Wow seeing this on one of my fav channels is crazy. A little clarification.. I had limited ADSB data to go with on top of literally just learning animation for this video. I'm not 100% satisfied with the depiction and accuracy. The altitudes when they descended and crossed could’ve been off anywhere between 2-300ft. I’m sure the flight didn't stay joined at the break as seen in the video. The last picture was of a generic image not from this incident.
This meaning that most of the analysis in this video is inaccurate because both locations and altitudes of all aircraft involved are simply guesses? It is kind of important to know the facts and seems like this video needs a massive disclaimer on how the information Mover's reacting to is inaccurate to who knows what degree. Kind of disappointing to see him treat it as fact
Don't rush your uploads and always append a disclaimer regarding inaccuracies and estimates. This was a moment where you could have felt honoured instead of being embarrassed.
@@vaffangool9196 only being off by 200=300ft doesnt make this ANY better. like it shows them both at 1500 so if the dud was only 300 off thats still REALLY BAD.
@@navalofficer1 @vaffangool9196 If you pull up the adsbexchange replay it is still traced and animated from that adsb data, so it's still fairly accurate. I can't link without it being removed, but I do have screen captures on imgur.
They didn’t have him in sight. The Citation was in the blind spot under their nose nearly as soon as everyone was on final. They weren’t paying attention to the traffic situation and the tower failed to verify spacing.
He never had that traffic in sight, he just said that to clear his ass. This practice should be banned in every civilian airport. That was dumb. I would expect much more proficiency and professionalism from an F-18 pilot. And of course, ATC is also at fault here.
Mover, I had a very similar situation that nearly killed me and a student over a decade ago in Daytona Beach. I was cleared for takeoff in a twin with a student. The tower cleared a F/A-18C for the overhead break as we were pulling onto the runway centerline. We were climbing through maybe 200’ when the tower controller came on the radio about two octaves higher pitch telling the hornet to start his break immediately. I looked over my shoulder just in time for the Hornet to go by our wingtip in full burner and knife edge. He was so close I could read the serial number on his centerline drop tank! This was just a week after watching a T-38 nearly run over a 172 and pointing out the developing situation to the tower. I love watching the Carrier break but fast movers at civilian airfields really need to do their best to fit in with everyone else. It’s only a matter of time before one of these near misses doesn’t miss. This situation should have never happened and the controllers should never have given the Hornets any indication they would get the break with traffic ahead of them for the same runway. Give them the break anytime they ask for it when there aren’t other aircraft in the area but not with two aircraft headed to the same runway and one holding position for departure. The difference in speed alone creates a problem let alone the maneuvering.
ERAU alumni here. I’ve witness the Thunderbirds staring a 5nm circle while a C172 started taking off, the Thunderbirds completed their 5nm circle in front of the C172 still climbing out on runway heading. They were pretty far apart tho, so all the spectators just laughed at the absurdity of it
30-yr ex-controller and 45-yr pilot here. The controller was wrong to grant the unlimited request and the hornet pilot was wrong to thump the Citation. They should have been stepped down over the Citation like the previous controller was doing. Even if the tower didn't have radar, they could have asked the Citation pilot for 500 ft altitude reports. Different frequencies with neither pilots being able to hear the other was definitely a contributing factor.
ATC didn’t do anything wrong. “Unrestricted” doesn’t mean do whatever you want. It simply shifts responsibility for separation from ATC to the pilot. I will call field and traffic in sight and get an unrestricted visual approach. That doesn’t mean I should buzz the other aircraft on the parallel approach as I cross over even though it’s well within my capabilities to do so-and even safety (I literally to that in my other job as a lead plane).
Retired Controller also, I have to agree with you, the Controller "owns" the airspace and is responsible for the safety of all aircraft under their control. Never "grant" anything like this unless there is ample clearance between all aircraft involved. Best thing to do was spin the Hornets, get the civvies on the ground then let the Hornets have their fun in clear airspace. Then there's no TCAS issues and everyone gets to enjoy watching the Hornets do their thing.
I think the arrogant attitude about how you guys don't have to have a certificate cause they are in the military is crap. I'm sure the FFA can make them more than uncomfortable over situations like these.
Citation Pilot to Snake 21 squadron commander: "Two of your snot-nosed jockeys did a fly-by on my Citation at over 400 knots! I want somebody's butt; I want it now; I've had it!"
That he saw the Citation on short final and decided to do what he did is the worst part of this incident. Like Mover said, if the Citation pilot had initiated a go-around based on his TCAS info, it could have resulted in a real mess. it's just not common sense to maneuver like this in the pattern at a busy airport.
I genuinely feel bad for the Citation pilot because other than cross your fingers and hope what can you really do? Pulling out of the landing would have killed him as we all saw in retrospect, but in the moment he had no idea what those idiots were doing and could only hold course and hope they didn't kill him and everyone else aboard.
@@neilpatrickhairless Uh NO. They must comply with ATC instructions unless I'd imagine there is a very good reason not to. Show boating for your pals on the ground doesn't qualify by any stretch of any imagination.
Exactly. That’s where this channel lost credibility. I can only imagine what that must’ve felt like when an unexpected overhead a couple hundred feet occurs. That was a douche comment by the narrator.
There is no reason you should have been born, but you still love your mom for not aborting you right? Stop pretending this was top gun. There was no tower buzzing you ignorant waste of a pulse.
Im a tower controller and the reasoning for the cancellation of the landing clearance for the EJA699 is because at airports without an ASDE-X (ground radar with conflict detection) we are not allowed to line up and wait with an aircraft cleared to land. So if you clear someone to land and then need to line up and wait you have to cancel the landing clearance first, and then reissue the landing clearance once the person in position begins their departure roll. The EJAs landing cancellation had nothing to do with the SNAKE flight. You can even hear that with after EJA got their cancel landing clearance he lines up and waits a Career Track which is gonna be a slow piston plane. So what happened is they were doing their runup when tower cleared EJA to land not knowing they were almost done. Then then they finished and called ready so in order to line them up and wait EJA needs their landing clearance cancelled. Also in regards to the "carrier break" being well understood Im not sure if it really is amongst tower controllers. I have F35s based on my field so Im very familiar with an Air Force break but I never work Navy/ Marine Corpse breaks. I wouldnt have known that they have different break techniques. I will say though IF this radar tape is accurate, and if those are 5 mile rings there's no way in hell that was ever gonna work, especially not with the SNAKE flight breaking over the numbers. Purely based off this radar display recreation those F18s would've been breaking departure end or later if I was working it. I also would not cancelled the altitude restriction either. I would have told them to maintain the high performance traffic pattern (1500 AGL) until the break for that very reason. Our approach hands us the fighters at the ILS intercept altitude + 500 and we in the tower drop them to 1500 AGL when safe. The AUS tower controller never should have cancelled their altitude restriction. But those fighter pilots never should have gotten that close. But like I said earlier you cant trust these guys which is why I lock them down.
