Navy T-6 Down in AL.

Maxnr

Maxnr

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
683
Location
NW FL
Display Name
Display name:
Bob
Yesterday, 10/23/2020, a USN T-6 went down in a residential area in Foley, AL. Both crew were fatalities. The house they hit went up in flames, but all occupants got out. Plane was based at NAS, Whiting field near Milton FL.
 
The pics are awful. It looks like an out of control high speed event.

RIP to the aviators.
 
Female crew, Navy instructor and Coast Guard student...sad deal something bad happened. Rest In Peace Lt Ross and Ensign Garrett.
 
End of September was the first FY in Naval Aviation history without a fatality, too :( Definitely something that happened fast :(
 
Really good ones too. But you gotta pull the handle. And I'll digress on it until the AIB comes out, which might be a year from now. Condolences to the families.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Really good ones too. But you gotta pull the handle. And I'll digress on it until the AIB comes out, which might be a year from now. Condolences to the families.
Click to expand...

Indeed, there might be a good reason they didn't punch. I watched a Thunderbird (T-38) pilot stay with his plane after a dual engine out, to avoid the crowd. He died.
 
JohnAJohnson said:
Indeed, there might be a good reason they didn't punch. I watched a Thunderbird (T-38) pilot stay with his plane after a dual engine out, to avoid the crowd. He died.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is a common trope proffered (claims of "stay with the ship" heroics from bystanders), but it's not an actual thing in military aviation. I lost a UPT classmate in a Hornet in the UK, no ejection. Many claims of heroics and residence-dodging by pedestrians and all the accompanying fanfare. Then you get to the tapes and the SIB, and the truth is much more straightforward, unremarkable. And most unfortunate for the emotionally invested: unflattering for the deceased.

We let laypeople and relatives of the deceased have their lionizing ideations and coping mechanisms. I have no issue with that escapism as long as the loss didn't involve bystanders or innocent crew (students would fall into that one). Otherwise, as professional aviators we don't indulge in political correctness and emotional projections. We call spade a spade, learn from their loss, and move on.

I've flown both the accident airplane type, and the airplane type your own anecdote relates to. Both of them in an instructional and evaluator capacity, in excess of 2,000 sorties. In the case of the former, let's just say I have it on good authority that there is ZERO place for an instructor to inhibit an ejection decision with a student onboard, especially in a sequenced seat setup. Zero ethical and procedural slop for that kind of nonsense, and it is nonsense.

As to the latter, again I can't even take the proposition seriously at face value since anybody with most basic front seat qual in the T-38 can immediately debunk the proposition of attempting to control a T-38 with dual engine flameout. It's not a matter of opinion, it's physical systems knowledge of the flight control system from day 1 academics. I understand it's empowering to believe in self-sacrifice stories, and there are such anecdotes in military aviation, but the non-ejection trope during aircraft malfunctions is just not one of them.

I won't speculate on the cause of this thread's accident, but based on the most recent losses, I do have a private conviction of what's at play here. It is very unfortunate and maddening if it bears out as true.
 
I agree with everything you said, but the T-38 I'm referencing was at a show at Hill AFB (Ogden) in the early 80s. Civilians had been jumping the fence on the south side of the field all day, and the SPs had been continuously moving them back out. During the T-Bird show, the SPs lost control and lots of civilians were gathered in the area. The accident ship setup for a low pass and on right base, lost power. He turned toward the runway and after establishing a glide on the extended centerline, it was obvious he was going to land short, and deviated off course and into a large manure wagon. Clipped two horses too. If he would have punched, there is no doubt there would have been civilian casualties. And yes, there was evidence that he tried to punch at the last minute but he obviously waited too long. As far as the physical systems, it's been a while but I seem to remember windmilling would give you 500 psi of hydraulics all the way down to 150 knots, and 500 psi was the minimum required to move flight controls. So while I agree with everything you said, I think in this case, there was an exception. I was there and it was obvious what had transpired, to us on the ground and to his team mates, who, within one minute, passed over in a missing man.

hindsight2020 said:
Yeah, this is a common trope proffered (claims of "stay with the ship" heroics from bystanders), but it's not an actual thing in military aviation. I lost a UPT classmate in a Hornet in the UK, no ejection. Many claims of heroics and residence-dodging by pedestrians and all the accompanying fanfare. Then you get to the tapes and the SIB, and the truth is much more straightforward, unremarkable. And most unfortunate for the emotionally invested: unflattering for the deceased.

