FWIW-My Take

[R080]

First let me state that my family and I have enjoyed the races for the past 24 years. Its an annual event that we have always looked forward to, and will continue to attend.

We have witnessed a number of the accidents and were present this year for the two race related accidents. I accept the fact that this is a potentially dangerous sport for the participants, and on occasion, have felt a bit concerned about the potential for spectators becoming a part of an accident. The first time was when Miss Ashely came apart and the second was last Thursday morning when Race #4 crashed in full view of the grandstands. My concern in both cases was "what if these accidents had occured just a few seconds earlier?". We all saw the wreckage of these accidents and it was spread over a very wide path.

To me, the margin for error is too slim. As exciting as it is to see the racers up close, this years jet class races felt too close. Perhaps it was the accident that made me feel this anxiety, but I believe that the proximity to the stands should be re-evaluated. The faster speeds and the fact that the jets seems to be bunced up more than the unlimiteds as they approach the straightway in front of the stands concerns me.

Any others feel the same?

[RCoulter]

Re: FWIW-My Take

I do not feel the same about crowd issues.

Think about it, when the Viper(F16) did it's demo, did it not do a max performance turn and end up coming towards the crowd at the end? When the heritage flight was doing it's act does it not come directly over the crowd? Heck, airliners fly over homes many times a day.

What I am trying to say is, sure there is a risk of a plane coming towards the crowd at an air race, or any airshow for that matter, that is just the nature of airshows. They are VERY safe, but just like anything in life, there are dangers so unless we (airshows) start loosing huge amounts of people, there is no need to change anything or over-react.

I hope that makes sense, I am not the best writer.

[Mike51]

Re: FWIW-My Take

The reality is that racing high performance aircraft in close proximity IS inherently more dangerous than highly-rehersed single-ship demos such as the F-16 demo that you mention, or a straight-and-level formation flown by selected pilots and pre-rehersed many times such as the Heritage Flight. When you have a bunch of extremely competitive individuals with diverse flying backgrounds racing in close proximity in highly modified experimental aircraft of varying performance being pushed beyond their original design limits, incidents and accidents will occur.

ANY major public event in which 3 participants are killed in the space of 72 hours in public view is going to come under scrutiny from a safety point of view. There will certainly be in-depth safety reviews in the aftermath of this year's tragic events, these will run their course and the results will be anounced in due time - we can only hope that the races will continue in something like their present form, although I'm sure that there will have to be some changes.

The one saving grace is that no paying spectators were killed or injured. Such an event would undoubtedly bring the races to an immediate end and would affect the whole airshow scene in the US - witness the virtual ceasing of airshows in Germany after the Ramstein crash.

Safety reviews will do all they can to minimize public danger, but the reality is that it will never be eliminated totally. The jet crash in particular must be particularly worrisome for those involved with the safety of the crowd - if it had happened a few seconds earlier as the jets were coming off the final turn, the trajectory of the crash would have been towards the hangars and pits. As it was, the wreckage fell away from the crowd and the long debris path, fortunately, fell parallel with the crowdline.

We will just have to wait and see what the results of the reviews are over the coming months. As with the majority of us here, I sincerely hope to be back at Reno for the 2008 races in another 51 weeks.

[Leo]

Re: FWIW-My Take

I've seen several spectacular crashes in Nascar recently (I don't know how old the film was tho) where crowds had pieces thrown into them, or fences downed and people hurt. Have they changed the format? It's a real hazard to be near the track and I think that everything possible has been done to make it as safe as they can.
All motorsports have some risk to the crowd. All airshows have some potential for disaster. The goal of the rules that are in place, the restrictions and boundaries, is to minimize those.
Truth is, more people are injured watching pro golf (I think Pres. Ford injured more by himself) than are injured at the Air Races.

[tim]

Re: FWIW-My Take

From what I can find there has not been a spectator fatality in a US air show since the fifties, I assume that the number includes air racing. (Anyone have information to the contrary?) Every air show or air race accident needs to be evaluated for possible safety changes. The jet races this year put up some incredible speeds and if the class rules or the race course need to be changed, then it should be done with a cool head after some of the emotion of the moment has passed. Let’s not try to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. (Pilot safety is another issue.)

The most dangerous thing about attending the air races is still the breakfast burritos washed down with MGD.

[ebutner]

Re: FWIW-My Take

The most dangerous thing about attending the air races is still the breakfast burritos washed down with MGD.

Now thats funny!!

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: FWIW-My Take

The reality is that racing high performance aircraft in close proximity IS inherently more dangerous than highly-rehersed single-ship demos such as the F-16 demo that you mention

Yes, it is and I'd argue, so is close formation driving on crowded freeways with 100's of drivers of WIDELY varying skill levels moving within 1000's of cars with constantly varying conditions.. unexpected stoppages etc.

Participation in this extremely dangerous act kills tens of thousands annually...

