f-16 fog

[battplatt]

All,

I don't post often, but this thread has struck a chord with me. In the interest of full disclosure, i am a current active duty fighter pilot (not an F-16), so at the risk of sounding like "big government"...

How about instead of taking a bad situation that happened to a fellow aviatior, a situation mind you that very few if any of us have experienced ourselves, we should look at what we can learn here from it. I think the potential of this thread has been lost to an irrelavant discussion or wheter there was "fog" and what "we" think happened. The truth is, the Pilot was no amateur, they were highly trained and proficient, but still bad things happen to good people. We should look at this andattemt to derive some universal lessons learned rather than a "well i really know what happened" type conversation, because honestly no one other than that pilot really truly will ever know exactly what happened.

Back in my heyday, Hangar talk meant telling stories and anecdotes that led you to become a better aviatior, not just a a reason to arm chair quarterback people and glow in their failures.

Maybe my view is a bit altruistic for this forum, but i would like to see opportunities like this become useful to anyone who reads them, then even as tragic as it is, damage to an airplane and a pilot's pride becomes something more than embarrassment and tax dollars spent.

And now to avoid hipocracy...One of the largest lessons here is...Always fly your speeds. A good landing starts with a good approach, which is in turn defined by being on speed, perhaps if this guy did not touch down hot he would have had a different outcome. I agree that the thought of a go around should have been in his head, but let's just say that in this case for whatever reason that wasn't an option. The old adage that runway behind you is useless hold true.

On a technical note, USAF ECS (Environmental Systems) are notorious for having issues with the filters, in that once they are dirty, they create a fog or somke like effect in the cockpit, it can be very distracting and disorienting. If it was bad enough it is completely plausible that it impeded the view of his flight instruments/HUD and cause complications. It may have ven made him question whether or not going around was possible without totally losing control of the aircraft.

Again, consider my point in that this whole forum could be a much more valuable resource if we actually tried to teach each other and learn from things. I agree there are times and things worth griping about, but i strongly feel this isn't one of them.

Batt

[Chad Jensen]

Well said Batt. I was standing at the T-28 line when this happened, and have watched all the videos, read the report. Seems plausible to me, and I think learning from this is the best take-away.

[Zack Baughman]

Thanks for sharing that info and point of view Batt, and THANK YOU for your service Sir!

Zack

[Bill]

Thanks for sharing that info and point of view Batt, and THANK YOU for your service Sir!

Zack

Its good to know that some EAA members appreciate our service to the United States of America. It was hard to tell that from some of the posts in this thread.

[Tlb67]

I started this thread not to pick on the pilot, thank God for his service
Poor guy just happened to do it on the biggest stage in the world
I was more of the final report, sorry guys but the days of believing what the goverment feeds us are long gone !!!!
probbly a little drenaline going in that cockpit buzin Oshkosh
Im not on here to piss people offf!!

[johnerrington]

I was at KOSH that day and watched the pair of F-16's do their high speed passes down the runway. The flight leader was very aggressive in making his turn to the east. He used afterburner and approximately 90 degrees of bank in what looked like a very high G turn. The second pilot was much less aggressive as he started his 180 degree turn toward the downwind leg. He did not use afterburner and his bank angle was about 65 degrees. I remember thinking at the time that perhaps he had an aircraft problem and was doing the best he could.

I also watched both F-16's during the last part of their landing roll, in fact, the back of my head is in the famous video of that event. I was concerned that even the 1st plane might miss his turnoff. When the 2nd one went past my position, I knew he was in trouble because he was even faster, but did not appear to be slowing. I thought accident report would indicate a brake failure... Just shows how wrong I was.

[steveinindy]

Its good to know that some EAA members appreciate our service to the United States of America. It was hard to tell that from some of the posts in this thread.

Well said, although I do have to say (thanks to my time in the Air Force) that I'm not exactly the first to give them a free pass just because it's the US military. I'm with Batt on this one: let's not criticize or assume that the colonel had pictures of someone and learn from the incident here as best we can. Everyone knows you save those for when you need a promotion that you're not going to get otherwise or to quash a full IG investigation....I think that's part of the second day's lesson plan in NCO and officer leadership programs right behind how to write reports making your unit (and therefore yourself) look great on paper.

[flyingriki]

Apparently made the brake pedals slippery, too.... :-)

Ron Wanttaja

Good point Ron. He went by us with the nose still floating and about 500' to the grass.........! Didn't seem to be having any visibility issues with that show.

[Dekef4]

Children,children please stop! I for one, am definately not laying the whole affair on the pilot. I didn't perceive a single comment from anyone that would disparage anyone's service or show a lack of "appreciation" for our service men and women. I spent a career and my son is half way through his and truly understand intimately all aspects of this problem.So just look at the facts and evaluate for yourself.I reviewed the u tube footage and read thoroughly theUSAF Accident Investigation Report as this thread piqued my interest. Let me say this, I was an Air Force trained accident investigator and have been on both side of an Accident Board. I am the last person to be spring- loaded either for or against a pilot mechanic, controller or anyone else. The Environmental Control System was Definately a factor in this mishap. I have no doubt that moments after the MIshap Pilot retarded the throttle that forward visibility was severely limited if not non-exist ant. I believe The MPs testimony was his accurate perception of what occurred However, Flight Safety Officer School at USC taught me that when we start to talk about mishaps there are Causes and Factors that create a chain of events in the accident sequence. If elimination of any of these factors eliminates the mishap then that factor is a "Cause". the Board steps through all the events in the sequence. Eg. #1 "The MP took off from MGM" and so forth thru the entire sequence. All I am trying to get across is that there were several factors that caused this Mishap. Failure of the ECS system is only one of them. pilot error cannot be discounted because had the pilot not flown an overhead pattern, after one approach clearly demonstrated that the weather was not suitable and a straight in visual or an instrument approach should have likely been the next step (fuel was NOT an issue,he nearly 50% internal fuel). The ceiling was 1400'. A normal overhead pattern used to be flown at 1500' AGL in the F16. thus, cloud clearance requirements dictated a ceiling of2000'AGL. We all know we did what we had to in order to complete the mission, but if caught outside the rules it was at our own risk. So the low pattern altitude requires more g (thus, more speed ) to complete the same radius turn that could be completed while trading altitude from a normal pattern. This effect is known as "radial g" in Fighter Pilot lingo. You have gravity, in effect, helping you turn. As a result the Board estimated that the MP touched down 1,000 to 1500' down the runway (normal point) however, speed was estimated 165 to 175Kts. Planned touchdown speed should have been 140 Kts. This would yield a normal landing distance 2800' from the report. 165 knots yields 5400' on an 8000' runway with no overrun or arresting system. Failure to deploy the speed brakes cost him another 600'. So, giving him the benefit of doubt, we say he landed 1000' down plus a 6000' rollout. Leaving a1000' excess. You make the call, had he conducted an on speed landing in the desired touchdown would he likely have been able to stop prior to the end even with impaired or no forward visibility. He did say that the fog disoriented him. I do not doubt that. But the last airspeed he recalled was 140kts which would have occurred well after touchdown with the aircraft already tracking down the runway. Winds were negligible. I'm sorry, but I have doubts that he seriously considered an ejection. A power increase for a go around may have cleared the problem could have been a scary or worse prospect especially if he was disoriented.One point I'd like to make. The Accident Report is the AFs official position on the matter as far as the media and the lawyers are concerned. However, know that there is another report that is never released, it is known as the Safety Investigation Board Report. It is conducted by a completely separate board that conducts an entirely independant investigation. The reason it is protected is because all information revealed by any party to the accident, pilot, mechanic,or vendor is guaranteed non retribution or litigation in return for their honesty and full cooperation. This is a sacred trust that is never broken in the interest of accurate investigation and accident prevention. The SIB is conducted first and only the facts are given to the Accident Board no testimony or analysis of any kind is yielded.Finally, I apologize for the length, this is my understamding of how these boards were conducted during my time (20 years ago). I also apologize for the "pictures" comment, it was a crude joke and in poor taste. I'm afraid that's part of the fighter pilot culture I grew up in. I love and truly respect all of our troops and especially our intrepid aviators. We all make mistakes!

[Intruder]

For the F-16 pilots - could the canopy have been raised enough to blow out the fog or to give the pilot clear view forward? If it was smoke or fumes in the cockpit on landing, what would have been done?