Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - [INFO]ACM possible issues

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

[INFO]ACM possible issues
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

gus.fraser(at)gs.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:18 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

While investigating something totally different I discovered the following in the FAA archive. It is the findings of an investigation the FAA carried out into the two acm accidents that happened a while ago. It makes interesting reading and for you ARS folks something to think about when planning.   

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/examiners_inspectors/8700/fsga/media/fsga9506.txt   

Gus

HawkerPilot2015

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 503

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:00 am Post subject: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

I find it odd that while ACM is discouraged, low level aerobatics is promoted and people pay money to see it!! I have seen two fatal accidents while low level aerobatics were being peformed. In fact, I was the second to the scene (the first was the dead pilot) and then I had to assist the womans husband! 



I dont go to too many airshows any more because of this. I honestly dont see the fun in seeing someone pull out from a loop 4 inches above the ground. I will agree that it takes extraordinary talent to do what they do...but it just does not make sense to me. The crowd does not truly understand the training and risk involved, they just want to see someone pushing the edge. 



What is the RPA's stand on this?

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Tim Gagnon wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 I find it odd that while ACM is discouraged, low level aerobatics is promoted and people pay money to see it!! I have seen two fatal accidents while low level aerobatics were being peformed. In fact, I was the second to the scene (the first was the dead pilot) and then I had to assist the womans husband! 

 

 I dont go to too many airshows any more because of this. 


	


I understand. I like participatory sports, not spectator sports. Acro is 

something you do, not something you watch (unless you are trying to 

understand a maneuver).



 	  Quote: 	
		   I honestly dont see the fun in seeing someone pull out from a loop 4 inches above the ground. I will agree that it takes extraordinary talent to do what they do...but it just does not make sense to me. The crowd does not truly understand the training and risk involved, they just want to see someone pushing the edge. 


	


You are certainly right on that.



 	  Quote: 	
		   What is the RPA's stand on this?


	


Well, it should be that it is legal and therefore RPA has no comment.



The desire to tell others what they can and cannot do "for their own 

good" is a powerful one. Still, people should be allowed to do what they 

want to do even if they risk their own life in the process.



RPA should stay out of this completely and provide services to its 

membership to help them be as safe as they can be. RPA should not be in 

the habit of telling people how they should fly their airplane or 

attempting to enforce same.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

HawkerPilot2015

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 503

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:38 pm Post subject: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

I was not advocating (although it seems like I did imply that) that RPA be involved in "regulating" low level aerobatics. They have taken a stand on the ACM issue but to the best of my knowledge, have not addressed the low level aerobatic issue. 



I must preface the following statement by saying that I am not involved in either activity,only by lack of training and education, not for lack of desire. 



It seems to me that ACM done with proper training by those proficient in it, is as safe as any other activity where you fly your airplane to its limits. I have sat in on and participated (from a GIB view) on ACM hops and can tell you that they were thoroughly briefed and specific ROE of were set and expected to be adhered too. I have been involved in countless military crew briefings and these were done as professionally as any of those. I understand the concerns of the community but I think they are overstated without regards to the operation. I do believe in and have seen the training that goes into getting someone up to speed on ACM. It is not unlike any other training I have seen yet we are shying away from it because of a couple of accidents. When the airshow season starts, so do the obituaries for those that were at the top of thier game...well...until one day when they made one mistake and got killed. It happens to the best out there and there is not an effort to shut down airshows. 



I just find it ironic, and a bit hypocritical,  to lambast something that has suffered few incidents while we pay for and praise those that operate at the very ragged edge, and sometimes beyond, an airplanes envelope. 



Maybe someone smarter than me can tell me where the difference exist between the two activities when done by proficient and trained pilots.

MajorGoofinoff(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:47 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

I think the reason to avoid ACM is the whole T-34 issues.  No matter how good your are you will pull more G's than you think, at least we have the HIGH G light and tone.  Let the Feds go after the T-34s and such.  I don't want any wings popping of the Yaks and then having to deal with the Feds who think are airplanes are all going to shed a wing.  

  

 Scott.

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:19 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Excellent point Scott.  One thing that always stands out in  my mind is "metal has memory".

 Dennis

 [quote]   ---

HawkerPilot2015

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 503

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:36 pm Post subject: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Does that metal know whether it is pulling G's from ACM or hard aerobatics? I think both carry risk but my question is the risk that much different? Rolling G's aside which limits even current fighters and the pilots know that, what is different about ACM and an aerobatic routine? How long does a routine last compared to a couple of engagements? 



When you have a surface waiver and you screw something up, how much time or altitude do you have to correct your mistake? If you have a wing failure at 200 feet or 4000 feet (assuming you survive the actual failure), how much time do you have to bail out at the respective altitudes? 



I just dont see that ACM is more risky than aerobatics when done properly. 



ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Tim,

Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it

is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that

come to our community. 

As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of  what

your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and

not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy

state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of

your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a 1

v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves

the cockpit at retirement. 

We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

just do not need to do that in our community. 

Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in

the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the

intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of

our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

flying, the vertical. 

Doc

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:26 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Tim Gagnon wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!


	


In the "heat of battle" one is more likely to pull and roll at the same 

time thus exceeding the load limit of the airframe without the 

accelerometer indicating the fact. Straight acro doesn't usually do this.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

dabear(at)damned.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:57 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Roger,



The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.



Your comment is valid:



"Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

opportunity to learn the "standards." 



I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

aircraft multiple times and cause failure.



I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.



Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

the program.



I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 



ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.



DaBear

Roger Kemp wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



Tim,

Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it

is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that

come to our community. 

As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of  what

your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and

not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy

state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of

your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a 1

v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves

the cockpit at retirement. 

We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

just do not need to do that in our community. 

Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in

the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the

intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of

our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

flying, the vertical. 

Doc

dabear(at)damned.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:01 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Brian Lloyd wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Tim Gagnon wrote:



> ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!

 In the "heat of battle" one is more likely to pull and roll at the

 same time thus exceeding the load limit of the airframe without the

 accelerometer indicating the fact. Straight acro doesn't usually do this.



So teach people what rolling G is, the consequences, and how to do ACM
	


without rolling G.  Sorry Brian, but people (qualified and not yet

instructed) are doing it today.  Hiding behind the illusion that lack of

ACM training and clinics will prevent someone from doing ACM is in the

same vein of if we outlaw guns, we will not have any gun crime.  Sorry,

we have airplanes, we have pilots, people want to do it.  If ACM wasn't

fun, challenging, etc, then the former military guys wouldn't be doing

it, the non-military people wouldn't want to, and this wouldn't be an

issue  But the folks in WWI opened the box, and we can't close it again.



DaBear

pa3arw(at)euronet.nl
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:02 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Sorry to ask this stupid question: Can anybody explain to me what "ACM"

stands for???

It would explain a lot to me...



Hans

Dutch Yak Pilot

 

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens DaBear

Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 6:56

Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Onderwerp: Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues






Roger,



The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.



Your comment is valid:



"Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

opportunity to learn the "standards." 



I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

aircraft multiple times and cause failure.



I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.



Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

the program.



I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 



ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.



DaBear

Roger Kemp wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		  



Tim,

Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it

is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that

come to our community. 

As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of  what

your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and

not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy

state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of

your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a 1

v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves

the cockpit at retirement. 

We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

just do not need to do that in our community. 

Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in

the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the

intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of

our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

flying, the vertical. 

Doc

feyerabm(at)web.de
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:14 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Hi Hans,



ACM = Air Combat Maneuvers



Regards,

Markus



 	  Quote: 	
		   -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

 Von: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Gesendet: 23.03.06 11:10:47

 An: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

 Betreff: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues


	




 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Sorry to ask this stupid question: Can anybody explain to me what "ACM"

 stands for???

 It would explain a lot to me...

