Low Flying - When Low is Too Low

[Hawkeye's Hobbies]

Anybody ever hear of Project Thundereagle?

I don't recall it being called Thunder Eagle, but Giant Walk or Strutting Eagle. Of course that was a long time ago. We had a B-52 and KC-135 practicing low level formation flying over Malmstrom/Great Falls Montana in the late '80s. It was impressive to see the two in tight formation flying just 1000' above the ground at 230kts. They practiced three passes each day they flew. One pass being the KC-135 in the lead boom extended and the Buff in trail just aft of the boom. It took some work for the tanker jocks to get the altitude right so the Buff wasn't dragging her belly on the tree tops.

The CINCSAC at the time was visiting us to award our unit with an Outstanding Unit Award. He made a point to tell everyone it was his idea. If I remember he spent most of his early days in TAC. It was also being reported by the aircrews tasked to fly these demonstrations that he insisted they be done regardless if the crew felt the weather and location were not suitable for the performances. The mishaps eventually lead in part to us getting a new CINCSAC.

There is a lot of speculation and rumors surrounding the B-52 crash at Fairchild. Everything from a kid being at the controls to a suicidal pilot. This incident showed the leaderships lack of common sense having a B-52 perform such routines in areas where density altitude plays a vital part of an aircrafts performance. Over Omaha it might have been doable, over Spokane, not so. Once the Buff rolled 90 it was done for at such a low altitude. Given a B-52 uses spoilers not large ailerons, correcting the roll was impossible.

In the early 80's a KC-135A out of Grissom did a full roll unintentionally. The autopilot malfunctioned during a turn, the pilots tried to reverse the turn but the autopilot didn't disengage so they had to fly to roll through its complete cycle. This happened over Chicago as they were returning home. The fairings along the fuselage and wings were all missing and the engines were cocked on their pylons. The aircraft pulled enough G's to bend it, yet hold the two cups of coffee on the throttle quadrant without spilling a drop! That was one of three incidents within 30 days that nearly got our Wing CC fired. The investigation btw revealed a wire improperly spliced and the splice failed and had chaffed to expose wires to the metal frame of the aircraft.

[Wayne S]

In the link it was written that the Navy rules are 1000ft, I thought 1000FT was a FAA rule and civil flight was 1500ft over stadiums etc. depending on terror alert status color.

-------------------------

I think some people think planes are lower and closer then they actually are. At an airshow the distance is 1500ft from the closet spectator or 500ft for a none aerobatic maneuver.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Wayne S

[ventura_kelley]

Can you link to youtube videos on here?

They have one with that crash B-52 dancing low level with a KC-135.

I honestly don't think it's that big a deal, but then again our warthogs were always in the dirt, so I guess I got used to pulling tree branches out of pylon access panels and sway braces.

[ventura_kelley]

Never mind. That video also shows the crash.

[Hawkeye's Hobbies]

In the link it was written that the Navy rules are 1000ft, I thought 1000FT was a FFA rule and civil flight was 1500ft over stadiums etc. depending on terror alert status color.

-------------------------

I think some people think planes are lower and closer then they actually are. At an airshow the distance is 1500ft from the closet spectator or 500ft for a none aerobatic maneuver.

FFA=Future Farmers of America ;)

FAA-Federal Aviation Administration

I know that the reason we can't have jet teams perform at AirVenture is because the field does not have the 1500' spacing necessary. However, jet aircraft are allowed to pass directly over the crowd. My guess is that these pilots were in direct control by ATC and the event was planned including altitude, aircraft configuration, airspeed and path of flight. They probably rehearsed it the day prior as well. Just as they do when they fly over Lambeau Field before a Packer game.

My question is who cried FOUL...the Navy or someone else and the Navy was forced to respond. I know when the WI ANG was doing joint training with the NG someone or a small group complained that the F-16s flying over the cities in our area was a severe threat to safety. A bomb might fall off and kill someone...considering they weren't carrying any ordinance what so ever the claim didn't hold water, yet the ANG relented and suspended further flights over populated areas. Now our airmen and soldiers have to travel else where to train, a high price to pay because someone has misconceptions about the aircraft and equipment being operated. Surprised these few didn't ask the National Guard folks not to drive their armored vehicles just in case they might accidently shoot someone.

