---------------------------------------------------------- Yak-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 11/20/08: 33 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 0. 12:32 AM - Behind By 21% - Advertising May Be Needed...? (Matt Dralle) 1. 12:08 AM - Away Message (Tyson V. Rininger) 2. 06:01 AM - Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Mozam) 3. 06:32 AM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Phil) 4. 06:44 AM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (David McGirt) 5. 07:13 AM - Shock and Awe (Roger Kemp MD) 6. 07:38 AM - Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (N642K) 7. 08:00 AM - Re: Re: Missing Man Formation (Bill Geipel) 8. 08:00 AM - FW: Promotion Ceremony (Bill Geipel) 9. 08:00 AM - Re: Missing Man Formation (Bill Geipel) 10. 08:04 AM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Bill Geipel) 11. 08:12 AM - Chute Packing extended (Peter K. Van Staagen) 12. 08:53 AM - Re: Chute Packing extended (Kurt Howerton) 13. 10:47 AM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Roger Kemp MD) 14. 10:51 AM - Re: Chute Packing extended (ByronMFox@aol.com) 15. 11:18 AM - Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Sarah Tobin) 16. 12:56 PM - Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Etienne Verhellen) 17. 02:43 PM - Re: Re: Missing Man Formation (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E) 18. 02:44 PM - Re: Missing Man Formation (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E) 19. 03:51 PM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E) 20. 04:36 PM - Re: Re: OFF TOPIC: Missing Man Formation (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E) 21. 06:08 PM - Formation takeoff (Barry Hancock) 22. 06:10 PM - More gas money... (Barry Hancock) 23. 07:03 PM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Roger Kemp MD) 24. 07:11 PM - BUY COOLING TURBINE (shirleytan) 25. 07:12 PM - urgently buy (shirleytan) 26. 07:15 PM - Off Subject- Speeding (Roger Kemp MD) 27. 07:28 PM - Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (N642K) 28. 07:33 PM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Bill Geipel) 29. 07:41 PM - Re: Re: Missing Man Formation (Bill Geipel) 30. 08:48 PM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Roger Kemp MD) 31. 09:36 PM - Re: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG (Walter Lannon) 32. 11:21 PM - Re: Shock and Awe (Tim Gagnon) ________________________________ Message 0 _____________________________________ Time: 12:32:23 AM PST US From: Matt Dralle Subject: Yak-List: Behind By 21% - Advertising May Be Needed...? Dear Listers, The percentage of people making a Contribution to support the Lists this year is currently lagging behind last year by approximately 21%! I'm hoping that everyone is just waiting until the last minute to show their support... ;-) Please remember that it is solely your direct Contributions that keep these Lists up and running and most importantly - AD FREE! If the members don't want to support the Lists directly, then I will likely have to start adding advertisements to offset the costs of running the Lists. But I *really* don't want to have to start doing that. I really like the non-commercial atmosphere here and I think that a lot of the members appreciate that too. Please take a moment to make a Contribution today in support of the continued ad-free operation of all these Lists: http://www.matronics.com/contribution I want to send out a word of appreciation to all of the members that have already made their generous Contribution to support the Lists! Thank you! Matt Dralle Email List Administrator ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:08:27 AM PST US From: "Tyson V. Rininger" Subject: Yak-List: Away Message Thanks for the note! I'll be out of the country, returning on the 22nd. Email access will most likely be sporadic, however I will do my best to get back to you as soon as possible. Many thanks, Tyson ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:01:47 AM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: "Mozam" Guys, I wouldn't get too excited over this photo. I am the left wingman on a formation acro team and have often (but not nearly enough times!) watched a video of one of our performances where it looked like we did pretty good. We were all smiles. Then somebody shows us some photos of our flight and we look like crap. One (or more) of us is wide, sucked, misaligned, etc. The photo just gives a picture of what your formation looks like for .000001 seconds, when in actuality, your formation looked pretty good in real life. Yeah, somebody flinched, turned their head for a nanosecond, one guy lifted off 1/10 of a second early, etc. But, in real time (or on a video) you just don't see these tiny glitches. Let's get back to MMO, flight suits, missing man formations, guns and politics! :D Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215308#215308 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:32:15 AM PST US From: "Phil" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Thanks, Steve. As the wingman in the photo I have to say, with absolute certainty, that we were both (lead and I) or opposite sides of a very wide runway. I fly often with this lead. A picture is a thousand words. 990 of them are utter bullshit but the total comes to a thousand for sure. Phil 'Shortbus' Cogan Nanchang CJ6A N21740 SB-Stamp -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mozam Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:01 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Guys, I wouldn't get too excited over this photo. I am the left wingman on a formation acro team and have often (but not nearly enough times!) watched a video of one of our performances where it looked like we did pretty good. We were all smiles. Then somebody shows us some photos of our flight and we look like crap. One (or more) of us is wide, sucked, misaligned, etc. The photo just gives a picture of what your formation looks like for .000001 seconds, when in actuality, your formation looked pretty good in real life. Yeah, somebody flinched, turned their head for a nanosecond, one guy lifted off 1/10 of a second early, etc. But, in real time (or on a video) you just don't see these tiny glitches. Let's get back to MMO, flight suits, missing man formations, guns and politics! :D Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215308#215308 ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:44:36 AM PST US Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: David McGirt 9 of the last 10 are why did they waste film on a CJ when there were Yaks to be shot? Haha.. Right on the point Steve Cheers David On 11/20/08 9:33 AM, "Phil" wrote: > > Thanks, Steve. > > As the wingman in the photo I have to say, with absolute certainty, that we > were both (lead and I) or opposite sides of a very wide runway. I fly often > with this lead. > > A picture is a thousand words. 