RCAf lost a Snowbird today.

[Pete Fleischmann]

12 hours ago, John1 said:

 

If properly maintained, the jets should be able to fly safely indefinitely.  Heck if that wasn't the case, half of the USAF would be grounded.  

 

Exactly.

[LSP_Ron]

2 hours ago, Pete Fleischmann said:

 

Exactly.

 

I'm not a jet pilot like you Pete but the Commander of the unit said the same thing today in a press release.

 

The airframe is sound and rebuilt to the bone using out of new box parts of which there are no shortages of for years to come.  We are not ones to question that unless we are in the know and have to fly it.

 

I do wonder about the ejection seats though. It seems they are dated if you have to be that high and still don't give enough time. They did eject somewhat horizontally because they were heading nose down but there are many examples of other planes being much much lower and successful ejections in similar attitudes.  I reference the demo CF-118 in Lethbridge Alberta a few years ago and several Mig airshow incidences at airshows.  They were much much lower and successful.  An upgrade there maybe in order but I am a belly button,  just an opinion which everyone has one. 

 

Regardless, a huge loss that has truly bothered me a lot. Something really hit home with this, tragic.

 

 

Ron

[Pete Fleischmann]

9 hours ago, LSP_Ron said:

 

I'm not a jet pilot like you Pete but the Commander of the unit said the same thing today in a press release.

 

The airframe is sound and rebuilt to the bone using out of new box parts of which there are no shortages of for years to come.  We are not ones to question that unless we are in the know and have to fly it.

 

I do wonder about the ejection seats though. It seems they are dated if you have to be that high and still don't give enough time. They did eject somewhat horizontally because they were heading nose down but there are many examples of other planes being much much lower and successful ejections in similar attitudes.  I reference the demo CF-118 in Lethbridge Alberta a few years ago and several Mig airshow incidences at airshows.  They were much much lower and successful.  An upgrade there maybe in order but I am a belly button,  just an opinion which everyone has one. 

 

Regardless, a huge loss that has truly bothered me a lot. Something really hit home with this, tragic.

 

 

Ron

 

Hi Ron-

I agree. 

I watched the tragic video. Looked like a level attitude but very high sink rate at the point of ejection. I assume that the seat is explosive powered vs. rocket powered, and I immediately thought “out of the envelope”. I wish they had punched out at the apex of the initial zoom climb..not sure why they turned away to the left- much more information will come out, and I am not one to second guess a fellow aviator until the facts are in..

 

so sad.

 

Pete

[John1]

Regarding the seats, is it safe to assume that they are the original seats and not upgraded models?  If so, that might be the one area that could be improved upon, since modern seats do a much better job in dicey situations.  Still not a cure-all since out of the envelope is still out of the enveloped, just that modern seats give you a much larger envelope.  All that being said, the CF isn't exactly floating in cash, not sure retrofitting modern seats on such a small fleet of aircraft would be even considered.

 

 

[Out2gtcha]

That seems like a good upgrade for the expense VS the return (extra safety net) but not being a pilot or involved in the industry it would  be just speculation.

 

How does money get allocated w/ regard to show teams like this? 

You might think that a tragedy like this one would add ammo to the cause of safety upgrades, even if a bit out of budget, but again, I know nothing on the subject.

[Alain Gadbois]

On the Blancolirio channel you can hear a "pop" as the planes fly over, then the aircraft starts pulling up immediately. Some engine trouble it appears, but the investigation will hopefully find the cause.

The ejector seats are original, so obviously not as effective as newer models. I hope they can study the problem of replacing them. I hope it is technically possible (dimensions). 

Very sad story. I feel it is very lucky that one survived. The parachute must have opened just enough ...

 

Alain

Edited May 20, 2020 by Alain Gadbois

[davral64]

It looks like engine failure.  The pull was to trade some airspeed for options.  As the airspeed bled below the stall it spun.  They stayed with it to aim it away from people and structures.  They jettisoned the acft when they knew it would not hurt anyone else.  It is the embodiment of "That others may live".  No seat modern or otherwise could have magiced them to safety given the parameters.  Fantastic people to be sure!

[Out2gtcha]

I wont engage in any speculation, but there have been much lower modern safe ejections as Ron pointed out, but in this case I have no clue what safe ejection parameters would be for the Tutor seats.

[LSP_K2]

7 minutes ago, Out2gtcha said:

I wont engage in any speculation, but there have been much lower modern safe ejections as Ron pointed out, but in this case I have no clue what safe ejection parameters would be for the Tutor seats.

 

Agreed. Zero-Zero seats are truly amazing, and several pilots have ejected safely under far worse conditions.

[LSP_Ron]

The Tudors seats are 0-60 rated but a retired Snowbird pilot has stated it appeared the rate of decent exceeded the safe envelope.

[Cheetah11]

1 hour ago, LSP_K2 said:

 

Agreed. Zero-Zero seats are truly amazing, and several pilots have ejected safely under far worse conditions.

 

Zero-Zero seat designation  actually gives a false impression of the seat’s performance.  The more correct designation would be Zero speed, Zero altitude and Zero rate of descend. Unfortunately a high rate of decent builds up quickly and with temporal distortion even a Zero-Zero seat is not enough close to the ground. I seem to remember a rule of thumb of one tenth the ROD for a Zero-Zero seat. ROD of 6000 f/min requires ejection 600 ft above ground. 
Modern seats have incredible capabilities, but there are still limitations.

[alaninaustria]

Very sad indeed. The Tutor is an excellent aircraft, however the ejection seat is ancient and not a zero/zero ejection system as was previously mentioned. I flew out of CYKA for a season flying heavy retardant tankers so I know the area quite well. The Snowbirds departed east bound which takes them directly over the Brocklhurst area of town. The pilot did what he was trained to do, climb to gain altitude. I suspect the left turn was to return to the runway but they stalled and entered a spin before ejecting. An immediate right turn would have placed them directly over the Thompson river which is very wide and there are no homes. 

I hope this unfortunate tragedy will allow the RCAF to upgrade their Tudors with zero/zero ejection seats/systems. If I remember correctly the Harper government earmarked 750 million for a Snowbird replacement aircraft and the new Trudeau government was very quick to cancel what Harper has already initiated. 

There are enough spares and support to keep the Tudors going until 2030. They just need to upgrade the ejection seat/system.

Regards,

Alan

[Pete Fleischmann]

Spin? No- I don’t think so.

 

respectfully

Pete

[DrewH]

I flew the tutor in early 90's as a CAF pilot. Later as a Flight Safety officer (black diamond badge on my flight suit) and investigator I've seen my fair share of military aircraft accidents. I'd climb in to any and all those aircraft at any time. They are that well maintained. Things go wrong, yes, same as your car. We're not taking '60's cars off the road for maintenance or safety due to an accident when someone was killed? There are risks in everything we do, how we mitigate those high risks, respect and understand them is part of the job that we accept. Just an FYI - I need more than one hand to count the number of friends I lost in the Canadian Forces. All flight related during peace time training. 

I especially won't speculate even with what I know - as a thought is purely that of what the cause may be - as not only is it fruitless but irresponsible and reckless. Nor will I make statements as to the limitations of systems. A lot of issues will be raised, the most important is to learn from every link in the chain of events. 

I ask this community to refrain from speculation and respect the memory of Capt. Casey by doing so. 

Edited May 21, 2020 by DrewH

[LSP_Ron]

1 hour ago, DrewH said:

I flew the tutor in early 90's as a CAF pilot. Later as a Flight Safety officer (black diamond badge on my flight suit) and investigator I've seen my fair share of military aircraft accidents. I'd climb in to any and all those aircraft at any time. They are that well maintained. Things go wrong, yes, same as your car. We're not taking '60's cars off the road for maintenance or safety due to an accident when someone was killed? There are risks in everything we do, how we mitigate those high risks, respect and understand them is part of the job that we accept. Just an FYI - I need more than one hand to count the number of friends I lost in the Canadian Forces. All flight related during peace time training. 

I especially won't speculate even with what I know - as a thought is purely that of what the cause may be - as not only is it fruitless but irresponsible and reckless. Nor will I make statements as to the limitations of systems. A lot of issues will be raised, the most important is to learn from every link in the chain of events. 

I ask this community to refrain from speculation and respect the memory of Capt. Casey by doing so. 

 

 

Well said and thank you for your service.  

 

Ron