Two F-18E pilots permanently grounded after Nov 7th Georgia Tech football game low flyover - Page 5

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Two F-18E pilots permanently grounded after Nov 7th Georgia Tech football game low flyover (Page 5 of 11)

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:17:55 PM EDT

[#1]

Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:19:31 PM EDT

[#2]

Discipline. If you don't have it, you shouldn't be a fighter pilot.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:19:35 PM EDT

[#3]

The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:23:01 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Your perspective is lacking. It has been well-known throughout Naval Aviation for a few years now that, if you fuck up a flyover, you're going to be a in a HEAP of trouble. This was a known quantity when they briefed it and performed the flyover.

Being "busted down in rank" is an enlisted punishment. Losing your wings is an officer punishment. The wings are a warfare qualification pin. If you demonstrate that you are not worthy of that warfare qualification through poor judgment, you lose it.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:23:52 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLPC-4Mj3N8

I was at a game in 2001 where the F-18 had to pull up OUT of the stadium. Navy stadium is shaped like a horseshoe.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:24:42 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Warfare transition"???

To what...subs...surface...SeaBees...JAG...GURL? No community manager is going to take them. They are spoiled goods. Their careers are over.

IP

That or intel. It's where all the grounded aviators go.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:27:55 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLPC-4Mj3N8

I was at a game in 2001 where the F-18 had to pull up OUT of the stadium. Navy stadium is shaped like a horseshoe.

This seems to be a Navy issue, I was at the Navy vs Boston College game in Charlotte a couple of years ago and remember thinking the flyover was REALLY low.

I'm certainly not saying the Air Force isn't capable of stupidity, I think its just a product of the way we each do business. The USAF a lot more prohibitive.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:29:36 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Were they told 1,000ft altitude or 1,000ft above ground level?

GT stadium is at 1,050ft right?

eta: HA! look what I found:

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/low-flyover-lands-two-oceana-pilots-hot-water

The board found that they chose to fly using barometric altitude measurements (feet above sea level) instead of radar altitude measurements (feet above ground level) but failed to adjust their low-altitude warning systems accordingly.

By the time the alarm sounded, the pilots didn't have enough time to correct the mistake.

Although the pilots "inexplicably failed to recognize" how low they were flying, the board concluded, their lapse was neither intentional nor malicious. It recommended putting both pilots on probation, an outcome endorsed and forwarded up multiple levels of the chain of command.

its one of those metric-instead-of-standard type situations.

and to continue on with my previous post; hey mr. flag rank:

Matthew 7:2 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

The Admiral who "judged" them, has been there, done that, and been "judged" by the same regulations he held them to for 33 years.

He is a test pilot, a nuclear power qualified officer, and certainly one of the top Naval Aviators in the field.

He's earned the right to make the "judgement" he did.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:29:36 PM EDT

[#9]

Originally
Posted By KA3B:

It's not that hard people.

You are a LCDR who is on your
department head tour, probably selected to become a commanding officer
some time soon, your only responsibility for a fly-over is to follow the
rules and don't fuck up in public.

Follow the rules an E1 can
understand, don't fly below 1,000 feet.

Pretty cut and dry.

Quoted:

Without commenting on what these guys in the F-18s did what some of you may not realize is that although there are certain restrictions that apply to Airshows and Flybys/Flyovers these restrictions are sometimes trivial. I say that because as a retired aviator I can't tell you how many airshows/flybys/flyovers I've done at below the minimum altitude. The difference is something called a "Waiver!" What most of you don't realize is that most airshows operate on waivers otherwise we wouldn't see the maneuvers we see that awe the public. The FAA has set some minimum limitations for aviators operating in general environments. Each branch of the service also have their own set of rules. Most airshows have FAA/military waivers to allow some of the maneuvers we see.

If you're gonna trash the F-18 guys then trash them for not getting a waiver for doing what they did, not by doing something that many aviators have and will continue doing. Unsafe? Horse hockey!! Did they break the rules? Yep...sure did but only because they possibly failed to get a waiver(which they may have not gotten anyway).

These two comments right here sum up this whole fiasco.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:30:46 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLPC-4Mj3N8

I was at a game in 2001 where the F-18 had to pull up OUT of the stadium. Navy stadium is shaped like a horseshoe.

Yup. There's a youtube of that one somewhere, shot from a camera on top of the stadium. The jet is almost below the camera.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:32:21 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's not that hard people.

