

[Chuck17]

i think the real question is "who knew"....

Then there's the second, more difficult question of "who SHOULD HAVE known?".

1. That question is addressed in both reports...

2. Your second question is the real issue. The issue of oversight shows that the buck stops somewhere. My issue, and the reason I'm engaging you guys on this, is that there is a defined process that has determined who was at fault. If the AF decides that any of the leadership has to go, so be it. We ALL serve at the behest of our commanders. But every un-informed bag-wearer on the block calling for blood and the replacement of all leadership en-mass is simply reactionary.

I have pointed out several of the issues being dealt with right now - information that was in both reports, but information that dudes would rather not read, preferring instead to place blame on an entire leadership chain or on the squadron or base as a whole. There is much more to this matter than is present in the AIB or SIB. There is a process. It's working. But wholesale leadership changes aren't the answer... just the tradition.

Chuck

Edited December 19, 2010 by Chuck17

[ClearedHot]

1. That question is addressed in both reports...

2. Your second question is the real issue. The issue of oversight shows that the buck stops somewhere. My issue, and the reason I'm engaging you guys on this, is that there is a defined process that has determined who was at fault. If the AF decides that any of the leadership has to go, so be it. We ALL serve at the behest of our commanders. But every un-informed bag-wearer on the block calling for blood and the replacement of all leadership en-mass is simply reactionary.

I have pointed out several of the issues being dealt with right now - information that was in both reports, but information that dudes would rather not read, preferring instead to place blame on an entire leadership chain or on the squadron or base as a whole. There is much more to this matter than is present in the AIB or SIB. There is a process. It's working. But wholesale leadership changes aren't the answer... just the tradition.

Chuck

You understand the local situation better than us but given some of the other videos of this same guy that are out there, there should be some leadership changes. Such a tremendous waste and a lot of people had to know what was going on.

[GoAround]

I think the OG and the WG/CC probably fall under that, since they are ultimately responsible for their airplanes. Unless there's some systematic problem in the whole unit, rarely does a single aircraft mishap rise further than the wing level.

I agree...so I'm surprised that the WG/CC got selected for Brig Gen this past week in the wake of the C-17 and F-22 mishaps.

[Danny Noonin]

For those calling for the chain of command to be fired for the capital crime called "they should have known"...be careful what you wish for. This can be exactly the kind of knee jerk reaction that can ruin a unit/wing/base. Good luck to you with the next guy who will surely be in your chili all the time, doesn't trust anyone, and treats everyone like children because he doesnt want anyone to ever say that he didn't know absolutely everything going on in the entire wing.

Edited December 20, 2010 by Danny Noonin

[PirateAF]

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...

Do you think this was a result of the blended force makeup that's in place at Elmo (TFI)? Perhaps with the mixed crew, one chain of leadership relied on the other one to provide proper oversight and vice versa.

"Because he was an accomplished aviator, leadership allowed him to operated independently with little or no oversight." (AIB, pg. 25)

I'd like to think that the OG/CC, had he flown with the crew, would have called knock it off on the first turn. But then again, who knows.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

Do you think this was a result of the blended force makeup that's in place at Elmo (TFI)? Perhaps with the mixed crew, one chain of leadership relied on the other one to provide proper oversight and vice versa.

"Because he was an accomplished aviator, leadership allowed him to operated independently with little or no oversight." (AIB, pg. 25)

I'd like to think that the OG/CC, had he flown with the crew, would have called knock it off on the first turn. But then again, who knows.

nothing happens in a vacuum. There's no way I'm going to believe that if the OG had been on that jet it would have been his first idea of what they were doing, especially with videos on youtube. The EXTENT may not have been known, but there's no way that it was some surprise that the airshow profile was being overflown.

[fire4effect]

Been a while since I've been on. Very busy...Who knew, what knew? all questions after the fact. We all do things in the air AND ground that CAN get us killed. Usually we get away with it. Is it worth the risk. Not usually in an Airshow. Learn the lesson and try to remember ALL the kids lost in A-stan on a day to day basis. Most of them weren't practicing for an airshow at the time.

Thanks

[Skitzo]

Better question than who is to blame in leadership is what is the personality defect that causes people to believe they are superior to the laws of physics. That notes, warnings and cautions do not apply. As aviators we are typically type a personalities, we are not adverse to risk we accept it every day we go do our job. What causes otherwise smart, intelligent and skilled aviators to simply split with their ability to be rational? Is it related to incrementalism? Well 60 degrees worked last time even with the stall warning going off, why not try for 65? Is it a climate of "we bend the rules to get the mission done?" I guess I'm just speculating because we will never know.

