Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: sumpnz on November 12, 2022, 03:45:23 PM

Title: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: sumpnz on November 12, 2022, 03:45:23 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11420933/Planes-crash-mid-air-Wings-Dallas-event-sending-debris-flying.html

Horrible.   :'(
Title: Re: Bf-109 and B-17 midair
Post by: WLJ on November 12, 2022, 03:52:28 PM
P-63 and B-17

video
https://twitter.com/GianKaizen/status/1591521366247112704
https://twitter.com/IFNY2775/status/1591529313958232064
Crap
Title: Re: Bf-109 and B-17 midair
Post by: Tuco on November 12, 2022, 04:33:25 PM
Horrific.  I've seen a B17 in flight and cannot fathom what may have led up to that collision. Nor can I fathom NOT seeing a B17 in flight. My heart goes out
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: Andiron on November 12, 2022, 07:15:48 PM
Well that' horrible.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: dogmush on November 12, 2022, 08:01:31 PM
Interesting that the Daily Mail kept saying that the B17 "approached the flight path" of the P63.  It looked to me like the Kingcobra overtook the B17, while in a bank.

Anybody on here know the rules for close flight? In a boat, that would be the overtaking crafts fault, but I don't know about planes.
Title: Re: Bf-109 and B-17 midair
Post by: Fly320s on November 12, 2022, 08:01:54 PM
Horrific.  I've seen a B17 in flight and cannot fathom what may have led up to that collision. Nor can I fathom NOT seeing a B17 in flight. My heart goes out

The P-63 was above the -17 and in a descending left turn.  He couldn't have seen the bomber.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: Fly320s on November 12, 2022, 08:05:36 PM
Interesting that the Daily Mail kept saying that the B17 "approached the flight path" of the P63.  It looked to me like the Kingcobra overtook the B17, while in a bank.

Anybody on here know the rules for close flight? In a boat, that would be the overtaking crafts fault, but I don't know about planes.

The rules are:  brief what you are going to do and do what you briefed.

It was an airshow, so maybe the pilots planned a mock attack on the airfield or something similar.  There were two other fighters ahead of the P-63 in the formation that made the turn ahead of the B-17.

There is also a very good photo of the crash online.  The photo captured the wreckage about .5 seconds after the collision.  I bet all the crew was dead by then.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: RocketMan on November 12, 2022, 08:56:47 PM
Given the paint scheme of the B-17 I'm thinking it was the Texas Raiders, a CAF B-17G based in Texas.  To my eye it looked like the P-63 pilot flew outside of the line assigned to the fighter aircraft in that display.

ETA:  Yes, it was Texas Raiders.  That was one of the CAF's original aircraft from when they first formed in Harlingen, TX, and it was their first B-17.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: RocketMan on November 12, 2022, 09:18:23 PM
Thinking back to when we on the crew of Sentimental Journey had a bit of a friendly rivalry going with the Texas Raiders folks as to who had the most properly and thoroughly restored B-17G.  We were sure that the SJ was the most authentically restored of the two Flying Fortresses.  On the rare occasions we attended the same airshows we would tour each other's aircraft and compare where everyone was in the restoration process.
Such an utter shame at the loss of life and destruction of two very rare aircraft.  A double tragedy.  Looking at the video that showed all four aircraft in the set, my bet is on the P-63 pilot flying outside his assigned lane.  The other fighters were well outside of the bomber lane.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: MechAg94 on November 12, 2022, 10:49:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZKglS-1VaE
Mrgunsngear posted some thoughts based on talking to a retired fight pilot.  He doesn't think the P-63 pilot ever saw the B17.

He had a bunch of different angles of the collision posted to Instagram, but it looks like they were removed. 
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: Boomhauer on November 12, 2022, 11:23:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZKglS-1VaE
Mrgunsngear posted some thoughts based on talking to a retired fight pilot.  He doesn't think the P-63 pilot ever saw the B17.

He had a bunch of different angles of the collision posted to Instagram, but it looks like they were removed. 

Low wing aircraft suck for seeing below just like high wing suck for seeing above. And even without the wing in the way you often still have significant blind spots

 
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: 230RN on November 12, 2022, 11:50:41 PM
I'm speechless.  What a tragedy for the planes and the personnel and their families.

Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: RocketMan on November 13, 2022, 08:23:31 AM
The more I look at those videos, I am starting to wonder if that collision was deliberate on the part of the Kingcobra pilot.  The P-63 Kingcobra and its predecessor aircraft the P-39 Airacobra are both mid-engine planes.  The engine sits behind the pilot, driving the prop via a shaft that sits below the pilot, almost between their legs.
With this layout the pilot actually sits slightly forward of the wing, and that allows decent visibility immediately below and forward of the wing.
The various videos available on the web show the flight path taken by the Kingcobra pilot was an efficient pursuit curve.  The B-17 should have been easily visible to the P-63 pilot right up almost to impact.  And it really did not look to me like the Kingcobra pilot was trying to get back into his proper flight lane.
The point of impact on the B-17 was perfect from the standpoint of someone wanting to bring the aircraft down.  The fuselage broke off just forward of the belly turret location and just behind the rear radio room bulkhead.
The more I think about this event, the more puzzled I get.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: sumpnz on November 13, 2022, 11:06:41 AM
Most likely it wasn’t deliberate.  That’s certainly a non-zero probability, but given that community I’d think the odds are exceptionally low of a deliberate mid-air collision.  I’d be more likely to put money on the P-63 pilot misjudging his position and was unable to maneuver away by the time he realized what was coming.  Even with the wings not blocking his view there’s still the cowling.  And given the bank he was in, and the location of the B-17 I can believe he couldn’t see the B-17 well enough to understand his mistake until he was pretty close.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: ConstitutionCowboy on November 13, 2022, 12:13:12 PM
The more I look at those videos, I am starting to wonder if that collision was deliberate on the part of the Kingcobra pilot.  The P-63 Kingcobra and its predecessor aircraft the P-39 Airacobra are both mid-engine planes.  The engine sits behind the pilot, driving the prop via a shaft that sits below the pilot, almost between their legs.
With this layout the pilot actually sits slightly forward of the wing, and that allows decent visibility immediately below and forward of the wing.
The various videos available on the web show the flight path taken by the Kingcobra pilot was an efficient pursuit curve.  The B-17 should have been easily visible to the P-63 pilot right up almost to impact.  And it really did not look to me like the Kingcobra pilot was trying to get back into his proper flight lane.
The point of impact on the B-17 was perfect from the standpoint of someone wanting to bring the aircraft down.  The fuselage broke off just forward of the belly turret location and just behind the rear radio room bulkhead.
The more I think about this event, the more puzzled I get.

I must point out that when in a turn, as a pilot, you are concentrating on where you are going - that is, looking into the turn. That would put the B-17 just outside his field of view. The pilot of the B-17 wouldn't have seen the P-63 coming either, as the P-63 came in from about 7 or 8 o'clock.

Woody
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: MechAg94 on November 13, 2022, 12:25:02 PM
I saw a video earlier talking about the P-63's visibility and mentioned the cockpit is further back and has relatively poor visibility forward/down.  That plus the pilots focus being elsewhere probably means he didn't see the B-17.  I can seem to find the same video now. 

I am sure there is going to be quite a bit of investigation.  I hate to assume bad intent without more tangible proof.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: 230RN on November 13, 2022, 12:45:05 PM
I can't help wondering how much alcohol might be found in any of the remains.

After reading that John Denver wasn't supposed to be flying when he pranged his kite, and that John Kennedy Jr. wasn't qualified to fly in any but VFR  conditions when he dumped his, and Bud Holland had been chastised multiple times about not following the rules, I start to wonder about either the chutzpah or celebratory beverage content or both of some pilots.

I don't know how true it is, but I heard one aviation expert claim "it's always pilot error."

This thing sickens me.

Terry, 230RN
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: RocketMan on November 13, 2022, 01:24:00 PM
Just read where the rehearsal flight was cancelled due to bad weather.  Going by previous experience, the rehearsal flight would have been on Friday, with the first show performance on Saturday when the collision occurred.  I wonder if that's how this show was done.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: WLJ on September 03, 2023, 07:58:55 AM
Update
Family of one of those killed is suing the organizers of the air show

Quote
The family of Len Root, who was one of six people killed last year when two WWII-era planes collided midair in front of a packed Texas crowd, is suing the organizers of the Wings Over Dallas Air Show.