You are a LCDR who is on your department head tour, probably selected to become a commanding officer some time soon, your only responsibility for a fly-over is to follow the rules and don't fuck up in public.

Follow the rules an E1 can understand, don't fly below 1,000 feet.

Pretty cut and dry.

Quoted:
Without commenting on what these guys in the F-18s did what some of you may not realize is that although there are certain restrictions that apply to Airshows and Flybys/Flyovers these restrictions are sometimes trivial. I say that because as a retired aviator I can't tell you how many airshows/flybys/flyovers I've done at below the minimum altitude. The difference is something called a "Waiver!" What most of you don't realize is that most airshows operate on waivers otherwise we wouldn't see the maneuvers we see that awe the public. The FAA has set some minimum limitations for aviators operating in general environments. Each branch of the service also have their own set of rules. Most airshows have FAA/military waivers to allow some of the maneuvers we see.

If you're gonna trash the F-18 guys then trash them for not getting a waiver for doing what they did, not by doing something that many aviators have and will continue doing. Unsafe? Horse hockey!! Did they break the rules? Yep...sure did but only because they possibly failed to get a waiver(which they may have not gotten anyway).

These two comments right here sum up this whole fiasco.

They would never have gotten the waiver for a flyby over a stadium like that.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:34:50 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLPC-4Mj3N8

I was at a game in 2001 where the F-18 had to pull up OUT of the stadium. Navy stadium is shaped like a horseshoe.

There was vid on youtube of one just like that, probably the same game. I can't find it anymore. But the pilot literally has to pull up to not clip the top of the stadium and he splits two light trees.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:34:58 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Officers don't get "busted a rank" –– their loss of their wings is their punishment, and it will cost them far more over the course of the rest of their lives than being reduced in rank would. ETA: I see V21 beat me to it.

Their permanent grounding was perfectly appropriate –– and I think I'll take the word of Commander, Naval Air Forces, Atlantic, over that of a mechanic.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:38:10 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
In the other thread linked near the top of this thread, it appears they claimed their altimeters were fucked up or something to that line. Then video shows up, and the Boss Man calls bullshit. So they lied to their C.O., and got busted.

Still don't think they shoulda had their wings pulled.

maybe if the hadn't lied to their CO to cover their known violation of the rules they would have gotten away with less punishment

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:40:26 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Officers don't get "busted a rank" –– their loss of their wings is their punishment, and it will cost them far more over the course of the rest of their lives than being reduced in rank would. ETA: I see V21 beat me to it.

Their permanent grounding was perfectly appropriate –– and I think I'll take the word of Commander, Naval Air Forces, Atlantic, over that of a mechanic.

Chief,

I think I must change my position

You are correct

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:41:17 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
In the other thread linked near the top of this thread, it appears they claimed their altimeters were fucked up or something to that line. Then video shows up, and the Boss Man calls bullshit. So they lied to their C.O., and got busted.

Still don't think they shoulda had their wings pulled.

maybe if the hadn't lied to their CO to cover their known violation of the rules they would have gotten away with less punishment

If that, in fact, happened, you may be right. Fucking up and taking responsibility for it is rarely punished as harshly as covering up your misdeeds –– at least in my experience in the surface and specwar Navy.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:42:14 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Officers don't get "busted a rank" –– their loss of their wings is their punishment, and it will cost them far more over the course of the rest of their lives than being reduced in rank would. ETA: I see V21 beat me to it.

Their permanent grounding was perfectly appropriate –– and I think I'll take the word of Commander, Naval Air Forces, Atlantic, over that of a mechanic.

Chief,

I think I must change my position

You are correct

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:43:08 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
In the other thread linked near the top of this thread, it appears they claimed their altimeters were fucked up or something to that line. Then video shows up, and the Boss Man calls bullshit. So they lied to their C.O., and got busted.

Still don't think they shoulda had their wings pulled.

maybe if the hadn't lied to their CO to cover their known violation of the rules they would have gotten away with less punishment

If that, in fact, happened, you may be right. Fucking up and taking responsibility for it is rarely punished as harshly as covering up your misdeeds –– at least in my experience in the surface and specwar Navy.

Same is true of Naval Aviation. Often, the harshest punishment you get (if you 'fess up right away), is a stern talking-to and being put in hack for a few days. That's normally enough for most pilots to unfuck their behavior.