 

 Hans

 Dutch Yak Pilot

  

 -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

 Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens DaBear

 Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 6:56

 Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Onderwerp: Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

 

 

 

 Roger,

 

 The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

 our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

 want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

 that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.

 

 Your comment is valid:

 

 "Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

 and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

 

 

 If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

 prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

 of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

 their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

 before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

 getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

 it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

 doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

 opportunity to learn the "standards." 

 

 I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

 different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

 likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

 idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

 acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

 their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

 just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

 aircraft multiple times and cause failure.

 

 I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

 safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

 safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

 right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

 support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

 includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.

 

 Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

 Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

 people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

 find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

 airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

 and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

 out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

 fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

 the program.

 

 I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

 appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

 and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

 own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

 go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

 teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

 fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

 next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

 have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

 formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

 learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 

 

 ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.

 

 DaBear

 

 

 Roger Kemp wrote:

 

 >

 >

 >Tim,

 >Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

 >nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it

 >is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

 >type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

 >headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that

 >come to our community. 

 >As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

 >disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

 >something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

 >Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

 >flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

 >your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

 >where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

 >your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of  what

 >your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and

 >not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

 >he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

 >entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy

 >state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of

 >your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

 >bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a 1

 >v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

 >The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

 >building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

 >He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

 >down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

 >building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves

 >the cockpit at retirement. 

 >We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

 >and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

 >major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

 >thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

 >himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

 >just do not need to do that in our community. 

 >Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

 >now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

 >Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime

 >and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in

 >the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

 >consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the

 >intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

 >the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

 >That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

 >buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

 >is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

 >Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of

 >our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

 >flying, the vertical. 

 >Doc

 >

 >  

 >

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

 

 

 


	




______________________________________________________________

Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS!

Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://f.web.de/?mc=021193

pa3arw(at)euronet.nl
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:30 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Thanks Markus, that explains a hell of a lot. I agree with Doc....



Hans

 



-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Markus Feyerabend

Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 11:14

Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Onderwerp: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues






Hi Hans,



ACM = Air Combat Maneuvers



Regards,

Markus



 	  Quote: 	
		   -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

 Von: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Gesendet: 23.03.06 11:10:47

 An: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

 Betreff: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues


	




 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Sorry to ask this stupid question: Can anybody explain to me what "ACM"

 stands for???

 It would explain a lot to me...

 

 Hans

 Dutch Yak Pilot

  

 -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

 Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens DaBear

 Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 6:56

 Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Onderwerp: Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

 

 

 

 Roger,

 

 The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

 our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

 want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

 that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.

 

 Your comment is valid:

 

 "Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

dime
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

 

 

 If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

 prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

 of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

 their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

 before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

 getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

 it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

 doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

 opportunity to learn the "standards." 

 

 I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

 different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

 likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

 idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

 acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

 their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

 just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

 aircraft multiple times and cause failure.

 

 I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

 safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

 safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

 right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

 support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

 includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.

 

 Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

 Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

 people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

 find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

 airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

 and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

 out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

 fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

 the program.

 

 I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

 appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

 and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

 own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

 go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

 teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

 fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

 next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

 have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

 formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

 learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 

 

 ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.

 

 DaBear

 

 

 Roger Kemp wrote:

 

 >

 >

 >Tim,

 >Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

 >nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what

it
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

 >type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

 >headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see

that
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >come to our community. 

 >As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

 >disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

 >something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

 >Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

 >flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

 >your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

 >where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

 >your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of

what
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight

and
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

 >he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

 >entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your

energy
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority

of
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

 >bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a

1
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

 >The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

 >building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

 >He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

 >down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

 >building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she

leaves
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >the cockpit at retirement. 

 >We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

 >and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

 >major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

 >thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

 >himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

 >just do not need to do that in our community. 

 >Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

 >now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

 >Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

dime
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it

in
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

 >consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if

the
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

 >the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

 >That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

 >buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

 >is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

 >Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management

of
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

 >flying, the vertical. 

 >Doc

 >

 >  

 >

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

 

 

 


	




______________________________________________________________

Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS!

Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://f.web.de/?mc=021193

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:36 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Also throw in age differences (read - reaction time), and physical 

condition.  Having a current 3rd, 2nd or 1st class medical doesn't make you 

physically fit to participate.

Dennis



---

mjbjhf(at)charter.net
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:58 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

So true Dennis.  I am 41 and fit as a fiddle.  But still went night night 

during the last of six fights during a Air Combat USA flight.  My advice is 

to only participate in these activities with a current proffessional in the 

other seat.  And I found these guys really good.



Michael "Mighty " Bolton

"If it doesn't sound round, WHY LOOK?"

---

gus.fraser(at)gs.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:55 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

There is already two bodies that 'regulate' aerobatics IAC and CIVA. I

should make the point that competition aerobatics and airshow flying are as

different as night and day. The safety record at IAC events is remarkable.

In fact I think the safety record of IAC events is to this day spotless. In

fact I think that makes it better that RPA ))) notice the smiley !



Airshow flying is about going beyond. We All know that the guy who

helicopters his Pitts 10 ft above the ground is walking a very thin line. A

reduction in HP, even slightly, can be disastrous. Aerobatics has rules in

place and these rules, pretty much all of them are obvious and everyone

accepts them because they make so much sense.



I agree that airshow pilots take, what for me are unacceptable risk but hey

all to there own. I am happy competing against my last score in a

competition.



Gus 



--

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:45 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

DaBear wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

 just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

 aircraft multiple times and cause failure.


	


One good thing about our Eastern Bloc aircraft: they design to a greater 

load margin than do US designers. If the structure is designed to yield 

at 12G and you spec it at 6G, even if you go over a little you still 

have a much greater safety margin than if you do the same to an aircraft 

designed to yield at 9G with a design load factor of 6G. Frankly I am 

going to feel safer in a CJ6A or Yak-52 of unknown background than I am 

a T-34 or SNJ of unknown background. (My opinion. YMMV.)



 	  Quote: 	
		   ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.


	


Now, while I agree with you philosophically, I don't think you can make 

the above statement with any degree of confidence. We just don't know 

because we just don't have enough data. For instance, most people 

wouldn't even try to play fighter jock. Put them through a class and 

they might feel more qualified to go out and try it on their own. In 

that case instruction would make an accident more likely.



OTOH, proper training will reduce the incidence of stupid errors and 

reduce the error rate over that of untrained people attempting the same 

thing. This would likely reduce the accident rate.



So you have competing results from the same action because the initial 

conditions change.



So what does this mean for RPA? It means that we can argue about the 

number of angels dancing on the head of a pin forever since there is no 

hard data from which to make a reasoned decision. It means that anything 

we decide is pure, unsupported, meaningless supposition.



Now the question is, what do we *DO*? Frankly, you guys know where I 

come from. I believe that it is the right and responsibility of the 

PILOT to determine how best to operate his/her aircraft. To that end I 

believe that members of RPA who have skill in an area; be that ACM, 

acro, form, maintenance, systems, or whatever; share that experience in 

a fashion that members interested in a particular activity can make 

decisions based on a better understanding of that activity. I think 

these members should learn and then practice under the watchful eye of 

the people with skill and then solicit the input of these people, 

including accepting, "You know what Bob? I don't think you are really 

getting this. You probably ought to do something else with your airplane."



But in the end, it is the PILOT and not RPA who makes the decision.



(But, boy oh boy, do some people want other people to make their 

decisions for them. <sigh>)



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:50 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

DaBear wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   So teach people what rolling G is, the consequences, and how to do ACM

 without rolling G.  Sorry Brian, but people (qualified and not yet

 instructed) are doing it today.  Hiding behind the illusion that lack of

 ACM training and clinics will prevent someone from doing ACM is in the

 same vein of if we outlaw guns, we will not have any gun crime.


	


Yo! Bear! Who do you think you are talking to here? You are talking to 

the resident extreme libertarian who thinks we should be able to do what 

we want to do, damn the torpedoes. I would *never* advocate legislating 

against any activity (so long as its practice only affects the person 

practicing it). I was just commenting on a possible reason why people 

playing fighter jock might be more likely to break their airplanes than 

people doing straight-ahead acro.



I -*{AGREE}*- with you. Long live instruction in the things we want to 

do! And long live the good sense to do it safely (or not do it as the 

case may be).



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

fougapilot(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:14 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Our community is still young.  It is growing rapidly both in numbers and in 

experience level. We are far from my first KOSH (1998) when there was only 3 

Yaks / CJ flying in the Big show. The level of professionalism and knowledge 

has done leaps and bounds and continues to grow exponentially. It is only 

normal for the members of our community to seek a higher level of knowledge 

and skills. Heck, I too want to improve my flying abilities. I too am 

interested in both ACM and / or Aerobatic. The question is at what cost. 

Agreed, having trained pilots flying their airplanes will not hurt our 

airplanes as much as the "thrill" rides sold by certain vendors, but still 

the level of fatigue imposed on our airplanes increases during ACM (even if 

compared to Acro).



So, what should the RPA do? Is it better for your association to turn a 

blind eye and leave its members on heir own to learn by trial and error? Is 

it better to come up with a training program and get every interested member 

trained? What is the responsibility of the RPA? Lets face it, both low level 

acro and ACM are high risk activities. Acro is already legislated via the 

FAA, IAC and ICAS but ACM is not. Is the RPA the proper venue to organize / 

legislate ACM? What about liability? Are you covered to fly formation 

aerobatic? After all, that IS what ACM is. Flying semi-improvised aerobatic 

maneuvers in reference to another airplane.



Facts are simple, neither formation flying, aerobatic nor ACM are strictly 

legislated by the FAA. Any pilot can legally go fly formation with their 

SpamCan, same with acro  and / or ACM (assuming they fly acro birds) and 

they will remain legal. Not the best of ideas, but legal no the less. The 

RPA (through FAST and FAST standards) trains its members for "airshow" 

formation. RPA did not come up with the FAST standard, it simply applies it 

to its operation. Should the RPA break new ground and "invent" an ACM 

standard? As with FAST, this standard would most likely have an experience 

level associated with training / qualification (something like: needs a Lead 

patch, 100hrs Acro, 100hrs Form and advance spin training (my numbers 

only)). Would this standard prevent two guys who do not meet the 

requirements from learning on their own the same way FAST prevented two non 

qualified guys from flying formation?... Oh wait a minute, FAST never 

prevented two guys from...



At the end of the day, opening this can of worm will only cause more 

headache to the RPA. ACM has already arrived, nothing we can do about it. 

The RPA will be faced with a tough choice in the near future; either condone 

ACM, not promote ACM or come up with a standard and go full fledge with it. 

Believe it or not, you have a voice in that choice. Let your BOD know in 

which direction you wnat your RPA to go. Personally, I think we should 

someone else break that ice.



Dan

[quote]From: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com>

Reply-To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'" <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:54:24 -0500






There is already two bodies that 'regulate' aerobatics IAC and CIVA. I

should make the point that competition aerobatics and airshow flying are as

different as night and day. The safety record at IAC events is remarkable.

In fact I think the safety record of IAC events is to this day spotless. In

fact I think that makes it better that RPA ))) notice the smiley !



Airshow flying is about going beyond. We All know that the guy who

helicopters his Pitts 10 ft above the ground is walking a very thin line. A

reduction in HP, even slightly, can be disastrous. Aerobatics has rules in

place and these rules, pretty much all of them are obvious and everyone

accepts them because they make so much sense.



I agree that airshow pilots take, what for me are unacceptable risk but hey

all to there own. I am happy competing against my last score in a

competition.



Gus



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum