Fingertip and Formation Landings

[Clark Griswold]

Lemoine did a video on the Vance accident using the AIB summarizing the accident, worth a view:

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Clark Griswold

[Bender]

Lemoine did a video on the Vance accident using the AIB summarizing the accident, worth a view:
[/url]  

As a pilot, that was worthless...as some one that has no idea what the AIB is trying to say, perhaps there is value.

Before you start that, it’s 35 minutes of him reading you the AIB. Analysis is non-existent, conclusions are short and without backing.

Not worth a view for the all but the youngin’s (what I suppose I am not anymore)...although, man, I sure do remember those days!

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[Smokin]

I think we've been lucky that this is only the first fatality on formation landings in recent memory.  I stress recent memory, because I have zero doubt that there have been many in the past but our memories are short.  However, this is at least the third serious mishap (I think all class A's) during a formation takeoff or landing that I can think of off the top of my nugget during my career.  And I'm not a safety guy and don't pay particularly close attention to incidents during types/phases of flight that I don't do (like formation takeoffs/landings) so I'd be surprised if there were not others.

 

I understand your point (at least I think I do) that we need to train military pilots and formation takeoffs and landings are a difficult challenge to master.  The fact that the specific challenge doesn't necessarily translate to the CAF isn't relevant and I agree.  I remember drawing the fuel system diagram during a T-37 ground eval.  I couldn't even pretend to draw a fuel system diagram of the F-16.  Also, that T-37 diagram was complete BS and I bet only had a vague similarity to how the fuel system actually looks.  But, if you can't memorize a diagram and regurgitate it, you're probably going to have a hard time memorizing other stuff that you need to know by heart.  However, as I said earlier, the majority of fighter incidents happen on takeoff/landing phase or in close proximity to another jet.  The CAF doesn't require a formation takeoff/landing skill set, so we are teaching UPT students a useless skill set (just like drawing a pretend fuel system).  If we are testing their ability to learn and execute a skill set, why not test them on one that won't get them and their IP killed if they mess it up?

 

Fighter pilots occasionally die practicing BFM.  BFM is a vital skill-set that you can't exchange for a safer one.  It seriously sucks to lose lives, but that's an extremely unfortunate yet unavoidable part of our business.  Formation takeoffs and landings is the exact opposite of vital, so why lose lives for it?

[di1630]

 

Fighter pilots occasionally die practicing BFM.  BFM is a vital skill-set that you can't exchange for a safer one. 

Interesting statement.

 

If I said F-16’s shouldn’t practice BFM because the risk of a collision far outweighs the likelihood that it will see BFM based on history and future trends, what would you argue?

 

Keep in mind last USAF gun kill was 1975.

 

Isn’t it essentially the same? Form landings haven’t been needed in many years and probably won’t be in the future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Hawg15]

17 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Interesting statement.

 

If I said F-16’s shouldn’t practice BFM because the risk of a collision far outweighs the likelihood that it will see BFM based on history and future trends, what would you argue?

 

Keep in mind last USAF gun kill was 1975.

 

Isn’t it essentially the same? Form landings haven’t been needed in many years and probably won’t be in the future.

I’d argue that you need to watch the Navy F-18-Syrian Su engagement, and really learn anything about what ops were like in Syria. BFM isn’t just going for guns, and ROE often requires a visual identification and signaling on guard/headbutt before engaging. Getting close to, merging, and even shooting down not so friendly aircraft has been an occurrence in the very recent past. 

Now, while fun to do, I have never seen a legit necessity of a form landing. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Hawg15

[di1630]

I’d argue that you need to watch the Navy F-18-Syrian Su engagement, and really learn anything about what ops were like in Syria. BFM isn’t just going for guns, and ROE often requires a visual identification and signaling on guard/headbutt before engaging. Getting close to, merging, and even shooting down not so friendly aircraft has been an occurrence in the very recent past. 
Now, while fun to do, I have never seen a legit necessity of a form landing. 

