DOCSLIB.ORG

Airshow Accident Review 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Airshow Accident Review 2013 1 AIRSHOW ACCIDENT REVIEW 2013 The tenets expressed in this review are those of the author and addresses a sample of significant accidents and incidents at aerial events worldwide in 2013, both during the actual events and during rehearsals and includes, airshows, air races, flypasts, and air capability demonstrations; in fact, any event at which an aircraft is displayed or rehearses for a public air event in which the flow of the event is jeopardised. Des Barker Introduction Quoting from the concluding remarks from the ‘Airshow Accident Review 2010’ published in World Airnews of February 2011 and reviewing the safety statistics of “Black 2010” in which critical questions were asked: “One is left with no other alternative but to reach the same conclusion as in 2009. As an international airshow community, we seem to have plateau’d in our ability to reduce accidents and incidents at airshows. The question is: “can we afford then to just continue and accept an increasing average of 24 accidents/incidents per annum. Can we afford to just accept what the dice have dealt with the associated loss of life? Are we doing enough worldwide to reduce the number of airshow accidents/incidents? Based on the fickleness of human judgement in the low level display environment, is it realistic to even believe that zero accidents are possible in a given year? If not, what is an acceptable loss rate?” “Should one even consider anything else but a target of zero accidents per annum? It is clear that regulatory oversight worldwide is in serious need of an overhaul and that airshow display pilots and airshow organisers will have to make a concerted effort to improve safety at airshows lest aviation legislation and insurance costs are brought to bear with dire consequences for this sport type. At the expense of melodrama, there is nothing new under the sun. Highly experienced pilots making the same errors in judgement over the past 101 years? Or is it the case as Earnest Gann implied in his book Fate is the Hunter – “We can only do is our best. We either make it, or not?” Maybe Airshow Accidents/Incidents 2004 to 2013 it’s just time to revisit the ‘marriage vows’ again with the realisation that low level 40 display flying is for the professionals only! 2013 Statistical Overview 35 These questions were put to the 30 European Airshow Council (EAC), the International Council of Airshows (ICAS) 25 and Airshow South Africa (ASSA) at their annual Safety Conventions in 2010. The year 2010 was acknowledged statistically 20 as the worst in recent airshow history and the loss rate was unacceptable and as 15 such, airshow safety oversight organisations were galvanized into taking 10 a more aggressive approach to airshow safety and introduced improved oversight 5 mechanisms and ongoing safety management systems that constantly 0 questioned the environment with the view 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 to identifying hazards and developing mitigating actions. It was pointless to introduce additional regulations, there Statistical analysis of airshow accidents and incidents over were already enough in place; what was the past 10 years shows a year on year average of 27 required, however, was to zero in on accidents per annum but with a decreasing trend since human factors across the entire airshow 2011. Can this trend be maintained? 2 community, from first responders, through vendors, safety officers and display pilots alike, through a continuous ‘in your face’ safety programme. By 2011, there was the first indication of a reduction in airshow accidents which raised the question: “Is this real or just random numerical scatter”? By 2012, a further reduction was evident and the first indications of a trend towards improved airshow safety statistics was becoming evident which was followed up in 2013 with a further improvement, the lowest accident rate in many years verifying the downward trend. This begs the question, can we maintain this trend? Is it possible to achieve a zero accident rate worldwide? What were the main contributory factors in 2013 that can be used as lessons learned? Reviewing some of the accidents in 2013 may provide some insight. It bears mentioning that the 2013 airshow season worldwide, was adversely affected by US sequestration effects which saw many military organisations curtailing their participation in aerial events and the cancellation of several airshows. Casualties Although a total of 20 accidents Pilots Wingwalk and incidents were recorded although two Killed, 11 Killed, 