Interesting formation flight

tonycondon

tonycondon

Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
15,470
Location
Wichita, KS
Display Name
Display name:
Tony
I found this through Avweb's pictur of the week. These guys are pros.

 
Of course they are. They have Navy formation flight training!
 
I really like the T-34. What is the status of the Wing Spar AD? Last I heard the T-34's could fly with certain G and speed limitations. Have these been lifted?
 
I've done 2-ship ILS's, but never a 3-ship. Too bad they didn't have the audio plugged in to hear the I/C and radio comms. And I guess #3 went around?
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
I've done 2-ship ILS's, but never a 3-ship. Too bad they didn't have the audio plugged in to hear the I/C and radio comms. And I guess #3 went around?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't #3 fall in behind #1 and left of and behind our ship?

We did simultaneous landings on the Piper flight to Oshkosh, but needless to say it was severe clear and we weren't quite that close to each other. We did stagger left and right on the runway.

The Lima Lima guys are airline pilots who live in (or are based at) the Naper Aero (LL10) fly-in community.
 
mikea said:
The Lima Lima guys are airline pilots who live in (or are based at) the Naper Aero (LL10?) fly-in community.
Click to expand...
Yes, LL10. About 6 miles from Clow. Though I'm not sure they still base there.
 
mikea said:
Wouldn't #3 fall in behind #1 and left of and behind our ship?
Click to expand...
#1 landed on the left side of the runway with no room for #3 to #1's left, and they broke out pretty low for #3 to have "dragged" enough behind the 2-ship formation landing to be safe if #3 had a brake problem. Normally, by the standards we use in the Grumman group, we want about 1000 feet of trail to land behind someone directly in front of us -- kinda hard to achieve when you break out as close to the runway as they did (about 20 seconds before crossing the threshold -- that would require a 30-knot speed split).
 
Beautiful landings. It must also be helpful to be brightly colored.
 
Tristar said:
It must also be helpful to be brightly colored.
Click to expand...
It does -- you can't imagine how hard it is to fly wing in the goo on a jet painted in "air superiority gray," which is designed to blend in with the clouds. If it weren't for the formation (bright amber) and strip (fluorescent green) lights originally intended to help night formation, it would be impossible even in daylight like this video.
 
Ron Levy said:
#1 landed on the left side of the runway with no room for #3 to #1's left, and they broke out pretty low for #3 to have "dragged" enough behind the 2-ship formation landing to be safe if #3 had a brake problem. Normally, by the standards we use in the Grumman group, we want about 1000 feet of trail to land behind someone directly in front of us -- kinda hard to achieve when you break out as close to the runway as they did (about 20 seconds before crossing the threshold -- that would require a 30-knot speed split).
Click to expand...

#3 could easily have landed on the taxiway west of the runway although I'm surprised they didn't land one of the three on runway 2R.

BTW, how can you tell the plane on lead's right isn't #3 other than the fact it landed with lead on the same runway as an element?
 
gismo said:
#3 could easily have landed on the taxiway west of the runway although I'm surprised they didn't land one of the three on runway 2R.
Click to expand...
I can't say that it would be easy to get them to OK landing on the taxiway, but I suppose it's possible.
BTW, how can you tell the plane on lead's right isn't #3 other than the fact it landed with lead on the same runway as an element?
Click to expand...
An assumption based on that reasoning, but the question would remain the same if were #3 which landed with Lead and #2 that didn't.
 
Ron Levy said:
I can't say that it would be easy to get them to OK landing on the taxiway, but I suppose it's possible.
An assumption based on that reasoning, but the question would remain the same if were #3 which landed with Lead and #2 that didn't.
Click to expand...

If #2 was on the right then #3 ought to be able to get permission to land on the right parallel runway. It's threshold equals 2L.
 
gismo said:
If #2 was on the right then #3 ought to be able to get permission to land on the right parallel runway. It's threshold equals 2L.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what airport is this where the left-side taxiway parallel to RWY 2 is also RWY 2L?:confused:
 
Ron Levy said:
Sorry, what airport is this where the left-side taxiway parallel to RWY 2 is also RWY 2L?:confused:
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to be confusing. DPA has an ILS to the 8000 ft 2L and there's also a 5000 ft 2R (with no ILS). There are two N/S taxiways, one west of 2L and one east of 2R. Since the formation was on approach to 2L the left wingman could have lined up on the west taxiway or the right wingman could have landed on 2R. The south ends of both runways and both taxiways begin adjacent to each other.
 
gismo said:
Didn't mean to be confusing. DPA has an ILS to the 8000 ft 2L and there's also a 5000 ft 2R (with no ILS). There are two N/S taxiways, one west of 2L and one east of 2R. Since the formation was on approach to 2L the left wingman could have lined up on the west taxiway or the right wingman could have landed on 2R. The south ends of both runways and both taxiways begin adjacent to each other.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. Well, the wingman on the right clearly landed on 2L with Lead, so the only places for the wingman on the left to have gone were the taxiway or around. Not many airports like folks landing on the twy, so I'm guessing it was "around."
 
gismo said:
#3 could easily have landed on the taxiway west of the runway although I'm surprised they didn't land one of the three on runway 2R.

BTW, how can you tell the plane on lead's right isn't #3 other than the fact it landed with lead on the same runway as an element?
Click to expand...

How would they have legally landed one of them on 2R when the approach was to 2L? There's no side-step to 2R published for the approach. Circling mins for the approach are 700/1. It's hard to tell precisely what the ceiling and vis were, but the description on YouTube says "...IFR approach down to 300 feet", so they couldn't have cleared to circle to 2L and 2R.
 
Wow, that looks like fun.....

JOOC, do all participants in the formation have to be instrument rated since only the lead is on a FP?
 
From a friend:

We were trained for formation in all conditions and we practiced formation landings just to stay proficient, but for normal ops we did not practice formation approaches in the weather and we did not do formation landings routinely.

The skills were used occasionally, however. We had an A7 that lost his attitude display near Atlanta one day. He was above a solid overcast. ATC vectored a nearby C130 to his position and the A7 flew on the C130's wing down through the overcast. Unfortunately, on the first approach, the vis was so low that the A7 could not see the runway at decision height, and the C130 flew a missed with the A7 hanging on. On the second approach, the C130 offset to one side so that the A7 was lined up on the runway and was able to make a successful landing. As the C130 flew his second missed, the vis went below the mins for the ILS. The C130, which fortunately had much more fuel, flew to an alternate.
Click to expand...
 
gismo said:
Yep. In acronym speak, to fly as PIC in IMC you need an IR.
Click to expand...

But out of curiosity, how do you log it? It's IMC, but you're not flying "by sole reference to instruments" You're flying visually, "by paint". Lead is flying by instruments, wings are flying by paint, and don't need instruments as demonstrated by the C130/A7 story above.

Just curious and kicking over an ants nest to see if an interesting conversation falls out. *grin*

--Carlos V.
 
gismo said:
Yep. In acronym speak, to fly as PIC in IMC you need an IR.
Click to expand...

Ah, but do you? You're not the one accepting the clearance... Where in the regs does it say that you need to have an IR to be PIC in IMC?

I've also heard stories of non-IR pilots forming up on other airplanes when they shoot an approach to get down. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's legal. :D
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Ah, but do you? You're not the one accepting the clearance... Where in the regs does it say that you need to have an IR to be PIC in IMC?

I've also heard stories of non-IR pilots forming up on other airplanes when they shoot an approach to get down. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's legal. :D
Click to expand...

Sure it is. Emergency authority.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Ah, but do you? You're not the one accepting the clearance... Where in the regs does it say that you need to have an IR to be PIC in IMC?
Click to expand...

14CFR61.3 (e)(1) said:
(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), and instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;
Click to expand...

The portion in bold is the definition of IMC.

--Carlos V.
 
Unbeliever said:
But out of curiosity, how do you log it? It's IMC, but you're not flying "by sole reference to instruments" You're flying visually, "by paint". Lead is flying by instruments, wings are flying by paint, and don't need instruments as demonstrated by the C130/A7 story above.

Just curious and kicking over an ants nest to see if an interesting conversation falls out. *grin*

--Carlos V.
Click to expand...

Flight by instruments doesn't by itself require an IR, that definition is about what can be logged as instrument flight (back when that actually mattered for currency).
 
gismo said:
Flight by instruments doesn't by itself require an IR,
Click to expand...

Yes, the "moonless night over the ocean/desert." case.

that definition is about what can be logged as instrument flight (back when that actually mattered for currency).
Click to expand...

Hence my first question, "how do you log it?"

I'm imagining a humorous exchange, "yeah, I was flying by instruments, so what if the instruments were in a different airplane?" *grin*

--Carlos V.
 
SkyHog said:
JOOC, do all participants in the formation have to be instrument rated
Click to expand...
Yes. The wingmen are still PIC's of aircraft operating under IFR. The fact that the IFR clearance is issued to lead doesn't mean they're not all operating on that clearance or under IFR, regardless of weather.
 
Last edited:
Unbeliever said:
But out of curiosity, how do you log it?
Click to expand...
Last time I flew wing in the weather, I logged it as actual instrument time. Nobody's complained yet. Frankly, I don't think the FAA really thought about this situation when they wrote 61.51(g). But you can feel free to ask the Chief Counsel for an official interpretation if you like.
 
Ron Levy said:
But you can feel free to ask the Chief Counsel for an official interpretation if you like.
Click to expand...

No need. I just remembered that roncachamp does not visit this board, so there aren't any hairs to split here. *grin*

--Carlos V.
 
Now that is just awesome.
 
Ron Levy said:
The only thing it lacks is Adam saying "Don't try this at home..." and Jamie saying "...ever!"

Or do I have their lines reversed?:confused:
Click to expand...

The part I left out (but was thinking) was that is something that I doubt I'll ever be able to do, and certainly wouldn't want to try. But watching others do it is extremely, extremely cool.
 
Ron Levy said:
The only thing it lacks is Adam saying "Don't try this at home..." and Jamie saying "...ever!"

Or do I have their lines reversed?:confused:
Click to expand...

Nope, you got the order right. Adam is the glasses dude, and Jamie is the bald walrus.

--Carlos V.
 
Ron Levy said:
Yes. The wingmen are still PIC's of aircraft operating under IFR. The fact that the IFR clearance is issued to lead doesn't mean they're not all operating on that clearance or under IFR, regardless of weather.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...so then, the letter of the law says to fly in IMC outside Class G airspace, you must be on an IFR flight plan.

Does being part of a flight count as being part of a flight plan?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top