Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

[Race#21]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

Cool, thanks for looking that up.

I am so saddened by this that no SCCA, Fast, Reno Race, or combat flight experence, F&N matters. God Speed all hurt & lost! My prayers are with you.

TC

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

I am so saddened by this that no SCCA, Fast, Reno Race, or combat flight experence, F&N matters.

That's certainly your prerogative.

Realize that in the rest of professional aviation, we very importantly take opportunities like this to learn from what happened and try and prevent future mishaps.

We seem to go through this same circular discussion every time there is a mishap and someone posts something other than simply saying how sad we are or that they're in our prayers. Certainly in this thread there hasn't been any speculation or finger-pointing. I agree that early speculation, or early assessment of blame before all the facts and analyses are known is very bad form, and could be quite offensive depending on who you are and where you sit. Again, that's not what's going on here...we are merely talking about understanding a specific "fact" that was printed in a newspaper article.

This type of discussion isn't disrespectful to those involved, or their friends and loved ones, in any way. In fact, it is probably the highest tribute we can pay to departed fellow airmen to try and not make the agony of their departure in vain.

[Lockheed Bob]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

Very well said Randy just as we learned from the Jimmy Leeward incident. As sad as we are we still have to learn from it.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

This type of discussion isn't disrespectful to those involved, or their friends and loved ones, in any way. In fact, it is probably the highest tribute we can pay to departed fellow airmen to try and not make the agony of their departure in vain.

Randy, you and I have talked in the past about why it's good to talk about these sort of events, bluntly.. I have to say, I've never heard your thoughts on this subject expressed so eloquently! (not sure I could dig up a more well put "argument" anywhere!)

[flyingjibus]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

This type of discussion isn't disrespectful to those involved, or their friends and loved ones, in any way. In fact, it is probably the highest tribute we can pay to departed fellow airmen to try and not make the agony of their departure in vain.

This is the best thing I have read here in a long time.

[Dudewanarace]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

I'm glad the majority agrees. As Randy pointed out, the only reason I bring this up is because the article pretty openly put some blame on the sea fury being responsible for overtaking. I have pointed out that most civilian formation may not work that way. I'm no expert, but have flown a fair amount of formation considering my age/experience. Even 49 at once!

What we have learned here is at least the Air Force has defined (with greater resolution) how to perform a lead change, something I intend to bring up if I'm involved with a lead change again.

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/pilot-plane-recovered-from-san-francisco-bay/Content?oid=2786388

KTVU is reporting that the Contra Costa coroner has identified the deceased pilot as 33-year-old David Everett Plumb of Sacramento.

[Fugari]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

I have a question. From my minimal experience with formation flying (backseat T-6 with 2-4 a/c 15 or so flights)
with FAST pilots. One thing I recall is that a low wing a/c with a bubble (?) canopy is the machine of choice and formation flight with high wing a/c is frowned upon due to visibility issues. The C-210 would not seem to be a good choice for this type of flying. Is this correct?? No disrespect intended BTW! This is a very sad deal! :-(

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

I have a question. From my minimal experience with formation flying (backseat T-6 with 2-4 a/c 15 or so flights)
with FAST pilots. One thing I recall is that a low wing a/c with a bubble (?) canopy is the machine of choice and formation flight with high wing a/c is frowned upon due to visibility issues. The C-210 would not seem to be a good choice for this type of flying. Is this correct?? No disrespect intended BTW! This is a very sad deal! :-(

I don't have a whole lot of FAST experience, but the issue that makes a high-wing aircraft less desirable is the same. Modern-day formation procedures and techniques have been developed for low-wing aircraft, and thus in close/fingertip formation wingmen generally form, stack, and maneuver low and aft of their leads. Those positions allow wingmen the best visibility of their leads throughout the spectrum of positions, cross-unders, and even when separating the formation or joining up.

Since wingmen are generally low and aft, that's why high-wing aircraft have the potential for a more challenging time maintaining sight.

I think that for an experienced formation pilot, this is an issue that can be pretty easily mitigated; it isn't really any different than landing a T-6 from the back seat, where you can't see in front of you and have to use peripheral visual cues. In some positions, high wings can limit sight lines to lead, but positions and visual references can be slightly altered so as to allow wingmen to keep visual.

[kenf]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancis...nt?oid=2786388

Does anyone know the connection between David Plumb and the Sanders brothers?

[eric 120]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

David was the crew chief on Dreadnought.

[Matt Jackson]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

David was the crew chief on Dreadnought.

The comments on this matter assume that the aircraft were flying formation. Not sure how anyone has come to this conclusion. It also assumes that the C210 was struck by the Sea Fury. I am not sure how you strike the lead aircraft with your tail, without touching it with the 13 foot diameter prop or that thing they call a wing. No I think is this case it might simply be an unavoidable accident, where one of the aircraft does an unintentional maneuver striking the other aircraft. I also think it would be appropriate that people on this site might wait for the factual information to come out before jumping to conclusions. Its a tough time for the parties involved and there is nothing to be learned by here say and misguided inputs from the fence birds. The parties involved are well trained experienced formation pilots. They understand how to fly formation as they have been doing it for decades. This is what we call an unavoidable accident. You ask what can you learn from it? Simple!!!!! This **** is dangerous and **** happens even to the qualified experts. So I would leave it at that and wait for the investigation to conclude what actually happened.

Matt J

[thunderstangfan]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

you might as well shut the site down Wayne... we never need to discuss a situation again.
we now know THIS S#%T is dangerous and we should wait to be fed the answers to everything from the true professionals...

[Matt Jackson]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

you might as well shut the site down Wayne... we never need to discuss a situation again.
we now know THIS S#%T is dangerous and we should wait to be fed the answers to everything from the true professionals...

Good answer Todd, your catching on. Now all you have to do is wait for the facts. Did I pull your panties up too tight?

[Fawkes]

Re: Sea Fury & Cessna 210 mid air over San Pablo Bay

Unless there were posts that were deleted, I have read nothing that speculates what one or the other PIC did during this incident or even if formation flying was occurring at the time. The only thing I have seen discussed is some questionable reporting and a very intelligent and respectful discussion of how formation flying is done in both military and civilian situations. If anything, I feel like this thread has gone above and beyond in not even raising legitimate questions that will be answered with time. While I have no way of KNOWING the pain of those involved, I, and clearly so do most on this site, certainly UNDERSTAND their pain and everyone here has been incredibly respectful of that reality.

I am deeply sorry and saddened for the loss of someone close to several of you. I also don't think anyone on this site should feel bad about how they have behaved to this point. I am not trying to pick a fight but instead simply point out that those who are posting here are friends, even if only virtually, who are not pointing fingers or wagging tongues.

My two cents.

James