[Guest JustALoad]

I've been following this thread since the mishap, as a guest, and decided to register for this post to possibly clear up some misconceptions, or maybe just to add my $.02 with my close personal insight to the crew. I've flown probably 200 hours with the MP, at least that many with the MSO, and a hell of a lot more with the MLM. They were all close personal and professional acquaintances. To give you an idea of the kind of guy the MP was: He flew that jet 99.9% of the time in a VERY conservative manner. He was a big fan of the "tactical ILS." During low levels, tac arrivals, and tac departures, he was one of the less aggressive guys I flew with (certainly less aggressive than some Altus IP's). He was however, a perfectionist to a fault. He wanted to fly the absolutely perfect demo profile. In this, is where he unfortunately deviated from procedures, and cut it too close. With AIB only information, there is no one thing that caused this mishap (on the technical side). If he had called for slats retract when he was ready for it, rather than prebriefing speeds for uncommanded retraction, then this may not have happened. If he had extended just a little farther on the base leg, it might not have happened, whatever... this could be debated to death- I have no idea why he thought that full rudder inputs and a skidding turn was a good idea... but I digress. As far as the stall warning: I have flown with a few WIC guys who (previous to the mishap) had no problem with the stall warning... "it's just a warning of an approach to a stall." Some holier than thou C-17 guys who seemed incredulous to the idea of flying in the stall warning really piss me off. A couple days before the mishap, I asked the MSO which profile they were going to perform. My family was in town, and I wanted to be able to explain to them what was happening, and what would be next. I don't remember my exact words, but is was something to the effect of "gonna take it right up to the stall warning?" (I made the comment in a joking manner). The MSO responded "oh, we hear that through the whole thing." There is (or was) obviously some confusion or sense of complacency with hearing bitchin betty (which I personally believe is a systemic issue, not a localized one).

Back to the MP... he was one of the most respected, calm, unassuming, intelligent, and humble guys I knew. One story that was told at the memorial (but I had heard previously) was that on a trip through Hickam, he and the crew were having a few drinks at either the Hale Koa, or the Shorebird. On that big sidewalk on the beach, a purse snatcher took off with some lady's purse. The MP jumped over the fence, and took off after the guy. He tackled him, and held him down till the police got there... a real class act.

As far as leadership... the MP was so respected, and flying outside of the box was SO out of character for the MP, I honestly don't think they thought anything of it. He was THE SME for the C-17 in our unit. He was regarded as incredibly intelligent (had a physics degree.) That something like what happened and they way the profile was flown was not even remotely expected. No one came to leadership to complain about previous practice sessions that I'm aware of. Should they have been more proactive? possibly. I won't argue that in hindsight... but arguing in hindsight is always easier than ahead of time isn't it?

Edited December 20, 2010 by JustALoad

[Skitzo]

JustALoad

Thanks for sharing, appreciate the candor.

[Guest JustALoad]

Please, for those of you who fly airplanes, perhaps the fate of Sitka 43 will not be in vain... please watch this video...

[Almansur]

From Flight International...

c17.pdf

[Hacker]

I love the logic of 2 incidents in 16 years indicating some kind of fault in the culture.

The author clearly doesn't have any concept of military incident rates from any time outside of recent history. The USAF operates safer and tighter now than at any point in the history of aviation.

[Toro]

Sidebar airshow discussion has been moved

[WeMeantWell]

Better question than who is to blame in leadership is what is the personality defect that causes people to believe they are superior to the laws of physics. That notes, warnings and cautions do not apply. As aviators we are typically type a personalities, we are not adverse to risk we accept it every day we go do our job.

Interesting thought, I have witnessed myself and others make illogical decisions many a times. I don't see it as a defect, but, just human. Every Aviator knows there about 1,000 things that might kill us at any one instance and 10x as many rules governing those things; and somehow we prioritize them and make very important decisions continuously. How many jobs require you to apply the knowledge of an encyclopedia continuously? The entire reason we make airplanes more automated is because we aren't as good as we think we are. The reasons we train, practice, and take checkrides, is because we sometimes forget those priorities.

What I think happens to aviators is they "get away with it", for some period of time, or they hear about someone else "getting away with it". (15+years the AF was flying the jet without a flying death/Hull loss? only 2 ground deaths I think?). I don't think it comes down to arrogance, or superior-ness to physics, I think it is logical, rational-thought. If I do something and don't get burned, not much going to stop me from doing it again. I think it starts with small-rules and builds, "hey I forgot my 3-hour out call (dating myself I am sure), but I didn't get in trouble... guess we don't have to worry about that anymore" and then it grows... "last time we pulled the GPWS circuit breaker and everything was fine". I think some people fly something once and believe it to be safe, or they hear about someone's exagerations at a bar. Even though all the rules, law, and physics are there making it dangerous.

FWIW, my little experience with Airshows (been awhile), the OG/CC better know what is going on. I remember trying to fly a Demo and had to bring all the regs governing it to his office; we sat down and went over all of them, completely, then we called A3V to make sure we had it right. We then mapped out a training plan, a certification plan and ultimately a ride-along with him or his deputy... We (He) found a lot of things that were being done wrong and (He)fixed the process. The OG/CC knew it was HIS butt on the line and he had to have complete trust we wouldn't bone it. Knowing we had to fly it with him got us on our A-game. Been a few years, but I think max bank was 45? I went to like 48 for a few seconds... He de-briefed me for like 10 minutes later on it. If he doesn't have the time to make a Demo HIS top priority, then he shouldn't let one happen.

Hopefully we can all learn from and remember this, this culture will repeat itself...again... sooner than you think.

[Guest]

FWIW, my little experience with Airshows (been awhile), the OG/CC better know what is going on...If he doesn't have the time to make a Demo HIS top priority, then he shouldn't let one happen.

Shack.

[Danny Noonin]

If he doesn't have the time to make a Demo HIS top priority, then he shouldn't let one happen.

What you talkin' bout Willis?

It looks to me like you said the OG's top priority should be the demo. It also looks to me that it garnered a "shack" from Rainman.

I truly hope I just can't read, because if any USAF OG's top priority is the airshow demo, then we should all just defect to france now and make it that much easier to surrender in the next war. We have lost our fukking minds.

An ops group commander's top priority should be mission accomplishment. His number 2 priority should be safe operations. Period dot. The demo (other than the safety aspect) should be nowhere near the top of the list.

[TacAirCoug]

I think what he's saying is if the OG can't give a demo the attention it warrants, then he shouldn't let it happen.

[Guest]

What you talkin' bout Willis?

It looks to me like you said the OG's top priority should be the demo. It also looks to me that it garnered a "shack" from Rainman.

I truly hope I just can't read, because if any USAF OG's top priority is the airshow demo, then we should all just defect to france now and make it that much easier to surrender in the next war. We have lost our fukking minds.

An ops group commander's top priority should be mission accomplishment. His number 2 priority should be safe operations. Period dot. The demo (other than the safety aspect) should be nowhere near the top of the list.

Perspective my friend. The airshow is the mission on airshow day.

If there's going to be a demo for an airshow it should be a top priority for attention from the OG. Since airshow is the mission and the ops portion of that mission is the demo then the OG has to pay attention to it. The OG needs to keep the demo between his 10 and 2 from the initial request to engine shutdown. I'm not saying the OG needs to cover his ass since he will be bounced if something happens. I'm saying it is the full responsibility of the OG to make sure the demo is properly approved from HHQ, planned, practiced and flown. The Wg/CC is counting on him for that.

Pretty simple really.

[amcflyboy]

Perspective my friend. The airshow is the mission on airshow day.

If there's going to be a demo for an airshow it should be a top priority for attention from the OG. Since airshow is the mission and the ops portion of that mission is the demo then the OG has to pay attention to it. The OG needs to keep the demo between his 10 and 2 from the initial request to engine shutdown. I'm not saying the OG needs to cover his ass since he will be bounced if something happens. I'm saying it is the full responsibility of the OG to make sure the demo is properly approved from HHQ, planned, practiced and flown. The Wg/CC is counting on him for that.

Pretty simple really.

"2" on that one!

[Danny Noonin]

Well at least I don't have to defect to france now

[Herk Driver]

Perspective my friend. The airshow is the mission on airshow day.

If there's going to be a demo for an airshow it should be a top priority for attention from the OG. Since airshow is the mission and the ops portion of that mission is the demo then the OG has to pay attention to it. The OG needs to keep the demo between his 10 and 2 from the initial request to engine shutdown. I'm not saying the OG needs to cover his ass since he will be bounced if something happens. I'm saying it is the full responsibility of the OG to make sure the demo is properly approved from HHQ, planned, practiced and flown. The Wg/CC is counting on him for that.

Pretty simple really.

BINGO!

[WeMeantWell]

An ops group commander's top priority should be mission accomplishment. His number 2 priority should be safe operations. Period dot. The demo (other than the safety aspect) should be nowhere near the top of the list.

Agreed, the mission to accomplish at an airshow IS safe operations; anytime a higher-than-normal risk mission is happening, that should be his top priority... They are not that "routine" and they warrant the extra attention. Obviously it is not just CYA for him, but responsibility of national assests: the aircrew and the plane.