That said, if you lie to your Skipper, and an Admiral wants a piece of your ass... you're toast.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:51:43 PM EDT

[#19]

Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:52:48 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I live right outside Oceana NAS. I see this over my house all the time in the landing pattern. I don't see the problem. The Navy hasn't crashed one here in a few decades I think. The flyby was awesome.

And why was Oceana a candidate on the BRAC list? Why were the examining alternatives? Could it be because of the risk to the people below in the areas that weren't built up and now are?

How many folks do you reckon have been killed in car crashes within 1 mile of the Oceana gate in the last 30 years? How many folks here have had planes fall on them in the same locale in the same time frame? Where's the greater risk?

You're missing the point. It's not about risk relative to other activities. It's about what risks you need to take with an aircraft vs what risks you don't need to take with an aircraft

The landing pattern is the only time you can descend below 1000 feet AGL, where there is no people or obstacles your minimum altitude is 500 AGL uncontrolled airspace for egs....in VFR controlled airspace you must be at least 1000 AGL and 500 above any obstacle...VFR Visual Flight Rules...AGL Above Ground Level

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:56:04 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

Yea...he certainly ended his career on a sour note. Glad the young man was not killed.

From the teacher.

I remember that setting the altimeter was one of my pre-flight checks. Is it with the fancy new radar altimeters too?

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:57:11 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Every jet fly over I've seen is basically a competition to see who can get the lowest.

Look at this one from the 2006 TCU Navy game. That is crazy low.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLPC-4Mj3N8

Hahaha. You managed to dupe within a thread. See page 2.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:57:44 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

Yea...he certainly ended his career on a sour note. Glad the young man was not killed.

From the teacher.

I remember that setting the altimeter was one of my pre-flight checks. Is it with the fancy new radar altimeters too?

Mostly, you just turn it on, BIT it and it either passes or doesn't.

Posted: 3/19/2010 3:58:10 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

would 500 feet really make a difference?

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:00:36 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Stupid Is Quite High In this Thread

I am an ex FA-18 Mechanic and I see an awful lot
of armchair wannabes in here without a clue.

The permanent grounding was way over the top and frankly stupid.

I do feel they should have been fined for the stunt.

Possibly even busted a rank for disobeying a direct order.

.

Your perspective is lacking. It has been well-known throughout Naval Aviation for a few years now that, if you fuck up a flyover, you're going to be a in a HEAP of trouble. This was a known quantity when they briefed it and performed the flyover.

Being "busted down in rank" is an enlisted punishment. Losing your wings is an officer punishment. The wings are a warfare qualification pin. If you demonstrate that you are not worthy of that warfare qualification through poor judgment, you lose it.

Did not know this until now. That being the case...game over. Those boyz are screwed.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:01:49 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

I think so at especially airshow altitudes

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:03:35 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

would 500 feet really make a difference?

FAA rules, even as a civilian you will lose your ticket

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:07:21 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Some of you think that setting an altimeter is not that bad of a fuck-up... and that shit never happens with professional pilots in the vicinity of fly-bys and air-shows...

Let's review:

THIS is the result of a mis-set altimeter by an ELITE Air Force airshow pilot. Be thankful there is not a stadium of 50k people underneath him.

http://digilander.libero.it/karenfuxia/tbird.jpg

Yea...he certainly ended his career on a sour note. Glad the young man was not killed.

From the teacher.

I remember that setting the altimeter was one of my pre-flight checks. Is it with the fancy new radar altimeters too?

This guy is still flying and was promoted below the zone to LtCol and went on to win the CSAF Individual Safety Award link

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:07:50 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Warfare transition"???

To what...subs...surface...SeaBees...JAG...GURL? No community manager is going to take them. They are spoiled goods. Their careers are over.

IP

Meh...after flying a fighter, I doubt they'd be happy flying a desk or sitting in the back of a EP-3.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:12:40 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Warfare transition"???

To what...subs...surface...SeaBees...JAG...GURL? No community manager is going to take them. They are spoiled goods. Their careers are over.

IP

Meh...after flying a fighter, I doubt they'd be happy flying a desk or sitting in the back of a EP-3.

They never are...

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:14:41 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

what's the difference between a few hundred feet and 1,000 feet?

i honestly don't know and it's a serious question

Again...not an aviator...

