Quantcast
Snowbird down - Page 5 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 4 5
Results 81 to 89 of 89

Thread: Snowbird down

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    calgary
    My Ride
    CLK 55 / 2g Eclipse / EP3
    Posts
    4,188
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jutes View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You don’t get anything extra. Pay is dependent on rank, not responsibility or position.
    So there is no incentive for out of town (base/road) pay or anything like that - sounds like you made the right choice.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    S.E. (not the drrty south)
    My Ride
    Natural gas, and natural gas accessories
    Posts
    7,256
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Birdstrike likely. Blurry pic though. Makes me wonder if it could have been a drone.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sno...port-1.5593259

    deadly-snowbird-crash-blamed-on-bird-strike.jpg
    Last edited by Tik-Tok; 06-01-2020 at 10:39 AM.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    sask
    My Ride
    Mullet
    Posts
    164
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Bird or drone, still doesn't explain why a split second ejection difference meant survival of the pilot and death of the passenger.

    In my opinion, if the Tutor had a similar modern system to the CF-18, seeing how the pilot ejected under worse/similar circumstances in the Lethbridge crash, both occupants would have at least survived in this situation. That's three ejections, including the one in October, that have reported anomalies with the ejection system. Something needs to give.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    YYC
    My Ride
    2 x E Class Benz
    Posts
    21,392
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jutes View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Bird or drone, still doesn't explain why a split second ejection difference meant survival of the pilot and death of the passenger.

    In my opinion, if the Tutor had a similar modern system to the CF-18, seeing how the pilot ejected under worse/similar circumstances in the Lethbridge crash, both occupants would have at least survived in this situation. That's three ejections, including the one in October, that have reported anomalies with the ejection system. Something needs to give.
    The reason is that ejection system needs 2000ft. It never made it that far. Pilot lucky to survive. You can’t fit any other ejection systems because it won’t fit.
    Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
    I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name

  5. #85
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    calgary ab
    My Ride
    4x4
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    There was a proposal to fit the MB... It's like a Basler dc3 conversion - result is a whole new aircraft. Cost was more than an 80s BAE hawk.

    As soon as the spin started - envelope was gone.

    I hope the discussion starts rolling around to noise abatement rules. That's why they were low and slow, .96 thrust to weight ratio - they could have been climbing near vertical. There's a need to be good neighbours, and not break windows, but here is the result...

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    sask
    My Ride
    Mullet
    Posts
    164
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The reason is that ejection system needs 2000ft.
    The seat in the tutor is designed for zero altitude - 60 knot ejections. If everything works as it should.

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyL View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I hope the discussion starts rolling around to noise abatement rules. That's why they were low and slow, .96 thrust to weight ratio - they could have been climbing near vertical. There's a need to be good neighbours, and not break windows, but here is the result...
    Tutors will never break windows as they can't hit supersonic, not anywhere close. A show team will never avoid crowds on the off chance a bird strike might occur. Low and fast take-off is a common practice among military jets, not just the Snowbirds. People living around airports will have to deal with it, they chose to live there.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    YYC
    My Ride
    2 x E Class Benz
    Posts
    21,392
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jutes View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The seat in the tutor is designed for zero altitude - 60 knot ejections. If everything works as it should.
    Are you sure? Every ex snowbird pilot that’s chimed in talked about the 2000 AGL requirement. I’m not an expert tho.
    Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
    I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name

  8. #88
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    calgary ab
    My Ride
    4x4
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jutes View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The seat in the tutor is designed for zero altitude - 60 knot ejections. If everything works as it should.



    Tutors will never break windows as they can't hit supersonic, not anywhere close. A show team will never avoid crowds on the off chance a bird strike might occur. Low and fast take-off is a common practice among military jets, not just the Snowbirds. People living around airports will have to deal with it, they chose to live there.
    You've been near a j85 at full power. You know damn well the vibrations shake windows. Some of those windows won't be installed right. Many years ago I watched a Learjet doing a post overhaul run-up do it. It's not just about supersonic.

    Those jets could have been 2-3000' before the end of the runway - not <200kts and under 100'.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    sask
    My Ride
    Mullet
    Posts
    164
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Are you sure? Every ex snowbird pilot thatís chimed in talked about the 2000 AGL requirement. Iím not an expert tho.
    Not sure what snowbird pilots you were talking to, but that 2000ft number is incorrect. If it was 2000ft there wouldnít be a point of ejecting, youíd have time to pop the canopy and jump out with a parachute.

    Quote Originally Posted by AndyL View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You've been near a j85 at full power. You know damn well the vibrations shake windows. Some of those windows won't be installed right. Many years ago I watched a Learjet doing a post overhaul run-up do it. It's not just about supersonic.

    Those jets could have been 2-3000' before the end of the runway - not <200kts and under 100'.
    A J85 wonít break windows at mil power, nor will a F404 for that matter. Iíve had a Chinook fly over the house at 1000ftish and that shook the dishes and glasses in the kitchen, all the various jets flying over didnít do any of that.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 4 5

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 11-10-2017, 08:34 AM
  2. Replies: 27
    Latest Threads: 09-04-2015, 11:34 AM
  3. Any one down for a CASINO meet

    By BarryBeach in forum General
    Replies: 12
    Latest Threads: 06-17-2002, 08:26 PM
  4. Is that red Acura NSX still down at Lone Star?

    By Fat Dave in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 11
    Latest Threads: 06-10-2002, 09:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •