Sad accident in Texas..

[duncang]

An airshow mid air collision , multiple deaths

[duncang]

..

[JohnnoK]

Yes, I saw the videos of the crash, and it seems to me that the guy in the fighter was having too much fun being in the limelight and got carried away with the performance of his machine versus his abilities as a pilot and went off-script for the airshow briefing.

Very sad to see.

[Mike N]

An airshow mid air collision , multiple deaths

Very very sad, and horrific to see it happen.

[Estee]

Yes, I saw the videos of the crash, and it seems to me that the guy in the fighter was having too much fun being in the limelight and got carried away with the performance of his machine versus his abilities as a pilot and went off-script for the airshow briefing.

Very sad to see.

Given the angle of the smaller aircraft, it could be attributed to the ''wing under'' visual obstruction. Apparently, a large number of air collisions in the US are attributed to either ''wing under'' or ''wing over'' visual obstruction, where the wing position obstructs visual contact in that area.

[Towatoy]

https://avcom.co.za/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=253983

Discussion and videos re. accident.

[Jens78]

Incredibly sad and clearly pilot error. The bomber split in half during impact, just like in the film Memphis Belle! See: https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...74b8d2954847e3.

[Peter Connan]

Very sad.

Forward/downward visibility was notoriously bad on WWII-era fighters. Ironically, the P63 (the fighter involved in this incident) should be one of the best in this regard due to the mid-mounted engine...

If I understand the event correctly the P63 was number 2 or 3 in a formation of fighters, and the B17 was not part of the same formation. If that is true I feel this one can't be blamed purely on the pilot. I suspect the "air boss" (the person in charge of the air show) and/or the leader of the fighter formation are at least partially responsible. It is my understanding that during formation flying, the pilots other than the lead pilot are supposed to have their full attention focused on the leader, and it is the leader's responsibility to guide the whole formation?

[Paul#25]

Peter the P-63 is apparently very bad for forward below the nose visibility. It also has peculiar stall characteristics in a turn. When I saw the one video from the carpark it looked like the P-63 was running faster than the 2 proceeding fighters and the bomber. My comment then was that the pilot hadn't seen the bomber under his nose.
Later I saw the video on YouTube and they come to a similar conclusion with a lot more information. Have a look at the video here: https://youtu.be/Sceufd1Xutc

[JohnnoK]

Given the angle of the smaller aircraft, it could be attributed to the ''wing under'' visual obstruction. Apparently, a large number of air collisions in the US are attributed to either ''wing under'' or ''wing over'' visual obstruction, where the wing position obstructs visual contact in that area.

It certainly looks that way, I also read that the pilot of the fighter deviated from his flight path, and likely didn't see the bomber, so that agrees with your point.

All the more reason to flan the flight and fly the plan.

[Estee]

In previous events, there was altitude separation between bombers and fighters. This time around, there wasnt.

[Jens78]

You can see two men in the broken fuselage at the bottom of the image at 5:40: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNnjqaJlHfY. Chilling stuff!! To the left of that under the right rear wing appears to be a seated human figure with its legs dangling.

[JohnnoK]

We have a saying in the aviation world that our lessons are written in blood, and it is by and large, true.

Those people didn't need to die because it was already accepted that vertical separation is a good thing to have, for obvious reasons, but sadly, there are lapses in safety oversight and by operators where the lessons are driven home in eye opening fashion.