Blue Angels Smyrna Mishap report published

Doggtyred

Doggtyred

En-Route
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
2,713
Location
Houston area, Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Dave
One of the reports of the investigation into the mishap this summer involving the 6 plane, opposing solo pilot Capt Kuss was released today.

The brief version:
He was on his third flight of the day
He entered the Split S lower than normal, faster than normal, and he didn't disengage afterburners when he called that he was disengaging afterburner.
He kept burners on throughout the maneuver which included the inverted pull towards the ground, through vertical.
He initiated ejection at around 98 feet AGL, with a downward vertical speed of >5000 fpm (>80 ish FPS).
Aircraft hit trees at 48 feet or so AGL, with subsequent crash and fireball occurring.
The ejection sequence catapulted him through the fireball, burning the drogue and main chute, and resulting in no braking action. He hit the ground before seat-man separation occurred.
No evasive action or maneuvers before initiating ejection were recorded.

Cause of death was ruled blunt force trauma.
Cause of the mishap was ruled pilot error.
No mechanical blame was assigned.
No weather blame was assigned, although nearby clouds may have been a factor in pilot decisionmaking.

http://lmgcorporate.com/wsmv/documents/BlueAngelsCrash.pdf
 
Last edited:
I didn't read the whole 46 pages yet, but I wonder if it is possible that with the extra speed, he GLOC'd at the point where he should have been taking it out of burner and then regained consciousness just in time to punch out? That might explain why he called burner off but didn't actually do it.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I didn't read the whole 46 pages yet, but I wonder if it is possible that with the extra speed, he GLOC'd at the point where he should have been taking it out of burner and then regained consciousness just in time to punch out? That might explain why he called burner off but didn't actually do it.
Click to expand...
If they find that to be true, I wonder if they'd reevaluate their Gsuit policy? It would be hard not to consider it, that always seemed like a bad idea to me regardless.
 
Cooter said:
If they find that to be true, I wonder if they'd reevaluate their Gsuit policy? It would be hard not to consider it, that always seemed like a bad idea to me regardless.
Click to expand...

If it was, then that would make their last two fatalities GLOC induced.

Not sure if the added benefit of the G suit would overcome the hazard of its interference during the demo. I'm sure it's something they'll look into though.
 
I've never completely bought the interference problem. Could be, but I don't really see it. Simple modifications could be made to fix any issues it caused.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I didn't read the whole 46 pages yet, but I wonder if it is possible that with the extra speed, he GLOC'd at the point where he should have been taking it out of burner and then regained consciousness just in time to punch out? That might explain why he called burner off but didn't actually do it.
Click to expand...

The parts I skimmed over made it seem he was pulling pretty consistent alpha until he released the stick to pull the handles. Perhaps I missed it. The media reports (Navy times) called into question the possibility of fatigue, and it could be possible that he was having a bad day and was behind the plane..... As unforgiving as the environment was, he's only human.
 
One of our resident fighter guys (@EvilEagle @35 AoA) probably knows the answer better than I, but in my limited experience teaching acro in a T-37, the entry parameters for a Split-S were (if I remember correctly) around 150 knots and a power setting between idle and 95%. It was kind of counter-intuitive at first, but to do a Split-S with minimum altitude loss you'd want to use the higher power setting of 95%. This gave you more G available through the pull and resulted in a tighter Split-S than if you did one at idle.
 
Were any changes made to the routine or training since?
 
Sluggo63 said:
One of our resident fighter guys (@EvilEagle @35 AoA) probably knows the answer better than I, but in my limited experience teaching acro in a T-37, the entry parameters for a Split-S were (if I remember correctly) around 150 knots and a power setting between idle and 95%. It was kind of counter-intuitive at first, but to do a Split-S with minimum altitude loss you'd want to use the higher power setting of 95%. This gave you more G available through the pull and resulted in a tighter Split-S than if you did one at idle.
Click to expand...

True for the tweet, I remember trying to get that concept through my thick student skull! In fighters it depends a lot on the entry parameters, weight and configuration. With a LOT of excess thrust (lightweight, slick configuration, etc) it might not be AB to get the min turning radius - at least not at the beginning. Below corner speed in the Eagle I'd expect full AB is the standard but I don't have cool toys like slats and strakes that the Hornet guys have to fly super-slow. I'm not a Hornet guy so I'll leave the speculation as to what he "should've done" to those more qualified.

RIP Kooch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top