We let laypeople and relatives of the deceased have their lionizing ideations and coping mechanisms. I have no issue with that escapism as long as the loss didn't involve bystanders or innocent crew (students would fall into that one). Otherwise, as professional aviators we don't indulge in political correctness and emotional projections. We call spade a spade, learn from their loss, and move on.

I've flown both the accident airplane type, and the airplane type your own anecdote relates to. Both of them in an instructional and evaluator capacity, in excess of 2,000 sorties. In the case of the former, let's just say I have it on good authority that there is ZERO place for an instructor to inhibit an ejection decision with a student onboard, especially in a sequenced seat setup. Zero ethical and procedural slop for that kind of nonsense, and it is nonsense.

As to the latter, again I can't even take the proposition seriously at face value since anybody with most basic front seat qual in the T-38 can immediately debunk the proposition of attempting to control a T-38 with dual engine flameout. It's not a matter of opinion, it's physical systems knowledge of the flight control system from day 1 academics. I understand it's empowering to believe in self-sacrifice stories, and there are such anecdotes in military aviation, but the non-ejection trope during aircraft malfunctions is just not one of them.

I won't speculate on the cause of this thread's accident, but based on the most recent losses, I do have a private conviction of what's at play here. It is very unfortunate and maddening if it bears out as true.
Click to expand...
 
JohnAJohnson said:
I agree with everything you said, but the T-38 I'm referencing was at a show at Hill AFB (Ogden) in the early 80s. Civilians had been jumping the fence on the south side of the field all day, and the SPs had been continuously moving them back out. During the T-Bird show, the SPs lost control and lots of civilians were gathered in the area. The accident ship setup for a low pass and on right base, lost power. He turned toward the runway and after establishing a glide on the extended centerline, it was obvious he was going to land short, and deviated off course and into a large manure wagon. Clipped two horses too. If he would have punched, there is no doubt there would have been civilian casualties. And yes, there was evidence that he tried to punch at the last minute but he obviously waited too long. As far as the physical systems, it's been a while but I seem to remember windmilling would give you 500 psi of hydraulics all the way down to 150 knots, and 500 psi was the minimum required to move flight controls. So while I agree with everything you said, I think in this case, there was an exception. I was there and it was obvious what had transpired, to us on the ground and to his team mates, who, within one minute, passed over in a missing man.
Click to expand...

If there was an attempted ejection, I completely buy the sequence of events you posted. Windmilling RPM is sufficient to attain hydraulic pressure to move flight controls, but the aerodynamics worthy of control occur above 200 knots in order to be of consequence to roll and pitch the aircraft. The roll and pitch authority will be severely degraded of course as it is, and sink rate will rapidly make the decision to continue to attempt control manipulation a lethal one, especially in the old seats those guys used to fly on.

I do want to emphasize the scope of my comments deal with two different ethical propositions. My main criticism of the conjecture about ejection delays deals with crew environment, particularly training command in this case. A demo team with single seat occupancy is ethically a different matter to me. Just wanted to make sure my comments didn't get misattributed, since we're talking about two very different event archetypes here. Cheers!
 
JohnAJohnson said:
I agree with everything you said, but the T-38 I'm referencing was at a show at Hill AFB (Ogden) in the early 80s. Civilians had been jumping the fence on the south side of the field all day, and the SPs had been continuously moving them back out. During the T-Bird show, the SPs lost control and lots of civilians were gathered in the area. The accident ship setup for a low pass and on right base, lost power. He turned toward the runway and after establishing a glide on the extended centerline, it was obvious he was going to land short, and deviated off course and into a large manure wagon. Clipped two horses too. If he would have punched, there is no doubt there would have been civilian casualties. And yes, there was evidence that he tried to punch at the last minute but he obviously waited too long. As far as the physical systems, it's been a while but I seem to remember windmilling would give you 500 psi of hydraulics all the way down to 150 knots, and 500 psi was the minimum required to move flight controls. So while I agree with everything you said, I think in this case, there was an exception. I was there and it was obvious what had transpired, to us on the ground and to his team mates, who, within one minute, passed over in a missing man.
Click to expand...

C4FCD2F6-4739-45F1-81D4-CBF23D1E7C37.jpeg
 
Phase of flight? What maneuvers were in progress at the time? Chances are it was during some type of maneuvering flight, besides ‘normal’ flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top