"Mrs. Root watched it happen, and she is not doing very well," Kevin Koudelka, who represents the family, told FOX 4 Dallas-Ft. Worth. "We need the lawsuit to get into what happened and who is responsible for that. Second part of that is who is responsible? What happened? Who is wrong? And why did this happen? And hold them accountable."

Root, 66, was inside a B-17 bomber with four other crew members when it collided with a P-63 fighter plane last November, killing everyone in both planes. 

Quote
Koudelka added, "Our investigation thus far and the preliminary report from the NTSB [National Transportation Safety Board] summed up is the planes shouldn’t have been near each other."

The air boss gave the go ahead to the pilots seconds before the crash, audio recordings released by the FAA earlier this year revealed, according to FOX 4.
Quote
While the preliminary report didn’t give the cause of the crash, it noted that there was no altitude advice plan for the pilots prior to the show.

Family of pilot killed in Texas air show crash sues organizers of Wings Over Dallas: 'Who is responsible?'
https://www.foxnews.com/us/family-pilot-killed-texas-air-show-crash-sues-organizers-wings-over-dallas-who-responsible
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: HankB on September 03, 2023, 08:30:37 AM
Quote
The air boss gave the go ahead to the pilots seconds before the crash, audio recordings released by the FAA earlier this year revealed, according to FOX 4.

Is the "air boss" the air show equivalent of an airport's air traffic controller?

If that's the case, I'd be interested in whether one or both of the pilots followed his instructions in the minutes before the crash, and if one of the pilots deviated from the instructions. EVERY pilot in the air show ought to be aware of air show traffic - airshows don't adhere to the normal separation procedures for commercial air traffic. 

I'm not a pilot, but I'm still thinking pilot error. As far as the lawsuit is concerned, I figure they'll be searching for whoever has the deepest pockets to pin the blame on, regardless of actual culpability.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: WLJ on September 03, 2023, 08:39:45 AM
Is the "air boss" the air show equivalent of an airport's air traffic controller?


I'm more familiar with the Navy carrier idea of what an Air Boss is

Quote
Also known as the air boss, the air officer (along with his assistant, the miniboss) is responsible for all aspects of operations involving aircraft including the hangar deck, the flight deck, and airborne aircraft out to 5 nautical miles (9.3 km; 5.8 mi) from the carrier.

But this also came up in google

Quote
What is a air boss in a airshow?
An air boss is the primary operations and safety official who at an airshow functions like a parade marshal, making sure each of the planes involved is carefully positioned both on the runways and in the air.

Basically sounds similar except for hanger deck bit of course.

This article from June also came up related to the air crash which also contains the same definition above and this info

Dallas Airshow Fatalities Raise Questions About Air Boss Qualifications
https://www.aviationpros.com/aircraft/business-general-aviation/news/21292967/dallas-airshow-fatalities-raise-questions-about-air-boss-qualifications

Quote
During an airshow, no Federal Aviation Administration-certified air traffic controller is directing the airshow planes. That’s all done by the air boss, who is often equipped with a headset, walkie-talkie and binoculars, stationed on a platform and making sure everything goes according to plan.

But despite this great responsibility, it was only in 2020 that the FAA began requiring an air boss to have a “letter of authorization” showing he or she had passed certain training requirements. Though approved by the FAA, those requirements have been established not by the agency, but by the International Council of Air Shows, an industry trade group.

Quote
Of concern is that the National Transportation Safety Board’s preliminary report about the Dallas crash released Nov. 30 noted that the pilots had no briefings to coordinate their altitudes either before or during their flights.

That finding, plus video and audio recordings of the moments before, during and after the accident, should prompt the FAA to review the required qualifications of air bosses.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: HankB on September 03, 2023, 10:47:42 AM
^^^^^
Thanks for the info.