Yet,

We continue to do it..

Shall we take up a petittion to shut down the nations highway and freeway system because it's dangerous?

If they don't shut it down... should we as individuals start walking?

Not sure, but I'd wager, if I researched the stats, there are probably some that would directly deal with the act of walking being pretty dangerous..

Better yet.. let's just not get out of bed!!

But, then... that's prolly dangerous in itself.. bed sores can kill.. sleep standing up!

[51fixer]

Re: FWIW-My Take

The reality is that racing high performance aircraft in close proximity IS inherently more dangerous than highly-rehersed single-ship demos such as the F-16 demo that you mention, or a straight-and-level formation flown by selected pilots and pre-rehersed many times such as the Heritage Flight. When you have a bunch of extremely competitive individuals with diverse flying backgrounds racing in close proximity in highly modified experimental aircraft of varying performance being pushed beyond their original design limits, incidents and accidents will occur.

ANY major public event in which 3 participants are killed in the space of 72 hours in public view is going to come under scrutiny from a safety point of view. There will certainly be in-depth safety reviews in the aftermath of this year's tragic events, these will run their course and the results will be anounced in due time - we can only hope that the races will continue in something like their present form, although I'm sure that there will have to be some changes.

The one saving grace is that no paying spectators were killed or injured. Such an event would undoubtedly bring the races to an immediate end and would affect the whole airshow scene in the US - witness the virtual ceasing of airshows in Germany after the Ramstein crash.

Safety reviews will do all they can to minimize public danger, but the reality is that it will never be eliminated totally. The jet crash in particular must be particularly worrisome for those involved with the safety of the crowd - if it had happened a few seconds earlier as the jets were coming off the final turn, the trajectory of the crash would have been towards the hangars and pits. As it was, the wreckage fell away from the crowd and the long debris path, fortunately, fell parallel with the crowdline.

We will just have to wait and see what the results of the reviews are over the coming months. As with the majority of us here, I sincerely hope to be back at Reno for the 2008 races in another 51 weeks.

When I was at Reno as a crew member or just hanging with a team, I always started the day with a prayer that there would not be a mid air coming off the last pylon.
The path would lead through the pits or the grand stand.
The physics involved is real. When Frank Sanders was killed in a T-33 the wreckage was spread out in a path that was around 3/4 of a mile. He hit at around 500 mph. The F-86 that looped in the ground at El Toro spread out over 1/2 a mile.
As long as no one comes together there it will not be a problem. If it does it will be horrible.
I always wondered why the crowd wasn't in the middle of the course. I guess you make the best guess at where things can go bad and try not to put people there.
Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it can't happen.
I won't be surprized if Reno goes away. Not that I want it too, but the FAA and the Insurance industry will take a hard look at what has happened.
Back in the 80s and 90s the racers were told that purses can't be increased because, among other things RARA needed to buy up the desert to protect the race course from housing being built. I don't know if what they have done there is a success.
Rich

[Ron101502]

Re: FWIW-My Take

Been a little hesitant to voice my opinion, and it's only an opinion, but perhaps RARA needs to re-visit the process of qualifying pilots to run unlimited and jets.

A couple years ago Bob Hoover, when addressing the Checkered Flag Club, said the reason Reno can be a dangerous event is that you have civilians flying formation, and they haven't been trained for it. It has nothing to do with ability and everything to do with training. As a former USAF fighter pilot who started out and still fly in the civilian world I see where he is coming from.

I don't know the exact PRS process, and I'm sure that if, say, David Martin or Mike Mangold who have flown airshows for us at Reno but are also experienced fighter pilots (and Mike a Red Bull champion) wanted to run unlimited or jets then the PRS process would be fine.

Let's look at the skill set required. Comfortable at low altitude (ag pilots and fighter pilots). Comfortable at high speeds and high g loads (fighter pilots). Used to flying with their attention diverted outside (ag pilots and fighter pilots). Used to flying close to other aircraft either in formation or trying to close on them in combat (fighter pilots). Used to taildraggers and propellers (ag pilots).

Obviously not everyone can be a fighter pilot or ag pilot and those skills take more than a week of practice to learn. But there may be a way to insure that a pilot's qualifications run deeper than a large bank account, and I think ICAS (the International Council of Airshows) has figured it out.

For those not familiar, after a rash of airshow performers killed themselves in the mid 1980s (usually the "guy in the red and white Pitts who will fly for gas") the FAA, whose inspectors issued low altitude waivers (I used to have an unlimited low altitude aerobatic letter in a BD-5J), none of whom flew aerobatics themselves (kind of like the FAA inspectors who ride my jumpseat on the airline and evaluate me but have never been an airline pilot, but I digress) almost killed airshows. Thanks to Bernie Geier, a great guy who was an aerobatic pilot and the FAA guy in charge of general aviation, a deal was worked out with ICAS where the airshow industry would police itself and take over qualifying airshow performers. The program is called the ACE program. ACE stands for Aerobatic Competency Examiner.

The program works like this. Long time airshow pilots who volunteered, such as Bob Hoover, Sean Tucker, etc. are authorized to represent the FAA and issue low altitude letters just like the airline APDs, pilots who can give type ratings to pilots on their airline in lieu of an actual Fed (John Penney is an APD at United where he gives type ratings on the B-777 to UAL pilots upgrading to captain on that airplane).

A prospective performer has to find an ACE to be his mentor, and after the ACE watches him fly and feels confident he will issue a letter that allows the pilot to perform certain manuevers in a particular aircraft down to 1000 feet agl. After the pilot has performed a certain number of airshows and been observed by various ACES he can take another check and either add manuevers or go down to 500 feet. The process continues and after 2 or 3 years with everything going OK the pilot can be certified with no manuever or altitude restrictions and there are ways they can be qualified in other airplanes as well. (When Skip Holm flew the Saab Drakken at Reno a few years ago it was on a 500 foot waiver, shows how strict the system is). If a pilot doesn't fly for a season or so they have to back up and start over.

Maybe RARA should require a new guy to fly a couple years in biplane, sport, F-1 or T-6, go to PRS every year, and if considered a good performer then be allowed to fly super sport or stock unlimiteds, again for a couple years, and only then be allowed in airplanes over 400 knots, and then only if they have at least 200 hours in an airplane similar to what they race (obvioulsy nobody is gonna fly Rare Bear 200 hours before racing but time in a stock Bearcat or P-51 would count).

Just my opinion, and I know guys like Tiger or Jimmy Leeward never needed all that but when they started racing decades ago they were only going about 330 so they too have worked up to speed, so to speak. And besides, the insurance environment is very different now, and without insurance there is no air racing.

Just my thoughts, not trying to bad mouth or offend anyone but I love this sport, it was my 18th year, and I want to be able to continue to enjoy it even though I'm only a spectator.

Ron Henning

[Lockheed Bob]

Re: FWIW-My Take

Ron, yours was the best process to actually be a top race pilot. Well thought out. It takes a well trained pilot like Mr. Penney to fly the Bear & handle the situation he was in at the end of the race. Thanks for the input.

[r_willy]

Re: FWIW-My Take

When I was at Reno as a crew member or just hanging with a team, I always started the day with a prayer that there would not be a mid air coming off the last pylon.
The path would lead through the pits or the grand stand.
The physics involved is real. When Frank Sanders was killed in a T-33 the wreckage was spread out in a path that was around 3/4 of a mile. He hit at around 500 mph. The F-86 that looped in the ground at El Toro spread out over 1/2 a mile.
As long as no one comes together there it will not be a problem. If it does it will be horrible.
I always wondered why the crowd wasn't in the middle of the course. I guess you make the best guess at where things can go bad and try not to put people there.
Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it can't happen.
I won't be surprized if Reno goes away. Not that I want it too, but the FAA and the Insurance industry will take a hard look at what has happened.

Added to that trajectory from an 8-9 incident, a 500-mph object can cover a 1/4 mile in less than 2 seconds and there's usually aircraft and fueling equipment sitting out on the ramp. Seems like the potential's there, it's just a matter of probability (sometimes referred to as luck).

[chuckd]

Re: FWIW-My Take

Like Wayne said "sleep standing up"?

A man once said "when you pays your money you takes your chances" Period. I roadrace motorcycles as a hobby, going a buck-60 or so and slamming on the brakes at the end of a long straightaway to turn at 40 dragging your knee might not be as risky as what the Ladys and Gentlmen Air Racers do , but I tell every new person that tries it, when you put on that helment and suit you have to know the risk. Evertime I walk through the gates at any Motorsport event, I know there is a risk, even getting there has it's inherent Risk. To Me that is part of the thrill, to Fly just a little bit closer to the flame, its A little Dangereous for sure, but isn't that where the fun is?

[jscott1]

Re: FWIW-My Take

If that jet had of been 3 seconds sooner, or if 38 had come apart on eight
that would be the end of Reno and probably Air Racing. Throw a bike down
at 160 and you only hurt yourself. And from watching MotoGP most of them get up and walk away.

Just MHOP

Jim

[BlueOvalRacing]

Re: FWIW-My Take

Just my $.02, but when you purchase a ticket to see an event like the air races, do you not accept the fact that you could be putting yourself in harm's way?

I do. Without reservation.

[chuckd]

Re: FWIW-My Take

If that jet had of been 3 seconds sooner, or if 38 had come apart on eight
that would be the end of Reno and probably Air Racing. Throw a bike down
at 160 and you only hurt yourself. And from watching MotoGP most of them get up and walk away.

Just MHOP

Jim

So what is Your solution?
What is the alternative to what we have now?
Not what IF's, and of course I understand your point!