Apparently it was his way or the highway type mentality. He wasn't in control of the airspace at all and this happened. Why the new rules and regulations took so long to get implemented is all down to "a culture of arrogance" within certain circles. It's a shame that people have to die to wake people up to what everybody was commenting on for a few years. (This is sketchy AF, etc)
@@Wes_Jones He was completely unqualified, he got the job because his dad did it before him. He fancied himself an air traffic controller - which he wasn’t. Not even close. Air Boss is NOT supposed to be making the calls he was giving.
@@dbaider9467the CT crash of the B17 was complete pilot error. Should not have taken the plane up due to issues with one of the engines when it started to fail he shut both engines on that side. He never climbed to gain altitude and set up the approach so as he was turning into the shut down engines.
As a retired air traffic controller who worked multiple air shows including two International Air Tattoos the first think I thought when the video started was "why the hell wasn't all this pre-briefed before any aircraft even started engines". The lack of positive control and deconfliction procedures was glaring in this instance. It was as if a couple of guys got together and said "hey, let's put on an airshow"! The air boss was in way over his head and should be held accountable for his lack of competence. They're damn lucky no one in the crowd was injured or killed..
Yeah, I have no clue how an airshow is organized, but even to me, this didn't look like coordinating a pre-briefed flight path and more ad-hoc directing. I generally wonder: when you've got two independent formations of planes airborne, wouldn't the most straightforward way to prevent issues be to order them on different altitudes, like tell the bombers to fly 1200feet and the fighters to fly 800 feet, something along those lines? As long as the planes stay away from each other in their own formations and maintain altitude, they can't accidentally intersect with another plane...
Does anybody know if there's a recording online of a competent air boss coordinating a similar flight? I'd like to know what a normal show sounds like, because as someone who's never flown with an air boss in charge or even heard transmissions from an air boss except when things go wrong, I have no basis to know how this compares other than comments here. I've read lots of comments and seen Blancolirio's video, but I'd like to understand for myself. Suggestions?
The directions from the air boss are confusing to me when I'm sitting and watching this on a screen. Imagine getting those instructions as you're trying to fly a frikkin P-63 under 500 ft with your eyes out looking for the other aircraft, knowing you have no height separation. Limits of human performance alright.
I would think the whole show would have been choreographed and burned into memory prior to takeoff. Airboss seemed like he wanted to make himself a much bigger part of the show than he was.
@@MrJeffcoley1 don't worry, there'll be plenty of ditched or unenforced regulations resulting in plenty of avoidable deaths coming up in the next few years. what a world to leave for your kids 🙂
Airboss needs to take 100% accountability for this. He threw procedures out the window and had traffic crossing paths at the same altitude. A recipe for disaster
How was this stuff not thoroughly prebriefed? The air boss should not have been talking NEARLY this much!!! This is absolutely awful coordination…as a former fighter pilot I can’t believe that this is standard for an airshow performance, my god. This is almost criminal. Also, fighters entering the bomber block without the requisite SA…terrible.
airboss directions reminded me of a caller at a square dance, i.e. sounded like he was making up the moves on the fly that's great for improv practice on stage, but these are aircraft near an audience I wonder if the FAA is simply understaffed, because they're evidently not able to keep up adequate oversight on all aircraft activities
I wouldn't trust the airboss to clean my windshield. Absolutely appalling on his end and tragic no one called knock it off or better yet raised a voice during the pre show brief.
I was under the impression from blancolerio that there was a pre-briefing for the airshow, but that the airshow boss decided to disregard it and change the plan. Is that a mistaken impression?
The wording in this presentation does not exclude a briefing but rather stating "lack of an adequate prebriefed... The key word adequate. So it wasn't good enough for min standards.
No, there was a briefing, and the show execution pretty much followed the plan presented in that briefing. The problem was the plan, which did not include hard geographic or altitude deconfliction between the fighter formation and the bomber formation.
Yes, mistaken impression. From the NTSB: We found evidence that the air show guidance provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the International Council of Air Shows Inc. (ICAS) did not adequately address the need to better mitigate the collision risks associated with air boss-directed performances involving multiple, dissimilar aircraft. We determined that a lack of administrative controls and a documented risk assessment process for ensuring air show aircraft separation directly contributed to the in-flight collision.
Passing directly across already established flight paths, two different speed aircraft groups all at the same height, all in similar banked left turns showing either low ground to their left or high sky to their right, what could possibly go wrong? How many times was similar practice allowed to go on previously?
Lack of awareness off the charts regarding the Airboss but much more here than just him. Not having an enforced altitude split between the types is shocking much less the clear unorganized & unprofessional communication. First rule of formation flying is aircraft closing is ALWAYS below the aircraft being intercepted. Obviously so you can see the airplane you are closing on. RIP
@@hackerf15eWhether or not they intend to fly formation for very long, crossing immediately next to each other is effectively a very brief formation flight, and it would be intelligent to observe good practices of formation flying in service of not ramming another plane because the paper doesn't say you're in formation with it. You can say two aircraft aren't in formation all you want, but if they occupy the same space they're going to have to do some level of coordinated flying or they're going to be hitting each other.
AOPA's _Air Safety Institute_ channel did a couple of videos on this incident, and they don't have any kind word's for him. At the very least I hope no one ever puts him in that position again.
Does anybody know if there's a recording online of a competent air boss coordinating a similar flight? I've read lots of comments and seen Blancolirio's video, but I'd like to understand the comparison for myself. Suggestions?
A competent air boss’s job is in the brief on the ground, ensuring everyone understands their role and duties. Once in the air the air boss’s job should only have two roles; to call in the next act, or to call ‘knock it off’ if someone is doing something they shouldn’t. The recording would contain very little traffic to listen to. Totally different from the nut job running this show.
@@beenaplumber8379 Most warbird parades are completely silent on the airboss frequency, outside of clearing the performers into and out of the airshow box. There's pretty much nothing to listen to.
"expected the bombers to maintain separation visually" Yeah, that doesn't work in turns with vastly different models of aircraft. These shows need to have actual certified/USAF professionals and for as much as these guys spend on their aircraft there is no reason at all they can't afford RTK avionics with position repeaters and proximity tracks.
Before I heard the probable cause, as I was listening to the video all I could think was wow, that is a lot of non-standardized chatter. Guidance on the fly using plain English, and a lot of it. Not surprising that was cited in the probable cause.
_Alright, plan is for you fighters to cross in front of the bombers, at the same altitude..._ Me if I was there: _Say what!?_ Who thought this was a good plan?
Too much talking by air boos, confusing everybody. Must keep instructions short. Give short separate instructions for each operation instead of long stories on the radio. I heard that after the pre briefing, many pilots walked out, not fully understanding what the game plan was.
I guess for me, if I were in this show, I’d want to sit in the briefing room with all other flight crews and go thru this show in detail. And I’d want this briefing long before the show began, as well as doing a quick refresh just before going out to the flight line to “saddle up”.
To sum up the NTSB recommendation to the FAA: "1) Be safer. 2) Don't be so unsafe. 3) Make a plan so you are not so unsafe." I would think these are things the FAA already knew, but here we are.
There's that, but also: "document more so we know who to blame next time this happens". You'll find that most government "security" procedures are actually about figuring out whom to blame when things go wrong.
If the bombers were to be on the 1000 foot line and fighters on the 500 foot line for the first pass why fly a pattern that requires crossing of paths in order to do the same for the second pass? Was this why the bombers were at a higher altitude and the fighters at a lower altitude?
There was neither a geographic deconfliction briefed nor an altitude deconfliction briefed between the bomber and fighter formations. This was a planning error by the airboss.
and it doesnt take a pilot or rocket scientist to figure out you put the bigger planes at the 1000 line at a higher altitude and the smaller planes at the 500 line at a lower altitude. clearly the airboss was no rocket scientist.
@@thurin84 The 500 foot line and the 1000 line are minimum distances based on the speeds of the aircraft. The faster the speed, the further away from the crowd the minimum distance is. The 500 foot line is for aircraft flying 180mph or less, the 1000 foot line is the min distance for aircraft flying 280mph or less. So, usually it is the bombers at either the 500 foot line or the low altitude 200-500 foot block, and the fighters at either the 1000 foot line or the 500-1000 foot altitude block. Reference FAA 8900.1, Volume 3 if you are interested in all the details.
I'm amazed that the pilots agreed to go ahead with the flights. An inadequate pre-breif should have been a red flag. As much as I agree with other commenters, that the air boss and airshow organizers were criminally negligent, the final decision to fly always rests with the pilot. The airshow organizers handed a loaded gun to a child. The air boss aimed the gun. The pilots pulled the trigger.
Most warbird parades at other airshows have either a hard altitude deconfliction plan or a geographic deconfliction between the fighter and bomber formations. This boss didn't have that in his plan, so his plan on that day was an anomaly.
@@TheNapalmFTW hmm, did you see this? “air show event organizer’s lack of an adequate, prebriefed aircraft separation plan for the air show performance”
@@dukeford8893 As I understand how it works, it’s a team effort, with others from the CAF. And that’s followed by a team meeting with all of the participating pilots. And all those greybeard career pilots who’ve been doing CRM their whole careers stayed silent. This is also noted in the NTSB report.
Well, his dad was competent. Nobody running the CAF willing to say that his son was not. And the CAF apparently retaliated against anyone who complained.
Way too micro managing of the aircraft. He has a fixed vantage point where he can never have as much situational awareness or visibility into every aircraft position in the formation to maintain separation as each pilot does. He has to leave more position control up to the individual pilots and use deconfliction plans that are briefed before the show to keep aircraft apart. Keeping things tight to 'make a good show' is outside the boundaries of proper flight safety and this direction style created this outcome. The honorable thing for him to do would be to join the crews that were killed by his ignorance so he can apologize to them in the afterlife.
This could've been much worse. I live nearby this airport. (Which most people still call 'Red Bird') I very nearly missed being by there myself as I had just passed by there a few minutes earlier. (I was planning to attend the Sunday show as I normally do...this event happened during the Saturday show.)This collision happened almost directly above a Freeway (US 67/Marvin D.Love) and the wreckage landed just barely inside airport property. Had they fallen onto this highway,or had this collision happened above & they had fallen into the nearby parking lot of a shopping center (Red Bird Ln,between Hampton & M.D.Love) where many were watching that is also directly under final approach,this could've had a far greater loss of life. Also just off the flight path to the right is a Texaco station & a Car Wash,and a 'low rise' multi story bank building is also across the freeway from the service station. (M.D.Love & Hampton. There is also another service station & another small shopping center across Hampton on the opposite side of the bank,but the opposite side of both Hampton Road & M.D.Love?)
After the collision, they were experiencing significant G forces and a lot of chaos. Anything you saw in those photos were involuntary bodily movements in the midst of violent changes in direction of flight.
@@thurin84 That photo was a milisecond after a 7,000 pound fighter had just collided with his aircraft. The transfer of energy says that a human isn't making any voluntary movements to brace themselves in that instant.
Quite incredible a large display like this was allowed to go ahead with so little in the way of "rules", proper planning and qualified management. Surprising it has not happened sooner really. All the NTSB have suggested you would have thought would have been so obviously necessary.
culture. airboss was the son of a highly regarded airboss. the culture in the field is people who are 'difficult' dont get shows or performances. essentially, you question things, you dont get to fly. so the culture encouraged silence and unquestioning compliance.
4:49 that was bad, airboss (def at fault) calls for visual confirmation by the B-17, gets nothing, carries on with the show I’m not qualified to say anything about anyone, but the Airboss had some weird, difficult to understand calls and requests, I’d assume he is at fault, the pilots did fine. Rest in Peace to the pilots lost.
The faster fighters should have never been at the same altitude with the slower bombers. THAT was their fatal mistake. If they had done that ONE THING alone this never would have happened. How could all of those experienced fliers get it so wrong???????
@@rael5469 Nobody spoke up and said this is dangerous we're not flying that. I bet its not the first time it's been attempted too. Experienced pilots should know better. The Air Boss might not like it but 6 people would still be alive.
@@andrewwaller5913 I think it was mostly just ONE of the Dirty Dozen Human Factors.......complacency. They were experienced fliers and had done these air shows so many times before. I think they might have been shaking their heads at the lack of planning but just thought their experience would see them through.
It was STUPID that specific Altitudes weren't given to each aircraft or that the pilots didn't have a Plan among themselves to ensure separation and safety. I'd say the Airboss was negligent for failing to ensure either. The entire event should have been REHEARSED in advance OR Prescribed on Paper for each of the pilots to see, read and comprehend and at the very least, a Pre-Flight Discussion. You don't make this type of thing up on the go with pilots and planes that have never flown together in this particular way. Absolute Negligence. In fact, if I were any of the pilots I would have demanded a flight plan OR refused to fly (at least in formation).
571 pages of interviews in docket will have you shaking your head. Noteworthy are short on scene interviews with all. Also noteworthy is later extensive interviews with excruciating extent with almost all. One telling missing later interview is with fighter lead. I guess he didn't want to talk about it.
These activities are and will be the death of Warbirds flying........as a former B017/DC-3/DC-3TP will end Living Flight Histories, etc.....the warbird community has too me cowboys and they will pay the price!
5 lives and 2 precious, historic aircraft are gone due to the simple lack of the 7 "P" rule. Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance. What a shame.....
Ok, I was there. Some commentary on the video, with time stamps... First off, 0:30 - the dot is not the correct location. The dot is shown on the closed runway, 17/35, when in fact it was east of that dot on Taxiway A just north of A4.
0:39 The crowd was NW of the location shown. The area labeled "Crowd" was mostly a hot ramp, extending from the gate south of the Terminal area all the way to Ambassador Jet Center.
2:15 no, the fighters generally don't fly at 1000' - if you know this airshow, you know that they would fly higher passes for a bit simulating "top cover" for the bombers, then fly low photo passes and "strafing runs" sometimes with pyro.
This accident was easily avoidable. Before the recommendation section was even presented, I thought of having two different set altitudes for the fighters and bombers, which would have practically guaranteed separation, say 1000 and 1500 feet or something similar. Having two very different aircraft essentially go in close formation during a turn like that (the B-17 and P-63) is just plain stupid.
No one talked about the B-17 1000 ft out front of everybody placing his aircraft over the field 1. before his bomber group was in formation and 2. before the fighters were formed up out front of him. Fighters 250ft down the 500 ft line, bombers 500 ft down the 1000 ft line should not have been hard to plan. Hindsight is always 2020. I remember how bad I felt for all when it happened. Terrible.
Reminds me of the armourer that got the director of the movie killed because she failed to keep control of the weapons. Just because your father did it does not mean you will be good at it. Nepotism kills!
except she had practical experience assisting her father over the years. yes she failed to do her safety checks, but obviously so did the assistant director and alec baldwin. and the gun was in baldwins control at the time. oh and the armorer wasnt allowed on set in the building at the time. so it wouldve been like as if the air boss wasnt allowed within visual range of the aircraft during the air show.
@@danielmacpherson1630 and the ironic thing is his dad was an nra rated shooting instructor at a school, so you know baldwin got the safety talk. probably multiple times.
Poor planning may or may not have been directly causal...That is only a guess....People are always finding better ways of doing things and better planning/briefing is a suggestion that may/may not prevent another accident...AND...The direct cause of this accident was the failure of the P63 pilot to see and avoid other aircraft.
One contributing factor could be the title 'Air Boss'. A title like that could go to his head and make him behave irresponsibly, which was probably what happened. Change it to 'Accident Prevention Boss' or 'Air Safety Coordinator' or something more serious and accountable.
Now watch the "too much government regulation" crowd either fight implementation of the recommendations and/or insure that the FAA lacks the funding to implement the recommended safety enhancements.
This report missed the mark. Pilots left the brief with no concrete deconfliction rules, formation roles and responsibilities, etc. Flight leads shirked their deconfliction responsibilities. The wingman were so far spaced apart there was no practical formation integrity. Wingmen DO NOT follow directions of anyone but flight lead….period. Once the wingman decides to follow Airboss instructions, he’s on his own, and the PIC owns ultimate responsibility for safety. The P-63 pilot knowingly drove to a line he knew was crossing the bomber path and didn’t ensure deconfliction by obtaining visual….we expect more clearing from a student pilot turning base to final. This entire show was a clown act and all that was missed by dumping it only on the Airboss.
I think fighter lead should bear part of the blame. His initial maneuvering with the close formation had some pretty close spacing to the bombers that surprised me. When they went trail lead is still responsible for all of the formation. NTSB says the P-63 didn't see the B-17. If you are calling the fighters a formation the P-63 is only looking at #2 in trail. But what trail alignment did they brief? Close trail is about a ship length behind. It looks like they were in a looser trail which might allow more lateral movement. Where did lead think his wingman were and why take your formation that close to the bombers flight path. Yes it looks like the P-63 deviated from exactly in trail but I suspect he wouldn't have been looking anywhere but at #2.
i agree with you to a certain extent, but from what i understand the airboss ruled with an iron fist and would ban dissenters from flying caf warbirds. yeah the pilots in the air hold some of the responsibility, but it all comes back to the airboss in the end.
2024 and they’re only now talking about risk assessments? The whole ‘air boss’ thing should be scrapped, there’s no way one person standing on a platform can possibly manage multiple aircraft going at different speeds all using the same radio channel.
Sure, they can. If they do the adequate preparation work before, pre-brief the plan with all participants (and provide the plan in writing), make sure that others review the plan for safety and encourage input, and then execute the plan. If that happens, the Air Boss should only have to deal with contingencies that crop up. Trying to orchestrate this kind of activity without a solid plan and calling all the moves on the fly, clogging up the airwaves with unneccessarily micromanaged flight direction? Yeah, that's asking for task saturation and the type of incident illustrated here. There needs to be an Air Boss (and supporting spotters), but that person should only be dealing with occurrences that are out of the ordinary--like deconflicting the revenue PT-17 flight coming in for a landing by asking the bombers and fighters to extend to a pre-briefed orbit point until the incoming aircraft is clear of the show area. Otherwise, the Air Boss should only have to call the next phase of the plan.
@@olpaint71 No need for an AirBoss. No such thing in Europe, just air traffic controllers in the tower. The pilots brief the display and fly it, no deviations, that's what causes accidents. The bombers and fighters were way too close and with no vertical separation. Inevitable result.
@@olpaint71 That Stearman should never have been flying during the airshow. Lucky the B-17 didn't collide with that. No planning at all here, just a total dangerous incompetent mess.
@@andrewwaller5913 I'm no expert on European air show protocols, but the UK CAA Regulatory Article 2335 appears to have a similar role to the Air Boss, titled Flying Display Director (FDD) who is responsible for, among other things, putting together maps of the display area, identifying hazards, producing and promulgating the Flying Display Risk Assessment to all participants, coordinating/controlling all fliying activities, controlling the safety, monitoring flying discipline during a flying display, briefing and debriefing all participants, controlling the programme and cancellation or modification of the programme, etc I'd expect similar rules to be in place for other European nations.
@@olpaint71 Yes in the UK we have an FDD at air shows but he won't micro manage displays like this Air Boss did. He's looking for safety issues and timings but not constantly in the pilots ears which is distraction.
I'm not expert...but a bunch of WW II aircraft without modern alarm systems shouldn't be packed that tightly together. As the commentator said, their fuselages probably stopped them from seeing each other.
Yup. Usually they'd be separated laterally and by altitude to address that risk, but that wasn't properly prebriefed for this airshow. The airboss actually directed the fighters to cross in front of the B-17, hence the P-63 hitting it. Absolute cluster.
with as far forward as the p-63s cockpit is its pilot shouldve been able to see the b-17 just over his right wing root, had he been looking. but i think he was too preoccupied trying to stay in formation for that. seemed like he was having some trouble staying in formation.
This is how they do it? What? They are winging it! One man with little skill directing all of them. What could go wrong? That is tragic! This is why I do not support air shows. Too many risks and too many past accidents. These people, pilots, organizers and all, are playing with fire to so casually be messing around in the sky with so many planes and no real plan A, let alone a plan B, and above a crowd of people. It's just shocking to me.
Not trying to play devil’s advocate here, but with all these experienced pilots, shouldn’t someone have raised some concerns about the unprofessional and confusing directions being given by the air boss? At what point do you say “screw this, someone’s going to get hurt and it’s not going to be me or my passengers”?
The issue is the incentive structure. If a pilot objects and the CAF leadership don't like it, they can take the pilot off of flight duties. Considering that the pilots are all likely enthusiasts for the aircraft and for demonstrating them to the public, that's a pretty steep disincentive to raise objections. The organization has to actively foster a safety oriented culture, and it has to happen from the inside. Ultimately, these airshows and organizations are privately owned and operated entities, which means governemental oversight only means so much.
Glad to see the NTSB so prompt with this report. Just over 2 years to explain an accident that aviation UA-camrs comprehensively covered and explained within a week of the occurrence
Being fast does nobody any good. NTSB must get ALL their facts right, not just a few pieces information of what some people think. Gathering true facts accurately takes a lot of time, and there are no shortcuts. Don't knock on the people who had to be burdened to do things right. If anything, knock on the people who created the situation that required years of work.
Just because your favorite youtuber speculated correctly, doesn't mean the NTSB doesn't have to deal with the burden of proof. Sorry the NTSB can't meet your standards of instant gratification. Their job is to be thorough and comprehensive and release an official report with recommendations to keep safety moving forward.
PB-1W was a modified B17 with no bomb bay and extra fuel tanks. You really don't need to get your knickers in a twist over that. Texas Radiers was built as a B-17G Flying Fortress. After the Navy retired her in 1955 she was bought in the late 60s by the CAF who preserved the aircraft, They also spent over a million dollars restoring her to an airworthy state as a B-17G as she was originally built, to which she took flight in 2009, fitted with period accurate items such as a Nordern bomb sight, disabled 50. Cal M2 machine guns including the chin turret
@andrewwaller5913 @andrewwaller5913 No, the main cause was the P63 pilots lack of situational awareness that led him to try and occupy the same airspace as the B17. The P63 was not flown by the AirBoss using remote control....some seem to believe that.
@@DernFool No because a proper pre flight briefing would have separated the fighters from the bombers not having the fighters accelerate to catch up to the B-17 as the airboss demands. The P-63 pilot is also to blame because he should have stuck closer to the Mustangs and been higher than the bombers to avoid them, he failed to look where he was going and banked straight into the B-17.
@andrewwaller5913 No...because P63 pilot is to blame for the his and the deaths of the B17 crew...No one else caused this or any other accident that day at this event. Better organizing at these useless airshows should always be considered.
This kind of "show" should never be permitted around a heavily inhabited area, and the "organizers" of this particular calamity should have faced criminal charges for gross negligence. It looks like it's going to take legal action by homeowners living near airfields to stop these programs before they get off the ground.
That's an idiotic attitude to take. What are the odds the airport was originally located in a rural area and the houses and businesses (none of which were actually damaged) were built up after the fact? The type of show being executed was a series of fly-bys that did not require radical maneuvering, aerobatics, or speed. The problem was the lack of a pre-briefed spatial separation scheme to keep the two types of aircraft out of the same air space. There were two defined horizontally separated show lines--one which should've been used for the slower and larger bombers (1000') and the other for the faster fighters (500'). The turns at either end of the lines could/should have also had the bombers turn first, with the fighters turning further away from the ends of the show lines, so that the flight paths never intersected. Likewise, the two patterns should have been assigned different altitudes. Placing the smaller fighters nearer to the crowd and the larger bombers further away would still give the crowd the illusion that the aircraft were operating close together, thanks to forced perspective, while keeping them deconflicted. This is basic stuff obvious to even a keyboard pilot, but it has to be briefed before the show and adhered to. Not made up by the Air Boss calling an "audible."
this was on blancolirio about 43,400 years ago. how is this useful at this point? going into 2025 in less than 2 weeks. what really is the point of wasting tax dollars at this point?
Investigations take time and come with recommendations which are designed to make pilots, passengers and people on the ground safer. This isn't a mcdonalds.
if you cant see the point in doing thorough research on the exact facts of a crash, not just speculation, and giving recommendations on how to prevent potential future deaths, then i see no point in you wearing a seatbelt since you dont give a fxck about preventative safety measures
Juan does excellent analysis we can probably all agree. But these people do this for a living. It's their job. They are pretty good at it even if they don't present it as well as Juan does.
Thanks for posting.
Looking forward to your follow-up.
The radio calls from the airboss seem pretty chaotic and confusing.
Apparently it was his way or the highway type mentality. He wasn't in control of the airspace at all and this happened. Why the new rules and regulations took so long to get implemented is all down to "a culture of arrogance" within certain circles. It's a shame that people have to die to wake people up to what everybody was commenting on for a few years. (This is sketchy AF, etc)
@@Wes_Jones He was completely unqualified, he got the job because his dad did it before him. He fancied himself an air traffic controller - which he wasn’t. Not even close. Air Boss is NOT supposed to be making the calls he was giving.
He should be in jail ...
They are he got the job because his father was the usual air boss.
@@dbaider9467the CT crash of the B17 was complete pilot error. Should not have taken the plane up due to issues with one of the engines when it started to fail he shut both engines on that side. He never climbed to gain altitude and set up the approach so as he was turning into the shut down engines.
As a retired air traffic controller who worked multiple air shows including two International Air Tattoos the first think I thought when the video started was "why the hell wasn't all this pre-briefed before any aircraft even started engines". The lack of positive control and deconfliction procedures was glaring in this instance. It was as if a couple of guys got together and said "hey, let's put on an airshow"! The air boss was in way over his head and should be held accountable for his lack of competence. They're damn lucky no one in the crowd was injured or killed..
Run by amateurs.
Yeah, I have no clue how an airshow is organized, but even to me, this didn't look like coordinating a pre-briefed flight path and more ad-hoc directing. I generally wonder: when you've got two independent formations of planes airborne, wouldn't the most straightforward way to prevent issues be to order them on different altitudes, like tell the bombers to fly 1200feet and the fighters to fly 800 feet, something along those lines? As long as the planes stay away from each other in their own formations and maintain altitude, they can't accidentally intersect with another plane...
@@h.a.9880 Yes, you would think this would be common sense. Sadly people had to die due to basic impompetence.
IMO, the air boss got those people killed, and deserves jail time. Unacceptable to just wing it like that.
Exactly. Thought the same the minute the audio was made public. Reckless disregard for life.
He wasn't an experienced air boss apparently, but got gigs because of his dad who was a well respected air boss.
Does anybody know if there's a recording online of a competent air boss coordinating a similar flight? I'd like to know what a normal show sounds like, because as someone who's never flown with an air boss in charge or even heard transmissions from an air boss except when things go wrong, I have no basis to know how this compares other than comments here. I've read lots of comments and seen Blancolirio's video, but I'd like to understand for myself. Suggestions?
@@Deano.1978 So it's exactly like the gun situation with Alec Baldwin. Got the job because their parent is well known.
It was more than the Boss. It was the lax system that put him there. The report tells us this.
The airboss, was winging it.
Winging it over Dallas
The directions from the air boss are confusing to me when I'm sitting and watching this on a screen. Imagine getting those instructions as you're trying to fly a frikkin P-63 under 500 ft with your eyes out looking for the other aircraft, knowing you have no height separation. Limits of human performance alright.
Plus the transmissions getting stepped on so they can't hear what was said.
I would think the whole show would have been choreographed and burned into memory prior to takeoff. Airboss seemed like he wanted to make himself a much bigger part of the show than he was.
The show was planned prior to the show. The air boss changed the plan mid-show.
Exactly, brief the display and fly it as briefed. No need for an airboss talking every 2 seconds, just confusing.
The air boss got the job because his daddy did it. It was all ad-hoc AF.
Dad operated in the same way
@@robertalonzo5725 yes but he was much much better
@@ethanhiggins4887 or he just got lucky and didnt get bit
20 years from now: “why is there all of this unnecessary regulation on flight shows?”
So true. Over time we tend to forget that these kinds of rules and regulations are "written in blood."
20 years from now: "Why haven't we had any catastrophic fatal accidents in airshows since that CAF crash?"
Now: "why is there there not more regulation in airshows to protect the public?"
DERP, we need more regulations, DERP DERP DERP!
REEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
@@MrJeffcoley1 don't worry, there'll be plenty of ditched or unenforced regulations resulting in plenty of avoidable deaths coming up in the next few years. what a world to leave for your kids 🙂
Airboss needs to take 100% accountability for this. He threw procedures out the window and had traffic crossing paths at the same altitude. A recipe for disaster
Air boss got the job because he was a nepo baby.