Semi good points....however not BFM. Tactical intercepts...maybe.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Sprkt69]

13 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Semi good points....however not BFM. Tactical intercepts...maybe.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

At that point it was BFM. If you are looking outside maneuvering in relation to another aircraft, I’d argue you are past the intercept. 
 

Besides, you just let Fat Amy carry you around. 

[Negatory]

Yeah, I personally know multiple fighter pilots who have turned with other nations’ aircraft in the last decade.  Way more than I ever expected.

 

Thats what happens when the ROE is basically “you stay on this side of the river/point/airfield, they will stay over there.  Except sometimes they won’t.  But don’t let them not.  But don’t do anything about it if they do. Got it??”

Edited May 15, 2020 by brawnie

[hindsight2020]

1 hour ago, Sprkt69 said:

Besides, you just let Fat Amy carry you around. 

 

[Clark Griswold]

7 hours ago, Bender said:

As a pilot, that was worthless...as some one that has no idea what the AIB is trying to say, perhaps there is value.
Before you start that, it’s 35 minutes of him reading you the AIB. Analysis is non-existent, conclusions are short and without backing.
Not worth a view for the all but the youngin’s (what I suppose I am not anymore)...although, man, I sure do remember those days!
~Bendy
Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

 

Yeah, it is narrated for his general audience but I'm a simpleton as it explained to this knuckledragger what happened so I took it as good enough. 

To them. 

[di1630]

At that point it was BFM. If you are looking outside maneuvering in relation to another aircraft, I’d argue you are past the intercept. 
 
Besides, you just let Fat Amy carry you around. 

I get what you guys are saying, I was mostly playing devils advocate with the argument parallels but...

Now if dudes want to argue “turning” in relation to another aircraft is BFM, that’s an entirely different thread and I’m happy to engage.

I tend to believe that BFM is maneuvering to a WEZ to employ.

When I was in the MERV I had to turn in relation to a Syrian jet, I didn’t consider it anything other than Deconfliction.

Does a F-18 v SU-24 engagement cut it as justification for the combat importance of BFM? I’d argue no.

Last real turning I know of was in GW1 with Eagles v a Fulcrum and that was semi legit but 30 yrs ago.

Oh and I’m 100% for practicing BFM. I’ll never emphasize it like some advocate but the skills learned in BFM go FAR beyond training to employ weapons.







Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Hawg15]

9 hours ago, di1630 said:

Now if dudes want to argue “turning” in relation to another aircraft is BFM, that’s an entirely different thread and I’m happy to engage.

I tend to believe that BFM is maneuvering to a WEZ to employ.

When I was in the MERV I had to turn in relation to a Syrian jet, I didn’t consider it anything other than Deconfliction.

Does a F-18 v SU-24 engagement cut it as justification for the combat importance of BFM? I’d argue no.

Last real turning I know of was in GW1 with Eagles v a Fulcrum and that was semi legit but 30 yrs ago.

Oh and I’m 100% for practicing BFM. I’ll never emphasize it like some advocate but the skills learned in BFM go FAR beyond training to employ weapons.

It’s evident you haven’t seen the HUD tape, and don’t know of what went on in Syria. I doubt you’re going to find any fighter pilot actually doing the job from this century who will agree with you that merging with aircraft and maneuvering isn’t BFM. I also wasn’t aware you could take min range missile shots and not have maneuvered yourself into a WEZ. 

Maneuver in relation to the bandit is like one of the key aspects of BFM gospel, written everywhere, that is recited like a cult by air to air guys.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Hawg15

[di1630]

It’s evident you haven’t seen the HUD tape, and don’t know of what went on in Syria. I doubt you’re going to find any fighter pilot actually doing the job from this century who will agree with you that merging with aircraft and maneuvering isn’t BFM. I also wasn’t aware you could take min range missile shots and not have maneuvered yourself into a WEZ. 
Maneuver in relation to the bandit is like one of the key aspects of BFM gospel, written everywhere, that is recited like a cult by air to air guys.