990 of them are utter bullshit but the total > comes to a thousand for sure. > > Phil 'Shortbus' Cogan > Nanchang CJ6A > N21740 > SB-Stamp > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mozam > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:01 AM > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > > > Guys, > > I wouldn't get too excited over this photo. > > I am the left wingman on a formation acro team and have often (but not > nearly enough times!) watched a video of one of our performances where it > looked like we did pretty good. We were all smiles. > > Then somebody shows us some photos of our flight and we look like crap. One > (or more) of us is wide, sucked, misaligned, etc. The photo just gives a > picture of what your formation looks like for .000001 seconds, when in > actuality, your formation looked pretty good in real life. Yeah, somebody > flinched, turned their head for a nanosecond, one guy lifted off 1/10 of a > second early, etc. But, in real time (or on a video) you just don't see > these tiny glitches. > > Let's get back to MMO, flight suits, missing man formations, guns and > politics! > :D > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215308#215308 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:13:14 AM PST US From: "Roger Kemp MD" Subject: Yak-List: Shock and Awe Back to flying and fighting it is. Being a conn0isseur of making things go bang check out this video on a Viper dropping a 1000lb wake up call on the Taliban..well for some, guess it was a go to your virgins now call! http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=176899 &page=8&ESRC=army.nl&ESRC=airforce-a.nl Doc ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:38:51 AM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: "N642K" Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:00:06 AM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Good for you Floyd. Mark send a list of the complainers so that we may apologize. This was yak stuff - FUN STUFF- YOU REMEMBER flying??? That Is on subject. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:53 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Interesting Mark. I don't see how this is related to rock and roll , who the hell is running for president, my mother or what beer I drink. It looked to me like formation flying and I was in a Yak. I take exception to your statement as not being a related subject. Have a nice Veterans Day!! Dale Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215018#215018 ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:00:06 AM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: Yak-List: FW: Promotion Ceremony Thought all you Yak guys (Except Mark) would enjoy reading about Flying Yaks as opposed to pontificating on-line everyday about how broke they are. It was a great weekend. We wish almost all of you could attend. Don't get me wrong, I learn a lot on-line with y'all, but you know sometimes you've got to fire it up and just go fly. Please don't correct my spelling, or whine, flying is why we own them. Bill _____ From: Mark Davis [mailto:mark@pld.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 3:07 PM Murray; Ray K. Davis; Randy Davis; Keith "Flipper" Harbour; Joe "Felix" Wilkins; Jeff Davis; J j; Gus Grissom; David Payne; Dave Hilker; Dale Matuska; Bob "Kilo" Watts; Bill Royer; Bill "Dawg" Geipel; Allen "Raid" Tinnes Subject: Fw: Promotion Ceremony The Lamar Clinic made the Air Force Times. Just a shame it couldn't have made a better publication like the NAVY TIMES! : ) http://www.airforcetimes.com/offduty/technology/military_yakpak_111008od/ ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:00:06 AM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation We are discussing technique, not if it is appropriate. Complainers need a life. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:29 AM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation MALS-14 64E" I thought we all agreed to drop this subject? Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of KingCJ6@aol.com Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:23 PM Subject: Re: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation Yesterday, I talked to Maj. Tim Decker, former F-117 pilot and a current U-2 Squad Commander at Beale AFB. His input: "After a healthy vertical pull up, #3 turns towards the briefed join-up area, rather that away because - 1) this expedites the join-up and 2) there is less chance of loosing visual on the main flight, thus it's safer" Dave In a message dated 11/17/2008 12:19:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, byronmfox@aol.com writes: Here's what a USAF active-duty F-15E pilot has to say on the subject: Blitz, I looked into it at work today and this is what I found. I know you guys fly using a lot of Navy formation stuff, so it may be a little different. I'm afraid I can only speak from an Air Force reg perspective. The standard Air Force 4-ship formation has #2 on the left with #3 and #4 on the right. Therefore for in the Air Force missing man North to South run, #3 will split west over #4. The only other thing I could find was that missing man formations are flown South to North if able (Weather, terrain, ceremony permitting) with #3 executing either the vertical pull or west-ward break over #1 and #2. It must have been a moving experience to be a part of. I wish I could have seen you guys executing it. Hope all is well! Brent -- Byron M. Fox TDA Investment Group 1214 Donnelly Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 650-343-6333 650-343-0858 Fax ://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/ Navigator?Yak-List .matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________ ?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown0 0000001">Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more! ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:04:26 AM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG An important consideration regarding any gear, tire issues, We do not have real good directional control when it is a gear issue. Hopefully the runway is real wide, and 2 maintained an almost line abreast position so that he can get ahead and out of the way. I have been through tire failures during takeoff and landings in Yaks and L-29. You are at best, a passenger. Just a thought. Fly it like you brief it. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:39 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:12:32 AM PST US From: "Peter K. Van Staagen" Subject: Yak-List: Chute Packing extended Effective December 19th 2008 the packing interval for parachutes is extended from 120 days to 180 days. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-27459.htm That's nice. I guess that means don't get your chute repacked until after the 19th. Pete __|__ __|__ ----=(*)=---- __|__ ----=(*)=---- __|__ ----=(*)=---- ----=(*)=---- ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:53:43 AM PST US From: Kurt Howerton Subject: Re: Yak-List: Chute Packing extended Arrrrggggg! I dropped mine off to be repacked last weekend! -- Kurt Howerton N923YK http://cj6.scitechsys.com Peter K. Van Staagen wrote: > > Effective December 19^th 2008 the packing interval for parachutes is > extended from 120 days to 180 days. > > http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-27459.htm > > Thats nice. I guess that means dont get your chute repacked until > after the 19^th . > > Pete > > > > __|__ > > __|__ ----=(_*_)=---- > > __|__ ----=(_*_)=---- > __|__ ----=(_*_)=---- > ----=(_*_)=---- > > > > > > * > * ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:28 AM PST US From: "Roger Kemp MD" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mike, You are absolutely correct. What I wrote was poorly worded for brevity. No excuse. I'm AF (ANG). During the brief, Motherhood will have covered when and if the element will abort together. Generally that is if the element is mission critical for training and the abort occurs leaving the chocks, in EOR, or as the flight starts TO roll. Everything is talked about on the radio if possible, but maybe not. If lead breaks one third, halfway down the runway, at rotation or at some point past loss of nose wheel steering, 2 is going flying to get out of lead's way. In the TO roll if two still had nose wheel steering, it is a judgment call. Nothing is embedded in concrete. We'll talk about it in the debrief. You are correct, the last thing we need is for two a/c to be in the barrier at the same time. Well since we don't have hooks and barriers, that one was a moot point. We are talking about round motors and it is a judgment call but me personally, if I'm two and lead has a bad day, aborts, then I'm going flying any way. We do this for fun and there is nothing mission critical in what we do. The point with the two pictures of the YAKs and the CJ's doing formation T.O.s was that Two is now the flight lead. He rotated and went flying before lead. For two now to stay in position with lead, he/she is going to have to pull back on the power, look down at lead, and possibly unintentionally roll into him while trying to maintain station. The other risk is since lead is at Vrot not quite flying with two now flying two can pull too much power and stall while trying to stay in position. Those were the safety issue I was trying to point out. Two at that point needs to become lead and fly his jet. Lead becomes two and joins on the new accidental flight lead. They can work it out on departure, in the area or in debrief. Talon, you are absolutely correct a picture is what is happening at that nanosecond in time. But it is worth a 1000 words when it shows something of interest. The "I fly with this lead all the time and we do it this way" because we are comfortable with each other is not a warm fuzzy for me that is. It is an invitation for bent metal and heartache. Sorry, I may be seeing it all wrong and maybe it is me that is missing the point here. But, I just had my DO in the office a few minutes ago and showed him the pictures. His reaction was Holly SHIT! Nuff said does not matter how big the @#$%^& runway is. We can go to the bar, drink beer, pat each other on the ass, scratch each other's backs and this was still not recognized as poor technique and not entirely safe. Two is trying to fly form on lead who is still on the ground. Here are two nanosecond shots of it being done right. Well the #2 Scooter is just a little bit sucked since we are splitting hairs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:39 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:51:47 AM PST US From: ByronMFox@aol.com Subject: Re: Yak-List: Chute Packing extended In a message dated 11/20/08 8:13:26 AM, petervs@knology.net writes: > > Effective December 19th 2008 the packing interval for parachutes is extended > from 120 days to 180 days. > http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-27459.htm > > We can thank Alan Silver of Silver Parachute Sales in Hayward, CA for his hard work on this. Alan has been an RPA supporter for years, and routinely repacks our NorCal chutes. ...Blitz ************** One site has it all. Your email accounts, your social networks, and the things you love. Try the new AOL.com ) ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:18:55 AM PST US From: Sarah Tobin Subject: RE: Yak-List: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG If the aborting aircraft calls over the radio "abort, abort, abort" then the other aircraft knows to stay in full blower and go, I can't imagine sacrificing aircraft control to stay in position... --- On Wed, 11/19/08, Roger Kemp MD wrote: > From: Roger Kemp MD > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Date: Wednesday, November 19, 2008, 10:57 PM > > > No, I disagree, it is not safe but not necessarily > dangerous. 2 just took > off before One. 2 is now flight lead. 150, 100, or 80 foot > wide runway or > not, 2 is airborne first and is now flight lead. > Now the reason it is not safe is the tendency of 2 (who is > now airborne) to > look down at lead and attempt to slow to match lead's > airspeed. 2 > unconsciously can roll to the right or left as he/she is > looking down on > lead depending on which side lead is on during the take > off. Two is doing > this in an attempt to maintain position with lead. > If 2 becomes airborne ahead of lead, he/she is now the new > flight lead or 2 > will find himself hanging closer to a stall than he/she > really wants to be > as well as turning into lead as he/she attempts to stay in > formation. > Passed these pictures around the squadron today, all pretty > much said the > same thing. It is 2's responsibility to maintain > station on lead and go > flying when lead goes flying. If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The > flight usually > will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation and > is taking the > barrier. If that happens, 2 goes flying and lead ends up in > the barrier. Two > flies his jet and forgets about lead until he has > established a positive > rate of climb and stabilized flight. > Doc > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Nigel Willson > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 9:33 AM > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > > Willson" > > If it's a form takeoff it's safe (lead sticks to > ground longest to ensure > safe flying speed for whole formation), if it's a form > landing, it's not... > normally on form landings, wing men make sure they touch > down fractionally > BEFORE the lead.... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Roger Kemp MD > Sent: 19 November 2008 15:12 > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: Yak-List: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > > Here is another one. Is a form landing or is a TO? Is it > safe? > Doc > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 12:56:28 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: "Etienne Verhellen" Just if you care to have a look ... http://yakitiyakps.free.fr/Photos/picture.php?cat=36&image_id=1293 http://yakitiyakps.free.fr/Photos/picture.php?cat=36&image_id=1272 http://users.skynet.be/B747/photogallery/Etienne%20G-CBSS/NW14_127.jpg http://users.skynet.be/B747/photogallery/Etienne%20G-CBSS/NW14_129.jpg http://www.patricksaviation.com/photos/giel/13754/ http://myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=01386259&size=large http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2e8f7_1ohQ ...... waiting for better weather to go flying. -------- http://www.pilotmarket.com/exams/Freelance_Flight_Instructors/listing-2904-11202.html http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/photos/profile.php?uid=84 http://www.pilotlist.org/tagazous/gcbss.htm http://www.airshowactionphotography.com/san07/page1.html Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215412#215412 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 02:43:08 PM PST US Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" I never said any such thing. End of discussion. Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Geipel Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:58 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Good for you Floyd. Mark send a list of the complainers so that we may apologize. This was yak stuff - FUN STUFF- YOU REMEMBER flying??? That Is on subject. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:53 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Interesting Mark. I don't see how this is related to rock and roll , who the hell is running for president, my mother or what beer I drink. It looked to me like formation flying and I was in a Yak. I take exception to your statement as not being a related subject. Have a nice Veterans Day!! Dale Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215018#215018 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:44:59 PM PST US Subject: RE: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" Bill, let's you and I meet someplace. I live in New Bern North Carolina. Is it possible that you and I could fly to a common location and have lunch? Mark -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Geipel Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:58 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation We are discussing technique, not if it is appropriate. Complainers need a life. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:29 AM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation --> Point, MALS-14 64E" I thought we all agreed to drop this subject? Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of KingCJ6@aol.com Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:23 PM Subject: Re: Yak-List: Missing Man Formation Yesterday, I talked to Maj. Tim Decker, former F-117 pilot and a current U-2 Squad Commander at Beale AFB. His input: "After a healthy vertical pull up, #3 turns towards the briefed join-up area, rather that away because - 1) this expedites the join-up and 2) there is less chance of loosing visual on the main flight, thus it's safer" Dave In a message dated 11/17/2008 12:19:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, byronmfox@aol.com writes: Here's what a USAF active-duty F-15E pilot has to say on the subject: Blitz, I looked into it at work today and this is what I found. I know you guys fly using a lot of Navy formation stuff, so it may be a little different. I'm afraid I can only speak from an Air Force reg perspective. The standard Air Force 4-ship formation has #2 on the left with #3 and #4 on the right. Therefore for in the Air Force missing man North to South run, #3 will split west over #4. The only other thing I could find was that missing man formations are flown South to North if able (Weather, terrain, ceremony permitting) with #3 executing either the vertical pull or west-ward break over #1 and #2. It must have been a moving experience to be a part of. I wish I could have seen you guys executing it. Hope all is well! Brent -- Byron M. Fox TDA Investment Group 1214 Donnelly Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 650-343-6333 650-343-0858 Fax ://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/ Navigator?Yak-List .matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________ ?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown0 0000001">Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more! ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 03:51:50 PM PST US Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" Doc, I have flown a good deal of dissimilar aircraft formation with me being in the aircraft with more performance and a much shorter take-off roll than the other guy. That said, I have made the mistake you are talking about. In this case, a formation take-off with me in a YAK-50 and the other fellow flying lead in a souped up Cessna 180. I am off the deck long before he is, and what you are saying is exactly what happened. I am looking down on lead. He is partially obscured by the wing. I have to pull to keep from over-taking him. I slow to near stall speed. It was easy to pick up a little drift, since there was a cross-wind situation. I am looking at an airplane on the deck that is not flying, yet I am in the air and have "keeping it flying" issues happening. It was bad ju-ju. Lead, a retired USMC C-130 pilot and ex-EA-6B ECMO chewed my ass and rightly so. He was right, I was wrong, it was a stupid thing to do. Of course in this case a freeze frame picture is hard to judge. The situation for THEM might have been just milliseconds. I have no idea. However, as a point of discussion for formation flying between two aircraft, there is no question that it is a bad idea to have your wingman rotate and start flying before lead. I say this as just a regular ole Pilot who does not have a FAST card from the RPA, and could of course be wrong. Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp MD Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 13:47 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mike, You are absolutely correct. What I wrote was poorly worded for brevity. No excuse. I'm AF (ANG). During the brief, Motherhood will have covered when and if the element will abort together. Generally that is if the element is mission critical for training and the abort occurs leaving the chocks, in EOR, or as the flight starts TO roll. Everything is talked about on the radio if possible, but maybe not. If lead breaks one third, halfway down the runway, at rotation or at some point past loss of nose wheel steering, 2 is going flying to get out of lead's way. In the TO roll if two still had nose wheel steering, it is a judgment call. Nothing is embedded in concrete. We'll talk about it in the debrief. You are correct, the last thing we need is for two a/c to be in the barrier at the same time. Well since we don't have hooks and barriers, that one was a moot point. We are talking about round motors and it is a judgment call but me personally, if I'm two and lead has a bad day, aborts, then I'm going flying any way. We do this for fun and there is nothing mission critical in what we do. The point with the two pictures of the YAKs and the CJ's doing formation T.O.s was that Two is now the flight lead. He rotated and went flying before lead. For two now to stay in position with lead, he/she is going to have to pull back on the power, look down at lead, and possibly unintentionally roll into him while trying to maintain station. The other risk is since lead is at Vrot not quite flying with two now flying two can pull too much power and stall while trying to stay in position. Those were the safety issue I was trying to point out. Two at that point needs to become lead and fly his jet. Lead becomes two and joins on the new accidental flight lead. They can work it out on departure, in the area or in debrief. Talon, you are absolutely correct a picture is what is happening at that nanosecond in time. But it is worth a 1000 words when it shows something of interest. The "I fly with this lead all the time and we do it this way" because we are comfortable with each other is not a warm fuzzy for me that is. It is an invitation for bent metal and heartache. Sorry, I may be seeing it all wrong and maybe it is me that is missing the point here. But, I just had my DO in the office a few minutes ago and showed him the pictures. His reaction was Holly SHIT! Nuff said does not matter how big the @#$%^& runway is. We can go to the bar, drink beer, pat each other on the ass, scratch each other's backs and this was still not recognized as poor technique and not entirely safe. Two is trying to fly form on lead who is still on the ground. Here are two nanosecond shots of it being done right. Well the #2 Scooter is just a little bit sucked since we are splitting hairs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:39 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 04:36:17 PM PST US Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: OFF TOPIC: Missing Man Formation From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" Well, let's see. Doc Kemp, Tim Gagnon, and myself are three of the either active or formally active and now retired (that means 20 or more years served Bill and in my case 38 years of DOD service) who feel that the Missing Man Formation flight is something that was invented by the military to essentially honor other military airmen who died while IN those very same aircraft in service to their country. I have a list of other people NOT on the YAK List who also sent me email agreeing that Missing Man Formations, like certain other military honors should be reserved for the military and not copied by civilians to honor other civilians who happen to fly Cessna 150's, or even 747's, or in some cases were not even a pilot at all. THAT list includes one former 3 star General, one Bird Colonel, and every Commanding Officer and aircrew present here at Cherry Point that I bothered to ask. So you will not misquote me.... Again..... Every one of them, including myself, never said that you, or anyone else should be PROHIBITED from doing what you want to do, including Missing Man Formations! Every one of them, including myself, felt that every one of you who feel otherwise, should be allowed to fly any kind of formation flight that you want to. No one ever said you should be grounded, shot, whipped, flayed, or neutered. No one ever said one bad thing about you or anyone else who did not share our viewpoint. What they said was: "We feel such a flight is disrespectful to service members and our traditions". The reason they feel that way Bill..and everyone else......is because even though a lot of us were active duty military AND aircrew, when we die we do not rate a Missing Man Formation flight by the military and therefore do not want one by anyone else since basically it would be disrespectful of those that DID die in aircraft in service and/or defense of their country. That is OUR way of seeing it Bill. That is the MILITARY'S way of seeing it Bill, and that aspect is simply not open for debate. But I concur: It is not YOUR way of seeing it and a lot of other people agree with you! So OK! FINE! NO PROBLEM! DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO! NO ONE IS STOPPING YOU! NO ONE EVEN WANTS TO, let alone try to. But please, none of you has the right to imply that those of us who feel as we do are wrong-headed, misguided, or are otherwise incorrect. We respect your point of view. Try giving us the same courtesy. Or is that just too hard to do? That said: There is another list of complainers. Those are the people that complained to the LIST OWNER MATT Dralle for our CONTINUED debate about this topic. The impression I got from Matt's message was that he preferred for us to stop debating this issue, and he specifically mentioned that he had received numerous complaints about it. If you want a copy of THAT list, please sent a message to Matt, and I am sure he would be happy to talk to you about it. His address is: Matt Dralle Give him a shout. Now are we DONE, or do you have to go into this whole mess SOME MORE? Jesus... Enough already! Let's get back to fixing airplanes. Your input to that subject being ?????? M. Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Geipel Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:58 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Good for you Floyd. Mark send a list of the complainers so that we may apologize. This was yak stuff - FUN STUFF- YOU REMEMBER flying??? That Is on subject. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:53 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Interesting Mark. I don't see how this is related to rock and roll , who the hell is running for president, my mother or what beer I drink. It looked to me like formation flying and I was in a Yak. I take exception to your statement as not being a related subject. Have a nice Veterans Day!! Dale Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215018#215018 ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 06:08:35 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Formation takeoff From: "Barry Hancock" Guys, This serves as a good review of the formation training manual.... >If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation >and is taking the barrier. If that happens, 2 goes flying and lead ends up in the barrier. Two flies >his jet and forgets about lead until he has established a positive rate of climb and stabilized flight. That may be the case for military jets, but we don't have barriers to contend with. And if lead aborts on take off, what is the proper procedure in our aircraft? Also, not to pick nits, but 2 does not become lead if he is airborne premature of lead. Granted, not the best technique, but there is no passing of the lead. Need to keep doctrine straight for the uninitiated or uninformed. A LOT of time and effort has gone into our training pubs, and it is incumbent upon all of us to review and know the manual...not knowing and adhering to the procedures in the manual has a more significant potential for impact on safety than an early liftoff by -2. Bdog -- Barry Hancock Worldwide Warbirds, Inc. office (909) 606-4444 cell (949) 300-5510 www.worldwidewarbirds.com ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 06:10:50 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: More gas money... From: "Barry Hancock" Just picked this up off of the EAA's e-hotline. Good news! FAA ADDS 60 DAYS TO PARACHUTE REPACK INTERVAL EAA, IAC Support Change The FAA has extended the time period for mandatory inspection and repacking of reserve and emergency parachutes from 120 to 180 days. The final rule, which goes into effect on December 19, 2008, affects reserve parachutes worn by skydivers and smokejumpers as well as emergency parachutes worn by pilots flying aerobatic aircraft or gliders, test pilots, and others. -- Barry Hancock Worldwide Warbirds, Inc. office (909) 606-4444 cell (949) 300-5510 www.worldwidewarbirds.com ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 07:03:42 PM PST US From: "Roger Kemp MD" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mark, You are dead on in what your experience was and what your reaction was to the fact you (2) are airborne and 1 is not. I talked with my DO today, my safety officer, Squadron CC, OPS officer and 2 of the 4 flight leads then took the picture to our 2 newly minted FNG's just out of F-16 RTU. They are the consummate virgin wing men! The response was unanimous! They all said they would chew 2's ass for his lack of SA and aircraft management. Fuck them, they do not get it and they are going to kill somebody. I am a "FAST" card carrier and it is BS because these clowns do not have a clue. They are more worried about the patches they wear on their flight suits and the wings they pin on. Incidentally, the vast majority did not earn any of them but they look good and feel good patting each other on the back and scatching each other's ass! Let kill themselves thinking they are safe. They are not. I can attest to that from a number of times that I have made the mistake of joining in a 4 ship with some of these clowns. So, FUCK them if they can not admit that what they are seeing in that nanosecond picture was not safe. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 5:51 PM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG MALS-14 64E" Doc, I have flown a good deal of dissimilar aircraft formation with me being in the aircraft with more performance and a much shorter take-off roll than the other guy. That said, I have made the mistake you are talking about. In this case, a formation take-off with me in a YAK-50 and the other fellow flying lead in a souped up Cessna 180. I am off the deck long before he is, and what you are saying is exactly what happened. I am looking down on lead. He is partially obscured by the wing. I have to pull to keep from over-taking him. I slow to near stall speed. It was easy to pick up a little drift, since there was a cross-wind situation. I am looking at an airplane on the deck that is not flying, yet I am in the air and have "keeping it flying" issues happening. It was bad ju-ju. Lead, a retired USMC C-130 pilot and ex-EA-6B ECMO chewed my ass and rightly so. He was right, I was wrong, it was a stupid thing to do. Of course in this case a freeze frame picture is hard to judge. The situation for THEM might have been just milliseconds. I have no idea. However, as a point of discussion for formation flying between two aircraft, there is no question that it is a bad idea to have your wingman rotate and start flying before lead. I say this as just a regular ole Pilot who does not have a FAST card from the RPA, and could of course be wrong. Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp MD Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 13:47 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mike, You are absolutely correct. What I wrote was poorly worded for brevity. No excuse. I'm AF (ANG). During the brief, Motherhood will have covered when and if the element will abort together. Generally that is if the element is mission critical for training and the abort occurs leaving the chocks, in EOR, or as the flight starts TO roll. Everything is talked about on the radio if possible, but maybe not. If lead breaks one third, halfway down the runway, at rotation or at some point past loss of nose wheel steering, 2 is going flying to get out of lead's way. In the TO roll if two still had nose wheel steering, it is a judgment call. Nothing is embedded in concrete. We'll talk about it in the debrief. You are correct, the last thing we need is for two a/c to be in the barrier at the same time. Well since we don't have hooks and barriers, that one was a moot point. We are talking about round motors and it is a judgment call but me personally, if I'm two and lead has a bad day, aborts, then I'm going flying any way. We do this for fun and there is nothing mission critical in what we do. The point with the two pictures of the YAKs and the CJ's doing formation T.O.s was that Two is now the flight lead. He rotated and went flying before lead. For two now to stay in position with lead, he/she is going to have to pull back on the power, look down at lead, and possibly unintentionally roll into him while trying to maintain station. The other risk is since lead is at Vrot not quite flying with two now flying two can pull too much power and stall while trying to stay in position. Those were the safety issue I was trying to point out. Two at that point needs to become lead and fly his jet. Lead becomes two and joins on the new accidental flight lead. They can work it out on departure, in the area or in debrief. Talon, you are absolutely correct a picture is what is happening at that nanosecond in time. But it is worth a 1000 words when it shows something of interest. The "I fly with this lead all the time and we do it this way" because we are comfortable with each other is not a warm fuzzy for me that is. It is an invitation for bent metal and heartache. Sorry, I may be seeing it all wrong and maybe it is me that is missing the point here. But, I just had my DO in the office a few minutes ago and showed him the pictures. His reaction was Holly SHIT! Nuff said does not matter how big the @#$%^& runway is. We can go to the bar, drink beer, pat each other on the ass, scratch each other's backs and this was still not recognized as poor technique and not entirely safe. Two is trying to fly form on lead who is still on the ground. Here are two nanosecond shots of it being done right. Well the #2 Scooter is just a little bit sucked since we are splitting hairs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:39 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 07:11:37 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: BUY COOLING TURBINE From: "shirleytan" I urgently need cooling turbine 586110-7, anybody who have pls contact me by email tanyanfang(at)fy-ic.com[/b] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215458#215458 ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:56 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: urgently buy From: "shirleytan" I urgently buy cooling turbine 586110-7, anybody who have pls contact me by email: tanyanfang(at)fy-ic.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215459#215459 ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 07:15:57 PM PST US From: "Roger Kemp MD" Subject: Yak-List: Off Subject- Speeding I GOT STOPPED FOR SPEEDING YESTERDAY. I THOUGHT I COULD TALK MY WAY OUT OF IT UNTIL THE OFFICER LOOKED AT MY DOG IN THE BACK SEAT cid:448F10D77AD44D149B9DF91B7F316B8F@D3SGWL81 Well guys, After our heated debates over the last few days on various off topic subjects, I figured we all needed a good laugh. Enjoy. Doc ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 07:28:28 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG From: "N642K" There should be a rule about posting under the influence..... [Shocked] :D Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215464#215464 ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 07:33:01 PM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG WOW? Your right, if I were you I would turn in my FAST card and not ever fly with these clowns. They don't deserve you. -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp MD Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:03 PM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mark, You are dead on in what your experience was and what your reaction was to the fact you (2) are airborne and 1 is not. I talked with my DO today, my safety officer, Squadron CC, OPS officer and 2 of the 4 flight leads then took the picture to our 2 newly minted FNG's just out of F-16 RTU. They are the consummate virgin wing men! The response was unanimous! They all said they would chew 2's ass for his lack of SA and aircraft management. Fuck them, they do not get it and they are going to kill somebody. I am a "FAST" card carrier and it is BS because these clowns do not have a clue. They are more worried about the patches they wear on their flight suits and the wings they pin on. Incidentally, the vast majority did not earn any of them but they look good and feel good patting each other on the back and scatching each other's ass! Let kill themselves thinking they are safe. They are not. I can attest to that from a number of times that I have made the mistake of joining in a 4 ship with some of these clowns. So, FUCK them if they can not admit that what they are seeing in that nanosecond picture was not safe. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 5:51 PM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG MALS-14 64E" Doc, I have flown a good deal of dissimilar aircraft formation with me being in the aircraft with more performance and a much shorter take-off roll than the other guy. That said, I have made the mistake you are talking about. In this case, a formation take-off with me in a YAK-50 and the other fellow flying lead in a souped up Cessna 180. I am off the deck long before he is, and what you are saying is exactly what happened. I am looking down on lead. He is partially obscured by the wing. I have to pull to keep from over-taking him. I slow to near stall speed. It was easy to pick up a little drift, since there was a cross-wind situation. I am looking at an airplane on the deck that is not flying, yet I am in the air and have "keeping it flying" issues happening. It was bad ju-ju. Lead, a retired USMC C-130 pilot and ex-EA-6B ECMO chewed my ass and rightly so. He was right, I was wrong, it was a stupid thing to do. Of course in this case a freeze frame picture is hard to judge. The situation for THEM might have been just milliseconds. I have no idea. However, as a point of discussion for formation flying between two aircraft, there is no question that it is a bad idea to have your wingman rotate and start flying before lead. I say this as just a regular ole Pilot who does not have a FAST card from the RPA, and could of course be wrong. Mark Bitterlich -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp MD Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 13:47 Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mike, You are absolutely correct. What I wrote was poorly worded for brevity. No excuse. I'm AF (ANG). During the brief, Motherhood will have covered when and if the element will abort together. Generally that is if the element is mission critical for training and the abort occurs leaving the chocks, in EOR, or as the flight starts TO roll. Everything is talked about on the radio if possible, but maybe not. If lead breaks one third, halfway down the runway, at rotation or at some point past loss of nose wheel steering, 2 is going flying to get out of lead's way. In the TO roll if two still had nose wheel steering, it is a judgment call. Nothing is embedded in concrete. We'll talk about it in the debrief. You are correct, the last thing we need is