MIG-23 Down at Thunder Over Michigan Airshow At Willow Run.

Well, there's a real test of a relationship. . . when the backseater punches you out while you are still PIC and handling the situation.
It's an equal test of the relationship when you're out of control and ready to leave but the front-seater says, "Stay with me!" ...and you do.

Nauga,
not from personal experience
 
It's an equal test of the relationship when you're out of control and ready to leave but the front-seater says, "Stay with me!" ...and you do.

Nauga,
not from personal experience

Indeed. The brief during my time in the CAF was everybody was their own seat commander. Of course, I had the added responsibility of commanding a downward ejecting Cold War relic, a non-sequenced one at that. So everybody upstairs was getting out, but I swore on my life I would do my very best to flip that POS over and give my downstairs guys 250 radial feet before I abandoned ship. I count my blessings every single day I never had to cash in that promise.

Speaking of people who put their money where their mouth is, what my squadronmate did (different CAF squadron, we met in AETC) for his men in 2018 (earned him a DFC) is nothing short of BAMF. Guy earned his retirement here recently and will be flying the friendly skies for a certain legAAcy.
 
Last edited:
It's an equal test of the relationship when you're out of control and ready to leave but the front-seater says, "Stay with me!" ...and you do.

Nauga,
not from personal experience

Been there, done that… he stayed! Woo hoo! One more pig to stick on a stick in some veterans park in the world…
 
Another great video by Scott Perdue with an interview of the backseater. NTSB conveniently didn't mention that their prelim was based on interviews while both pilots were doped up in the hospital...

 
Another great video by Scott Perdue with an interview of the backseater. NTSB conveniently didn't mention that their prelim was based on interviews while both pilots were doped up in the hospital...

Which is why there would be *some* value to a civilian alternative board to the NTSB. When you have personal knowledge and experience with the NTSB system, it leaves a lot to be desired, unfortunately.
 
Which is why there would be *some* value to a civilian alternative board to the NTSB. When you have personal knowledge and experience with the NTSB system, it leaves a lot to be desired, unfortunately.
Agreed.

NTSB complained about how they were portrayed in the movie Sully, but if you've ever seen one of his speaking tour presentations, Sullenberger doesn't hold back on his thoughts on how adversarial the NTSB process is.
 
Which is why there would be *some* value to a civilian alternative board to the NTSB. When you have personal knowledge and experience with the NTSB system, it leaves a lot to be desired, unfortunately.
The NTSB is a civilian board.
 
The NTSB is a civilian board.

Government civilians.

No different in federal status as FAA employees.

Just a different agency that in theory reports directly to Congress.

To Ryan’s point they are often undermanned, but have conditioned themselves to use that as an excuse to be lazy/rely on others to do their work for them.
 
*TLDR warning*

That thickens the plot quite a bit. The narrative from the observer is basically akin to he had more SA than the front seater, and essentially saved his life. The further implication on his part is that the owner (front-seater) was biased towards troubleshooting vs punching. Fighting words amongst friends, especially when one goes to one of the youboobers (not a specific dig at this Perdue fella, I have personal acquaintances who are youboobers too) and agrees to get interviewed for what is effectively a refutation of an NTSB prelim. I'd like to hear the version from the front seater, regarding the state of the engine and the energy parameters. Given he is alive, he should be able to refute it, if the narrative is self-serving coming from the back seater.

As to the NTSB, that org has become such a disgrace. This is why I'll keep poking at the appeal to authority fallacies often parroted on here regarding deference to the alphabets. Hoo boi, what a keystone cop operation. Folks, if it doesn't have 121 on the front of the chapter, don't expect good or timely poop from these folks. And here I thought the usaf/usn AIB/AMB process was bush league....

Perdue goes too much Pepperidge Farms Remembers for my taste, instead of letting the main attraction talk. So I had to fast forward like a bad porno preamble. So I'll ask since I probably missed it, did the backseater disclose what kind of experience he had on the MIG-23? Doing a cursory google-fu, looks like the guy was a C-17 dude and currently a 121er, aka mil basic pilot. Don't get too deep looking though, cuz it also appears he's the same Mark Ruff engulfed in a nasty 2018 lawsuit involving him and 4 of his siblings, the mother and the convicted sibling, all squabbling like vultures over the late Ruff's almost 26-50 million dollar estate. holy. crap. Complete with youtube videos, allegations of murder threats, just the works. Yikes.