But what's the difference between driving at 35 and 65? Reaction time, stopping distance...the magnitude of the danger goes up considerably with more speed. At 1,000 feet if the absolute worst happens the pilot has more room to take measures that don't result in a plane smashing into a crowd full of people.

I'm not an aviator...but I do know a thing or two about small arms training. That's another endeavor with a high amount of inherent risk and the potential to turn lethal in an instant. There are situations when it is appropriate to have people downrange of your weapon, but in most situations it's a stupid idea. There's a reason why there's no live ammo allowed in the classroom. There's a reason why there's no weapon handling behind the line. There's a reason why the range has to go cold when the appointed instructor isn't there. There's a reason why you reholster in a slow and deliberate manner.

Sometimes those range rules are a pain in the neck...but you know what? If followed they present disaster.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:19:45 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

And if those two F-18's had connected and crashed into a crowded football stadium you'd be looking at hundreds dead and thousands burned.

So not the 10K dead number everyone is throwing around?

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:25:42 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:

And if those two F-18's had connected and crashed into a crowded football stadium you'd be looking at hundreds dead and thousands burned.

So not the 10K dead number everyone is throwing around?

it could go either way really...

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:27:40 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:

And if those two F-18's had connected and crashed into a crowded football stadium you'd be looking at hundreds dead and thousands burned.

So not the 10K dead number everyone is throwing around?

Take a look at your average 50k stadium. Now take a 25 ton aircraft full of jet fuel and crash it into one side... now watch that side collapse onto all the people milling about... now watch the people being trampled to death as the living try to escape being burned alive. I'd say 10k is conservative.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:32:36 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

A tongue lashing, or a temporary grounding I could understand, but not a career-ender like this. I'd gladly take the risk of sitting in that crowd of people with those highly-trained pilots flying over that close, wouldn't concern me in the least.

You're probably right about the people dying thing tho, I don't really put this under the realm of "crazy" though, but, exactly as it is, that's my opinion, which means absolutely nothing

Again, no one is saying the pilots can't hack it... airplanes break. If an airplane broke the wrong way during a flyby and turned 10k people into a smoking hole, you would NEVER hear the end of the incompetence of the risk-taking cowboys we call pilots.

I retired CAG I used to work for had a flameout on takeoff in an F-8U Crusader flying out of Atsugi Japan in 1964. He ejected...but his plane augured in at a metal factory in Kamisouyagi and killed a bunch of locals. He felt bad about that in the '90s. He went on to a distinguished career flying Phantoms over Vietnam.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:35:26 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:

A tongue lashing, or a temporary grounding I could understand, but not a career-ender like this. I'd gladly take the risk of sitting in that crowd of people with those highly-trained pilots flying over that close, wouldn't concern me in the least.

You're probably right about the people dying thing tho, I don't really put this under the realm of "crazy" though, but, exactly as it is, that's my opinion, which means absolutely nothing

Again, no one is saying the pilots can't hack it... airplanes break. If an airplane broke the wrong way during a flyby and turned 10k people into a smoking hole, you would NEVER hear the end of the incompetence of the risk-taking cowboys we call pilots.

I retired CAG I used to work for had a flameout on takeoff in an F-8U Crusader flying out of Atsugi Japan in 1964. He ejected...but his plane augured in at a metal factory in Kamisouyagi and killed a bunch of locals. He felt bad about that in the '90s. He went on to a distinguished career flying Phantoms over Vietnam.

Big difference between taking off (routine non-showey event) and a fly-by performed to make spectators oooohhh and aaaaahhhh.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:35:50 PM EDT

[#37]

I am just surprise they fly around topped off for a flyby. I watched about 5 superhornets depart KBUR for the rose bowl flyby and return after it, so I figured they were fueled appropriately for a short mission.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:37:34 PM EDT

[#38]

It's just a shame all the way around. I've been under a lot of flyovers, and even when they are thousands of feet up it's still a thrill.

For the record I'm not arguing with the Navy's disciplinary action.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:39:00 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Without commenting on what these guys in the F-18s did what some of you may not realize is that although there are certain restrictions that apply to Airshows and Flybys/Flyovers these restrictions are sometimes trivial. I say that because as a retired aviator I can't tell you how many airshows/flybys/flyovers I've done at below the minimum altitude. The difference is something called a "Waiver!" What most of you don't realize is that most airshows operate on waivers otherwise we wouldn't see the maneuvers we see that awe the public. The FAA has set some minimum limitations for aviators operating in general environments. Each branch of the service also have their own set of rules. Most airshows have FAA/military waivers to allow some of the maneuvers we see.

If you're gonna trash the F-18 guys then trash them for not getting a waiver for doing what they did, not by doing something that many aviators have and will continue doing. Unsafe? Horse hockey!! Did they break the rules? Yep...sure did but only because they possibly failed to get a waiver(which they may have not gotten anyway).

aha .... I knew it!

A piece of paper DOES make it safer!

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:41:34 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Were they told 1,000ft altitude or 1,000ft above ground level?

GT stadium is at 1,050ft right?

eta: HA! look what I found:

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/low-flyover-lands-two-oceana-pilots-hot-water

The board found that they chose to fly using barometric altitude measurements (feet above sea level) instead of radar altitude measurements (feet above ground level) but failed to adjust their low-altitude warning systems accordingly.

By the time the alarm sounded, the pilots didn't have enough time to correct the mistake.

Although the pilots "inexplicably failed to recognize" how low they were flying, the board concluded, their lapse was neither intentional nor malicious. It recommended putting both pilots on probation, an outcome endorsed and forwarded up multiple levels of the chain of command.

its one of those metric-instead-of-standard type situations.

and to continue on with my previous post; hey mr. flag rank:

Matthew 7:2 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

The Admiral who "judged" them, has been there, done that, and been "judged" by the same regulations he held them to for 33 years.

He is a test pilot, a nuclear power qualified officer, and certainly one of the top Naval Aviators in the field.

He's earned the right to make the "judgement" he did.

you know, you're right.

I shouldn't judge him on ONE action. After all he may have an otherwise spotless record.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:43:39 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
I am just surprise they fly around topped off for a flyby. I watched about 5 superhornets depart KBUR for the rose bowl flyby and return after it, so I figured they were fueled appropriately for a short mission.

Fueled appropriately is "full."

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:44:20 PM EDT

[#42]

They should have had their reflective belts on.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:44:54 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Were they told 1,000ft altitude or 1,000ft above ground level?

GT stadium is at 1,050ft right?

eta: HA! look what I found:

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/low-flyover-lands-two-oceana-pilots-hot-water

The board found that they chose to fly using barometric altitude measurements (feet above sea level) instead of radar altitude measurements (feet above ground level) but failed to adjust their low-altitude warning systems accordingly.

By the time the alarm sounded, the pilots didn't have enough time to correct the mistake.

Although the pilots "inexplicably failed to recognize" how low they were flying, the board concluded, their lapse was neither intentional nor malicious. It recommended putting both pilots on probation, an outcome endorsed and forwarded up multiple levels of the chain of command.

its one of those metric-instead-of-standard type situations.

and to continue on with my previous post; hey mr. flag rank:

Matthew 7:2 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

The Admiral who "judged" them, has been there, done that, and been "judged" by the same regulations he held them to for 33 years.

He is a test pilot, a nuclear power qualified officer, and certainly one of the top Naval Aviators in the field.

He's earned the right to make the "judgement" he did.

you know, you're right.

I shouldn't judge him on ONE action. After all he may have an otherwise spotless record.

In order to make it where he did, his record is probably completely spotless. I'm sure you're trying to be funny, but the humour escapes me.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:49:02 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Without commenting on what these guys in the F-18s did what some of you may not realize is that although there are certain restrictions that apply to Airshows and Flybys/Flyovers these restrictions are sometimes trivial. I say that because as a retired aviator I can't tell you how many airshows/flybys/flyovers I've done at below the minimum altitude. The difference is something called a "Waiver!" What most of you don't realize is that most airshows operate on waivers otherwise we wouldn't see the maneuvers we see that awe the public. The FAA has set some minimum limitations for aviators operating in general environments. Each branch of the service also have their own set of rules. Most airshows have FAA/military waivers to allow some of the maneuvers we see.

If you're gonna trash the F-18 guys then trash them for not getting a waiver for doing what they did, not by doing something that many aviators have and will continue doing. Unsafe? Horse hockey!! Did they break the rules? Yep...sure did but only because they possibly failed to get a waiver(which they may have not gotten anyway).

aha .... I knew it!

A piece of paper DOES make it safer!

No it doesn't. It's the deliberation that goes into submitting said waiver and the deliberation, and controls, that go into issuing said waiver. Think about the whole process, not the object itself.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:50:07 PM EDT

[#45]

My house gets buzzed by F/A-18's all the time (Blue Angel members live in the neighborhood).