Easy there Francis. No, disclaimer I haven’t seen the HUD. But let’s be real it’s a Su-22. If we justify BFM training for a super hornet shooting down 3rd gen fighter-bombers...that’s not a solid argument. I’d expect any IFF level trainee student to handle that mismatch of weapons/maneuverability.

It’s just like my opinion man. But maybe I’ll seek out that video. Cheers




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[zachbar]

Fatty driver here, so no opinion on the utility of form landings or fingertip or BFM, but the impression I got was that form landings were quietly taken away due to political pressure as much as a safety review. Anyone else hear the same rumors?

Also formation landings made me feel like I was really improving my stick and rudder skills as a T-6 IP, more than anything else I fly. I miss them!

[Danger41]

23 minutes ago, Hawg15 said:

It’s evident you haven’t seen the HUD tape, and don’t know of what went on in Syria. I doubt you’re going to find any fighter pilot actually doing the job from this century who will agree with you that merging with aircraft and maneuvering isn’t BFM. I also wasn’t aware you could take min range missile shots and not have maneuvered yourself into a WEZ. 

Maneuver in relation to the bandit is like one of the key aspects of BFM gospel, written everywhere, that is recited like a cult by air to air guys.

If you read his definition of what he considers BFM (maneuvering to a WEZ to employ) and the context of this thread (safety vice relevance of training), then why is control zone BFM given so much time and effort? Because of the mechanics and broad spectrum of skills it teaches. Same argument for continuing form approaches and landings.
 

And your earlier assertion that scores of people have died doing form landings is incorrect (https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/aetc/publication/aetch11-210/aetch11-210.pdf) according to Road to Wings. A quick Wikipedia search of F-15 accident history (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F-15_losses) is chocked full of dozens of accidents from BFM training that hasn’t been put to combat use in decades. I don’t think you’d advocate that all of that stops under the guise of safety. Even though BFM is demonstrably more dangerous than formation landings. 
 

 

[SurelySerious]

53 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Easy there Francis. No, disclaimer I haven’t seen the HUD. But let’s be real it’s a Su-22. If we justify BFM training for a super hornet shooting down 3rd gen fighter-bombers...that’s not a solid argument. I’d expect any IFF level trainee student to handle that mismatch of weapons/maneuverability.

It’s just like my opinion man. But maybe I’ll seek out that video. Cheers




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

When you do watch the vid, you’ll probably think the Navy needs a school to emphasize fighter maneuvering and dogfighting because they have become too reliant on a-a missiles. 
 

 

 

 

disclaimer: not qualified to throw spears but what if they had that...

[Hawg15]

34 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

If you read his definition of what he considers BFM (maneuvering to a WEZ to employ) and the context of this thread (safety vice relevance of training), then why is control zone BFM given so much time and effort? Because of the mechanics and broad spectrum of skills it teaches. Same argument for continuing form approaches and landings.

BFM teaches broad spectrum of skills and has been directly used in recent combat. Saying the last instance of BFM was a guns kill in Vietnam is complete bullshit. That’s more my issue. We have AETC warriors who have spent their whole career there and are decades disconnected with ops. Then they spread this BS to students and kill their interest in flying fighters because they have no understanding of any fighter community.

I never said scores of people have died doing them, I said that mishaps, some which involve fatalities, have and will continue to happen for no value to the end user from them (the CAF). It’s not 1970 where we are fine with crashing aircraft on a monthly basis, and AETC T-38s as a whole haven’t been doing too hot. 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Hawg15

[di1630]

BFM teaches broad spectrum of skills and has been directly used in recent combat. Saying the last instance of BFM was a guns kill in Vietnam is complete bullshit.

Agreed on the skills part, now back up your instances of BFM. I gave you in my opinion the most notable...F-15 turning with Fulcrums in GW1.