At any rate, if we are to take his narrative at face value, as someone who flies behind the same kind of old timey turbine engines, this sounds to me like idle-decay when the front seater gets an AB no light and goes all the way back idle-to-MIL. If true, he probably shouldn't have done that, going MIL-to-AB/MAX/reheat/wahtever the Ruskie label for it is, would have sufficed. Now, there's a big difference between an AB no light, idle decay, and an actual rollback/flameout. His narrative is not particularly specific on that front, which I found a little underwhelming for a guy who made the decision to punch everybody out.

The old timey analog fuel control probably hanged, though I'm a bit surprised this would happen at 300 knots (he didn't seem particularly sure of the actual value), even in a big bore MIG. Those big-@ssed Migs are draggy as hell, so I'm not surprised a big lumbering flogger go from 3 bills to nothing in zero time flat.

If it was indeed idle-decay, though he's not completely correct that it would require an airstart by default, he is correct they would need a ton of altitude to clear the fuel control choke and get the turbine spooled up again. It takes almost the same altitude loss as an airstart, so I'll concede the semantics. The point is he is correct they didn't have anywhere near the altitude to clear it. Again, he makes the owner-pilot sound like he was aloof and tunneled-vision. I would expect the owner to recognize this sequence, given we do know the flying background of the front seater in its entirety.

Looks like he's going full retard on making the social media round now, ward carrol is next youboober on the hopper who has him in the queue, I think the video streamed here 20 mins ago. I will say, it is a departure for me to see folks involved in an ejection, gum-flapping so openly about it "before the NTSB final is out". It's kinda refreshing actually.

I'll say again, he doesn't paint a complementary picture of the owner-pilot ("Files" Filer ?). Having to direct him to throw the wings forward, read out the airspeed trend, command flaps. It reads like a narrative of an instructor talking to an upgrade or unqual. Again interesting given the backseater was not a pointy noser in the usaf, and files was navy tacair, so he's not uninitiated to pointy nose. The backseater must have more civilian Mig experience than is being reported, given his family history he has the socioeconomic background to float a stand-alone civilian fighter hobby.



Has anybody found any interviews with files on the accident in question? The fact the backseater is leaking like a seeve all over the internet and the front seater is EMCON IV, doesn't escape me right now.
 
Last edited:
*TLDR wanring*

That thickens the plot quite a bit. The narrative from the observer is basically akin to he had more SA than the front seater, and essentially saved his life. The further implication on his part is that the owner (front-seater) was biased towards troubleshooting vs punching. Fighting words amongst friends, especially when one goes to one of the youboobers (not a specific dig at this Perdue fella, I have personal acquaintances who are youboobers too) and agrees to get interviewed for what is effectively a refutation of an NTSB prelim. I'd like to hear the version from the front seater, regarding the state of the engine and the energy parameters. Given he is alive, he should be able to refute it, if the narrative is self-serving coming from the back seater.

As to the NTSB, that org has become such a disgrace. This is why I'll keep poking at the appeal to authority fallacies often parroted on here regarding deference to the alphabets. Hoo boi, what a keystone cop operation. Folks, if it doesn't have 121 on the front of the chapter, don't expect good or timely poop from these folks. And here I thought the usaf/usn AIB/AMB process was bush league....

Perdue goes too much Pepperidge Farms Remembers for my taste, instead of letting the main attraction talk. So I had to fast forward like a bad porno preamble. So I'll ask since I probably missed it, did the backseater disclose what kind of experience he had on the MIG-23? Doing a cursory google-fu, looks like the guy was a C-17 dude and currently a 121er, aka mil basic pilot. Don't get too deep looking though, cuz it also appears he's the same Mark Ruff engulfed in a nasty 2018 lawsuit involving him and 4 of his siblings, the mother and the convicted sibling, all squabbling like vultures over the late Ruff's almost 26-50 million dollar estate. holy. crap. Complete with youtube videos, allegations of murder threats, just the works. Yikes.

At any rate, if we are to take his narrative at face value, as someone who flies behind the same kind of old timey turbine engines, this sounds to me like idle-decay when the front seater gets an AB no light and goes all the way back idle-to-MIL. If true, he probably shouldn't have done that, going MIL-to-AB/MAX/reheat/wahtever the Ruskie label for it is, would have sufficed. Now, there's a big difference between an AB no light, idle decay, and an actual rollback/flameout. His narrative is not particularly specific on that front, which I found a little underwhelming for a guy who made the decision to punch everybody out.

The old timey analog fuel control probably hanged, though I'm a bit surprised this would happen at 300 knots (he didn't seem particularly sure of the actual value), even in a big bore MIG. Those big-@ssed Migs are draggy as hell, so I'm not surprised a big lumbering flogger go from 3 bills to nothing in zero time flat.

