green arrow, pilot looks ahead ..
red lines.. blind spot
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668440079.png

I can't draw it properly enough

but if you hold your right hand flat and your left hand banked,

now move them both forward, in such a way your left hand makes contact at the base of your right thumb at a 45 degree angle(in forward trajectory)


now look at the field of view from both finger tips, as a pilot would look, forward.. and up
Neither pilot could see eachother... and the B17 just pops up from below from the P63's perspective. It just a massive blind spot..

The only way the B17 could have seen it, is if left side pilot stuck his head against the windshield to look back
The only way the P63 could see the B17, is if he was not banked
or flew much slower so the B17 would popup at a greater distance.


Freak accident, It takes a perfect combination of speeds and angles for both of them to be blind like this.

The faster P63 imho did something odd.. flying banked but not pulling up means he's banked with direction from where everybody is coming, is completely blindspotted by his own fuselage..

Either he should have been level..
or he should have been pulling away from that blind spot, only safe way to maintain SA : to be faster and pull away from the blind spot

exact same happens in traffic on the highway when merging from the on ramp
excessive speed is good, you pick your entry point in the forward visual , ahead
Not enough speed, and you sit in eachothers blind spot, which only resolves if you look abaft.... which is a lot harder.

This happened just a while ago, a few miles from me.
https://share.newsbreak.com/2abk9hpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668451222.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668453497.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668453512.png
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668453512.pnghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668453589.png

Great swiss AF pictures,
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3635/look-at-these-stunning-photos-from-axalp-switzerlands-mountaintop-military-air-show
From ___ Pistonheads
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=191&t=1905904&i=1120

Okay, this is a video about the KC 135 that made me laugh


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1mkSjyfzGJg" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Beautiful P-51 seen on the ramp this morning at Fort Worth Alliance (KAFW).

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1668654990.jpg

General concensus seems to be los of SA
63 unable to see the B17 because of the bank

<iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C342dfNPCyg" title="'Wings Over Dallas' Mid Air Collision Report" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thanks for posting this Stijn.

It was very informative

^^^Second what RNajarian said. As a layman I'm still confused whether the fighters/bombers were assigned different altitudes. Why was the P63 diving? Does a hard turn lose altitude if stick is not pulled back simultaneously?

Also, well-played RNajarian in post #1942! :)

I posted this in another thread but this guy has some interesting insight. You have to scroll ahead to about 22.0 in the video as he covers a lot of other incidents as well.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QunMRwNzr_c" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The idea mentionend in my the video in my previous post
is that to do the turn inside the bombers, the faster fighters did a high yo yo

Which is a classic maneuver to turn inside a slower fighter and stay or get behind him[

img]http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads26/Barrel_roll_attack_with_instruction_diagram_1_1668 930103.jpg[/img]
So thats why he climbed
Then on the return leg, he dived to catch up with his formation , the P51's ahead.

The main problem with that, was that he was still in a bank, and one cannot ever overtake inside a turn cause it is impossible to look down, to the outside of the turn, it creates a huge blind spot in the direction of flight (because G makes plane push out of the bend)




Find it odd, that he says "I never liked how CAF did that, it was an accident waiting to happen"

He says it so convinced, like he was so convinced before it happened.


Then Why did he not speak up at that time?
or report his concern to the FAA?
This is not about just other pilots flying, this is also the Safety of the spectators at the Airshow, or civilians living near or on the road around the airport.
And historical heritage lost

and why did not no body else internal or external to the CAF speak up if it was so obvious?
From what he says they did this similar thing before, and they have experienced pilots flying.

Why didn't anyone before think mixed speeds same altitudes, ground directed formation was a bad thing??
Sounds odd in a community where formation and safety is paramount, and twice as much in airshow context.

He says it so ademantly that it was already obvious before hand, that well if it was, it makes it almost part negligence that he not to report it..

I think you’re getting way ahead of your skis here.

Que?

You mentioned the yo-yo maneuver. It’s not clear that that’s what the guy was doing. People familiar with what took place at the airshow, from inside knowledge of what the air boss was doing, indicated that they initially had separated the bombers and the fighters with differing altitudes and that the air boss had directed the fighters to come down to the same altitude as the bombers at some point.

Then you decide it’s negligent that a third-party observer, with no connection to the airshow or who was not even present there, should bear some responsibility for not communicating his opinion on how they should run the show. As if he had some responsibility to keep this from happening and should be her some of the blame for the fact that it did. Nope.

The primary fault seems to be with the pilot in the fighter, although the airshow boss would seemingly be partially responsible as well. At this point, we can’t even rule out the bomber was where it should’ve been, either.

I did not say that he did or didn't do the yoyo, I just explained the maneuver to VenezianBlau as response to his question about the diving.
the dude in the video said that is how they did the inside turn with the fighters.

Try to keep up with the actual conversation.

And if you wanna point something out, point it out instead of posting snubby remarks without any argumentation.


I did not decide it was negligent, I just said it is odd that somebody post accident states that he had observed the problem he talks about on previous occasions and felt it was very dangerous
The guy in the second video said that

So if he says that, I find it odd that the then did nothing about it.
That's what I said, that its odd.
I did not say that guy was negligent.. Just that its odd.. why

because when I see an accident waiting to happen? I report it
I do that all the time
on the road
at the shooting range
event security wise

I see accident waiting to happen: I report it.
And I have seen changes in safety because of it and gotten thanks from organisers, and police for it.

So why can he now boast to have seen it before, and not having done anything?
Either
A he did not and he's armchair pedantic post facts.
B or he did, and then perhaps he was negligent

I left that up for others to think about.. I did not say which it was, you picked B. Ok, but thats your call. not mine

OK, we will have to agree to disagree.

again, i did not make any statements, I just pointed out what others had said about it
and suggested there was something odd with that in the second video.
I did not say he bears responsibility, you put words in my mouth and then say we disagree

sorry, but you are not on topic with arguments, you are just being argumentative and now you dismiss it as if you weren't

Go back and read post 1993 again.