1 were not directly aircraft related and despite the fact that the total number of Skydiver, accidents had decreased year on year, the 1 accidents resulted in 112 casualties in which 11 pilots, one wing walker, one Spectators parachutist and 8 spectators lost their lives Spectator Killed, 8 with a further 91 spectators injured, this in s Inj, 91 stark contrast to the zero spectator fatalities of 2012 which in itself, was a first in the history of airshows. Unfortunately, the most significant contribution to the unnecessary spectator deaths and injuries was not aircraft related, Airshow accident/incidents 2013 by casualty category. but rather a ‘rogue’ truck which was a sideshow at the Mexican Extreme Aeroshow where eight spectators were killed and eighty injured. Fatalities remain untenable and unsustainable if the airshow Display community is to continue to exist without Practice additional regulatory and insurance 19% interventions, both of which could impose additional constraints on the ability to host air events. Sponsors are not generally amenable to supporting events in which fatalities occur; not good for branding at all! Airshows Event Categorisation 81% Historically, the ratio of airshow accidents during actual displays versus practice was 71%. In a significant regression in 2013, the percentage of accidents occurring at actual air events Airshow accident/incidents 2013 by event category. increased by 14%, to 85% with only 15% during practice. This phenomenon can possibly best be explained by the fact that the pressure to perform during the actual event watched by spectators and at times under hostile atmospheric conditions, places additional stress on the pilot to ‘press’ the display to capability limits. There are often cases in which the conditions during rehearsal are less than ideal and pilots then elect to postpone rehearsals until conditions improve. The problem is that on show day under less than ideal conditions, with the demands from the event organiser, and pilot’s wanting to meet their fee 3 commitments, sometimes ‘press’ the performances under conditions for which they have not practiced. The military adage of “fight like you train” is especially relevant; display like you practice – anything else is pushing the error budget. Accidents by Country 20 accidents occurred in fourteen different countries; a significant improvement on the 34 airshow accidents and incidents of 2011 and the 26 accidents of 2012. The USA, by virtue of its significantly greater number of airshows annually, experienced six, accidents and incidents – down from the nine in 2012. Sadly, there are no accurate statistics regarding flying hours flown in practice and during air events against which to make more statistical sense of the accident figures. Germany experienced two airshow accidents while El Salvador, Spain, Turkey, Sweden, Australia, South Africa, Dominican Republic, Russia, UK, Norway, Mexico and Switzerland all suffered one accident. 7 6 5 4 3 2 Accidents/Incidents 1 0 Airshow accidents and incidents 2013 by country. Causal Factors For the third year in succession, Machine causes (30%) were the most significant contribution to airshow accidents and incidents, not the traditional Flight Into Terrain (25%) and Loss of Control (25%). In a way, that is good news. What is of concern is the number of mechanical failures within the vintage aircraft category, mainly engine failures. This contribution from MACHINE was thus inordinately high at 30% versus the historical average of 23%. Flight Into Terrain was down from the historical average of 28% at 25% and Loss of Control, up from 21% to 25%. Truck Para The question is why the mechanical 5% 5% contribution had increased so significantly? Enviro Not surprisingly, the primary contribution to 9% Machine factors was closely tied into the Mech increased number of vintage aircraft that 33% were involved in airshow accidents; 50% of FIT the accidents involved vintage aircraft, 83% of which were engine failures. Conclusion, 24% mechanical failures on vintage category Loss of aircraft contributed inordinately as the Control primary causal factor of accident statistics in 24% 2013, a similar trend was evident in the previous year and is certainly an indicator to monitor into the future. Airshow accident and incidents 2013 by causal factors. 4 Very reassuring was the swing away from human judgement error, down from 86% in 2010 to 53% in 2011, 42% in 2012 and a slight increase to 52% in 2013. Does this mean that the airshow community have become more sensitive to the threats and challenges and that pilot judgement and fine motor skills have improved? Does this imply that maintenance efforts, particularly on vintage aircraft engines have now regressed below standard? Aircraft Categories Bearing in mind the adverse effects of sequestration on military aircraft participation Trainer Truck Trainer at airshows in 2013, the aircraft categorization Prop 5% Turbo essentially reflected the main participants 5% Prop worldwide with Sport Aero category involved 5% in 35% of the accidents, followed by a total of Vintage Sport 50% various vintage category aircraft. The Light Util Aero single largest change to the historical trends 10% 33% was that for the first time in close on 100 Vintage years, no fighters were involved in airshow accidents worldwide. Trainer What was of concern was the fact that Jet Vintage vintage aircraft as a category, as was the 9% Fighter case in 2011 and 2012, continued to make up Vintage Prop 50% of the aircraft types involved in the Trainer 19% accidents and incidents, this being 30% Prop greater than the historical norm and is more 14% than likely going to be the trend in the short to medium term.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 6 Part 2 - Glider Aircraft Version 2020
    FAI Sporting Code Fédération Aéronautique Internationale Section 6 Regulations for the Conduct of International Aerobatic Events Part 2 Glider Aircraft Maison du Sport International Av. de Rhodanie 54 Version 2020 CH-1007 Lausanne (Switzerland) Tél. +41 (0)21 345 1070 Effective 1st January 2020 Fax +41 (0)21 345 1077 E-Mail: [email protected] Web: www.fai.org Sporting Code, Section 6 Part 2 - Glider Aircraft Version 2020 FEDERATION AERONAUTIQUE INTERNATIONALE MSI - Avenue de Rhodanie 54 – CH-1007 Lausanne – Switzerland Copyright 2020 All rights reserved. Copyright in this document is owned by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI). Any person acting on behalf of the FAI or one of its Members is hereby authorised to copy, print, and distribute this document, subject to the following conditions: 1. The document may be used for information only and may not be exploited for commercial purposes. 2. Any copy of this document or portion thereof must include this copyright notice. 3. Regulations applicable to air law, air traffic and control in the respective countries are reserved in any event. They must be observed and, where applicable, take precedence over any sport regulations Note that any product, process or technology described in the document may be the subject of other Intellectual Property rights reserved by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale or other entities and is not licensed hereunder. ii Sporting Code, Section 6 Part 2 - Glider Aircraft Version 2020 RIGHTS TO FAI INTERNATIONAL SPORTING EVENTS All international sporting events organised wholly or partly under the rules of the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) Sporting Code1 are termed FAI International Sporting Events2.
    [Show full text]
  • CAA Doc 743 Civil Air Displays a Guide for Pilots
    Safety Regulation Group Civil Air Displays a guide for pilots contents introduction Introduction Air displays are now one of the most popular The law spectator events in the United Kingdom. On average there are over 250 civil flying displays Guidance for display each year attracting in excess of two million pilots spectators. It is of the utmost importance in the interests of public and personal safety, that those Managing the risk who participate in such displays operate to the highest standards. These notes are intended to Planning your provide advice to display pilots to help them display avoid the pitfalls which have been experienced in the past. Practising for your display The air show Display day Post display © Andrew Critchell 1 the law The rules governing the conduct of civil air displays in the United Kingdom are given in the current Air Navigation Order, The Rules of the Air Regulations and comprehensively explained in CAP 403 – “Flying Displays and Special Events: A Guide to Safety and Administrative Arrangements”. guidance for display pilots Display flying, especially aerobatics, is a specialised form of flying that frequently involves flying the aircraft close to the edges of the permitted flight envelope. Regrettably, most years, a small number of pilots are killed whilst displaying. Many of these pilots were highly experienced and extremely competent in their particular aircraft and display. What can be done to minimise the risk? managing the risk personnel fitness There are a large number of factors which affect the outcome of a particular flight. Many of them are encountered well before the pilot gets anywhere near the aircraft.