I'm surprised they pushed Career-Track out there. KAUS must be crazy busy. If I had been asked to LUAW with that Cessna basically in sight, I'd have been sweating it.
@@RealDavidN 5 miles is plenty of time to get a 172 out with a citation on final. By the time a citation is on a 5 mile final they’re doing 120, 130 knots and even less if the headwind is strong. That’s 2.5 minutes flying time and it takes 90 seconds tops to get a nearly every plane in the air
I was a student another lifetime ago on a straight in to KADS. Tower requested my permission to overfly a Lear. I looked at my instructor and he said, "Your call." I agreed and that dude shot past me like I was parked. Now he was at least 500' overhead but dang, it got my attention. I get why the Citation pilot was perturbed. I _KNEW_ what was going on and it still rattled me a touch. My IP also told me, "Watch their touchdown point and land past it." As he was explaining wake turbulence to me I suggested, "So, if I landed before their touchdown point we'd be upside down?" Overall a great memory but it made me feel for the Citation pilot.
Retired USAF controller here: whenever I worked Navy fighter type aircraft, I always made sure it was clear which overhead pattern was being requested and/or flown (carrier break or Air Force overhead pattern).
Only thing I disagree with is criticizing the Citation Pilot for his remarks. Sure from a training aspect they weren't needed. But holy shit did that dude keep his cool considering those Navy hot heads could have just easily killed him and everyone on board. And for a few long moments all he could do was sit and hope they didn't. I've seen pilots get way more upset over a 10 second delay. Dude kept a lot more calm than most people ever could.
@@CWLemoine i think you are being a little harsh on the Cessna pilot. you even call his ego out, really... that sounded like ego to you? i doubt this is ego, he is just scared and mad that 2 asshats endangered his plane and the souls on board for no reason and he reacted ( i would argue pretty calmly). No airline school i have seen or anything i've heard of trains you for 2 fighters buzzing your aircraft in close proximity. I get your point during short final he should be focused on that, but i think there is room for cutting the guy some slack. He got the scare of a lifetime and honestly just a comment about filing a report seems a bit harsh to label him as unprofessional. As you will know, the military training on emotional responses to sudden shocks is a little different then those taught by the FAA and other civi groups. But im just a student so what do i know.
@@CWLemoine What about the others? Are they not expected some manners or airmanship? Even abiding by or respecting law? The one who was violated only very, very slightly diverted from 100% professional communication, and even that depends. They did not actually cause any harm except to maybe some ASPD ego, potentially. Some other parties did in fact cause a little bit more than disturbance. "Temper" is not to be mentioned in reference to how the Cessna pilot acted. He demonstrated loads of patience and restraint. This is like lynching someone because they cut the cheese. Someone was wielding a sword while making nasty remarks to the unfortunate bystander who happened to pass the gas.
Speaking as a USAF controller, the "carrier break" is not a procedure we generally train to. VFR patterns (altitudes, direction of turns, etc.) are defined on an airport specific basis. I would be surprised if an FAA facility, absent locally assigned USN aircraft, had a carrier break procedure defined. The controller was probably unfamiliar enough that a request for unrestricted airspeed AND ALTITUDE didn't set off alarm bells.
Yeah the ATC giving them clearance for that with a civilian on final was wonky asf and exactly why ATC owns a good portion of this mess. It doesn't absolve the 18 pilots at all though as they knew the civilian was final and had visual on him the entire time and pulled their show boating stunt regardless.
Great commentary on the approach of all inbound aircraft mover! The situation appeared to be heading towards a FUBAR, but thankfully, all landed with no incident.
I can relate to the Citation pilots mood. I got all up close and personal with a 2 ship abreast formation of RAF Harriers over the forest of dean at 1200'. My poor student was doing IMC training and 'under the hood' I saw them due to their sooty smoke trails as they were at full noise, coming at me dead level, 90degrees off, The left harrier was going to just miss my tail but the 2nd was going to hit me. All I could do was bunt forwards and we passed just beneath the harrier. My poor student had no idea why his head was up against the ceiling, All I could do was whip off his hood and point to the rapidly receding harriers whose smoke trails were still dead parallel. We got so close, upon landing I actually checked the top of the tail fin to see if the rotating beacon was still there!!
He's not being a douche. He's actually helping the Local controller out. Controllers have a reporting system also. It looks really bad for the controller when a report is submitted by a pilot that involves a controller and no report was submitted by the controller. The question will be asked to the controller involved, "why didn't you submit a report?"
C.W. As a retired NetJets pilot the ASAP report is a useful tool for the pilots to avoid a violation. In this instant I can totally feel the NJA pilots level of pissed off-ness. Having a couple of F-18’s go blasting by you on final approach in excess of 250 kt overtake would elevate anyone’s pucker factor. Good discussion though and I like your debriefs.
I don’t have a problem with filing an ASAP. I take issue with calling it out to the world on short final on tower freq. Fly your plane. Land. Deal with it after like a professional. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
@ I’m wrong for saying the Hornets are wrong? Nuance is beyond you. They were wrong. ATC was wrong. The Netjets guy was wrong for whining on the radio. “I’m telling mom” on the radio is unprofessional, especially during a critical phase of flight.
@@tomriley5790 "if he had the execjet in sight why on earth did he get 100feet from it???" Exactly. So he was either negligent or lying. Neither of which I would want any fighter pilot to be.
@@tomriley5790 Well the maker of the video Mover reacted to responded and said he wasn't that accurate with his numbers and display so it most likely wasn't that close but still too close for ANY reasonable excuse. Most likely between 200-300 feet and exactly what Mover said the civilian could have called a go around thanks to his TCAS and given the show boating speed the 18s decided to take it could have gotten bad with a quickness. Just no excuse for the 18 pilots to do this at all.
I'd have been pissed as Hell too if I were the EJA, this is an UNSAFE practice at a high density civilian AIRPORT with traffic on final......PERIOD! I don't care if you're a high performance military jet, ATC should make these guys conduct themselves in accordance with other traffic operations. Cessna's and Piper's don't practice approaches at military bases during on-going fighter patterns do they?
Back when the Thunderbirds were starting to fly T-38's, one of them came into Holloman for some maintenance. Holloman had lots of fighter lead-in activity in the pattern. I happened to be on the ramp about ready to taxi when I heard the Thunderbird pilot asked at least twice for special clearance to do some Thunderbird approach and landing. The controller kept denying this due to being focused on regular pattern traffic. Good move. We had our share of showing off a bit but it was our home field. We flew 2000 ft patterns and often came down initial a little hot to do a 5G break. The final turn was tight and bumpy, often in and out of mil power. I had more than one fighter lead-in student express shock at what they experienced. The idea was to show them that flying by the numbers like UPT wasn't always necessary.