How was this stuff not thoroughly prebriefed? The air boss should not have been talking NEARLY this much!!! This is absolutely awful coordination…as a former fighter pilot I can’t believe that this is standard for an airshow performance, my god. This is almost criminal.
Also, fighters entering the bomber block without the requisite SA…terrible.
Air shows are so dangerous and have an extremely high incident rate.
The show was thoroughly pre-briefed. The air boss changed the plan after the show began.
What do you mean almost criminal? I see "negligent homicide" written all over that mid-air.
@@marksmith8079They don't have a extremely high
incident rate. Stay in your safe space.
There are good airshows.
airboss directions reminded me of a caller at a square dance, i.e. sounded like he was making up the moves on the fly
that's great for improv practice on stage, but these are aircraft near an audience
I wonder if the FAA is simply understaffed, because they're evidently not able to keep up adequate oversight on all aircraft activities
What do you think, do the guys who hired an employee of an auto body shop to be the their airboss bear some responsibility?
He did change it on the fly. He didn’t stick to the pre-show briefed plan.
This air boss was an accident waiting to happen. It was not a question of if but when. Pilots that should have raised concerns did not.
I wouldn't trust the airboss to clean my windshield. Absolutely appalling on his end and tragic no one called knock it off or better yet raised a voice during the pre show brief.
I was under the impression from blancolerio that there was a pre-briefing for the airshow, but that the airshow boss decided to disregard it and change the plan. Is that a mistaken impression?
I'm seeing multiple other comments saying something similar so I think you might be correct
The wording in this presentation does not exclude a briefing but rather stating "lack of an adequate prebriefed... The key word adequate. So it wasn't good enough for min standards.
No, there was a briefing, and the show execution pretty much followed the plan presented in that briefing. The problem was the plan, which did not include hard geographic or altitude deconfliction between the fighter formation and the bomber formation.
Blanco Lito gave a far more thorough brief than this video.
Yes, mistaken impression. From the NTSB: We found evidence that the air show guidance provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the International Council of Air Shows Inc. (ICAS) did not adequately address the need to better mitigate the collision risks associated with air boss-directed performances involving multiple, dissimilar aircraft. We determined that a lack of administrative controls and a documented risk assessment process for ensuring air show aircraft separation directly contributed to the in-flight collision.
Passing directly across already established flight paths, two different speed aircraft groups all at the same height, all in similar banked left turns showing either low ground to their left or high sky to their right, what could possibly go wrong?
How many times was similar practice allowed to go on previously?
Lack of awareness off the charts regarding the Airboss but much more here than just him. Not having an enforced altitude split between the types is shocking much less the clear unorganized & unprofessional communication. First rule of formation flying is aircraft closing is ALWAYS below the aircraft being intercepted. Obviously so you can see the airplane you are closing on. RIP
The P-63 and the B-17 were not in the same formation.
That is exactly what a form up is. Anytime you close you must have visual. Obviously that didn't happen.
@@maxtanicfilmsdiy Again...they were not "forming up". The fighters and bombers were independent formations operating in the same airshow box.
@@hackerf15eWhether or not they intend to fly formation for very long, crossing immediately next to each other is effectively a very brief formation flight, and it would be intelligent to observe good practices of formation flying in service of not ramming another plane because the paper doesn't say you're in formation with it.
You can say two aircraft aren't in formation all you want, but if they occupy the same space they're going to have to do some level of coordinated flying or they're going to be hitting each other.
Wow. Great impartial and detailed analysis.
"Wow"? That's what we're paying them for, ja? If not them, then who?
Air Boss should be banned from all areas of aviation. He is legally and criminally liable. Violated every rule of airshow planning and performance.
This air boss broke a lot of rules. He should be in jail.
AOPA's _Air Safety Institute_ channel did a couple of videos on this incident, and they don't have any kind word's for him. At the very least I hope no one ever puts him in that position again.
i agree. seems like negligent homicide
Does anybody know if there's a recording online of a competent air boss coordinating a similar flight? I've read lots of comments and seen Blancolirio's video, but I'd like to understand the comparison for myself. Suggestions?
A competent air boss’s job is in the brief on the ground, ensuring everyone understands their role and duties. Once in the air the air boss’s job should only have two roles; to call in the next act, or to call ‘knock it off’ if someone is doing something they shouldn’t. The recording would contain very little traffic to listen to. Totally different from the nut job running this show.
@@beenaplumber8379 Most warbird parades are completely silent on the airboss frequency, outside of clearing the performers into and out of the airshow box. There's pretty much nothing to listen to.
"expected the bombers to maintain separation visually" Yeah, that doesn't work in turns with vastly different models of aircraft.
These shows need to have actual certified/USAF professionals and for as much as these guys spend on their aircraft there is no reason at all they can't afford RTK avionics with position repeaters and proximity tracks.
Before I heard the probable cause, as I was listening to the video all I could think was wow, that is a lot of non-standardized chatter. Guidance on the fly using plain English, and a lot of it. Not surprising that was cited in the probable cause.
What a cluster.
Air boss??
_Alright, plan is for you fighters to cross in front of the bombers, at the same altitude..._
Me if I was there: _Say what!?_
Who thought this was a good plan?
Evidently all the CAF admin people and participating pilots did, they OK’ed the plan. Amazing isn’t it?
a non pilot with no experience formation flying. maybe he slept in a days inn the night before?
@@thurin84 NTSB report doesn’t mention any issues with fatigue
@@PRH123 its called "a joke".
Too much talking by air boos, confusing everybody. Must keep instructions short. Give short separate instructions for each operation instead of long stories on the radio. I heard that after the pre briefing, many pilots walked out, not fully understanding what the game plan was.
I guess for me, if I were in this show, I’d want to sit in the briefing room with all other flight crews and go thru this show in detail. And I’d want this briefing long before the show began, as well as doing a quick refresh just before going out to the flight line to “saddle up”.
That’s why they call him the Air boss. Extreme Ownership.
To sum up the NTSB recommendation to the FAA: "1) Be safer. 2) Don't be so unsafe. 3) Make a plan so you are not so unsafe." I would think these are things the FAA already knew, but here we are.
There's that, but also: "document more so we know who to blame next time this happens".
You'll find that most government "security" procedures are actually about figuring out whom to blame when things go wrong.
If the bombers were to be on the 1000 foot line and fighters on the 500 foot line for the first pass why fly a pattern that requires crossing of paths in order to do the same for the second pass?
Was this why the bombers were at a higher altitude and the fighters at a lower altitude?
There was neither a geographic deconfliction briefed nor an altitude deconfliction briefed between the bomber and fighter formations. This was a planning error by the airboss.
@@hackerf15ehe wasn’t the only one working on the plan, the CAF admin and all the participating pilots were there, all have the thumbs up
and it doesnt take a pilot or rocket scientist to figure out you put the bigger planes at the 1000 line at a higher altitude and the smaller planes at the 500 line at a lower altitude. clearly the airboss was no rocket scientist.