for two a/c to be in the barrier at the same time. Well since we don't have hooks and barriers, that one was a moot point. We are talking about round motors and it is a judgment call but me personally, if I'm two and lead has a bad day, aborts, then I'm going flying any way. We do this for fun and there is nothing mission critical in what we do. The point with the two pictures of the YAKs and the CJ's doing formation T.O.s was that Two is now the flight lead. He rotated and went flying before lead. For two now to stay in position with lead, he/she is going to have to pull back on the power, look down at lead, and possibly unintentionally roll into him while trying to maintain station. The other risk is since lead is at Vrot not quite flying with two now flying two can pull too much power and stall while trying to stay in position. Those were the safety issue I was trying to point out. Two at that point needs to become lead and fly his jet. Lead becomes two and joins on the new accidental flight lead. They can work it out on departure, in the area or in debrief. Talon, you are absolutely correct a picture is what is happening at that nanosecond in time. But it is worth a 1000 words when it shows something of interest. The "I fly with this lead all the time and we do it this way" because we are comfortable with each other is not a warm fuzzy for me that is. It is an invitation for bent metal and heartache. Sorry, I may be seeing it all wrong and maybe it is me that is missing the point here. But, I just had my DO in the office a few minutes ago and showed him the pictures. His reaction was Holly SHIT! Nuff said does not matter how big the @#$%^& runway is. We can go to the bar, drink beer, pat each other on the ass, scratch each other's backs and this was still not recognized as poor technique and not entirely safe. Two is trying to fly form on lead who is still on the ground. Here are two nanosecond shots of it being done right. Well the #2 Scooter is just a little bit sucked since we are splitting hairs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:39 AM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element unless lead aborts at rotation If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if he calls aborting as my wingman. I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near the end of the runway. Mike Looking forward to your response. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 07:41:54 PM PST US From: "Bill Geipel" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation Dale, I've read his stuff. My time in the military doesn't count unless I here bullets zipping by my ears. I still will talk about flying, I still will tell and listen to anything about flying and Yaks, and I would still fly when and where I choose. Mark gave me that freedom. I don't lose sleep over any of this. Bill Have you flown the TW yet? -----Original Message----- From: Dale Matuska [mailto:dale@frii.com] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 6:41 PM Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation HI Bill Before you meet this guy you might want to read what he has to say to me off line. Start at the bottom ( first message ) and read up the list. Floyd > > > Are you a vet? > > Have you fought in any wars? When was the last time you heard a round > from the bad guy go zipping by your ears? > > Do you care how some Vet's feel about this issue or is your loyalty to > them only lip service and otherwise, please shut up I do not want to > hear it except on Veterans Day, and even then only in a parade? > > Matt Dralle owns this list server. Not you. Your freedom here is not > promised by being a member of this country, but by the money that is > raised to support the hardware on this system. It is not yours, nor was > it given to you. It is a privilege to use and not your RIGHT to use. > Your freedom of speech is not an issue on this list server. You do not > have the right to scream FIRE FIRE FIRE in a theatre no more than you > have the right to say anything you feel like here. > > I know what I am saying and have defended YOUR right to say it directly > for over 38 years now. No, I am not Hitler. > > Please don't direct profanity towards me. If you insist on doing so, > please have the courage to do so to my face. Otherwise, I deem you a > coward who's courage comes directly in proportion to the distance he is > away from the person being talked to. > > Thank you for your point of view. > > Mark Bitterlich > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dale Matuska [mailto:hdinamic@qwestoffice.net] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 16:31 > To: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E > Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation > > Raise hate and discontent ? > > I fly in the RPA to honor the generations of military pilots that > protected my freedom and those around the world. > > I fly in the RPA to keep the tradition alive for future generation to > see. > > I fly at the Veterans events to honor our veterans and the service to > this country so they know we care. > > I don't fly for Matt Dralle who in charge of "your" freedoms. No one > owns my freedom of speech. > > My god man have you stopped to think about what your saying. > > When we toppled Hitler in WW2 " someone was angry " > > So What. Life is what you make it. Don't shit in your food pan. > > Enjoy the ride. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" > > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:52 AM > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation > > > It is related to what I referred to in my letter because all are topics > that raise hate and discontent and can never be solved or answered to > the satisfaction of everyone. Someone ALWAYS ends up angry. > > The Missing Man Formation topic falls into that same category. > > Some think it is just fine for civilians to be flying for their buddies. > Others think it should be reserved for the military. Regardless of who > is right or who is wrong, bringing it up is a bad idea because feelings > about it are strongly held. > > This is why Matt Dralle suggested it might not be a good topic for the > YAK list. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:53 PM > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: Yak-List: Re: Missing Man Formation > > > Interesting Mark. > > I don't see how this is related to rock and roll , who the hell is > running for president, my mother or what beer I drink. It looked to me > like formation flying and I was in a Yak. I take exception to your > statement as not being a related subject. Have a nice Veterans Day!! > > > Dale > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215018#215018 > > > ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 08:48:47 PM PST US From: "Roger Kemp MD" Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Copy, 8 hours bottle to keyboard. *:>)) hic*^ Doc -----Original Message----- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:28 PM Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG There should be a rule about posting under the influence..... [Shocked] :D Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215464#215464 ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 09:36:46 PM PST US From: Walter Lannon Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG Mark, I was intending to stay out of this one but I have to say that you are absolutely correct. As you noted the photo is a micro-second image that generally could not tell the whole story. In this case however I believe it does, whether it is a take-off or landing situation. It is obviously a take-off and is clearly unsafe since #2 is airborne before the lead with all the difficulties and potential dangers you have noted. Very bad form. If it were a landing situation it would be far worse than bad form and I would remind everyone of the recent P51 disaster at Oshkosh. Some may say this is different as the Mustangs were not in formation but the photo of the CJ's (for that micro second at least) shows two aircraft in close proximity but NOT in controlled formation. In a formation take-off formation flight begins when lead nods his head and releases the brakes. The wingman's job from that moment is; 1. Maintain wing tip clearance in the event that lead has to abort. 