@@brandspro I used to see F-16's in the pattern at McDill as I passed overhead in my airliner landing at TPA 36L. They would appear to disappear when they would turn nose on to me in the climbing turn to downwind....Spooky!
I am glad you did a video on this. I saw the ATC video on the other channel earlier. But I'm not a pilot and so I had no idea who was in the wrong here. You explained this so well that it made everything crystal clear.
"Cancel landing clearance" has to do with LUAW (line up and wait) rules. Some operations don't allow an aircraft to hold in position with and aircraft cleared to land. Taking away the landing clearance allows the other to line up. At airports with the authorization to use LUAW, equipment limitations/outages in the tower or positions being staffed/unstaffed may require suspension of LUAW ops. Great video Mover!
That's interesting because I've looked it up after making this video and cannot find it. I don't believe that is standard phraseology. If someone told that to me in an airliner, I'd do a go around - UNLESS they added some sort of amplifying data like "continue the approach" or "expect clearance."
@@CWLemoine I'm currently active with FAA ATC, we use this phraseology as Austin did, however, I personally add "expect landing clearance on 2 mile final, traffic holding in position" to make sure the arrival understands what's going on. If their AMASS was in limited mode due to errors or false targets, or Local control (tower) was combined with another position, etc, LUAW would be suspended.
5:16 A cool addition to this is that, like you briefly mentioned, the CF-18 can use ILS. However, other countries F/A-18C/D models such as those of the Finnish and Swiss airforces have later upgrade packages, which include the civilian ILS system. Also, if you look at cockpit videost, those Hornets look more like Super Hornets.
I fly a Citation Sovereign part time, which is similar to the Latitude Execjet 699 was in. If the hornets truly were 4 bagging, and the Latitude was light, then the Citation going around could've really startled the hornets. Those Citations in that class have got some amazing climb performance, I've seen 6k fpm *while below max climb power* on empty legs with low fuel.
Yeah, you have to plan on go arounds. I wouldn't have anybody overfly traffic on final below the published go around altitude. What if someone lost comms?
@@calvinnickel9995 Sure, but if you're only separated by 1000ft that is still almost at blink-and-you'll-miss-it reaction times. I have no doubt a fighter can dodge that, but if they were looking down or whatever, or the aircraft is below them and out of view, it could surprise them. You don't want to be doing ACM in the traffic pattern...
@@calvinnickel9995 It is fast enough to cause bad things to happen if the civilian had followed that TCAS and aborted landing with the speeds the 18s were closing at.
I've had an F-16 knife-edge around me with vapor trails and all during a cross-country once near McEntire AFB. I was close enough to see the pilot looking at me in the cockpit as he/she zipped past the nose of my aircraft. Pissed me off because flight following didn't bother to tell me the F-16 was even in my area. The F-16 was cookin' and zipped past me faster than I could say "WTF!". When I bitched about it to flight following, snarky AFB controller just responded with "Maintain VFR". While it was cool to see the F-16 doing it's thing. It startled the crap out of me to be cruising along and suddenly there is an F-16 off the nose at my altitude, and not much more than a haircut away.
"Don't be a douche", sure, but that citation pilot was a few feet away from being killed, and he knew it. Citations don't have hot seats, and a collision at that altitude would have been a death sentence for him. He has every right to be pissed. You'd think fighter bros are good enough to spot a slow citation on final ahead of them, given that they need to spot an opponent in BFM doing 7Gs, but no. Apparently you just expect everyone to get out of the way cause you're in a fighter...?
Had something similar happen at Selfridge ANGB several years back, not nearly as close, but ended up with us going around. Pre Pacer CRAG KC-135R, so no RA (we didn't have ETCAS at the time) and we did have SA on the Tomcats, jusr that they came off the perch ahead of us after being directed to extend their downwind. We offset & went around as -2 ended up a bit too close for comfort. We blocked in next to them (a VF-32 2-ship), and the RIO form one of the Tomcats actually came over & apologized for sending us around. Got a free tour of a Tomcat out of it so all good, LOL.
@@georgeforeman1097find the video of the dude cut in half on the road because he hit the back of a truck at speed, lower half stayed in the car, upper half on the road, still alive, with his entrails scattered under him
@@georgeforeman1097 *YOU* are not the one that decides if you're John Force or Dale Earnhardt, let alone which day you are. Don't track on the street and don't street on the track.....
40 years ago I was cleared to land in my cardinal in front of an F-4 phantom. It was night and as I turned final. I could see the F-4 quite a ways out. the controller ask that I keep my speed up. I followed I like to do an immediate left turn out of the pattern and Let the jet go first. He said I was ok to land. followed by the F-4 flying over the top of us in Afterburner. It was deathning. No one was in danger, but it is the kind of thing that you will never get to do again.
So, there I was, puttering along in my Caravan on a high right downwind for 4R at HNL when an F-15 lined up on 8R asks for the 'hang-10 departure' (aka, straight up). Tower denies the clearance but F-15 does it anyway. Tower to F-15: "I have a number for you to call, advise ready to copy." Just another crazy day at HNL....
“Unrestricted” in the civilian world doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want. It is a shifting of the responsibilities of separation from ATC to you. I will call field and traffic in sight and get an unrestricted visual approach. That doesn’t mean I’m allowed to buzz the traffic on the parallel approach even though I’ve got him in sight and can pass right over him as I cut across-even though I do exactly that in my other job flying a lead plane for aerial firefighting and can do it safely. The Execjet pilot.. a guy who’s on final in a busy stage of flying doing checklists and calls with zero visibility behind him and SA constructed based on ATC conversations and the expectation that he’s sharing the sky with the best of the best is in his right to lay it on those guys. It was a concentrated and deliberate effort on their part that got them into that position.. not an accident or misunderstanding and they deserved hell from everyone.
Gotta give fault where fault is due…this is 100% on the F-18 lead. There is no reason to ever get that close to a civilian non-participating aircraft for that maneuver. In the pilot’s own words he “had the traffic in sight” which makes it even worse. He almost killed several people in a huge mishap. Guy should be flying a desk after this…
So he told Foot Hills about the jets, but didn’t tell ExecJet, right? Having a fighter scream overhead would shake anybody not expecting it. That’s all, no other commentary. Thanks, Mover - always appreciate your thoughts. Glad to catch this video, heard you and Gonky talking about it last night.
Just a reminder to us tactical guys what may be comfortable to us as either party in this scenario may not be to a strictly civilian experienced pilot. We are trained to be aggressive and they are more about smooth. When on their turf, it’s probably better to play their game. Plus we have ejection seats..they dont
A good example of how fast fighters and straight in slower aircraft do not mix and cause large loss of life is the Pope AFB accident between an F-16 and a C-130. I flew both those aircraft, and I have an FAA CTO certificate with two tower ratings at mix use fields. For safety of flight, fighters can suck it up, and fly the straight-in where the preponderance of traffic is slower straight‐in aircraft. It will make it easier on everyone for them to sequence like all the other traffic. They can whine all they want about speeds and time and fuel, but you said it yourself. It's a normal procedure they are trained for in instrument conditions, so suck it up and sequence like everybody else.
Thanks Mover! I watched the original video yesterday and pretty much understood the situation and dangers - hearing you describe it only added more clarity.
It’s the “See ya.” from Delta for me LOL definitely one of those take offs where you accelerate turning onto the runway there’s a TOGA call before my movies started
"That's unsat" Tell me you’re an IP without telling me you’re an IP. Even though it is a very serious safety of flight discussion, I got a good chuckle out of that one mover.
Great channel. I watched the raw video of the incident and really couldnt tell what was going on other than somebody was pissed. Your video clarified everything including all the acronyms that I had no clue about.
17:20 be a professional? How bout you tell the fighter to be professional and not ALMOST KILL THEMSELVES AND THE CITATIONS CIVILIANS. THATS not profesional.
@@CWLemoine yes but the greater truth must be highlighted in this case to make any future fighter pilot absolutely disgusted with himself if he were to think about requesting something like that with people on final already. Social shame and whatnot. Do you believe in the butterfly effect mr Lemoine?
Saying, "Approved as requested," to a request you don't understand is not air traffic control. Not issuing some sort of restriction to the F18s is not air traffic CONTROL.
Good discussion. Thanks. I am used to USAF Initial. (Flew USAF, corporate jets now) Fifteen hundred. Well above anybody on short final. Not having flown Navy, I had not realized their Initial is lower, more in the straight in pattern altitude. Good point. I am smarter for having listened to you.
Would love to have had video of what the exec jet saw. I’m inclined to give him some grace for announcing the ASAP as we only know something like the maximum vertical separation when the F/AGs passed; he might have gotten something close to a face full of AB and a bit of a scare as they went by like that.
When the TCAS system gives you a RA, it puts a green box on the PFD for you to put the flight director into. It can be a climb, descent, or a level off. It’s not stated here what the command was. That being said, I’d have been really pissed if this happened to me! That’s way too close and too low, not giving much margin in there. And him stating on the radio he’s filing an ASAP is probably more for the controller’s benefit. They have their own, similar program. He’s notifying him that the incident is going to be reported and looked at, and he needs to file a report too to cover himself.
Frankly, there should not be any world in which Hornets are cleared to descend to 800 feet at high speed (or any speed) when there's a low and slow jet already in the way. Like...of course that's a huge problem. Military or not, you're going to have problems when your traffic control accepts directing multiple planes into the same airspace at the same time. You say that those Hornets were not in any danger of a collision with the Exec Jet, but then shortly afterwards they come within 200 feet of each other where the only thing protecting them is visual avoidance, which is notoriously unreliable. The industry weeded out that attitude a long time ago, and it seems like the military still hasn't caught on. ATC cleared multiple planes into the same airspace at the same time, and this is apparently only not routine in that the planes came stupidly close this time?
Dude, watching you fly while you’re talking is so awesome! More of that if possible, we won’t get sick of it or think you’re showing off… Your flying footage is just bad-ass!
"Snake" is the callsign of VMFA-323 based out of Miramar, so I can easily see this being a cross country training flight. Wikipedia notes that the "Death Rattlers" took over training duties a year ago when VMFAT-101 was deactivated on 1 October 2023, and it appears VMFA-323 will continue in this role until 2027
“Push it up, give me burner”…definitely trying for a SH break. That’s AUS, though, not the Carl Vinson or Eisenhower 800 miles out to sea. No reason to be hot dogging like that. The skirt on the ground you’re trying to impress is going to be plenty thrilled with 300 knots at 1500 AGL.
I feel bad for the ExecJet guy. He seemed genuinely excited for the opportunity to watch the break happen, imagining how cool it would be to see it from his perspective on the runway. What an unfortunate turn, literally.
Probably not a good idea to co-mingle civilian and military aircraft. When in Rome, do as the romans. Landing at a civilian regional airport requires civilian/FAA rules. Drop the military techniques and get inline. If you need to conduct a 360 for separation, do it.
Published the same comment on another channel and got blasted by every military jock with 100 excuses. They should probably have watched this video because it was broken down very well on the different types of breaks whether it be navy or Air Force and God knows what else. In other words, the military can’t even standardize the way to fly a pattern and somehow all the civilian traffic and civilian controllers are supposed to be up to speed on this shit. Give me a break (no pun intended). There’s been a brand of FBO that has proliferated around military routes, strictly to take advantage of their cross country trips for fuel sales. Never understood this when sometimes they sit within 15 or 20 miles of a military base where this type of traffic could fuel .
What's not in this is that Snake 21 also blew past at 200ft over a Piper PA-28 that was holding short of the runway waiting for The Exec jet to land when they did their approach numbers break. That was the reason the controller told them to do their break at the departure numbers which they didn't adhere to. The FAA and the Marine Corp investigated it because this had been the third near miss that year at Austin.
I was playing golf at Champions next to Alliance airfield here in Texas when a group of 4 or 5 18's did this kinda maneuver. They all came in formation then one by one broke off later and later then eventually came screaming by low & slow. It was lit 🇺🇸
The EJA pilot was not in any way wrong, and every reason in the world to be indignant. You said he shouldn’t have reacted that way and you’re wrong. His RA would have been “descend” and not enough altitude to do it. This error was 100% totally on the USMC pilots and I hope they were grounded for a period for retraining. Airplanes aren’t toys, it was a total lack of airmanship or professionalism on the part of the Marine pilots. You can tell by the inflection in the Marine’s radio communications that he has the maturity of a pre-pubescent boy.
Nope. Tower freq is not the place to throw a tantrum, nor is it a good time to do it on short final. Fly your plane. Land. Make a phone call if you need to when you shutdown. I understand he’s angry, but that comm was unnecessary and unprofessional.
@@CWLemoine You have a very liberal definition of a tantrum and not your say if you weren’t in the EJA. Did you ever think the guy saying he was going to file as ASAP was his way of ensuring the AUS tower or Marine pilots didn’t try to hide this stupid stunt?
Nope. There is no reason for that. He doesn’t need them to know in order to file an ASAP. He could have easily waited 5 more minutes until he was shut down in chocks. It was him being pissed off and not controlling his anger. Fly your plane. Land. Deal with it. Anything else is nonsense.
I can appreciate the fact that you don't want to disparage a fellow military aviator however your lack of candor is less than expected. Making excuses for Snake 21 and flights lack of basic airmanship and situational awareness are concerning. I operate daily in the airspace and expect my fellow aviators to operate in a safe and professional manor. The Execjet pilot stayed on task and landed safely, likely with some terrified passengers to calm. Snake 21 could very easily have killed 2+8 his wingman and himself. Leave the Sierra Hotel shit for the fleet. As to your comment about the ARSA report voiced over comms, it was a professional way of calling Snake 21 and flight assholes.
Those 2 nutters in hornets should be stripped of their wings and never allowed anywhere near a cockpit again. Either they didn't have the traffic in sight or they deliberately buzzed a civilan plane on final. And then they violated directions from atc ontop of all that.
All depends on previous behavior of the lead pilot really. You don't need to hammer someone if they are normally safe but made a mistake. If it's repeated behavior though, it will get serious.
I was/am a keen motorcyclist. I used to do a lot of track days and then started racing. Often we’d use track days as unofficial practice days. Strictly forbidden, but as long as you weren’t an idiot, it was fine. As a racer, you start to react faster and anticipate earlier. The reason why we were sometimes taken aside between sessions is because whilst we knew what we were doing, wanted to do and how we wanted to do it, the poor rider in the fast group who wasn’t expecting a close pass didn’t. So the rule was we had to keep out of trouble, not frighten other riders into making mistakes that would hurt all of us. It wasn’t a comment on their skills, just we were doing this most weekends and we knew each other and what we would do. I could be close passed on the inside of a corner and I knew they wouldn’t take me out. Another rider, not so. I see a strong corollary here between the Hornets and the Exec Jet. Both competent, just the fighters knew exactly what they wanted to do. The Exec Jet would have seen the RA and could have reacted in any number of ways. The Hornets placed themselves and the Exec Jet in a high risk situation for zero benefit.
That's a really good comparison! Having someone blow by you at race pace while you're probably just fast enough to get your knee down is pretty damn close to a high-performance jet blowing by your commuter while you're on the approach with your gear down haha. Great way to force someone into a mistake. Happy trails! Keep the rubber side down and the blue side up!
I've never flown a Hornet. How's the line of sight at 12:00 low, range 1000' and less? When he said he had the Citation in sight I thought that he was basically admitting to the world, that he's an ass. He knew he would pass that close and thought it was a good idea?
Just a note on the last comment, for civilian pilots, the phone number is a potential get-out-of-jail-free card. It's the opportunity to clear up a misunderstanding BEFORE it turns into punitive action. I'm guessing for military pilots, clearing stuff up doesn't help their careers much if they wind up on TH-cam 😐
I understand this completely.. I had a similar event recently. I was looking to park my car in a fairly small car park, I spotted a space but another car was manoeuvring into or out of this space.. I was closing at around 5 mph and the other vehicle didn’t appear to have any situational awareness.. I think her radio was out of commission, probably stuck playing some country music. Anyway, I managed to avoid a mishap & performed a go around, but it was a close call.. If I wasn’t married, she definitely would have been given a number to call..
@woooster17: You were in the wrong by not stopping and letting her have more time. If you have any questions or concerns about this, check with your wife.
The reason it was so stupid is that the separation was so little that the TCAS RA probably started as a "strengthened RA". A normal RA is a gentle maneuver. The strengthend RA can require high vertical speeds to stay out of the red on the IVSI. Citation guy can't see them until they pass over/under him. A bit disconcerting.
Many years ago we had a real problem with military jets vs civilian acft. An F4 out of McDill hit a Florida Highway Patrol Cessna and killed the trooper. The F4 landed back at McDill. It was said that the F4 pilot was screwing around making runs at the Cessna. There were many incidents of Navy aircraft making runs on airliners around JAX as well. In the case in this video, I believe they have no business doing military approaches at civilian airfields. Many years ago I was a controller at Lawson Army Airfield at Ft Benning. I had one runway (8900ft) and many times I had three paterns running for that one strip. I had "Fuss" flights (130s, 141s and the occasional C5) hauling the airborne school who many times would return as opposite direction traffic . F4s out of Warner Robbins shooting GCAs and fairly heavy helicopter traffic. We also had transient Navy traffic from Pensicola. We were the busiest airfield in the military. If you had called me for some tally ho crap, I would have sent you away. I would also have Air Farce One and the moblie airborne command 747 as well.
Former AF ATC....stationed at Hill AFB back in 80 with F16's....all the controller had to do was have the F18's break midfield to follow Exec Jet with plan B to extend downwind if need be to maintain sep. The easy layup would've been to have them break dep end at the get go.
Totally off the main topic, but as a ground maintenance type in the Navy, cross country flights were one of my favorite things! We were a P-3 squadron. Pilots would plan a cross country flight to X destination thousands of miles away (usually their home town), and post a sign-up sheet for passengers a week ahead in the maintenance office. Anyone could sign up and request a destination airport or military base near where they wanted to go (again, usually home). Towards the end of the week, the flight crew would figure out the flight plan based upon the requests, The flight would depart after work on Friday and proceed to hopscotch across the country dropping everyone off where they requested. The P-3 had about 8 crew slots besides the flight crew, and it was not unusual to make five or six stops all over the country dropping people off. The P-3 has an integral boarding ladder so it was common when arriving at a destination to shut down 1 and 2, kick out the ladder, have a passenger depart, and then have us depart for the next stop within 10 or 15 minutes. On Sunday, the process reversed with the bird picking up everyone they dropped off on Friday. My usual destination was NAS Glenview near Chicago, although I went other places to sightsee and visit friends. A running gag was that on Sunday I would be standing on the ramp at Glenview all alone with my thumb out and a P-3 stop and pick me up. Good times. Thanks taxpayers, but honestly, besides just building time, the flight crews got quite a workout and gained valuable experience outside their wheelhouse.
Good review, Mover ... having AUS in my backyard all my life and having flown out there with the big jet, the Hawg, and ... GA .. back before Bergstrom was "taken over" and it was Robert Mueller (Not that one) next to IH35 ... Austin ATC (App, Twr, Gnd) started struggling about 10 years ago. It's a busy place and that's not ATC's fault ... but I've had more problems with AUS App/Twr in the last 10 years with the big jet than anywhere else ... even long haul international destinations ... ESL. if the Hornets DID have that much gas hanging in those bags ... he should have considered a VFR hold north of the field. That was tight from the beginning and only got worse as the feet and miles decreased. Hat Tip, again, on the video.
I nearly had a mid-air when I was a student pilot due to my inexperience and not verifying information my instructor gave me about the proper radio frequency. I learned that details matter and you need to communicate clearly... Glad there was no mishap in Austin.
Fighters set off TCAS RA due to closure rates. That doesn't necessarily mean a collision is actually imminent. A civilian TCAS is not designed for that.
@@CWLemoine well yea, all TCAS does is look at closure rates to determine when an aircraft is a threat. They caused a civil aircraft to have a descending RA at low altitude with their bullshit. And they either knew they would cause one and didn’t give a shit or are incompetent and didn’t know. Either way they screwed up.
