Titans Flyover

The big deal in this has nothing to do with the “Karens.” It’s the Army, it’s a bureaucracy and they’re big on following orders. Just like the Miramar squadron commander who was relieved for that sundown ceremony flyover a couple years back. You can bet the CG of the 101st is gonna want answers.

A flight evaluation board will most likely convene and if found in violation of regs, you can bet their BDE Commander will pass down some sort of punishment. Unless gross negligence was at play, I seriously doubt anyone will lose their wings. Simple negligence, most likely 30 days PIC orders pulled and the air mission commander’s designation for the flight rescinded. Fact is, the days of the “Wild West” in military aviation are over.
 
Velocity173 said:
The big deal in this has nothing to do with the “Karens.” It’s the Army, it’s a bureaucracy and they’re big on following orders. Just like the Miramar squadron commander who was relieved for that sundown ceremony flyover a couple years back. You can bet the CG of the 101st is gonna want answers.

A flight evaluation board will most likely convene and if found in violation of regs, you can bet their BDE Commander will pass down some sort of punishment. Unless gross negligence was at play, I seriously doubt anyone will lose their wings. Simple negligence, most likely 30 days PIC orders pulled and the air mission commander’s designation for the flight rescinded. Fact is, the days of the “Wild West” in military aviation are over.
Click to expand...

I was at a Georgia Tech game 10-15 years ago where a couple of F/A-18's did a very low flyover. I commented to SWMBO at the time "Wow, that looks really low". Someone in the Navy agreed. Both pilots were removed from flying duty (at the least). I don't remember if anyone was discharged or court martialed.
 
kyleb said:
I was at a Georgia Tech game 10-15 years ago where a couple of F/A-18's did a very low flyover. I commented to SWMBO at the time "Wow, that looks really low". Someone in the Navy agreed. Both pilots were removed from flying duty (at the least). I don't remember if anyone was discharged or court martialed.
Click to expand...

Yeah I heard about that one. I believe it was these two.

 
NoHeat said:
For me, this is deja vu.

In 2011, there was an Air Force flyover at Kinnick Stadium, in Iowa City, that cleared the scoreboard by only 58 feet. I was there, among 70,000 fans, and I was very surprised at what I saw.

The AF investigated, and threatened court martial for the lead pilot. He instead accepted a demotion and resigned.

About the AF investigation:

To avoid future problems, the investigation recommended an experienced instructor pilot should fly in the backseat of one aircraft during flyovers, target altitudes must be set beforehand and video recording and altitude warning systems should be used by aircraft that have them.​

According to the story linked below, the other pilots didn't seem to have much choice in the matter -- they said they were angry that their lead pilot caused them to fly so low. But I'm not sure if I believe they're really innocent, especially since the team was actually practicing the day before at altitudes less than 1000' over the same stadium.
​
Pilot in low Kinnick flyover blamed other air traffic | The Gazette
Click to expand...

**Uncle hindsight story time TLDR warning**

The older I get, the smaller the world gets. So there I was...

Yeah, the guy was an IP during my student tenure at END. I also had the opportunity to work with #4 of said fly-over much more recently for the last few years until 3 months ago, when he finished his initial commitment and separated AD to go Guard to a unit closer to his formative home.

The flight lead in question was my XC IP back then. I can vouch for the fact that the character was an OK stick, but a lazy aviator and not particularly invested in his role as an undergraduate training instructor. His tenure at Vance, plastered for all to read on that article via FOIA, was riddled with such exchanges and administrative admonishments. From where I sit, the things he boned up he did not because he somehow sucked at flying, no. Rather, it was because his GAF factor for the job at hand was pegged at zero. I've met many such former fighter pilots who act as though this job is beneath them.

As to #4, it was complete BS what happened to him. A mere FAIP at the time, completely railroaded by men who were supposed to be mentors at such a young point in his career. An environment where he wouldn't have been able to effectively speak up (TDY dynamics), let alone do anything about the altitude of the fly-by. Just like junior wingmen look up to their 4FLs and patches, FAIPs take cues from senior flyers at the squadron in very much the same vein. The fact though is that the environment even as recent as 2011, was a lot more cowboy than it is today.



In the end, the relative experience level of the instructor cadre continues to green down, big AF production goals continue to go unmet. So it is incumbent on all us who have a vested interest in watching our students not die a premature death in vain, to hold ourselves to a higher standard, even if many consider this task beneath them. I don't have much patience for that petulance anymore, having buried half a dozen peers and students alike so far. I can say we have become better as a community when it comes to flight discipline; our current challenge is simply the lack of retained experience and a predisposition from senior leadership to dilute down our training regiment.

Fly safe and check six!

Velocity173 said:
Fact is, the days of the “Wild West” in military aviation are over.
Click to expand...