    [Show full text]
  • CIVA Plenary Minutes
    OFFICIAL MINUTES FAI International Aerobatics Commission (CIVA) Meeting Held Madrid Spain 25-26 September 2004 IN THE CHAIR President of CIVA................................................................................................................... Michael R. Heuer President of Honour .......................................................................................................................James Black 1st Vice President ..................................................................................................John Gaillard (South Africa) 2nd Vice President ................................................................................................ Jirí Kobrle (Czech Republic) 3rd Vice President.....................................................................................................Osmo Jalovaara (Finland) Vice President, Finance ..................................................................................Lars-Göran Arvidsson (Sweden) Vice President, Glider Aerobatics ..................................................................................... Karl Berger (Austria) Secretary.............................................................................................................................Liz Cook (Australia) FAI.................................................................................................................... Max Bishop, Secretary General Australia ...............................................................................................................................Liz
    [Show full text]
  • Helicopter Rotorway: «Selbst Ist Der Pilot» Ich Bin Berufspilot – Wie Weiter? Jetzt Jedenwettbewerb! Monat: Kommen Sie Auf Unsere Seite
    CHF 7.60 / 5.20 Das Schweizer Luftfahrt-Magazin Nr. 11/November 2009 General Aviation Pilot Report DA40 TDI Nr. 11/November 2009 11/November Nr. Civil Aviation Lockerbie – das ungeklärte Military Aviation Drama BAE Systems Warton: Im Auge des Taifuns… Helicopter RotorWay: «Selbst ist der Pilot» Ich bin Berufspilot – wie weiter? Jetzt jedenWettbewerb! Monat: Kommen Sie auf unsere Seite. Ist es nicht Zeit für eine Versicherung, die genau auf Ihre Bedürfnisse abgestimmt ist? Umfassender Schutz in der Luft und am Boden Wer abhebt – ob mit Motorkraft oder Thermik – muss grossen Wert auf die Sicherheit legen. Wir von der AXA Winterthur bieten Ihnen einen genau auf Ihre Bedürfnisse abgestimmten Versicherungsschutz, damit Sie und Ihre Passa giere mit Sicherheit komfortabler fliegen. Jetzt Offerte beantragen: Urs Spiegelberg und Georg M. Hardegger, General Guisan-Strasse 42, 8401 Winterthur, 052 261 58 33 oder 052 261 58 28, axa-winterthur.ch fh4_210x297_AXA_LuftFZVers_Cockpit_d.indd 1 07.10.09 14:32 Military Aviation Kommen Sie auf unsere Seite. L «Im Auge des Taifuns…» Englands Eurofi ghter-Werk in Warton 6 Ist es nicht Zeit für eine Versicherung, die genau L Inhalt Eurofi ghter in Österreich: Ein Beispiel auf Ihre Bedürfnisse abgestimmt ist? Herausgeber, Inserate, Abonnemente, Cockpit November 2009 «politischer Flugzeugbeschaffung» 11 Druck, Verlag: 50. Jahrgang L Ziegler Druck- und Verlags-AG Tiger über Belgien – Schweizer Maschinen Verlag «COCKPIT» «auf der Pirsch» 12 Postfach 778 L CH-8401 Winterthur Military News 14 ZD-Medien.ch LL Zentrale: +41 52 266 99 00 Erster Gripen für Thailand fl iegt 15 Fax: +41 52 266 99 13 Verlagsleiter: Markus Wenger Civil Aviation Leiterin Verlagssupport: Brigitte Tanner 16 Anzeigenleiter: Pablo Vecchi Die Tragödie von Lockerbie L Tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Bennet KATHY MEXTED
    48 Profile: Paul Bennet KATHY MEXTED Fasterand Louder Kreisha Ballantyne persuaded airshowman and warbird scared of spins and stalls, they tend to look down on aerobatics as though it exponent Paul Bennet to sit still long enough for an is wrong. “Aerobatics inspire a lot of people, but we’ve come across a few interview. Kathy Mexted wrote up the story on one of old pilots who think aeros put too Australia’s air show stalwarts. much stress on the airframe. “There are people you wouldn’t expect that absolutely hate spinning f you don’t go near another fly. The next day Paul was at Royal stupid risks. I’m competitive and ‘out but sometimes they’ve become so computer for the whole week, Newcastle Aero Club enquiring there’ and will try new things, but I good at knowing how to stay out of just log onto Paul Bennet’s about flying lessons. like to be in control. I don’t persist it, they don’t get close to it. Some website and have a look at the “From being a qualified boat builder with things I’m not good at.” of the country’s best warbird pilots short clip on his home page. It and shipwright, I’d moved into making With an aerobatic rating, the goal refuse to spin, and while I can’t say involves a low-flying Pitts and granite bench tops. I made some good is to compete. You start with rolls and that’s wrong, I can’t agree with it. In a high flying motorbike.
    [Show full text]
  • Unusual Attitudes and the Aerodynamics of Maneuvering Flight Author’S Note to Flightlab Students
    Unusual Attitudes and the Aerodynamics of Maneuvering Flight Author’s Note to Flightlab Students The collection of documents assembled here, under the general title “Unusual Attitudes and the Aerodynamics of Maneuvering Flight,” covers a lot of ground. That’s because unusual-attitude training is the perfect occasion for aerodynamics training, and in turn depends on aerodynamics training for success. I don’t expect a pilot new to the subject to absorb everything here in one gulp. That’s not necessary; in fact, it would be beyond the call of duty for most—aspiring test pilots aside. But do give the contents a quick initial pass, if only to get the measure of what’s available and how it’s organized. Your flights will be more productive if you know where to go in the texts for additional background. Before we fly together, I suggest that you read the section called “Axes and Derivatives.” This will introduce you to the concept of the velocity vector and to the basic aircraft response modes. If you pick up a head of steam, go on to read “Two-Dimensional Aerodynamics.” This is mostly about how pressure patterns form over the surface of a wing during the generation of lift, and begins to suggest how changes in those patterns, visible to us through our wing tufts, affect control. If you catch any typos, or statements that you think are either unclear or simply preposterous, please let me know. Thanks. Bill Crawford ii Bill Crawford: WWW.FLIGHTLAB.NET Unusual Attitudes and the Aerodynamics of Maneuvering Flight © Flight Emergency & Advanced Maneuvers Training, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Maneuver Descriptions
    2017-2018 Senior Pattern Association Section III Maneuver Descriptions NOTE: MANEUVER DESCRIPTIONS THAT FOLLOW ARE TAKEN VERBATIM FROM THE APPROPRIATE AMA RULE BOOKS FROM WHICH THE MANEUVERS WERE TAKEN. THE ONE EXCEPTION IS FOR THE SQUARE HORIZONTAL EIGHT, FOR WHICH EVERY APPEARANCE IN THE AMA RULE BOOK ENDED AS AN INCOMPLETE DESCRIPTION. THE SPA BOARD HAS CREATED WHAT WE THINK WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE ENDING, WHICH IS SHOWN ON PAGE 34 IN ITALICS. Anatomy of an SPA Maneuver by Phil Spelt, SPA 177, AMA 1294 SPA pilots are flying what is called “Precision Aerobatics,” in the official AMA publications” -- the old-time way (pre turnaround). The emphasis in that name is on the word “Precision.” That means pilots are supposed to display precise control of their aircraft in front of the judges. This precision should, ideally, be shown from the moment the plane is placed on the runway until it stops at the end of the landing rollout. Technically, the judges are only supposed to “judge” during the actual maneuvers, but they will notice either wild or tame turnarounds – whether deliberately or accidentally. An SPA maneuver consists of five sections, which can be viewed as an onion sliced through the middle vertically – so there are 2 pairs of layers, or parts, surrounding the actual maneuver in the center, as illustrated. The outer pair (sections 1 and 5) comprises the “free flight” area, which is used to turn the aircraft around and get it lined up to enter the next maneuver. Most pilots use a Split-S maneuver for the turnaround, thus maintaining the track of the plane at the distance from the runway at which the maneuvers are performed.