@@thurin84 The 500 foot line and the 1000 line are minimum distances based on the speeds of the aircraft. The faster the speed, the further away from the crowd the minimum distance is. The 500 foot line is for aircraft flying 180mph or less, the 1000 foot line is the min distance for aircraft flying 280mph or less. So, usually it is the bombers at either the 500 foot line or the low altitude 200-500 foot block, and the fighters at either the 1000 foot line or the 500-1000 foot altitude block. Reference FAA 8900.1, Volume 3 if you are interested in all the details.
Was any video recovered from the GoPros?
I'm amazed that the pilots agreed to go ahead with the flights. An inadequate pre-breif should have been a red flag.
As much as I agree with other commenters, that the air boss and airshow organizers were criminally negligent, the final decision to fly always rests with the pilot.
The airshow organizers handed a loaded gun to a child. The air boss aimed the gun. The pilots pulled the trigger.
apparently the air boss ruled with an iron fist and would ban anyone dissenting from flying caf warbirds.
why not have altitude separation? A few hundred feet would be imperceptible from the crowds’ point of view looking up
Most warbird parades at other airshows have either a hard altitude deconfliction plan or a geographic deconfliction between the fighter and bomber formations. This boss didn't have that in his plan, so his plan on that day was an anomaly.
and the FAA official at the briefing didn't question the lack of a plan...
@@calvinreeves There wasn't a "lack of a plan" -- it was just a poor plan.
We all knew it was the air bosses fault. Thank you Ntsb for confirming it
hmm, read the report again
@PRH123 hmmm I did
@@TheNapalmFTW hmm, did you see this? “air show event organizer’s lack of an adequate, prebriefed aircraft separation plan for the air show performance”
@@PRH123 Who do you think the event organizer would have tasked with developing the separation plan? Maybe the air boss?
@@dukeford8893 As I understand how it works, it’s a team effort, with others from the CAF. And that’s followed by a team meeting with all of the participating pilots. And all those greybeard career pilots who’ve been doing CRM their whole careers stayed silent. This is also noted in the NTSB report.
Aviation rules are written in blood.
Don't use an incompetent airboss. Problem solved.
Well, his dad was competent. Nobody running the CAF willing to say that his son was not. And the CAF apparently retaliated against anyone who complained.
Way too micro managing of the aircraft. He has a fixed vantage point where he can never have as much situational awareness or visibility into every aircraft position in the formation to maintain separation as each pilot does. He has to leave more position control up to the individual pilots and use deconfliction plans that are briefed before the show to keep aircraft apart. Keeping things tight to 'make a good show' is outside the boundaries of proper flight safety and this direction style created this outcome.
The honorable thing for him to do would be to join the crews that were killed by his ignorance so he can apologize to them in the afterlife.
Why didn't they recommend manslaughter charges for the air boss? That dude belongs in prison.
That was such a sad day. RIP to all involved.
The "boss" just ruined airshows for the rest of us.
This could've been much worse. I live nearby this airport. (Which most people still call 'Red Bird') I very nearly missed being by there myself as I had just passed by there a few minutes earlier. (I was planning to attend the Sunday show as I normally do...this event happened during the Saturday show.)This collision happened almost directly above a Freeway (US 67/Marvin D.Love) and the wreckage landed just barely inside airport property. Had they fallen onto this highway,or had this collision happened above & they had fallen into the nearby parking lot of a shopping center (Red Bird Ln,between Hampton & M.D.Love) where many were watching that is also directly under final approach,this could've had a far greater loss of life. Also just off the flight path to the right is a Texaco station & a Car Wash,and a 'low rise' multi story bank building is also across the freeway from the service station. (M.D.Love & Hampton. There is also another service station & another small shopping center across Hampton on the opposite side of the bank,but the opposite side of both Hampton Road & M.D.Love?)
Absolutely unbelievable!
The ntsb needs to learn from the CSB how to make a animation.
They also need to hire the same voiceover guy!
The CSB sets a very high standard with their videos. They are uniformly excellent and hold back zero punches.
This isnt made for your entertainment
@evanfinch4987 No, but the people making it could at least do a professional job. I've seen cleaner presentations from high school kids.
I came here to make this comment less than a minute into the video. This is like watching paint dry
I’ll never forget the photos of the B-17 crew sticking their heads out of the windows post collision… sickening.
After the collision, they were experiencing significant G forces and a lot of chaos. Anything you saw in those photos were involuntary bodily movements in the midst of violent changes in direction of flight.
where did you see that?
@@hackerf15e Jesus. I hope that at least it wasn’t painful and they didn’t really register what happened.
@@hackerf15e the copilot clutching the window frame seemed very voluntary.
@@thurin84 That photo was a milisecond after a 7,000 pound fighter had just collided with his aircraft. The transfer of energy says that a human isn't making any voluntary movements to brace themselves in that instant.
Quite incredible a large display like this was allowed to go ahead with so little in the way of "rules", proper planning and qualified management. Surprising it has not happened sooner really. All the NTSB have suggested you would have thought would have been so obviously necessary.
Apparently air bosses are just allowed to fake it until they make it.
Wow, cool rhyme! 👍
The Ego has landed.
Scary and terrifying.The horror
Airboss should have had altitude blocks set out and minimum separation rules in place.
Total chaos, Jesus. This operation relied solely on pilots' masterful skills.
I'm not a pilot or airboss... but if the airboss was such an amateur, then why didn't any of the pilots call him out?
culture. airboss was the son of a highly regarded airboss. the culture in the field is people who are 'difficult' dont get shows or performances. essentially, you question things, you dont get to fly. so the culture encouraged silence and unquestioning compliance.
I can say it in a word. "Politics".
apparently he ruled with an iron fist and would ban any dissenters from flying caf warbirds.
Astonishing incompetence. Flying by the seat of your pants should be for Hollywood only.
4:49 that was bad, airboss (def at fault) calls for visual confirmation by the B-17, gets nothing, carries on with the show
I’m not qualified to say anything about anyone, but the Airboss had some weird, difficult to understand calls and requests, I’d assume he is at fault, the pilots did fine.
Rest in Peace to the pilots lost.
The faster fighters should have never been at the same altitude with the slower bombers. THAT was their fatal mistake. If they had done that ONE THING alone this never would have happened. How could all of those experienced fliers get it so wrong???????
@@rael5469 Nobody spoke up and said this is dangerous we're not flying that. I bet its not the first time it's been attempted too. Experienced pilots should know better. The Air Boss might not like it but 6 people would still be alive.
@@andrewwaller5913 I think it was mostly just ONE of the Dirty Dozen Human Factors.......complacency. They were experienced fliers and had done these air shows so many times before. I think they might have been shaking their heads at the lack of planning but just thought their experience would see them through.
It was STUPID that specific Altitudes weren't given to each aircraft or that the pilots didn't have a Plan among themselves to ensure separation and safety.
I'd say the Airboss was negligent for failing to ensure either.
The entire event should have been REHEARSED in advance OR Prescribed on Paper for each of the pilots to see, read and comprehend and at the very least, a Pre-Flight Discussion. You don't make this type of thing up on the go with pilots and planes that have never flown together in this particular way. Absolute Negligence.
In fact, if I were any of the pilots I would have demanded a flight plan OR refused to fly (at least in formation).
571 pages of interviews in docket will have you shaking your head. Noteworthy are short on scene interviews with all. Also noteworthy is later extensive interviews with excruciating extent with almost all. One telling missing later interview is with fighter lead. I guess he didn't want to talk about it.
Wow that p-63 pilot has some stones not to drop a wing and look at what was in front of him !
These activities are and will be the death of Warbirds flying........as a former B017/DC-3/DC-3TP will end Living Flight Histories, etc.....the warbird community has too me cowboys and they will pay the price!
5 lives and 2 precious, historic aircraft are gone due to the simple lack of the 7 "P" rule. Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance. What a shame.....
What a bloody mess 😔
Ok, I was there. Some commentary on the video, with time stamps... First off, 0:30 - the dot is not the correct location. The dot is shown on the closed runway, 17/35, when in fact it was east of that dot on Taxiway A just north of A4.
0:39 The crowd was NW of the location shown. The area labeled "Crowd" was mostly a hot ramp, extending from the gate south of the Terminal area all the way to Ambassador Jet Center.
2:15 no, the fighters generally don't fly at 1000' - if you know this airshow, you know that they would fly higher passes for a bit simulating "top cover" for the bombers, then fly low photo passes and "strafing runs" sometimes with pyro.
This accident was easily avoidable. Before the recommendation section was even presented, I thought of having two different set altitudes for the fighters and bombers, which would have practically guaranteed separation, say 1000 and 1500 feet or something similar. Having two very different aircraft essentially go in close formation during a turn like that (the B-17 and P-63) is just plain stupid.
Air Boss screwed up. It had to be someone’s fault. Someone has to except blame.
No one talked about the B-17 1000 ft out front of everybody placing his aircraft over the field 1. before his bomber group was in formation and 2. before the fighters were formed up out front of him. Fighters 250ft down the 500 ft line, bombers 500 ft down the 1000 ft line should not have been hard to plan. Hindsight is always 2020. I remember how bad I felt for all when it happened. Terrible.
When they run out of B17's there wont be anymore crashes.
Reminds me of the armourer that got the director of the movie killed because she failed to keep control of the weapons. Just because your father did it does not mean you will be good at it. Nepotism kills!
a stupid actor that thinks he is a gun expert when he really is an ignoramus did not help.
except she had practical experience assisting her father over the years. yes she failed to do her safety checks, but obviously so did the assistant director and alec baldwin. and the gun was in baldwins control at the time. oh and the armorer wasnt allowed on set in the building at the time.
so it wouldve been like as if the air boss wasnt allowed within visual range of the aircraft during the air show.
@@danielmacpherson1630 and the ironic thing is his dad was an nra rated shooting instructor at a school, so you know baldwin got the safety talk. probably multiple times.
Poor planning may or may not have been directly causal...That is only a guess....People are always finding better ways of doing things and better planning/briefing is a suggestion that may/may not prevent another accident...AND...The direct cause of this accident was the failure of the P63 pilot to see and avoid other aircraft.
One contributing factor could be the title 'Air Boss'. A title like that could go to his head and make him behave irresponsibly, which was probably what happened. Change it to 'Accident Prevention Boss' or 'Air Safety Coordinator' or something more serious and accountable.
A real air traffic controller in the mix probably would have kept this from happening. Keeping airplanes APART is their job!!!
why was a non pilot with no experience formation flying allowed to remote control flay aircraft from the ground in the 1st place?
looked like a cluster F...
FFS, what a clusterfk
Now watch the "too much government regulation" crowd either fight implementation of the recommendations and/or insure that the FAA lacks the funding to implement the recommended safety enhancements.
government overregulation is often the direct result of people abusing their freedom by acting irresponsibly
Air boss needs to go to prison along with the organizers
Why did all those pilots agree to participate?
This report missed the mark. Pilots left the brief with no concrete deconfliction rules, formation roles and responsibilities, etc. Flight leads shirked their deconfliction responsibilities. The wingman were so far spaced apart there was no practical formation integrity. Wingmen DO NOT follow directions of anyone but flight lead….period. Once the wingman decides to follow Airboss instructions, he’s on his own, and the PIC owns ultimate responsibility for safety. The P-63 pilot knowingly drove to a line he knew was crossing the bomber path and didn’t ensure deconfliction by obtaining visual….we expect more clearing from a student pilot turning base to final. This entire show was a clown act and all that was missed by dumping it only on the Airboss.
I think fighter lead should bear part of the blame. His initial maneuvering with the close formation had some pretty close spacing to the bombers that surprised me. When they went trail lead is still responsible for all of the formation. NTSB says the P-63 didn't see the B-17. If you are calling the fighters a formation the P-63 is only looking at #2 in trail. But what trail alignment did they brief? Close trail is about a ship length behind. It looks like they were in a looser trail which might allow more lateral movement. Where did lead think his wingman were and why take your formation that close to the bombers flight path. Yes it looks like the P-63 deviated from exactly in trail but I suspect he wouldn't have been looking anywhere but at #2.
Exactly. Ultimate responsibility lies with the CAF and their pilots, the NTSB went too soft on them in the report.
i agree with you to a certain extent, but from what i understand the airboss ruled with an iron fist and would ban dissenters from flying caf warbirds. yeah the pilots in the air hold some of the responsibility, but it all comes back to the airboss in the end.
@@thurin84 F.A.R. 91.3.a
@@thurin84 Then they should have refused to fly and tell the air boss no. 6 people would still be alive.
This is that crash that went viral 😢 for recording from the mcdonalds parking lot
Today's Tech should be able to track 6 or 7 AC in real Time and keep them separated by 100 ft
2024 and they’re only now talking about risk assessments? The whole ‘air boss’ thing should be scrapped, there’s no way one person standing on a platform can possibly manage multiple aircraft going at different speeds all using the same radio channel.
Sure, they can. If they do the adequate preparation work before, pre-brief the plan with all participants (and provide the plan in writing), make sure that others review the plan for safety and encourage input, and then execute the plan. If that happens, the Air Boss should only have to deal with contingencies that crop up.
Trying to orchestrate this kind of activity without a solid plan and calling all the moves on the fly, clogging up the airwaves with unneccessarily micromanaged flight direction? Yeah, that's asking for task saturation and the type of incident illustrated here.
There needs to be an Air Boss (and supporting spotters), but that person should only be dealing with occurrences that are out of the ordinary--like deconflicting the revenue PT-17 flight coming in for a landing by asking the bombers and fighters to extend to a pre-briefed orbit point until the incoming aircraft is clear of the show area. Otherwise, the Air Boss should only have to call the next phase of the plan.
@@olpaint71 No need for an AirBoss. No such thing in Europe, just air traffic controllers in the tower. The pilots brief the display and fly it, no deviations, that's what causes accidents. The bombers and fighters were way too close and with no vertical separation. Inevitable result.
@@olpaint71 That Stearman should never have been flying during the airshow. Lucky the B-17 didn't collide with that. No planning at all here, just a total dangerous incompetent mess.
@@andrewwaller5913 I'm no expert on European air show protocols, but the UK CAA Regulatory Article 2335 appears to have a similar role to the Air Boss, titled Flying Display Director (FDD) who is responsible for, among other things, putting together maps of the display area, identifying hazards, producing and promulgating the Flying Display Risk Assessment to all participants, coordinating/controlling all fliying activities, controlling the safety, monitoring flying discipline during a flying display, briefing and debriefing all participants, controlling the programme and cancellation or modification of the programme, etc
I'd expect similar rules to be in place for other European nations.