2. Maintain position during the take-off roll with judicious use of power to lift off after the lead. 3. Use leads cue for gear (and flap if used) retraction. 4. Maintain position. The formation landing begins and ends with #4 above. Gear and flap extension of course on the leads signal and maintain adequate wingtip clearance. Other than that the mission is to fly formation and maintain the correct position. Touchdown will be before the lead You will have done this without looking at the runway. That is the leads job. Walt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:51 PM Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > MALS-14 64E" > > Doc, I have flown a good deal of dissimilar aircraft formation with me > being in the aircraft with more performance and a much shorter take-off > roll than the other guy. That said, I have made the mistake you are > talking about. In this case, a formation take-off with me in a YAK-50 > and the other fellow flying lead in a souped up Cessna 180. I am off > the deck long before he is, and what you are saying is exactly what > happened. I am looking down on lead. He is partially obscured by the > wing. I have to pull to keep from over-taking him. I slow to near > stall speed. It was easy to pick up a little drift, since there was a > cross-wind situation. I am looking at an airplane on the deck that is > not flying, yet I am in the air and have "keeping it flying" issues > happening. It was bad ju-ju. Lead, a retired USMC C-130 pilot and > ex-EA-6B ECMO chewed my ass and rightly so. He was right, I was wrong, > it was a stupid thing to do. Of course in this case a freeze frame > picture is hard to judge. The situation for THEM might have been just > milliseconds. I have no idea. However, as a point of discussion for > formation flying between two aircraft, there is no question that it is a > bad idea to have your wingman rotate and start flying before lead. I > say this as just a regular ole Pilot who does not have a FAST card from > the RPA, and could of course be wrong. > > Mark Bitterlich > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp MD > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 13:47 > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > > Mike, > You are absolutely correct. What I wrote was poorly worded for brevity. > No excuse. > I'm AF (ANG). > During the brief, Motherhood will have covered when and if the element > will abort together. Generally that is if the element is mission > critical for training and the abort occurs leaving the chocks, in EOR, > or as the flight starts TO roll. Everything is talked about on the radio > if possible, but maybe not. If lead breaks one third, halfway down the > runway, at rotation or at some point past loss of nose wheel steering, 2 > is going flying to get out of lead's way. In the TO roll if two still > had nose wheel steering, it is a judgment call. Nothing is embedded in > concrete. We'll talk about it in the debrief. You are correct, the last > thing we need is for two a/c to be in the barrier at the same time. > Well since we don't have hooks and barriers, that one was a moot point. > We are talking about round motors and it is a judgment call but me > personally, if I'm two and lead has a bad day, aborts, then I'm going > flying any way. We do this for fun and there is nothing mission critical > in what we do. > The point with the two pictures of the YAKs and the CJ's doing formation > T.O.s was that Two is now the flight lead. He rotated and went flying > before lead. For two now to stay in position with lead, he/she is going > to have to pull back on the power, look down at lead, and possibly > unintentionally roll into him while trying to maintain station. The > other risk is since lead is at Vrot not quite flying with two now flying > two can pull too much power and stall while trying to stay in position. > Those were the safety issue I was trying to point out. Two at that point > needs to become lead and fly his jet. > Lead becomes two and joins on the new accidental flight lead. They can > work it out on departure, in the area or in debrief. > Talon, you are absolutely correct a picture is what is happening at that > nanosecond in time. But it is worth a 1000 words when it shows something > of interest. The "I fly with this lead all the time and we do it this > way" > because we are comfortable with each other is not a warm fuzzy for me > that is. It is an invitation for bent metal and heartache. Sorry, I may > be seeing it all wrong and maybe it is me that is missing the point > here. But, I just had my DO in the office a few minutes ago and showed > him the pictures. His reaction was Holly SHIT! Nuff said does not matter > how big the @#$%^& runway is. We can go to the bar, drink beer, pat each > other on the ass, scratch each other's backs and this was still not > recognized as poor technique and not entirely safe. Two is trying to fly > form on lead who is still on the ground. > Here are two nanosecond shots of it being done right. Well the #2 > Scooter is just a little bit sucked since we are splitting hairs. > That's my story and I'm sticking to it. > Doc > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N642K > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:39 AM > To: yak-list@matronics.com > Subject: Yak-List: Re: Emailing: DSC_1427-A[1].JPG > > > Sorry Doc, I gotta disagree BIG time with this statement; > > If lead aborts, 2 aborts. The flight usually will abort as an element > unless lead aborts at rotation > > If lead aborts, the worse thing -2 can do is abort as well. We agree > that near rotation -2 goes flying. My point is -2 ALWAYS goes flying. > Near rotation is too subjective. I dont want my wingman guessing about > our speed and then making a decision. That takes too long. Make it > easy for him. If I abort after we apply takeoff power, you go flying. > > Say lead aborts. The first thing that happens is -2 blows past him/her. > Thats for a high or slow speed abort! The last thing you expect from the > lead is idle power and brakes. You simply cannot react quickly enough. > Now lead not only has to deal with whatever issue caused the abort but > now he/she has to figure out where -2 is. > > Now I'm only aborting for something catastrophic, i.e., the engine > coming apart or a major gear/directional control issue. The best thing > -2 can do is go flying and get off my runway, the same thing I'll do if > he calls aborting as my wingman. > > I don't know you. But your call sign says Air Force. In the Navy we had > a agreement in ALL formation take offs -NO SYMPATHETIC ABORTS! Its too > easy to turn a simple indicator problem into an ugly aircraft pile near > the end of the runway. > > Mike > > Looking forward to your response. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215332#215332 > > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 11:21:10 PM PST US Subject: Yak-List: Re: Shock and Awe From: "Tim Gagnon" Then he or she, bingo'ed and RTB'ed. ;) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=215498#215498 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message yak-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Yak-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/yak-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/yak-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.