Snowbird crash in CYKA

[7ECA]

Here's hoping everyone made it out alright.

From the one video, it appears as though both seats went...

Edited, sadly the PAO died in the crash.

[Dry Guy]

Looks like they were going for the 180 degree turn back but stalled and spun. The purpose of the tour was to boost Canadian's morale and now we are mourning another young Canadian Forces member. It's tragic.

[Localizer]

The Global news video pans the tail section of the plane and you can read the last digit of the serial number of the aircraft, cross checked it to the file photos of the planes and the only one ending in 6 is Snowbird #9.

This could be bad info as they swap planes in and out.

[gustind]

It is with heavy hearts that we announce that one member of the CF Snowbirds team has died and one has sustained serious injuries. We can confirm that we have contacted all primary family members of those involved. More information will be communicated in the near future.

Condolences to those affected by this.

[DH82EH]

I am just gutted to hear news like this.
My sincerest condolences to the team and their families. So tragic.
I saw all of these team members and spoke to several of them when they transited through YYZ.

I watched the videos.
I too heard the "pop" basically as the two ship crossed the airfield boundary.
Given the pull up for altitude I think the noise was a compressor stall as the engine quit / flamed out.
There was not enough energy to complete a turn around and the jet stalled.
I think the first puff of smoke is the canopy, the second is a crew member.

This two ship, is the spares that accompany the team.
I am so sorry to hear this.

[boeingboy]

From Global news....

Global News has learned that Capt. Jennifer Casey was killed in the crash. Casey, the team’s public affairs officer, is from Halifax, according to her Canadian Forces biography.
She joined the CAF in 2014, and the Snowbirds in 2018. Prior to that, she worked as a radio reporter, producer and anchor.

http://rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/snowbir ... y/jucn33uv

from an eyewitness....

Hinds had been watching the aircraft after hearing them take off, and said he was able to see the crash.
"I heard 'bang, bang,' and just as I looked before it left my view from the house beside me, I saw the Snowbird going straight down," he said. "I saw what looked like a parachute about, say, 20 feet over the house, and it disappeared from sight, and the parachute hadn't fully deployed yet — it was still sort of straight up and down."

Condolences to all involved.

[cncpc]

Here's hoping everyone made it out alright.

From the one video, it appears as though both seats went - so the witness account of finding a "deceased female" in the wreckage seems odd to say the least.

I spoke with the guy Cory who made the video in which the aircraft pass the camera just after liftoff and in which the "pop" can be heard. He didn't hear anything unusual but he said the aircraft noise was very loud. I asked about birds, and he was sure there were no birds in the area at that time.

He went to the house where the pilot was found. He was not conscious, and to him, it appeared that the parachute had not opened fully. The deceased woman was found some distance away from the pilot, but she was not in the aircraft.

Condolences to the families, and to the members of CAF on this forum.

[7ECA]

Very sad news, condolences to the families involved.

[Daniel Cooper]

I'm disappointed in those ejectors seats. The aircraft was in a significant nose down attitude but it wasn't until after they ejected that it went straight down. They also had what looks to be more that 100 feet of altitude when they ejected. If an ejector seat can't save you in that scenario than something is wrong with the design.

[AuxBatOn]

I don’t know any ejection seat that would guarantee survival in a 90 degrees nose down, 6,000 ft/min descent at less than 500 ft.

[boeingboy]

Aux,
What is the ejection window for seats on the CT-114?

[98 Corolla]

It was not 90 degree nose down when they ejected. Not even close. Airspeed was actually pretty low too due to just coming out of the spin. I thought modern ejection seats were supposed to be zero-zero certified. Their chutes weren't even close to being open despite traveling a fair distance through the air.

This is how it should go:
https://youtu.be/YxMLkEYgT78

[boeingboy]

98 Corolla » Sun May 17, 2020 6:33 pm
It was not 90 degree nose down when they ejected. Not even close. Airspeed was actually pretty low too due to just coming out of the spin. I thought modern ejection seats were supposed to be zero-zero certified. Their chutes weren't even close to being open despite traveling a fair distance through the air.

Yea.....airspeed could be 0 - but your decent rate is going to be stupid high isn't it? When they left they were way nose low past 50 or 60 degrees. In a modern seat - an internal gyroscope and computers would have pitched the seats upright and/or changed the parameters of the sequence.

BTW - the seats in the Tutor are not 0/0 seats.....they are from the 60's. Sometimes you can't just stuff modern seats in older aircraft. Hence I was curious what the minimum safe envelope is. Auxbat would know......

[98 Corolla]

Ah I thought they modernized the seats in the early 2000's. That explains why the F-18 ejection seat worked much better at an even worse angle and altitude. These seats effectively drove them into the ground. You'd have to wonder if they'd be better off staying onboard and trying to pull out of the dive more before impact.

[boeingboy]

The Canadian Forces said the other victim’s injuries were considered non-life-threatening. In a tweet Sunday night, the RCAF identified him as Capt. MacDougall.
Capt. Richard MacDougall is listed on the team website as Snowbird 11 coordinator.

Sounds like the pilot will pull through. That's good news.

[boeingboy]

You'd have to wonder if they'd be better off staying onboard and trying to pull out of the dive more before impact.