QFT!
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Other than the CH-47 all of the aircraft in that formation have wire strike protection systems. However, WSPS isn’t a 100 % save all against all wires. Could easily damage the aircraft depending on angle and type of wire.

While the FAA doesn’t have authority in punishing the aviators here, they have the rule making authority. In this case, unless a waiver had been obtained (doubtful) they’re limited to 500 ft AGL. The gray area is the FAR min altitude as applicable to helicopters. The request for a military aerial event actually goes through the local FSDO as well.

View attachment 102265

CH-47 wire strike
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-chinook-looks-like-after-a-power-line-strike
Click to expand...

Military Fly-Overs are limited to 1000’ unless it’s one of the sanctioned demo teams, e.g. Blue Angels, then it’s 500’.

The Stadium would have filed for a DD2535 that the local FAA FSDO would approve. A 119 wavier isn’t required for the typical fly overs. A sanctioned team will request and receive a 119 waiver if they want to do the flight below 1000’.

The most the local FSDO can do is a Enforcement Investigation Report and forward it to legal. At that point they’re done and it will somehow make it to the DOD and then I guess the local command.
 
ARFlyer said:
Military Fly-Overs are limited to 1000’ unless it’s one of the sanctioned demo teams, e.g. Blue Angels, then it’s 500’.

The Stadium would have filed for a DD2535 that the local FAA FSDO would approve. A 119 wavier isn’t required for the typical fly overs. A sanctioned team will request and receive a 119 waiver if they want to do the flight below 1000’.

The most the local FSDO can do is a Enforcement Investigation Report and forward it to legal. At that point they’re done and it will somehow make it to the DOD and then I guess the local command.
Click to expand...

Where does the FAA get the 1,000 ft from? Current DoD and Army public affairs policy states 500 ft. I can tell you right now, the vast majority of flyovers are well under 1,000 ft.
65894419-F3DE-4A6B-9791-D1DA9A210FA5.jpeg EB2500FA-BB55-483C-80FE-304B8A89CB91.jpeg
 
Ok, I found it. Strange conflicting of policies.

2C1F9B2C-23A9-42DE-A6B6-C1F2DB988180.png
 
Lol! That girl’s comment. “holy ****!”
 
I really don't think it's a big deal either with the exception of the cable that was pointed out in two diferent video segments. It was mentioned this was an optical illusion, but on two different video clips? Did they actually fly under a cable? If so, then I do think this is a big deal. If there are no cables and the airspace was wide open from side to side, then I say, good show.
 
Sounds like the cables were actually below them according to this.

"Raising concerns were some videos that appeared to show the choppers passing just beneath some sort of cable.

The Titans said it was actually cables used to hold the field goal nets.

As viewed from Sky 5, those cables are connected to the bottom of the top deck, which means the Army helicopters would have flown above them."
 
CerroTorre said:
Sounds like the cables were actually below them according to this.

"Raising concerns were some videos that appeared to show the choppers passing just beneath some sort of cable.

The Titans said it was actually cables used to hold the field goal nets.

As viewed from Sky 5, those cables are connected to the bottom of the top deck, which means the Army helicopters would have flown above them."
Click to expand...

Question is, were they aware of the cables and their position in the stadium . . . knowledge of all items pertinent to the flight and all.
 
So it seems most don’t care about the pilot’s choice of altitude here. I’d ask this, should there be any sort of hard deck at all for these events? Highly trained pilots, as long as they don’t hit anything it’s alright? And what about 91.119 mins for civilian pilots? Just another overreaching FAR restricting our rights as pilots?
 
Velocity173 said:
So it seems most don’t care about the pilot’s choice of altitude here. I’d ask this, should there be any sort of hard deck at all for these events? Highly trained pilots, as long as they don’t hit anything it’s alright? And what about 91.119 mins for civilian pilots? Just another overreaching FAR restricting our rights as pilots?
Click to expand...

It's like porn. I know "too low" when I see it. One size really doesn't fit all. A helicopter flight 200' over the highest point on the stadium - not a big deal to me. A 'Vark doing a dump and burn at the same altitude would probably be a bad idea.

Maybe the 5 services get together and set minimums by aircraft category then find a way to get the FAA in agreement.
 
kyleb said:
It's like porn. I know "too low" when I see it. One size really doesn't fit all. A helicopter flight 200' over the highest point on the stadium - not a big deal to me.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you were referencing this flyover, but in this case they were below the highest point of the stadium. I don't think there is any argument this was planned and cleared, this was showboating.
 
Search "Titans flyover" and there are dozens, if not hundreds, of videos popping up on youtube. The vast majority show the helicopters flying over the wires (although some angles also really show just how low they were), such as this one:

 
midwestpa24 said:
Not sure if you were referencing this flyover, but in this case they were below the highest point of the stadium. I don't think there is any argument this was planned and cleared, this was showboating.
Click to expand...

No, not referencing this flyover. Just making a hypothetical statement.
 
kyleb said:
It's like porn. I know "too low" when I see it. One size really doesn't fit all. A helicopter flight 200' over the highest point on the stadium - not a big deal to me. A 'Vark doing a dump and burn at the same altitude would probably be a bad idea.

Maybe the 5 services get together and set minimums by aircraft category then find a way to get the FAA in agreement.
Click to expand...

I agree. I’m a believer in adhering to some sort of standards but also ones that make sense. In this case, 1,000 would be ridiculous for a flyover and hardly any of them are done at that height. 500 ft makes sense and if you see maybe 400 on the RADALT, no one would throw a fit. Being below the highest obstacle even with a proper recon I think is an unnecessary risk over a very densely populated area. Since they weren’t landing, there’s no pre-briefed path that’s been cleared for them. Anything can happen.

Lot of ignorance online about how they’re “highly trained professionals” and “trained to fly that low in combat.”Well, they’d be surprised to know that there are hard decks there as well. 50 ft (200 the following year) when I left Iraq and 500 ft when I was in Astan. These guys fly low level (NOE) 90 % of the time in approved routes in restricted areas. You’re over trees and isn’t a chance of hitting wires or a flag pole and there aren’t 50,000 people below you if you were to have a major mech problem with your aircraft. Even in areas where no hard deck exists, I have two friends who were punished for flying too low. Safety is in the eye of the beholder.

I draw the line though in the polarized approach to punishment these days. The T-38 / F-18 examples earlier shouldn’t have lost their wings. You look at the regs, what’s the standard and what was your pre briefed altitude? Ok, you broke it, you admit breaking it and now you get a slap on the wrist for it. Shouldn’t be a career ender.
 
Channel 5 blew this completely out of proportion, and they're my favorite local news channel.

Nobody had any problems with the Nascar Pace Car infils quite a few times back in the mid 2000's. Helped that our Regimental Commander was a huge Nascar fan. Flew right in over the crowd, landed, dropped off the car, and flew back out. Sometimes there'd be Blackhawks fast roping guys in and Little Birds with guys on the pods. We did do a few practice runs a couple of days before, and made sure we had all the obstacles identified.


I'm the guy on the left side of the ramp as the pace car comes out. I think it was Darrel Waltrip driving it.
 
For the record, regarding the IA flyover, only flight lead "lost" his wings. The entire purpose behind him leading the flyover was as a last good deal before separating from the Air Force; this was merely his fini flight and had a separation date approved and established.

The investigation actually delayed his departure from the service because formal court martial charges were brought up. He quickly elected to negotiate with the service and offer to give up his aeronautical rating (a meaningless gesture, as someone with no intention of going to the airlines and a separation date already processed) and forfeit his last months pay, in lieu of court martial. That's as sweetheart deal as they come from my perspective.

The rest of those involved did not lose their wings. All five (included 2 pilots on the ground acting as controllers for the flyover timing) were admin punished (I only knew of #4, I never knew of 2 and 3), likely article 15s and/or LOA/LOR. Not sure about the 2 pilots on the stadium. But it is a matter of public record all pilots except hollywood retained flying status. I don't agree with the admin punishments for all involved, but I think in the aggregate the person primarily responsible for the whole breach of discipline got the brunt of the punishment, as he should have.

I can't speak to the internal deliberations that led to the gatech F-18 flyover outcomes.
 
Flymy47 said:
Channel 5 blew this completely out of proportion, and they're my favorite local news channel.

Nobody had any problems with the Nascar Pace Car infils quite a few times back in the mid 2000's. Helped that our Regimental Commander was a huge Nascar fan. Flew right in over the crowd, landed, dropped off the car, and flew back out. Sometimes there'd be Blackhawks fast roping guys in and Little Birds with guys on the pods. We did do a few practice runs a couple of days before, and made sure we had all the obstacles identified.


I'm the guy on the left side of the ramp as the pace car comes out. I think it was Darrel Waltrip driving it.
Click to expand...

NSDQ
 
Velocity173 said:
Other than the CH-47 all of the aircraft in that formation have wire strike protection systems.
Click to expand...

Chinooks are too big for WSPS and they usually survive after sacrificing a few feet of rotor blade. Ask me how I know...

My old unit in Korea suffered two fatal wire strike crashes in a 10 month period and there is still a memorial to those crews somewhere on Camp Humphries...
 
Flymy47 said:
Channel 5 blew this completely out of proportion, and they're my favorite local news channel.

Nobody had any problems with the Nascar Pace Car infils quite a few times back in the mid 2000's. Helped that our Regimental Commander was a huge Nascar fan. Flew right in over the crowd, landed, dropped off the car, and flew back out. Sometimes there'd be Blackhawks fast roping guys in and Little Birds with guys on the pods. We did do a few practice runs a couple of days before, and made sure we had all the obstacles identified.


I'm the guy on the left side of the ramp as the pace car comes out. I think it was Darrel Waltrip driving it.
Click to expand...

Yep. My Reserve unit has done that often. We would show up with either a pace car or a HMMWV and roll it out onto the track and he would take off and do a lap or two...
 
IK04 said:
Yep. My Reserve unit has done that often. We would show up with either a pace car or a HMMWV and roll it out onto the track and he would take off and do a lap or two...
Click to expand...

HMMWV’s usually required a fiberglass donation from the ramp area on infil. Airframe shop would always cringe when they found out we were doing vehicle training.
 
For perspective I fly that low over cars and people every single time I'm on final at certain airports... not saying we should be careless and reckless, but some of the hysteria is more about public perception than anything else. Also, while we're not over the crowd, per-say, when you are in the low stack at an airshow, the L's and O's are often doing nice little orbits at 300' over the houses and businesses on the other side of the airport.
 
I don’t see any uniform standard that the FAA is applying here. Let’s face it, none of these helicopter flyovers are at 1,000 ft. One flyover draws the FAA’s attention yet another doesn’t.

 
I think the thread title refers to the professional football team that plays at Nissan stadium in Nashville, where the flyover occurred.
 
So this threads begs a question with me, are military pilots subjected to the FAA rules? I understand that they follow them with flying in the National Airspace system, and stunts like this is going to get you a meeting with a senior officer but are they in trouble with the FAA itself?
 
Ventucky Red said:
So this threads begs a question with me, are military pilots subjected to the FAA rules? I understand that they follow them with flying in the National Airspace system, and stunts like this is going to get you a meeting with a senior officer but are they in trouble with the FAA itself?
Click to expand...

All of the branches list the FARs as regulatory and any applicable violation will be investigated by their commander. In this case, the Army PA reg states they have to comply with any FAA regulatory altitude. Whether or not the 8900.1 is regulatory for DoD is a bit gray. I would think they’re referencing the CFR with that statement and not the 8900.1. Doesn’t matter anyway because they were below the DoD min altitude of 500 ft. Unless they went through ARCOM and got an altitude waiver (doubtful), they’ll be punished in some shape or form.

FAA going after their FAA certs, for those that possess them? Not sure this would meet that criteria. Are they exercising the privileges of a COM cert is this operation? I suppose it’s possible but I’ve never heard of the FSDO getting involved in that.
 
Last edited:
Ventucky Red said:
So this threads begs a question with me, are military pilots subjected to the FAA rules? I understand that they follow them with flying in the National Airspace system, and stunts like this is going to get you a meeting with a senior officer but are they in trouble with the FAA itself?
Click to expand...

I realize that I'm just some guy on the internet, but I'll say that that military pilots aren't subject to FAA rules, except to the extent the military adopts those rules.
 
Ventucky Red said:
So this threads begs a question with me, are military pilots subjected to the FAA rules? I understand that they follow them with flying in the National Airspace system, and stunts like this is going to get you a meeting with a senior officer but are they in trouble with the FAA itself?
Click to expand...

Yes, we follow most of the NAS rules as defined by the FAA, others we have letters of agreement and/or waivers to selected rules on the basis of special operational requirements or equipment limitations wrt speed (yes, 250KCAS is sloooooow in our slice of the mil world).

As to getting in trouble? No, one cannot be punished by the FAA while operating in a military capacity, my individual identity is withheld from the FAA as a matter of policy, and deviations incurred or alleged while flying DoD equipment do not result in actions against civilian airman certificates (for those of us who have them). Military chain of command is ultimately the disposition authority for the adjudications of mil aeronautical ratings and flight evaluation boards (FEB). Dispositions which do in fact occur, as was highlighted earlier in the thread with the T-38 and F-18 flyovers.
 
This comes up every year. Usually it’s right after a bunch of people complain about not getting a flyby or getting “one that sucked”. Typically the “ones that suck” were probably adhering to the letter of the law.

I’ve gotten into a tiff or two over my flybys. The only one that I felt bad about was Daytona in 2010. I was busy dodging birds and a Cessna that went from our hold point then direct to the field so we had him, lost him, had him, lost him the whole way in plus looking for the blimp and banner tow guys and adjusting speed to make the timing. The altitude fell out of my cross check and we were quite a bit too low. My B.

The other ones I was always right where I wanted to be (even if that wasn’t 1,000’).

Everytime it was brought up to my bosses it was always by someone who had a bone to pick with fighter pilots and they made that clear in their complaints (lucky for me).

edit to add: having said all that these helo’s were too low IMO. (And they didn’t even shack the timing - WTFO??!!)
 
That was my biggest gripe. Timing was way off. Come on 101st. Air Assault! That’s what happens when you have have a full bird leading it.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top