@@olpaint71 Yes in the UK we have an FDD at air shows but he won't micro manage displays like this Air Boss did. He's looking for safety issues and timings but not constantly in the pilots ears which is distraction.
The air boss was flying by the seat of is pants.
Air boss = COWBOY
I'm not expert...but a bunch of WW II aircraft without modern alarm systems shouldn't be packed that tightly together. As the commentator said, their fuselages probably stopped them from seeing each other.
Yup. Usually they'd be separated laterally and by altitude to address that risk, but that wasn't properly prebriefed for this airshow. The airboss actually directed the fighters to cross in front of the B-17, hence the P-63 hitting it. Absolute cluster.
with as far forward as the p-63s cockpit is its pilot shouldve been able to see the b-17 just over his right wing root, had he been looking. but i think he was too preoccupied trying to stay in formation for that. seemed like he was having some trouble staying in formation.
5 pairs of eyes in the B-17 an no one saw the P-63 coming?
No time to react, far too fast. Should have been 300ft separation at least.
11/12/22 at 1:22pm…
🧐
They don’t even match bro lol
@@profile5I see a 1-2-2 in the middle of the date.
@@big_beak It's obviously an Illuminati code. They use air crashes as their written language now.
12/11/22 in the real world 😂
Who was the Air Boss
An absolute clown.
The old air boss’s son I believe….untrained
This is a great video, exactly the same as the other 12 I've seen on YT over the last 2 years. Everybody's an expert.
Russell needs to see prison time
This is how they do it? What? They are winging it! One man with little skill directing all of them. What could go wrong? That is tragic!
This is why I do not support air shows. Too many risks and too many past accidents. These people, pilots, organizers and all, are playing with fire to so casually be messing around in the sky with so many planes and no real plan A, let alone a plan B, and above a crowd of people. It's just shocking to me.
Cry more.
Not trying to play devil’s advocate here, but with all these experienced pilots, shouldn’t someone have raised some concerns about the unprofessional and confusing directions being given by the air boss? At what point do you say “screw this, someone’s going to get hurt and it’s not going to be me or my passengers”?
The issue is the incentive structure. If a pilot objects and the CAF leadership don't like it, they can take the pilot off of flight duties. Considering that the pilots are all likely enthusiasts for the aircraft and for demonstrating them to the public, that's a pretty steep disincentive to raise objections. The organization has to actively foster a safety oriented culture, and it has to happen from the inside.
Ultimately, these airshows and organizations are privately owned and operated entities, which means governemental oversight only means so much.
11/12/2022 at 1:22.... weird number pattern here
Airboss wanted fighters the the b-17s left but then have the fighter pull up and to the right? Stupid
No damn excuse for this crap
Glad to see the NTSB so prompt with this report. Just over 2 years to explain an accident that aviation UA-camrs comprehensively covered and explained within a week of the occurrence
The gubament NEVER does anything quickly.
They have to be thorough. And most UA-camrs won't be correct.
Being fast does nobody any good. NTSB must get ALL their facts right, not just a few pieces information of what some people think. Gathering true facts accurately takes a lot of time, and there are no shortcuts. Don't knock on the people who had to be burdened to do things right. If anything, knock on the people who created the situation that required years of work.
UA-camrs are concerned first and foremost with getting clicks, not providing accurate, in-depth information.
Just because your favorite youtuber speculated correctly, doesn't mean the NTSB doesn't have to deal with the burden of proof. Sorry the NTSB can't meet your standards of instant gratification. Their job is to be thorough and comprehensive and release an official report with recommendations to keep safety moving forward.
Raiders was NOT a B-17 but a PB-1W
@@dgansz705 irrelevant
PB-1W was a modified B17 with no bomb bay and extra fuel tanks. You really don't need to get your knickers in a twist over that.
Texas Radiers was built as a B-17G Flying Fortress. After the Navy retired her in 1955 she was bought in the late 60s by the CAF who preserved the aircraft, They also spent over a million dollars restoring her to an airworthy state as a B-17G as she was originally built, to which she took flight in 2009, fitted with period accurate items such as a Nordern bomb sight, disabled 50. Cal M2 machine guns including the chin turret
Absolutely terrible phraseology
Wait, Republicans keep telling me that more 'regulations' kiII jobs??
AND...The main cause of this accident was the P-63 pilot flying into the B-17. Didnt blame that P-63 pilot once.
Omg 🤦♂️
@@DernFool No, the cause was no proper pre flight briefing and no vertical separation.
@andrewwaller5913 @andrewwaller5913 No, the main cause was the P63 pilots lack of situational awareness that led him to try and occupy the same airspace as the B17. The P63 was not flown by the AirBoss using remote control....some seem to believe that.
@@DernFool No because a proper pre flight briefing would have separated the fighters from the bombers not having the fighters accelerate to catch up to the B-17 as the airboss demands. The P-63 pilot is also to blame because he should have stuck closer to the Mustangs and been higher than the bombers to avoid them, he failed to look where he was going and banked straight into the B-17.
@andrewwaller5913 No...because P63 pilot is to blame for the his and the deaths of the B17 crew...No one else caused this or any other accident that day at this event. Better organizing at these useless airshows should always be considered.
These guys believe they are Tom cruises and jimmy stewart
This kind of "show" should never be permitted around a heavily inhabited area, and the "organizers" of this particular calamity should have faced criminal charges for gross negligence. It looks like it's going to take legal action by homeowners living near airfields to stop these programs before they get off the ground.
That's an idiotic attitude to take. What are the odds the airport was originally located in a rural area and the houses and businesses (none of which were actually damaged) were built up after the fact?
The type of show being executed was a series of fly-bys that did not require radical maneuvering, aerobatics, or speed. The problem was the lack of a pre-briefed spatial separation scheme to keep the two types of aircraft out of the same air space.
There were two defined horizontally separated show lines--one which should've been used for the slower and larger bombers (1000') and the other for the faster fighters (500'). The turns at either end of the lines could/should have also had the bombers turn first, with the fighters turning further away from the ends of the show lines, so that the flight paths never intersected. Likewise, the two patterns should have been assigned different altitudes. Placing the smaller fighters nearer to the crowd and the larger bombers further away would still give the crowd the illusion that the aircraft were operating close together, thanks to forced perspective, while keeping them deconflicted.
This is basic stuff obvious to even a keyboard pilot, but it has to be briefed before the show and adhered to. Not made up by the Air Boss calling an "audible."
this was on blancolirio about 43,400 years ago. how is this useful at this point? going into 2025 in less than 2 weeks. what really is the point of wasting tax dollars at this point?
Investigations take time and come with recommendations which are designed to make pilots, passengers and people on the ground safer. This isn't a mcdonalds.
if you cant see the point in doing thorough research on the exact facts of a crash, not just speculation, and giving recommendations on how to prevent potential future deaths, then i see no point in you wearing a seatbelt since you dont give a fxck about preventative safety measures
Juan does excellent analysis we can probably all agree. But these people do this for a living. It's their job. They are pretty good at it even if they don't present it as well as Juan does.
@@LatitudeSky Well... I thought it was very well presented. The primary draw of Juan's "analyses", on the other hand, is their dujour nature.