Snowbirds Crash

[Ryder1587]

Snowbirds jet down around an hour ago it seems.  The video is awful to watch , doesn’t look like chutes had time to deploy.  

[Gazmo]

Ugh. Looks like they recognized power loss and tried to get some altitude.

[Skitzo]

Ugh. Looks like they recognized power loss and tried to get some altitude.

Followed by a stall/spin

[di1630]

https://www.nsnews.com/photo-galleries/video-galleries/snowbird-crashes-in-kamloops-1.24136795


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[precontact]

Time to ground them...Too many crashes with an outdated airplane...sad.

[herkbum]

‪

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Clayton Bigsby]

Their fallen member was their PAO.

Pretty detailed article there.

🍺

Edited May 18, 2020 by Clayton Bigsby

[HuggyU2]

Clayton, were you at Hangar 24 AirFest in 2018?  Jenn was the PAO for the CF-18 team back then.  She was a hoot... just a lot of fun and energy.  

2 hours ago, precontact said:

Time to ground them...Too many crashes with an outdated airplane...sad.

OK!.  Let's just jump on the knee-jerk train and take action before any causal information is known.  Certainly not an example of "thoughtful response".  

Edited May 18, 2020 by HuggyU2

[precontact]

36 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:

Clayton, were you at Hangar 24 AirFest in 2018?  Jenn was the PAO for the CF-18 team back then.  She was a hoot... just a lot of fun and energy.  

OK!.  Let's just jump on the knee-jerk train and take action before any causal information is known.  Certainly not an example of "thoughtful response".  

From 2012: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-forces-spending-755m-to-replace-snowbird-jets

Canadian Forces spending $755M to replace Snowbird jets

The need to replace the Snowbirds comes at a time when the military is making deep cuts and its leadership is putting emphasis on ensuring combat readiness
Postmedia News

August 16, 2012
11:38 PM EDT

OTTAWA — The Canadian Forces is planning to spend $755-million on a new fleet of aircraft for its Snowbirds aerobatics team, according to documents obtained by Postmedia News.The Snowbirds will need new planes by 2020 and the Royal Canadian Air Force is now examining various options.But the need to replace the Snowbirds comes at a time when the military is making deep cuts and its leadership is putting emphasis on ensuring combat readiness. The coming years will also see the start of multi-billion-dollar equipment projects such as those to acquire new fighter jets and ships.

The aerobatic aviation team is seen as a key public relations tool for the military. But some in the Canadian Forces have privately questioned spending money on the Snowbirds since it does not directly contribute combat capabilities to the air force.

The Snowbirds fleet of CT-114 Tutors will be retired by December 2020, according to the Royal Canadian Air Force. “Based on this planned retirement date, the RCAF is currently investigating options that would address the continued provision of a Canadian air demonstration capability,” stated an email from the air force.

A report produced for then-associate minister of defence Julian Fantino in October 2011 listed the budget for the “Snowbird Aircraft Replacement Project” at $755-million. It did not outline how many planes would be purchased for that amount. The documents were obtained by Postmedia News through the Access to Information law.

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 

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.

It’s a huge cost for air show entertainment 

“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

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by precontact

[HuggyU2]

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.

Edited May 18, 2020 by HuggyU2

[hindsight2020]

Those seats tho...... 

You gotta get out before stall or sink develops, especially on these non-zero-zero dino seats. That was a wicked belated punch for those seats (assuming stock seats for the Tutor). They even got one full turn as the airplane post-stall-gyrated. Yikes. Envelopes are paltry as it is on them. I know people kvetch about RCP vis on the martin bakers on the 38, but I love working with that seat on the C model, just as I did on the T-6.

Condolences to the affected families. RIP.

[HuggyU2]

Hindsight, I completely get your point.  

But if I were to get the offer, I'd jump in a Snowbirds jet tomorrow without a thought.  

Same with the T-38.  

You can always "buy" more capable technology... but at some point it becomes diminishing returns.  

Accelerating through 400' AGL at 60+ degrees nose low is a tough parameter for any seat.  

And there sure are a lot of high performance aerobatic aircraft that don't have the luxury of an ejection seat.  

Edited May 18, 2020 by HuggyU2

[raimius]

🍺

Very sad to hear...

[precontact]

Summary is as follows: Tudor jet was identified as needing replacement almost 10 years ago. Substandard technology, including limited ejection seat capability. Canada has slow-rolled its replacement, placing undue risk to aircrew and others. Jets have a lifespan, this one is past its effective timeframe.

[HuggyU2]

Uh huh. 

[hindsight2020]

3 hours ago, precontact said:

Summary is as follows: Tudor jet was identified as needing replacement almost 10 years ago. Substandard technology, including limited ejection seat capability. Canada has slow-rolled its replacement, placing undue risk to aircrew and others. Jets have a lifespan, this one is past its effective timeframe.

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.

 

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by hindsight2020
grammerz no bueno

[HuggyU2]

Well stated. 

Edited May 19, 2020 by HuggyU2

[precontact]

Would it be acceptable for the Thunderbirds to fly around T-37s these days when it has been out of active service for over 10 years (like the Tutor)? It has served them well, but the risk/reward today isn't justifiable when other newer options are out there. CF-18s, BAe Hawks, etc would be better choices.

[Sprkt69]

At what cost? You speak like there is unlimited budget and assets

[Clark Griswold]

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.  

[Sim]

Engine trouble-failure on the departure end .... options - A) Straight ahead into the drink. B) Gain max alt and punch out. C) Turn back to the field.  

[Clark Griswold]

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

 

[M2]

 

[M2]

Posted on Facebook...

Quote

The Snowbirds will be returning to 15 Wing Moose Jaw, Sask. on Monday, May 25 at approximately 2:15 p.m (local time). The Squadron is still grieving deeply and asks for privacy upon their arrival. Citizens that wish to show their support for the team are encouraged to make creative displays or drawing large hearts with sidewalk chalk for the team to see from the sky.

It is important to note Capt Casey died inspiring people across the country to stay home, keep their distance, and stay safe while keeping their spirits high. At the request of Capt Casey’s family, those who wish to show their support for the team are asked to do so in a manner that respects physical distancing guidelines.

 

[Stitch]

For Jenn