[Spongebob]

Clowns. After This (which was the final straw in an "unofficial competition for the lowest pass at a Naval Academy home game") EVERYONE in Naval Aviation was warned.

BTW, note the near departure after he manages to clear the stands.

Spongebob

Edited March 20, 2010 by Spongebob

[ventura_kelley]

There is a lot of speculation and rumors surrounding the B-52 crash at Fairchild. Everything from a kid being at the controls to a suicidal pilot. This incident showed the leaderships lack of common sense having a B-52 perform such routines in areas where density altitude plays a vital part of an aircrafts performance. Over Omaha it might have been doable, over Spokane, not so. Once the Buff rolled 90 it was done for at such a low altitude. Given a B-52 uses spoilers not large ailerons, correcting the roll was impossible.

They've got a good writeup on wikipedia about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairchil...Base_B-52_crash

That's pretty much as I remember being briefed about that incident after it happened.

[ventura_kelley]

Clowns. After This (which was the final straw in an "unofficial competition for the lowest pass at a Naval Academy home game") EVERYONE in Naval Aviation was warned.

BTW, note the near departure after he manages to clear the stands.

Spongebob

Ok. Now THAT'S too low.

Those other guys weren't in the stadium; they were over it.

This guy could have eaten a corn dog in the box seats.

[Wayne S]

FFA=Future Farmers of America ;)

FAA-Federal Aviation Administration

That is a brain fart, There is a game I use to play all the time, it had a room was called FFA "Free For All" I always end up typing FFA when thinking FAA LOL.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Wayne S

[Moose135]

What if they were at the right altitude by sea level, but didn't correct for the land height? Where'd they take off? Where's that stadium and what is its altitude above sea level?

If these guys couldn't tell the difference between 1,000 feet AGL and 1,000 feet MSL, they don't belong in the cockpit either. I suspect they briefed the proper altitudes prior to the flight, and this wasn't just a simple mistake of misreading an altimeter. As Murph said, better they get grounded then they kill themselves or someone else hot dogging it.

My question is who cried FOUL...the Navy or someone else and the Navy was forced to respond.

From the NT article Waco posted, the pilots reported the low pass themselves after landing. Maybe they thought by turning themselves in, it wouldn't be as bad.

In the early 80's a KC-135A out of Grissom did a full roll unintentionally. The autopilot malfunctioned during a turn, the pilots tried to reverse the turn but the autopilot didn't disengage so they had to fly to roll through its complete cycle. This happened over Chicago as they were returning home. The fairings along the fuselage and wings were all missing and the engines were cocked on their pylons. The aircraft pulled enough G's to bend it, yet hold the two cups of coffee on the throttle quadrant without spilling a drop! That was one of three incidents within 30 days that nearly got our Wing CC fired. The investigation btw revealed a wire improperly spliced and the splice failed and had chaffed to expose wires to the metal frame of the aircraft.

I got to Grissom a couple of years after that happened, but I knew the crew involved. They had patches made up with an inverted KC-135 and the words "Mach 1 Over Michigan".

[TaiidanTomcat]

In a world where drones are taking over the most machine like people will be kept, and others discarded.

[Wayne S]

They've got a good writeup on wikipedia about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairchil...Base_B-52_crash

That's pretty much as I remember being briefed about that incident after it happened.

Here is a Video of some of the events leading up-to the crash and the crash

[dougp]

http://www.dunrobincastle.com/Nose_Art/WW2...ito_Freddie.htm

http://www.vintagewings.ca/page?a=578

Sh*t happens when you least expect it. History points this out. These two mosquito crew lived and fought through a war only to die in front of a horrified crowd.

[GreyGhost]

Clowns. After This (which was the final straw in an "unofficial competition for the lowest pass at a Naval Academy home game") EVERYONE in Naval Aviation was warned.

BTW, note the near departure after he manages to clear the stands.

Spongebob

Although, it is pretty impressive when he would go through the Drive Thru ...

Gregg

[Fuji]

Those other guys weren't in the stadium; they were over it.

Looking at the videos on line, perfectly justified - they barely clear the office building on the other side of the stadium (100 ft or less). Low, slow and with the gear sticking out, handling isn't going to be the best if something goes wrong (ie - Bird Strike?). What I think best stands out is that the pilots themselves reported the violation. The days of better to ask forgiveness than ask for permission are long gone. They knew this was a possibility and they still reported it. They screwed up, they knew it and they owned up to it.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Fuji

[skidbuggy]

If those guys want to keep in the air, I'd suggest they start looking for positions flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog (ahem) out of Hong Kong.

That's actually not a bad job right now...

[VADM Fangschleister]

Well, it's not like they were attempting the Kolvoord Starburst and tried to ignite the plasma.

STTNG

Edited March 20, 2010 by VADM Fangschleister

[Raymond]

the vid of the crash and aftermath is on youtube - VERY brutal

....besides, fast n low is better in chad anyway

[Sabre Freak]

Okay, I get it. Never violate the rules that apply to the airspace you find yourself in at any given particular moment.

But how was this “stunt” any more or less dangerous than a standard approach into Lindberg Field?

From

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_Int...ight_operations

San Diego International is the busiest single-runway commercial service airport in the United States, and second in the world after London Gatwick, with approximately 600 departures and arrivals carrying 50,000 passengers each day, and a total of 18.3 million passengers in 2007.

...

The approach from the east is steep, necessitated by terrain which drops from 266 ft (81 m) to sea level in less than one nautical mile. Aircraft normally descend at 318 feet per nautical mile (52.3 m/km) per nautical mile. Due to terrain in San Diego they must descend at 331 ft/nmi (54.5 m/km), exceeding the FAA standard. San Diego's only runway is located at the base of a hill lined with several obstructions, including Interstate 5 and trees in Balboa Park. Contrary to local lore, the parking structure off the end of the runway was built long after previous obstructions built up east of I-5. The parking structure was then built up to this controlling limit. Aircraft clear the parking structure by the required 109 feet (33 m).

Edited March 20, 2010 by Sabre Freak

[Waco]

That's a published approach which, while outside the normal TERPS criteria, includes appropriate warnings on how/why it deviates from the standard descent rates, has approved altitudes, and meets FAA standard clearance criteria minima.

They were flying below the minimum altitudes, at airspeeds less than the required minimum maneuvering airspeeds for low altitude navigation, and over a major public gathering. Big difference.

I don't know how the Navy works, but in the Air Force, you have to submit a flyover profile/"plan of execution" prior to the event which indicates the run-in headings, altitudes, airspeeds, and any deviation from USAF regulations and/or FAA regulations and the appropriate waivers you've acquired to cover those deviations. I imagine the Navy must have something similar.

[Fuji]

Okay, I get it. Never violate the rules that apply to the airspace you find yourself in at any given particular moment.

But how was this “stunt†any more or less dangerous than a standard approach into Lindberg Field?

Simply, they're not on approach to a runway.

[GreyGhost]

I imagine Kolja knows, he has helped run a few flyovers in the past ...

Gregg

[zerosystem]

heres one from the red sox home opener a few years ago, viper pilot out of vermont had a little too much speed and had some unusual procedures for slowing down during a flyby...

great handling, even if a violation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdkmZrPta48

[Fuji]

heres one from the red sox home opener a few years ago, viper pilot out of vermont had a little too much speed and had some unusual procedures for slowing down during a flyby...

great handling, even if a violation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdkmZrPta48

Tha'ts hotdoggin' plain as day - not a screwed up join up

[HOLMES]

heres one from the red sox home opener a few years ago, viper pilot out of vermont had a little too much speed and had some unusual procedures for slowing down during a flyby...

great handling, even if a violation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdkmZrPta48

Did he clip the nose/wing on the 3rd Jet?