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:50:57 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Were they told 1,000ft altitude or 1,000ft above ground level?

GT stadium is at 1,050ft right?

eta: HA! look what I found:

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/low-flyover-lands-two-oceana-pilots-hot-water

The board found that they chose to fly using barometric altitude measurements (feet above sea level) instead of radar altitude measurements (feet above ground level) but failed to adjust their low-altitude warning systems accordingly.

By the time the alarm sounded, the pilots didn't have enough time to correct the mistake.

Although the pilots "inexplicably failed to recognize" how low they were flying, the board concluded, their lapse was neither intentional nor malicious. It recommended putting both pilots on probation, an outcome endorsed and forwarded up multiple levels of the chain of command.

its one of those metric-instead-of-standard type situations.

and to continue on with my previous post; hey mr. flag rank:

Matthew 7:2 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

The Admiral who "judged" them, has been there, done that, and been "judged" by the same regulations he held them to for 33 years.

He is a test pilot, a nuclear power qualified officer, and certainly one of the top Naval Aviators in the field.

He's earned the right to make the "judgement" he did.

you know, you're right.

I shouldn't judge him on ONE action. After all he may have an otherwise spotless record.

You know what? If you don't want to be judged by one action or decision, particularly major ones that defy orders or safety protocols, and you aren't ready to reap the consequences of that action or decision, then don't become a Naval Officer. If you are ready for that responsibility and accountability, then welcome aboard. Otherwise, don't let the brow skirt hit you where the good lord split you.

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:51:10 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Were they told 1,000ft altitude or 1,000ft above ground level?

GT stadium is at 1,050ft right?

eta: HA! look what I found:

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/low-flyover-lands-two-oceana-pilots-hot-water

The board found that they chose to fly using barometric altitude measurements (feet above sea level) instead of radar altitude measurements (feet above ground level) but failed to adjust their low-altitude warning systems accordingly.

By the time the alarm sounded, the pilots didn't have enough time to correct the mistake.

Although the pilots "inexplicably failed to recognize" how low they were flying, the board concluded, their lapse was neither intentional nor malicious. It recommended putting both pilots on probation, an outcome endorsed and forwarded up multiple levels of the chain of command.

its one of those metric-instead-of-standard type situations.

and to continue on with my previous post; hey mr. flag rank:

Matthew 7:2 (New International Version)
2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

The Admiral who "judged" them, has been there, done that, and been "judged" by the same regulations he held them to for 33 years.

He is a test pilot, a nuclear power qualified officer, and certainly one of the top Naval Aviators in the field.

He's earned the right to make the "judgement" he did.

you know, you're right.

I shouldn't judge him on ONE action. After all he may have an otherwise spotless record.

So, skippy, how many stars do YOU have on your shoulder? How many times have YOU flown a fighter under the Navy's rules and regulations (Ace Combat 4 doesn't count)?

Posted: 3/19/2010 4:57:24 PM EDT

[#48]

Please cite example where mil plane has crashed into stadium. I'll be awaiting response.

Posted: 3/19/2010 5:01:22 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Please cite example where mil plane has crashed into stadium. I'll be awaiting response.

Please explain why the fact that it has never happened matters. I can cite a host of occurances where .mil aircraft have turned themselves into smoking holes while show-boating... but you can use google as well as me. There is even one instance of a Tomcat just tearing itself apart (for no real discernable reason) during a fly-by of an aircraft carrier... even when the aircrew was doing everything by the book. Shit happens when dealing with tactical aircraft... no reason to place innocent people at unnecessary risk.

Honestly, I think I'm done arguing with the uninformed. The rules are there for a reason (sometimes they're written in blood, and sometimes they're written in litigation). Break them, and you'll get in trouble. Break them and LIE about it... and you'll lose your wings. The world of tactical aviation really is that simple. We all know it... we all abide by it. If you think it's unfair, you are free to earn yourself a pair of golden (or lead) wings and change the system.... or you can keep bitching about how unfair life is on the internet.

Posted: 3/19/2010 5:01:58 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Please cite example where mil plane has crashed into stadium. I'll be awaiting response.

YGBSM

ETA: That would be SILVER Val

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Two F-18E pilots permanently grounded after Nov 7th Georgia Tech football game low flyover (Page 5 of 11)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us