Are there others in a valid Air v Air war like we practice to that I’m missing?

Danger41 pretty much connected the dots: people arguing the non-importance of form land vs fatal accidents and then scoffing the lack of use of BFM vs accidents.

I’m just telling you to back up your argument man vs throwing insults at whoever the “AETC warriors are”

If it BS, make your case. I can admit if I’m wrong and not too old to learn.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Sprkt69]

2 hours ago, di1630 said:

Easy there Francis. No, disclaimer I haven’t seen the HUD. But let’s be real it’s a Su-22. If we justify BFM training for a super hornet shooting down 3rd gen fighter-bombers...that’s not a solid argument. I’d expect any IFF level trainee student to handle that mismatch of weapons/maneuverability.

It’s just like my opinion man. But maybe I’ll seek out that video. Cheers




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

If it was a Flanker, would that have made it BFM? Why does the platform you are trying to get to the control zone of matter? Still need to know how to do that. And your expectations of IFF grads are WAY higher than mine.

 

[Breckey]

When you do watch the vid, you’ll probably think the Navy needs a school to emphasize fighter maneuvering and dogfighting because they have become too reliant on a-a missiles. 
 
 
 
 
disclaimer: not qualified to throw spears but what if they had that...

There was a blog post on SIPR about it. Needless to say it was more complicated than being reliant on missiles.

[SurelySerious]

55 minutes ago, Breckey said:

3 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

When you do watch the vid, you’ll probably think the Navy needs a school to emphasize fighter maneuvering and dogfighting because they have become too reliant on a-a missiles. 
 
 
 
 
disclaimer: not qualified to throw spears but what if they had that...

There was a blog post on SIPR about it. Needless to say it was more complicated than being reliant on missiles.

Well aware, have actually read the data...just making a top gun joke. 

[di1630]

If it was a Flanker, would that have made it BFM? Why does the platform you are trying to get to the control zone of matter? Still need to know how to do that. And your expectations of IFF grads are WAY higher than mine.
 

So I honestly haven’t even been too interested in this but maybe I should check out the classified info. I’m familiar with the basics enough to know some eyebrows were raised.

To me there is a HUGE difference between BFM vs a SU-30 type air to air fighter that you merged with because you were out of missiles and the risk level was extreme so you had to BFM...and....

A 4+ gen fighter shooting down a A/G optimized 1960’s airframe design that could put up little to no fight and could have been shot down by any supporting fighter within many many miles.

Yeah, to me the difference is pretty big. Not pretty big but huge, as in Yuuuge.

Maybe I’m behind on my SU-22 threat knowledge and the ones In Syria are rocking advanced EW suites, countermeasures and aesa’s paired with only the most advanced all aspect IR missiles.

When I had to adjust my path to avoid one, I certainly didn’t piss my pants thinking the end was near with my finger on the stores Jett button.

Maybe I should have.

Not saying you guys are wrong. Not saying knock off BFM. I simply do not believe it’s as relevant in 2020 as some people think it is.

Now Stby reticle dive bombing on the other hand...who’s up for cranking some mils? Bring that sh-t back 100% fo sho. And glass cockpits are for p-ssies....and so is GPS...and dayalinks datalinks. You’ll thank me when we raid Beijing.





Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Sprkt69]

2 hours ago, di1630 said:

So I honestly haven’t even been too interested in this but maybe I should check out the classified info. I’m familiar with the basics enough to know some eyebrows were raised.

To me there is a HUGE difference between BFM vs a SU-30 type air to air fighter that you merged with because you were out of missiles and the risk level was extreme so you had to BFM...and....

A 4+ gen fighter shooting down a A/G optimized 1960’s airframe design that could put up little to no fight and could have been shot down by any supporting fighter within many many miles.

Yeah, to me the difference is pretty big. Not pretty big but huge, as in Yuuuge.

Maybe I’m behind on my SU-22 threat knowledge and the ones In Syria are rocking advanced EW suites, countermeasures and aesa’s paired with only the most advanced all aspect IR missiles.

When I had to adjust my path to avoid one, I certainly didn’t piss my pants thinking the end was near with my finger on the stores Jett button.

Maybe I should have.

Not saying you guys are wrong. Not saying knock off BFM. I simply do not believe it’s as relevant in 2020 as some people think it is.

Now Stby reticle dive bombing on the other hand...who’s up for cranking some mils? Bring that sh-t back 100% fo sho. And glass cockpits are for p-ssies....and so is GPS...and dayalinks datalinks. You’ll thank me when we raid Beijing.





Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Lemme guess, you always go 2 circle with the tanker too

[HuggyU2]

 

On 5/14/2020 at 6:34 PM, Smokin said:

I think we've been lucky that this is only the first fatality on formation landings in recent memory.  I stress recent memory, because I have zero doubt that there have been many in the past but our memories are short. 

In the T-38?  Pretty sure you're wrong.  And no, we haven't been "lucky".  Same way you haven't been "lucky" you haven't killed yourself in whatever you fly.  You've worked hard at being good at it.  

Irrespective, we have had a shitload more Class A's on single-ship no flap, single-engine, and normal touch and goes than we have EVER had on T-38 wing landings.  How about the dreaded T-38 single-engine go-around.  About as benign as it gets, right?  And not needed for an F-16 or F-35, right?  For you T-38 IP's out there, do you know why they brief it now the way that they do?  It's because in '87 or '88, we crashed a T-38 doing a SE Go at DLF.  It's not in Road to Wings because... miraculously... the jet hit the dirt, went through the VASI's, and came to rest in the caliche and weeds to the left of 13L... and everyone walked away.  The jet flew a few days later.  So stop SE Go's too?  After all, what are the odds it will happen for real... and if it does, that it will kill you??  

Maybe the problem is touch and go's, and everything should be a full stop like in the GA world.  That'll fix it.  

7 hours ago, Hawg15 said:

BFM teaches broad spectrum of skills

I'm sure it does!!!  As do other training events.  

6 hours ago, Sprkt69 said:

... your expectations of IFF grads are WAY higher than mine.

I think a lot of you have higher expectations of UPT grads than maybe you should.  And dumbing down the T-38 syllabus won't make it any better.  

What else should go away?  3G/90 degree wing work?  Close trail at 4G and 120 degrees?  Do you do those items in the CAF?  

How much four-ship wing work and close formation do y'all do in a $339M F-22?  

You want to know the closest times I've come to a midair?  Twice as #3 in an echelon turn where the other IP insisted that we fly 2G/60 deg... f'in dumb.  I could have put the palm of my hand on the belly of #2 one of those times.  Thankfully 4 wasn't that close when I split S'd out of formation.  

The other memorable instance... also TWICE... was sandbagging on IFF sorties with all IP's (no students).  And both times it was on BDA checks.  YGBSM!  When was the last time a BDA check found something really important?  So get rid of that too?  

Typing this out with a bottle of tequila has brought back some great memories.  And it's fun to watch you fighter/attack folks argue about the merits of BFM too.  Good night!

Edited May 16, 2020 by HuggyU2

[VMFA187]

11 hours ago, di1630 said:

Easy there Francis. No, disclaimer I haven’t seen the HUD. But let’s be real it’s a Su-22. If we justify BFM training for a super hornet shooting down 3rd gen fighter-bombers...that’s not a solid argument. I’d expect any IFF level trainee student to handle that mismatch of weapons/maneuverability.

It’s just like my opinion man. But maybe I’ll seek out that video. Cheers




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Go on SIPR and watch a piss-poor engagement from our pre-eminent A/A fighter against a Russian 4th gen fighter. It's embarrassing. So perhaps you're expecting too much from an IFF level training student.