I doubt it - they were just out of altitude. The best outcome would have been to leave at the apex of the climb - instead of turning......but there could be many reasons why they did turn instead. I'm sure it will come out in the investigation.

[Jean-Pierre]

Do you happen to know if the military pilot are trained not to attempt low altitude turnback after an engine failure on takeoff like civilian pilot are?

[boeingboy]

No - I don't, I would guess that it's pretty standard training though for anyone....military or not.

But there are still many reasons that they turned.

BTW a link to the seats
http://www.ejectionsite.com/ct114seat.htm

[Mick G]

Localizer wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:02 pm
Those things should have been retired years ago .. the Snowbird name can live on in a new jet.

That's not it.

That's not it? ... That's all you got? ... I can except "That's not it" had it been followed with an intelligent reason.

I'm not saying this accident has to do with maintenance or anything related, but the Tutors had their day .. what's wrong with gracing the CT-155 with Snowbird colours and beginning a new chapter?

I hope to God everyone is ok .. it would be nice to see something positive come out of what's evolving into a shitty 2020.

These Tudors are not high hour air-frames, they are still young in terms of accumulated fatigue. They were Canadian built and still carry a source of National pride. There is no need to currently retire them, they do not see large hours annually.

The problem is simple, it is a Single Engine jet. These will always be unsafe in my opinion. With redundancy built into most aircraft systems nowadays, the overwhelming elephant in the room is the single engine. This is why the F-35 should never be considered for Canada and our High Arctic environment. Birdstrike, compressor stall, lose an engine and big trouble........these are not great gliders. In this case it appears very likely they lost power at about the worst point in time, and tried for altitude while they still could. They failed to get the full 180° and entered a stall. The video will play a very important role in the investigation, however it looks fairly clear as to what happened.

[AuxBatOn]

It was not 90 degree nose down when they ejected. Not even close. Airspeed was actually pretty low too due to just coming out of the spin. I thought modern ejection seats were supposed to be zero-zero certified. Their chutes weren't even close to being open despite traveling a fair distance through the air.

This is how it should go:
https://youtu.be/YxMLkEYgT78

0/0 yes. Assuming on the ground, not going down. The flight path vector was nose down, even if the aircraft attitude was not.

[2R]

Sad day , when the folks trying to help us through this , are hurt .
Big hugs , Condolences and much love to the Snowbirds and their families .

[North Shore]

You'd have to wonder if they'd be better off staying onboard and trying to pull out of the dive more before impact.

I doubt it - they were just out of altitude. The best outcome would have been to leave at the apex of the climb - instead of turning......but there could be many reasons why they did turn instead. I'm sure it will come out in the investigation.

That direction of takeoff puts you over the city - perhaps some effort on the pilot's behalf to not put the plane through someone's house?

[boeingboy]

That direction of takeoff puts you over the city - perhaps some effort on the pilot's behalf to not put the plane through someone's house?

That's one scenario I was thinking of... although it was more like not letting it plow through the downtown core.

[L39Guy]

A few points of clarification from a guy with 1600 hours on the Tutor (not Tudor, for the record):

- although the airframes are getting close to 60 years old, the engines are not. They have a TBO and service life they did when they were first introduced (those figures I am not sure of). These engines are likely still in production as it is the same basic engine (GE J85) that is used by the USAF and their fleet of 500+ T38 Talon fleet. The Tutor is the J85-Can 85 while the T38's is a J85 - 5A version.

- ejection is all about physics and the aircraft vector when ejection is initiated. The seat has the same inertial characteristic as the aircraft hosting it - the velocity vector is downward, so is the seat; if the aircraft is in a steep, nose-down attitude, so this the seat and if the aircraft is banked so is the seat. With a gimballed seat, there is some assistance provided by the rockets as the will aid in changing the ejection path; notice in that CF18 video how he went out of the aircraft in a 90 degree bank and the rockets maneuvered to provide a slight vertical upward component.

- the idea with an engine failure in single engine military jets is to exchange airspeed for altitude to get away from the ground, buy some time to sort things out and assess whether one can return to the same runway. The idea in the Tutor is to apex at 130 kts (above the stall speed) and assess if one can get to a downwind position abeam the threshold of the take-off runway at or above 1500 ft agl; this is known as "low-key". If you can't achieve that then the idea is to jump out.

I do not wish to debate whether the engines are good or bad or whether decisions were right or wrong but simply provide facts on this forum. I will say, however, that the Tutor jet is perfectly safe even at its ripe old age; engine failures with this aircraft, like any military jet aircraft, have occurred from their introduction in the 1960's and throughout their history. This engine failure occurred at the worst possible time, shortly after take-off before the aircraft could achieve lots of energy (potential, i.e. altitude, and kinetic, i.e. airspeed).

This is a terrible tragedy wherein a goodwill tour turned tragic in the blink-of-an-eye. My hope and prayer is that they get to the bottom of what happened, adjust as necessary and continue the Snowbirds with the Tutor aircraft.

[Dry Guy]

So is it just not feasible to put a modern gimballed ejection seat into the Tutor? You would think with the single engine threat and the low altitude flying the Snowbirds do it would be a priority to protect the crews.