    [Show full text]
  • 22. Maneuvering at High Angle and Rate
    12/3/18 Maneuvering at High Angles and Angular Rates Robert Stengel, Aircraft Flight Dynamics MAE 331, 2018 Learning Objectives • High angle of attack and angular rates • Asymmetric flight • Nonlinear aerodynamics • Inertial coupling • Spins and tumbling Flight Dynamics 681-785 Airplane Stability and Control Chapter 8 Copyright 2018 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only. http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.html 1 http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/FlightDynamics.html Tactical Airplane Maneuverability • Maneuverability parameters – Stability – Roll rate and acceleration – Normal load factor – Thrust/weight ratio – Pitch rate – Transient response – Control forces • Dogfights – Preferable to launch missiles at long range – Dogfight is a backup tactic – Preferable to have an unfair advantage • Air-combat sequence – Detection – Closing – Attack – Maneuvers, e.g., • Scissors • High yo-yo – Disengagement 2 1 12/3/18 Coupling of Longitudinal and Lateral-Directional Motions 3 Longitudinal Motions can Couple to Lateral-Directional Motions • Linearized equations have limited application to high-angle/high-rate maneuvers – Steady, non-zero sideslip angle (Sec. 7.1, FD) – Steady turn (Sec. 7.1, FD) – Steady roll rate " F FLon % F = $ Lon Lat−Dir ' $ FLat−Dir F ' # Lon Lat−Dir & Lon Lat−Dir FLat−Dir , FLon ≠ 0 4 2 12/3/18 Stability Boundaries Arising From Asymmetric Flight Northrop F-5E NASA CR-2788 5 Stability Boundaries with Nominal Sideslip, βo, and Roll Rate, po NASA CR-2788 6 3 12/3/18 Pitch-Yaw Coupling Due To Steady
    [Show full text]
  • Parents Question High School Policies After Game Forfeit Officials to Review Coach Leonow's Position in Light of 'Quality of Supervision'
    W^t USPS 6S020 OUR 100th YEAR Second Class Postage Paid Published it Wcsindd. N.J. Thursday, October 25,1990 Every Thursday 232-4407 FORTY CENTS DRINKING PARTY CAUSES SUSPENSION OF 21 STUDENTS Parents Question High School Policies After Game Forfeit Officials to Review Coach Leonow's Position In Light of 'Quality of Supervision' Ky R. R. FASZCZEWSKI Spmiilh Wnllenfor Thr Wnifirld Ltutlri The violations of Westfield High School policy which led to the forfeiture of the school's boys' WAGONLOAD OF BEAUTIES...Enjoying the hayride during yw soccer team's bid fora sixth Union event, left to right, are: Kelly Norton, Brooke Wiley, and Courtney and Meghan Bender. County championship last week have been dealt with by high DROPOFF ZONE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS GETS SUPPORT school officials, but controversy still surrounds the matter. On October 12 forty members Parking Prohibition at Apartment of the boys' soccer team, the cheerleaders for the team and four coaches, assigned to chaperone the group, journeyed to Bermuda Draws Applause from Residents to play the Warwick Secondary School team, rated the top team HyR.R.FASZCZEWSKI the fight for the extension of the to get in and out of cars there. on the island. Sprciully Wrilieti/or Thr VlmfitU Uodti no-parking prohibition, thanked While he welcomed the idea of The extension of the no-parking the Council for adopting the a dropoff zone, Third Ward On the night of October 12, zone at the north side of the measure because, she said, it Councilman Kenneth L. after the team arrived in Bermuda, southern exit of the Duncan Hill would increase the safety of MacRitchie said that issue would according to high school principal, Apartments on Central Avenue drivers using the driveway.
    [Show full text]
  • Ownershipindividual Or Group? B:8.125” T:7.875” S:7.375”
    AUGUST 2020 OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF THE INTERNATIONAL AEROBATIC CLUB SO, YOU WANT TO BUY A PITTS? TALE OF TWO LLCS AIRCRAFT OWNERSHIPINDIVIDUAL OR GROUP? B:8.125” T:7.875” S:7.375” CGI image. Pre-production models shown. B:10.75” T:10.5” S:10” 2-DOOR 4-DOOR SPORT RESERVE YOURS NOW AT FORD.COM DOC. NAME: FMBR0151000_Bronco_SportAerobatics_Manifesto_10.75x7.875_01.indd LAST MOD.: 6-22-2020 5:51 PM CLIENT: FORD ECD: Karl Lieberman BLEED: 10.75” H x 8.125” W DOC PATH: Macintosh HD:Users:nathandalessandro:Desktop:FRDNSUVK0158_Bronco_Manifesto_Print:FMBR0151000_ Bronco_SportAerobatics_Manifesto_10.75x7.875_01.indd CAMPAIGN: Bronco Reveal CD: Stuart Jennings & Eric Helin TRIM: 10.5” H x 7.875” W FONTS: Ford Antenna Cond (Regular; OpenType) BILLING #: FRDNSUVK0158 CW: None VIEWING: 10.5” H x 7.875” W COLORS: Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Black MEDIA: Print AD: Alex McClelland SAFETY: 10” H x 7.375” W EXECUTION: Manifesto – Sport Aerobatics AC: Jamie Robinson, Mac Hall SCALE: 1” = 1” SD: Nathan Dalessandro FINAL TRIM: 10.5” H x 7.875” W PD: Ashley Mehall PRINT SCALE: None IMAGES: FRDNSUVK0158_Bronco_silhouette_family_V2_09_Flipped_CMYK.tif (914 ppi; CMYK; Users:nathandalessandro:Desktop:FRDNSUVK0158_Bronco_silhouette_family_V2_09_Flipped_CMYK.tif; Up to Date; 32.81%) Bronco_BW_Stacked_KO_wk.eps (Users:nathandalessandro:Desktop:BRONCO_ASSETS:_Bronco_LogoPack:Bronco_BW_Stacked_KO_wk.eps; Up to Date; 38.25%) EAA_PartnerRecognition_Rv_PK.eps (Creative:FORD:~Ford_MasterArt:2019:Outsourced:Originals:EAA_Logo:EAA_PartnerRecognition_Rv_PK.eps; Up to Date; 23.79%) BFP_OOH_PRINT_WHITE_KO.eps (Creative:WK_LOGOS:FORD_wk:_Built_Ford_Proud:OOH_PRINT:BFP_OOH_PRINT_WHITE_KO.eps; Up to Date; 43.28%) Vol. 49 No. 8 / AUGUST 2020 A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL AEROBATIC CLUB Publisher: Robert Armstrong, [email protected] Executive Director: Stephen Kurtzahn, [email protected], 920-426-6574 Editor: Lorrie Penner, [email protected] Contributing Authors: Robert Armstrong, Lynn Bowes, Budd Davisson, Lawrence V.
    [Show full text]
  • Airshow Accident Review 2014
    1 AIRSHOW ACCIDENT REVIEW 2014 Des Barker The tenets expressed in this review are those of the author and addresses a sample of significant accidents and incidents at aerial events worldwide in 2014, both during the actual events and during rehearsals and includes, airshows, air races, flypasts, and air capability demonstrations; in fact, any event at which an aircraft is displayed or rehearses for a public air event in which the flow of the event is jeopardised. Des Barker Introduction There is a Frank Sinatra song with lyrics: “When I was seventeen, it was a very good year”, - 2014 could have been a good year for the airshow community had it not been for the seventeen accidents and incidents worldwide resulting in the deaths of ten pilots and injury to one crew member. Most certainly, it was the best year since 2000 in terms of the number of accidents and incidents and also the fact that there were no injuries to spectators although a passenger died being ‘flipped’ during a low level display! As an international airshow community we have continued to reduce Airshow Accidents/Incidents 1998 to 2014 accidents and incidents at airshows; decreasing from 37 in 2010 to 17 in 2014. 40 The question over the past three years has been whether the apparent decrease 35 was attributable to some statistical spike or a genuine all-round improvement to 30 airshow safety worldwide from the contributions of the display pilots, safety 25 officers, air bosses, airshow organisers and spectators. Could it just be that the number of air events have reduced? 20 Unfortunately, there are no accurate figures available for the number of air 15 events worldwide, nor the number of hours flown annually from which to draw 10 scientific conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Skyline Soaring Club Aerobatics Guide
    Skyline Soaring Club Aerobatics Guide Revision 2.0 November 2013 1 Revision History Date Revision Comment Jan 2003 1.0 Initial Version (DW) Reformatted to Microsoft Word, added revision to aerobatic procedures, Nov 2013 2.0 relocated unusual attitude recovery procedures, repaginated and deleted (CW) Hammerhead from syllabus. 2 Contents Chapter 1 – Aerobatic Training ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.2. Sailplane Aerobatics ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3. Approved Maneuvers ........................................................................................................................................ 4 1.4 Prohibited Maneuvers ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Chapter 2 – Aerobatic Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1. Preflight Procedures ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 3 – Unusual Attitude Recoveries .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]