If it was indeed idle-decay, though he's not completely correct that it would require an airstart by default, he is correct they would need a ton of altitude to clear the fuel control choke and get the turbine spooled up again. It takes almost the same altitude loss as an airstart, so I'll concede the semantics. The point is he is correct they didn't have anywhere near the altitude to clear it. Again, he makes the owner-pilot sound like he was aloof and tunneled-vision. I would expect the owner to recognize this sequence, given we do know the flying background of the front seater in its entirety.

Looks like he's going full retard on making the social media round now, ward carrol is next youboober on the hopper who has him in the queue, I think the video streamed here 20 mins ago. I will say, it is a departure for me to see folks involved in an ejection, gum-flapping so openly about it "before the NTSB final is out". It's kinda refreshing actually.

I'll say again, he doesn't paint a complementary picture of the owner-pilot ("Files" Filer ?). Having to direct him to throw the wings forward, read out the airspeed trend, command flaps. It reads like a narrative of an instructor talking to an upgrade or unqual. Again interesting given the backseater was not a pointy noser in the usaf, and files was navy tacair, so he's not uninitiated to pointy nose. The backseater must have more civilian Mig experience than is being reported, given his family history he has the socioeconomic background to float a stand-alone civilian fighter hobby.



Has anybody found any interviews with files on the accident in question? The fact the backseater is leaking like a seeve all over the internet and the front seater is EMCON IV, doesn't escape me right now.
My sense is that little of that matters, assuming they were at <200 knots, <1,000', descending, with little/no power. Answer is... Pull the handles.
 
My sense is that little of that matters, assuming they were at <200 knots, <1,000', descending, with little/no power. Answer is... Pull the handles.
Yeah; I would have disagreed from the early reports, but knowing now that the engine powering the brick was idling, there really was no other choice.
 
Has anybody found any interviews with files on the accident in question? The fact the backseater is leaking like a seeve all over the internet and the front seater is EMCON IV, doesn't escape me right now.
Haven’t heard anything directly from the PIC, but I do know this: Scott Perdue is friends with both pilots and I personally know Scott well.

I can’t imagine Scott posting that interview with the GIB if the PIC has a significantly different story.
 
Haven’t heard anything directly from the PIC, but I do know this: Scott Perdue is friends with both pilots and I personally know Scott well.

I can’t imagine Scott posting that interview with the GIB if the PIC has a significantly different story.

Fair enough, I'll take your word for it. I'm also to assume the backseater is well-versed in the Flogger, for Files to have put him in a physical position capable of punching everybody out in the first place. I would expect a seeing-eye dog to have more experience than the pilot asking for a seeing-eye dog. I only bring that up because no Mig-relevant information has been forthcoming on Ruff's experience, we only know he wasn't a pointy noser in the usaf, and we of course know Files was navy strike (A-6).
 
Fair enough, I'll take your word for it. I'm also to assume the backseater is well-versed in the Flogger, for Files to have put him in a physical position capable of punching everybody out in the first place. I would expect a seeing-eye dog to have more experience than the pilot asking for a seeing-eye dog. I only bring that up because no Mig-relevant information has been forthcoming on Ruff's experience, we only know he wasn't a pointy noser in the usaf, and we of course know Files was navy strike (A-6).
Why does that matter? Facts (and I'll call them that, pending other info) is that they were out of energy and with no chance of getting it back. Assuming that's the case, why the assault on the backseater, who seems to have made the right decision?
 
Why does that matter? Facts (and I'll call them that, pending other info) is that they were out of energy and with no chance of getting it back. Assuming that's the case, why the assault on the backseater, who seems to have made the right decision?
calm down, I'm not assaulting anyone. Post wasn't even addressed to you so feel free to not quote me.
 
I thought this was a public forum and an open discussion. My bad...
This is POA. There's no place for logic here. Only ranting, name calling and opinions that aren't supposed to be challenged. I'm pretty sure you're going to get fined or something now.
 
I thought this was a public forum and an open discussion. My bad...
It is an open discussion, but twice in the last three times you quoted my posts just to say they're immaterial to the discussion, then flat out accused me of smearing people. And I'm the one being censorious here? Pot meet kettle.

My angle may be immaterial or tangential to what you care about the accident, but it isn't to me. My interest in the accident deals with the CRM angle, a topic very germane to those of us who actually fly fighter-trainers (dual hot seat), nevermind for a living at that. As such, a topic where the discussion of a non-PIC punching us out is very much of interest, on the daily. That's why I want to learn more about the participants' personal and flying background. Is that ok with you, or do we have to start a different thread about everything you personally deem a tangent?
 
It is an open discussion, but twice in the last three times you quoted my posts just to say they're immaterial to the discussion, then flat out accused me of smearing people. And I'm the one being censorious here? Pot meet kettle.

My angle may be immaterial or tangential to what you care about the accident, but it isn't to me. My interest in the accident deals with the CRM angle, a topic very germane to those of us who actually fly fighter-trainers (dual hot seat), nevermind for a living at that. As such, a topic where the discussion of a non-PIC punching us out is very much of interest, on the daily. That's why I want to learn more about the participants' personal and flying background. Is that ok with you, or do we have to start a different thread about everything you personally deem a tangent?
Aah, so we can only discuss what you want to discuss on your terms. Got it.
 
Aah, so we can only discuss what you want to discuss on your terms. Got it.

Not at all a representation of my point. You can have the last word, I feel I've clarified my position wrt the topic.
 
It is an open discussion, but twice in the last three times you quoted my posts just to say they're immaterial to the discussion, then flat out accused me of smearing people. And I'm the one being censorious here? Pot meet kettle.

My angle may be immaterial or tangential to what you care about the accident, but it isn't to me. My interest in the accident deals with the CRM angle, a topic very germane to those of us who actually fly fighter-trainers (dual hot seat), nevermind for a living at that. As such, a topic where the discussion of a non-PIC punching us out is very much of interest, on the daily. That's why I want to learn more about the participants' personal and flying background. Is that ok with you, or do we have to start a different thread about everything you personally deem a tangent?
I'm old, but confused. Do you believe: 1) the back seater improperly usurped the front seater's authority, 2) front seater did not properly brief the flight, or 3) back seater probably saved them both from death by acting on his own? Or, who (if anybody) committed aviation sin?
 
It is …discussion of a non-PIC punching us out is very much of interest, on the daily. …
Makes you wonder the odds of just leaving the other seat pinned for the fam flights.
 
Last edited:
I'm old, but confused. Do you believe: 1) the back seater improperly usurped the front seater's authority, 2) front seater did not properly brief the flight, or 3) back seater probably saved them both from death by acting on his own? Or, who (if anybody) committed aviation sin?

I don't have the information to answer that, because I don't know anything about the back seater's experience. I can't corroborate the account of the engine status, because the PIC is not talking publicly. An ejection is not corroboration of the narrative, that is definitionally confirmation bias. I don't know why my agnosticism on that front turned into having to notch against white knighting attacks. Oh wait, it's POA that's why.

Now, if you're asking me to ASSume a bunch of stuff? Sure, let's assume that: Backseater has similar/higher MIG 23 time than the front seater; PIC asked him to be seeing-eye dog; engine sequence occurred exactly as the backseater purports on social media; PIC tunneled-vision to the extraneous degree the backseater describes on SM.

If all of that is true, then mark me down for your option 3 up there.

If the intra-cockpit exchange is as he describes on his social media rounds, then that is akin to a bog standard exchange between an instructor and a tumbleweed upgrade trainee. The sequence as narrated by the guy, is not a compliment to Files. Some might look at it as "he saved them both", I'd look at it more like "you tried to kill me", if I'm pulling handles first as the so-called observer. Only time "self-loading baggage" should be beating PIC to the handles, would be PIC incapacitation. Are we on an instructional ride or not; that stuff needs to be clarified before people strap into a hot seat. That's the CRM piece that takes my breath away. By that narrative, the owner would have been dead if flown solo. Better lucky than good I guess.

Makes you wonder the odds of just leaving the other seat pinned for the fam flights.
It depends, for me. I don't think a qualified guy in non-PIC capacity would ever agree to that. I certainly wouldn't; in fairness I've been playing the sport of kings a bit too long for my own good and prob wouldn't make a good SIC on a wide deck BBQ grill, let alone a crew airplane lol (insert john wayne CRM flying meme here).

Now, same comment wrt unqualified guys? Oh, absolutely 100% I wouldn't launch without Hamburger Helper hands back there having their seat pinned, or me having a sequence selection of "CMD FWD" available to me in the front. We had a couple boo boos decades back when observers pulled the wrong handle and jettisoned the canopy on the ground, getting lucky the frame cleared the cockpit area on the way down (not always a given in a zero airspeed pop).

I fear being punched out by my student (especially certain internationals) a heck of a lot more than the statistical chances I'll mort while flying solo due to incapacitation/FOD-headstrike. To wit, I wouldn't have desired to become a pilot if I couldn't fly solo, so the aforementioned opportunity cost has always been sunk for me.
 
1. Flew TA4s, advanced flight school
Instructor and S3s in the fleet.

2. Was common in the fleet to brief NFO as primary ejector… was pretty much assumed the pilot was gonna be fighting the thing past when was necessary.

3. Non qualified passengers AND students never got command eject authority. They could pop themselves, but not me. NO ONE rides a pinned seat.

4. The well publicized Holtgren F14 ejection came too late to save her… it was initiated by the NFO back seat, BUT only after the LSOs called for it. He was a fleet experienced NFO and instructor, he should have initiated that much sooner.

5. Well within his rights, a right seat experienced NFO went to command eject himself and his pilot (after a broke wire bolter or something) in a S3. Command eject lever was installed backwards, went by himself, jet flew away from the water and successfully trapped single seat! (was a two seat mission, overhead tanker). It's somewhere on boobtoob.

6. Will be interesting to learn more details…
 
If the intra-cockpit exchange is as he describes on his social media rounds, then that is akin to a bog standard exchange between an instructor and a tumbleweed upgrade trainee. The sequence as narrated by the guy, is not a compliment to Files. Some might look at it as "he saved them both", I'd look at it more like "you tried to kill me", if I'm pulling handles first as the so-called observer. Only time "self-loading baggage" should be beating PIC to the handles, would be PIC incapacitation. Are we on an instructional ride or not; that stuff needs to be clarified before people strap into a hot seat. That's the CRM piece that takes my breath away. By that narrative, the owner would have been dead if flown solo. Better lucky than good I guess.
I noticed that as well. Not great, no matter how you cut it.
 
That would make for an awkward conversation, one would think.

Is the loss of afterburner really that big of a deal in something like that?

Loss of A/B on it's own, no. But there's a rub. The nozzle.

Typically on afterburning jets, when AB is selected, the variable exhaust nozzle opens to allow for the supersonic exhaust flow (a divergent nozzle). When AB is deselected, at full power the nozzle will close down as a convergent nozzle. As thrust is further reduced to idle, the nozzle opens again reducing thrust output. Nozzle position is critical to engine thrust. A jet at max RPM, with the nozzle open produced almost zero usable thrust.

So, if AB was selected, the nozzle opened, but the afterburner failed to light, and now the engine is at full dry RPM, but with the nozzle open, usable thrust is near zero and that becomes a big problem real quick.

If you recall, there was a F/A-18D crash in Oceana in 2013 or so where the jet went into an apartment building with both crew ejecting shortly after takeoff. The cause was an engine failure on one side, and an unrelated nozzle failure on the other motor...near infinitesimal chances, but it was their day...and that failure took a jet that flies pretty well on one engine, and made it irrecoverable.

In the F-16 for example, selecting backup engine control (SEC) closes the nozzle regardless of power setting, eliminating that variable. The engine will produce excess thrust at idle, but that's a far better scenario that producing insufficient thrust at mil.

I don't know how the MiG-23 systems work, but I'd suspect that AB failure could lead down a path of exhaust nozzle issues as well.
 
Loss of A/B on it's own, no. But there's a rub. The nozzle.

Typically on afterburning jets, when AB is selected, the variable exhaust nozzle opens to allow for the supersonic exhaust flow (a divergent nozzle). When AB is deselected, at full power the nozzle will close down as a convergent nozzle. As thrust is further reduced to idle, the nozzle opens again reducing thrust output. Nozzle position is critical to engine thrust. A jet at max RPM, with the nozzle open produced almost zero usable thrust.

So, if AB was selected, the nozzle opened, but the afterburner failed to light, and now the engine is at full dry RPM, but with the nozzle open, usable thrust is near zero and that becomes a big problem real quick.

If you recall, there was a F/A-18D crash in Oceana in 2013 or so where the jet went into an apartment building with both crew ejecting shortly after takeoff. The cause was an engine failure on one side, and an unrelated nozzle failure on the other motor...near infinitesimal chances, but it was their day...and that failure took a jet that flies pretty well on one engine, and made it irrecoverable.

In the F-16 for example, selecting backup engine control (SEC) closes the nozzle regardless of power setting, eliminating that variable. The engine will produce excess thrust at idle, but that's a far better scenario that producing insufficient thrust at mil.

I don't know how the MiG-23 systems work, but I'd suspect that AB failure could lead down a path of exhaust nozzle issues as well.
Fascinating. Thanks for that.
 
Back
Top