As I see it, FAA and military traffic controllers and "air bosses" have considerable legal shielding by virtue of their employer, but given the potential personal liability exposure in this litigious society, it's a wonder they get anyone to accept "air boss" responsibility for an air show not run by the government.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: BobR on September 03, 2023, 01:01:00 PM
Update
Family of one of those killed is suing the organizers of the air show

Family of pilot killed in Texas air show crash sues organizers of Wings Over Dallas: 'Who is responsible?'
https://www.foxnews.com/us/family-pilot-killed-texas-air-show-crash-sues-organizers-wings-over-dallas-who-responsible

Of course they are. It was an accident however tragic it was. I am sure the pilot knew the dangers and possibly also the family of the pilot. I knew every time I strapped on an airplane I was going where I really didn't belong and the chances of it falling out of the sky was never zero. Even if people who make their living in the air don't say so they all know what can happen. I find these types of lawsuits as nothing more than a grieving family trying to lay blame for an accident and refusing to see it as such. I imagine flying a vintage aircraft at airshows adds just a bit more possibility of crashing than a commercial flight.

bob
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 03, 2023, 04:35:29 PM
I imagine flying a vintage aircraft at airshows adds just a bit more possibility of crashing than a commercial flight.

Especially one of the few remaining WW2 bombers. I wonder if the CAF is any better about maintenance than the Collings Foundation (the owners of the bomber that crashed at Bradley Airport in Connecticut) were?
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: sumpnz on September 03, 2023, 04:41:47 PM
Especially one of the few remaining WW2 bombers. I wonder if the CAF is any better about maintenance than the Collings Foundation (the owners of the bomber that crashed at Bradley Airport in Connecticut) were?

I was just at a warbird museum by KSC and they had a C-47 that saw action in Normandy (3 missions), Market Garden, Bastogne, and the Berlin air lift.  You can rent it for sky diving today.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: RocketMan on September 03, 2023, 04:51:51 PM
Especially one of the few remaining WW2 bombers. I wonder if the CAF is any better about maintenance than the Collings Foundation (the owners of the bomber that crashed at Bradley Airport in Connecticut) were?

When I was a member of the Arizona Wing of the CAF, we were meticulous about our maintenance.  We were the ones flying in our birds and didn't really want to crash and burn.  We had some very capable licensed A&Ps as members, and they kept us legal, supervising all the work that was done.  One of the members had actually been a flight engineer on Sentimental Journey, our B-17G, for a while shortly after WWII when it was doing photo mapping in the Philippines.  This was before it was sold as surplus by the AAF.
YMMV with other CAF wings in different areas of the country, not to mention the passage of time.  I was a member for over six years during the '80s.
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: BobR on September 03, 2023, 04:58:43 PM
When I was a member of the Arizona Wing of the CAF, we were meticulous about our maintenance.  We were the ones flying in our birds and didn't really want to crash and burn. 

That is usually a pretty good motivator to not cut corners, etc. When I first checked into VRC 30, a squadron in San Diego they had a base wide reputation of all being dopers. I took over the piss test coordinator role for the command and had several all hands piss tests in 6 months plus many random ones . I cleaned up a lot of the drug use by helping them exit the Navy. Those people were working on the planes I was flying out to the carriers on, that is dangerous enough without shoddy maintenance.

bob
Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: Boomhauer on September 03, 2023, 06:39:14 PM
I must point out that when in a turn, as a pilot, you are concentrating on where you are going - that is, looking into the turn. That would put the B-17 just outside his field of view. The pilot of the B-17 wouldn't have seen the P-63 coming either, as the P-63 came in from about 7 or 8 o'clock.

Woody

Not to mention the closure rate was such that there wasn’t going to be any evasive action anyway on the part of either aircraft at a “last second” sighting

Title: Re: P-63 and B-17 midair Dallas
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on September 05, 2023, 05:44:07 PM
When I was a member of the Arizona Wing of the CAF, we were meticulous about our maintenance.  We were the ones flying in our birds and didn't really want to crash and burn.  We had some very capable licensed A&Ps as members, and they kept us legal, supervising all the work that was done.  One of the members had actually been a flight engineer on Sentimental Journey, our B-17G, for a while shortly after WWII when it was doing photo mapping in the Philippines.  This was before it was sold as surplus by the AAF.
YMMV with other CAF wings in different areas of the country, not to mention the passage of time.  I was a member for over six years during the '80s.

I see Sentimental Journey flying overhead here in Mesa frequently.  I've toured her a couple of times, but never had an opportunity to fly in her (well, never had the money to expend on the opportunity).  She is a beauty to behold, and each time I meet crew members that maintain her I'm impressed by their dedication to keeping the craft in peak condition.