NTSB update in Reno

[Airracer75]

If anybody want to see NTSB update in Reno it will be streamed online here:

http://www.capitolconnection.net/capcon/ntsb/ntsb.htm

[Bob]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

The Sacramento Bee ran that article, and guess what picture they chose to use? Yep you got it, the impact pic.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/10/4402379/ntsb-to-release-recommendations.html

Everyone write a letter to the editor and let them know how tasteless their choice of a photo was, I did.

[bill_f]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Press conference followup with NTSB release:

http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2012/120410.html

http://www.rgj.com/article/20120410/EVENTS05/304100039/NTSB-making-7-safety-recommendations-Reno-Air-Races-follow-live-updates?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

[Pete]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

No real surprises in the investigation or recommendations. It would be interesting to see exactly what failed in the trim system.

I never liked hanging out near the fuel truck. I've been thinking about that one for a number of years. Recommending moving it is a good call. Blocks the view too.

[ignomini]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Pete, +1 on both points. Being immortal, however, I have always been bothered by the fuel truck for blocking the view. Never worried too much about it being hit.

[frankg]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

A tanker was between me and the L-29 crash in '07. I'll be glad to see them moved to a safer place.

[Idaho_cowpony]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

...Being immortal...

+1 to That!

And a big thumbs up for the NTSB to hold this press conference in Reno. It's good to see their support.
Joseph

[AirDOGGe]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Pete, +1 on both points. Being immortal, however, I have always been bothered by the fuel truck for blocking the view. Never worried too much about it being hit.

A tanker was between me and the L-29 crash in '07. I'll be glad to see them moved to a safer place.

Ironically, a tanker sat between my viewing position on the edge of the pits and the crash of Tommy Rose's Venture in 2002, and I am forever thankful for that. Those kind of visual memories, NOBODY needs to recall.


.


Concerning the report, they seen to follow the same line of thought that I did...do something about the last turn onto the front straight where the planes are pointed at the crowds. My suggestion of increasing the radius to reduce the sharpness of the turn is all I could think of as far as practical fixes go. With all the land outside the fenceline area privately owned, I don't know where else the course could be laid out to fix that portion of the course without overflying homes.

The only other way I can think of to fix turn 8 is probably unthinkable....change course direction to a clockwise pattern...... "Go Fast...Fly Low...Turn RIGHT(?)"...




.


Finally....Huh?....
From the report:
"Our investigation revealed that this pilot, in this airplane, had never flown at this speed, on this course," said Chairman Hersman. "We are issuing a safety recommendation to ensure that pilots and their modified airplanes are put through their paces prior to race day."


Now I wasn't there in 2011, but didn't Jimmy qualify GG on the course prior to race day as is the norm? Was it because they believe qualifying at 465 mph wasn't fast enough to get sufficient experienced with the airframe for racing?

[Reever]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Sitting in the pits with a fuel truck in front of me, I was more worried about someone with a cigarette or a brake fire (yes I know people are not suppose to smoke in the pits, but they do).

Steve

[Sky Critter]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Now I wasn't there in 2011, but didn't Jimmy qualify GG on the course prior to race day as is the norm? Was it because they believe qualifying at 465 mph wasn't fast enough to get sufficient experienced with the airframe for racing?

The report says his estimated air speed prior to the departure was 530mph. Perhaps they feel that's too big a difference from the 465?

Hypothetical:
Team "X" demonstrates their AC can safely handle 500mph at PRS. Come Sunday afternoon in September, they pull a 510mph lap. Do they forfeit the trophy due to exceeding the max demonstrated speed?

On the flip side, how many teams can afford or are willing to push their racer to the extreme limits other than race week? It they did, wouldn't they be showing their cards in advance?

Thoughts?

[Frank C.]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

I think moving the fuel truck would be a good idea. It blocked the view from certain points on the line. Fire was never a concern to me. It could happen, but then again a lot of things could happen. I am willing to take that chance. The chance of dying while watching the races never crosses my mind. If people are worried about dying at the Races, don't come. Simple.

Frank C.

[Lockheed Bob]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

Do you think that unlimited owners & pilots want to go thru the extra cost,time & effort required by the recomendations in order to fly? Sounds like Sept. isn't that far off if they want to get all that done for 2012. Lets hope so.

[Bob]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

I wonder how many of the bronze and silver racers will spend the time and money. Would a g suit helped at all? They buy you what maybe 2 g's? The telemetry stopped at 9g, I wonder how fast it got to the max the equipment could read?

[Big_Jim]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

I wonder how many of the bronze and silver racers will spend the time and money. Would a g suit helped at all? They buy you what maybe 2 g's? The telemetry stopped at 9g, I wonder how fast it got to the max the equipment could read?

My guess is that any of the recommendations would apply to aircraft that had had 'permanent' airframe modifications. I can't see Air Biscuit having to go through flutter testing.

[Sky Critter]

Re: NTSB update in Reno

I think the recommendations are primarily referring to "highly modified" aircraft which would encompass the Gold and some of the Silver racers. So, if you have to provide an engineering validation for mods, the days of the last minute thrash are likely over.