@@CWLemoinenah man, in this case the separation was gone... It wasn't a closure rate thing... They were about 100feet from each other... That's waaaaaaaay too low
F18 had Citation in sight, but Citation didn't have F18 in sight. Passing above that poor Citation within couple hundred feet must scared the shit out of that dude.
When acquiring hours to improve my usaf UPT application, another aircraft was performing a teardrop entry while we were turning our downwind (uncontrolled airport). We communicated the conflicting situation (traffic already in pattern having right of way) and that we had them in sight to please let us know when they see us. They were forced to do a 360 without entering the pattern which made them really angry over the radio trying to argue about whatever. We simply ignored them, landed the plane and left. Some people don’t understand what it means to be professional over the radios. I absolutely understand what you mean by “deal with it on the ground”
This is why I advocate for all military pilots to have experience flying as a civilian, now I don't know the numbers for how many fighter pilots fly private, or how that all works with licensing and qualifications and stuff. But it seems like a lot of mishaps and ... situations, could potentially be avoided if certain military pilots(mainly rookies and newer guys) had a bit of, for lack of a better word, humility for the civilian pilot's POV. The F-18 has great forward visibility, I have no doubt he had the Cessna in sight the whole time, but does that matter if he couldn't see you? what if he makes a sudden shift to avoid a flock of birds or something? This isn't rocket science, it's basic aviation, even 14 year old cadets could see the error here. I hope the pilots weren't penalized too hard if at all for this, but I sure hope lessons were learned all around here.
I will never understand why some people get upset when you stop and comment. They can always watch the original video if it bothers them that much. Good job explaining the incident, Mover. 👍
I get what you are saying, Mover did not get carried away! But man, some creators will stop and comment WAY TOO often! I just move on to the next vid when it gets irritating!
I live about 15 miles from Bergstrom (AUS) I think this happened close to me. I do remember seeing 2 Hornets flyin over us. Everytime I see Hornets fly over my house going to AUS.....takes me back to my days on USS Carl Vinson and Eisenhower.
And then there are the 'near misses' on purpose. I was cruising at 8000' on an IFR clearance just west of Phoenix AZ. Four F-16s in finger 4 formation on their way to the Goldwater bombing range passed me at my altitude, two on each side of me. They flew out about a half mile and then pulled up in a turn to look back to see my reaction. I was determined to not react and stayed on course and altitude. No question that they saw me and did it on purpose.
@C.W. Lemoine That picture was not taken at Bergstrom. I live here and there were mountains in the background of that photograph. There are no mountains or tall hills visible from that side of the airport.
Yikes, unprofessional aviation by the Hornet guys. Poor comms, little or no SA, accelerating behind civilian traffic (and losing visual on him), using burner in the APPROACH pattern at a major airport, failing to adhere to ATC clearance. They arrived with a fixed idea, not a plan, and demonstrated zero capacity to flex as the dynamic situation around them changed. You commented on the FAA having zero role when it comes to military aviation. Something I have heard a lot over the years but the wider construct is still odd. International aviation laws direct additional laws to be implemented by the individual State (as in nation). US law delegates this to the FAA alone and, by precedent, fails to include US military aviation. I struggle to think of another ICAO nation who fails to have clear legal primacy and lawful control of aviation. This is one of the threads that leaves US military aviation in the quagmire of doing its own thing, including individual US services making up their own procedures, with little regard to commonality between themselves, let alone other airspace users. I admit that I have very little civilian experience relative to my 30 years of military flying but I have done a great deal of flying in the US and with the US military across the globe. I am astonished how rigidly some US military pilots stick to their home-grown SOPs with little appreciation to the internationally agreed norms. I have had US pilots based in the UK, particularly those based at Lakenheath and are otherwise skilled at operating in UK airspace, express surprise that whilst they, like their UK equivalents, do not fall within the remit of the UK CAA they still fall under UK law. This includes the UK Air Navigation Order - where convictions in a civilian court can include sentences of imprisonment. Being judged by your own branch of the US military may be the least of your concerns.
Wow seeing this on one of my fav channels is crazy. A little clarification.. I had limited ADSB data to go with on top of literally just learning animation for this video. I'm not 100% satisfied with the depiction and accuracy. The altitudes when they descended and crossed could’ve been off anywhere between 2-300ft. I’m sure the flight didn't stay joined at the break as seen in the video. The last picture was of a generic image not from this incident.
This meaning that most of the analysis in this video is inaccurate because both locations and altitudes of all aircraft involved are simply guesses? It is kind of important to know the facts and seems like this video needs a massive disclaimer on how the information Mover's reacting to is inaccurate to who knows what degree. Kind of disappointing to see him treat it as fact
Don't rush your uploads and always append a disclaimer regarding inaccuracies and estimates. This was a moment where you could have felt honoured instead of being embarrassed.
@@vaffangool9196 only being off by 200=300ft doesnt make this ANY better. like it shows them both at 1500 so if the dud was only 300 off thats still REALLY BAD.
@@navalofficer1 @vaffangool9196 If you pull up the adsbexchange replay it is still traced and animated from that adsb data, so it's still fairly accurate. I can't link without it being removed, but I do have screen captures on imgur.
@@C0mmanderX
Not sure why that comment is directed to me
Snake 21 had the execujet in sight and still decided to pass within a couple hundred feet of a civilian aircraft on final. That was just stupid.
You took the words right out of my finger tips.
They were just keeping the exec jet that didn't rate military jets awake...
Yeah the whole excuse of “we had him in sight” had me scratching my head. That’s what’s known as an admission of guilt buddy lol.
They didn’t have him in sight. The Citation was in the blind spot under their nose nearly as soon as everyone was on final. They weren’t paying attention to the traffic situation and the tower failed to verify spacing.
He never had that traffic in sight, he just said that to clear his ass. This practice should be banned in every civilian airport. That was dumb. I would expect much more proficiency and professionalism from an F-18 pilot. And of course, ATC is also at fault here.
Mover, I had a very similar situation that nearly killed me and a student over a decade ago in Daytona Beach.
I was cleared for takeoff in a twin with a student. The tower cleared a F/A-18C for the overhead break as we were pulling onto the runway centerline. We were climbing through maybe 200’ when the tower controller came on the radio about two octaves higher pitch telling the hornet to start his break immediately.
I looked over my shoulder just in time for the Hornet to go by our wingtip in full burner and knife edge. He was so close I could read the serial number on his centerline drop tank!
This was just a week after watching a T-38 nearly run over a 172 and pointing out the developing situation to the tower.
I love watching the Carrier break but fast movers at civilian airfields really need to do their best to fit in with everyone else. It’s only a matter of time before one of these near misses doesn’t miss. This situation should have never happened and the controllers should never have given the Hornets any indication they would get the break with traffic ahead of them for the same runway. Give them the break anytime they ask for it when there aren’t other aircraft in the area but not with two aircraft headed to the same runway and one holding position for departure. The difference in speed alone creates a problem let alone the maneuvering.
That 18 pilot you are referencing was massively screwing up then. There is NO reason for an 18 to be that low doing the break.
You flying erau? I learned out there too lol graduated 2007.
ERAU alumni here. I’ve witness the Thunderbirds staring a 5nm circle while a C172 started taking off, the Thunderbirds completed their 5nm circle in front of the C172 still climbing out on runway heading. They were pretty far apart tho, so all the spectators just laughed at the absurdity of it
30-yr ex-controller and 45-yr pilot here. The controller was wrong to grant the unlimited request and the hornet pilot was wrong to thump the Citation. They should have been stepped down over the Citation like the previous controller was doing. Even if the tower didn't have radar, they could have asked the Citation pilot for 500 ft altitude reports. Different frequencies with neither pilots being able to hear the other was definitely a contributing factor.
Thank you for contributing to this discussion and my understanding. Please continue to do so on other aviation forums so we can get your thoughts.
Good point. May have had to hostile-rename the flight lead on this one. “Thumper”? 😂
ATC didn’t do anything wrong.
“Unrestricted” doesn’t mean do whatever you want. It simply shifts responsibility for separation from ATC to the pilot.
I will call field and traffic in sight and get an unrestricted visual approach. That doesn’t mean I should buzz the other aircraft on the parallel approach as I cross over even though it’s well within my capabilities to do so-and even safety (I literally to that in my other job as a lead plane).
@@calvinnickel9995what does “unrestricted “ mean? Is there a definition in the FAR’s? If not, where?
Retired Controller also, I have to agree with you, the Controller "owns" the airspace and is responsible for the safety of all aircraft under their control. Never "grant" anything like this unless there is ample clearance between all aircraft involved. Best thing to do was spin the Hornets, get the civvies on the ground then let the Hornets have their fun in clear airspace. Then there's no TCAS issues and everyone gets to enjoy watching the Hornets do their thing.
“Hey Snake-21, I have a number for your commander to call.”
Thank you, this made me laugh out loud.
Prolly THE Commander.
YUP 🙂
I think the arrogant attitude about how you guys don't have to have a certificate cause they are in the military is crap. I'm sure the FFA can make them more than uncomfortable over situations like these.
@@22floridacat IKR, allegations about sheep and all.
"I guess that fly-by wasn't such a great idea." -Maverick
These guys may be cool…..but they will never be that cool.
someone's going to be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dogshit out of Hong Kong...
Citation Pilot to Snake 21 squadron commander: "Two of your snot-nosed jockeys did a fly-by on my Citation at over 400 knots! I want somebody's butt; I want it now; I've had it!"
Truck master
@@ronaldkonkoma4356You got that number?
That he saw the Citation on short final and decided to do what he did is the worst part of this incident. Like Mover said, if the Citation pilot had initiated a go-around based on his TCAS info, it could have resulted in a real mess. it's just not common sense to maneuver like this in the pattern at a busy airport.
I genuinely feel bad for the Citation pilot because other than cross your fingers and hope what can you really do? Pulling out of the landing would have killed him as we all saw in retrospect, but in the moment he had no idea what those idiots were doing and could only hold course and hope they didn't kill him and everyone else aboard.
And the Citation indeed should have complied with the RA.
US military pilots own everything over 500' and I have no idea how that's news to anyone considering Nagasaki and Hiroshima happened rofl
Giving someone God Privileges when it comes to air ownership sometimes have unfortunate consequences as we have seen today and other times as well
@@neilpatrickhairless Uh NO. They must comply with ATC instructions unless I'd imagine there is a very good reason not to. Show boating for your pals on the ground doesn't qualify by any stretch of any imagination.
So the citation just shit his pants minding his own business and cleared to land, yea I'd be on the radio bitching also.
Exactly. That’s where this channel lost credibility. I can only imagine what that must’ve felt like when an unexpected overhead a couple hundred feet occurs. That was a douche comment by the narrator.
@@Jimmer-Space88 Narrator should just polish the flying grunt's joystick an get it over with.
Maybe the Citation pilot was just "getting it on the tape' for what he knew might be an investigation.
There is no reason to get that close to a civilian aircraft just so you can do your "buzz the tower" BS.
There is no reason you should have been born, but you still love your mom for not aborting you right? Stop pretending this was top gun. There was no tower buzzing you ignorant waste of a pulse.
Im a tower controller and the reasoning for the cancellation of the landing clearance for the EJA699 is because at airports without an ASDE-X (ground radar with conflict detection) we are not allowed to line up and wait with an aircraft cleared to land. So if you clear someone to land and then need to line up and wait you have to cancel the landing clearance first, and then reissue the landing clearance once the person in position begins their departure roll. The EJAs landing cancellation had nothing to do with the SNAKE flight.
You can even hear that with after EJA got their cancel landing clearance he lines up and waits a Career Track which is gonna be a slow piston plane. So what happened is they were doing their runup when tower cleared EJA to land not knowing they were almost done. Then then they finished and called ready so in order to line them up and wait EJA needs their landing clearance cancelled.
Also in regards to the "carrier break" being well understood Im not sure if it really is amongst tower controllers. I have F35s based on my field so Im very familiar with an Air Force break but I never work Navy/ Marine Corpse breaks. I wouldnt have known that they have different break techniques. I will say though IF this radar tape is accurate, and if those are 5 mile rings there's no way in hell that was ever gonna work, especially not with the SNAKE flight breaking over the numbers. Purely based off this radar display recreation those F18s would've been breaking departure end or later if I was working it. I also would not cancelled the altitude restriction either. I would have told them to maintain the high performance traffic pattern (1500 AGL) until the break for that very reason. Our approach hands us the fighters at the ILS intercept altitude + 500 and we in the tower drop them to 1500 AGL when safe. The AUS tower controller never should have cancelled their altitude restriction. But those fighter pilots never should have gotten that close. But like I said earlier you cant trust these guys which is why I lock them down.
Excellent break down of the small details that most wouldn't know. Thanks for that info.
I'm surprised they pushed Career-Track out there. KAUS must be crazy busy. If I had been asked to LUAW with that Cessna basically in sight, I'd have been sweating it.
@@RealDavidN 5 miles is plenty of time to get a 172 out with a citation on final. By the time a citation is on a 5 mile final they’re doing 120, 130 knots and even less if the headwind is strong. That’s 2.5 minutes flying time and it takes 90 seconds tops to get a nearly every plane in the air
Try Corps vice corpse.
Not a good demonstration of how fast and powerful our Jets are.
I was a student another lifetime ago on a straight in to KADS. Tower requested my permission to overfly a Lear. I looked at my instructor and he said, "Your call." I agreed and that dude shot past me like I was parked.
Now he was at least 500' overhead but dang, it got my attention. I get why the Citation pilot was perturbed. I _KNEW_ what was going on and it still rattled me a touch.
My IP also told me, "Watch their touchdown point and land past it." As he was explaining wake turbulence to me I suggested, "So, if I landed before their touchdown point we'd be upside down?"
Overall a great memory but it made me feel for the Citation pilot.
Retired USAF controller here: whenever I worked Navy fighter type aircraft, I always made sure it was clear which overhead pattern was being requested and/or flown (carrier break or Air Force overhead pattern).
When you are in uniform, you always treat the public with respect.
Only thing I disagree with is criticizing the Citation Pilot for his remarks. Sure from a training aspect they weren't needed. But holy shit did that dude keep his cool considering those Navy hot heads could have just easily killed him and everyone on board. And for a few long moments all he could do was sit and hope they didn't. I've seen pilots get way more upset over a 10 second delay. Dude kept a lot more calm than most people ever could.
The first comments - ok. Not professional but understandable. On short final? Fly your plane. Deal with it after shutdown. Be a professional.
@@CWLemoine i think you are being a little harsh on the Cessna pilot. you even call his ego out, really... that sounded like ego to you? i doubt this is ego, he is just scared and mad that 2 asshats endangered his plane and the souls on board for no reason and he reacted ( i would argue pretty calmly). No airline school i have seen or anything i've heard of trains you for 2 fighters buzzing your aircraft in close proximity. I get your point during short final he should be focused on that, but i think there is room for cutting the guy some slack. He got the scare of a lifetime and honestly just a comment about filing a report seems a bit harsh to label him as unprofessional. As you will know, the military training on emotional responses to sudden shocks is a little different then those taught by the FAA and other civi groups. But im just a student so what do i know.
@@jsmith5681 he's a professional pilot. He should be able to control his temper and land, dealing with it on the ground.
@@jsmith5681 seems to me like he got some skin in the game to be this stubborn
@@CWLemoine What about the others? Are they not expected some manners or airmanship? Even abiding by or respecting law? The one who was violated only very, very slightly diverted from 100% professional communication, and even that depends. They did not actually cause any harm except to maybe some ASPD ego, potentially. Some other parties did in fact cause a little bit more than disturbance.
"Temper" is not to be mentioned in reference to how the Cessna pilot acted. He demonstrated loads of patience and restraint. This is like lynching someone because they cut the cheese. Someone was wielding a sword while making nasty remarks to the unfortunate bystander who happened to pass the gas.
Speaking as a USAF controller, the "carrier break" is not a procedure we generally train to. VFR patterns (altitudes, direction of turns, etc.) are defined on an airport specific basis. I would be surprised if an FAA facility, absent locally assigned USN aircraft, had a carrier break procedure defined. The controller was probably unfamiliar enough that a request for unrestricted airspeed AND ALTITUDE didn't set off alarm bells.
Oh I know. I can’t tell you how many times Eglin denied Gonky. 😂
Yeah the ATC giving them clearance for that with a civilian on final was wonky asf and exactly why ATC owns a good portion of this mess. It doesn't absolve the 18 pilots at all though as they knew the civilian was final and had visual on him the entire time and pulled their show boating stunt regardless.
seems like there should be some training/commuincation seminars between AF / Navy controllers for safety/procedures ??
@@CWLemoine Gonky gets denied everywhere I guess except Rosy .
Great commentary on the approach of all inbound aircraft mover! The situation appeared to be heading towards a FUBAR, but thankfully, all landed with no incident.
I can relate to the Citation pilots mood. I got all up close and personal with a 2 ship abreast formation of RAF Harriers over the forest of dean at 1200'. My poor student was doing IMC training and 'under the hood' I saw them due to their sooty smoke trails as they were at full noise, coming at me dead level, 90degrees off, The left harrier was going to just miss my tail but the 2nd was going to hit me. All I could do was bunt forwards and we passed just beneath the harrier. My poor student had no idea why his head was up against the ceiling, All I could do was whip off his hood and point to the rapidly receding harriers whose smoke trails were still dead parallel. We got so close, upon landing I actually checked the top of the tail fin to see if the rotating beacon was still there!!
YIKES.
He's not being a douche. He's actually helping the Local controller out. Controllers have a reporting system also. It looks really bad for the controller when a report is submitted by a pilot that involves a controller and no report was submitted by the controller. The question will be asked to the controller involved, "why didn't you submit a report?"
Correct. That was an extremely inappropriate comment to make about ExecJet.
No it does not. That does not happen.
C.W. As a retired NetJets pilot the ASAP report is a useful tool for the pilots to avoid a violation. In this instant I can totally feel the NJA pilots level of pissed off-ness. Having a couple of F-18’s go blasting by you on final approach in excess of 250 kt overtake would elevate anyone’s pucker factor.
Good discussion though and I like your debriefs.
I don’t have a problem with filing an ASAP. I take issue with calling it out to the world on short final on tower freq. Fly your plane. Land. Deal with it after like a professional. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
@ I’m wrong for saying the Hornets are wrong? Nuance is beyond you. They were wrong. ATC was wrong. The Netjets guy was wrong for whining on the radio. “I’m telling mom” on the radio is unprofessional, especially during a critical phase of flight.
Going "yeah dude, push it up, go burner" on the tower freq in the middle of traffic doesn't sell the part of you NOT being a fighter douche.
Yikes.
exactly
Definitely intentional, glad he was able to make himself look even more negligent
YEah he was just show boating and ignoring the rest of the airspace. Plus if he had the execjet in sight why on earth did he get 100feet from it???
@@tomriley5790 "if he had the execjet in sight why on earth did he get 100feet from it???"
Exactly. So he was either negligent or lying. Neither of which I would want any fighter pilot to be.
@@tomriley5790 Well the maker of the video Mover reacted to responded and said he wasn't that accurate with his numbers and display so it most likely wasn't that close but still too close for ANY reasonable excuse. Most likely between 200-300 feet and exactly what Mover said the civilian could have called a go around thanks to his TCAS and given the show boating speed the 18s decided to take it could have gotten bad with a quickness. Just no excuse for the 18 pilots to do this at all.
Appreciate you doing these
I'd have been pissed as Hell too if I were the EJA, this is an UNSAFE practice at a high density civilian AIRPORT with traffic on final......PERIOD! I don't care if you're a high performance military jet, ATC should make these guys conduct themselves in accordance with other traffic operations. Cessna's and Piper's don't practice approaches at military bases during on-going fighter patterns do they?
Back when the Thunderbirds were starting to fly T-38's, one of them came into Holloman for some maintenance. Holloman had lots of fighter lead-in activity in the pattern. I happened to be on the ramp about ready to taxi when I heard the Thunderbird pilot asked at least twice for special clearance to do some Thunderbird approach and landing. The controller kept denying this due to being focused on regular pattern traffic. Good move.
We had our share of showing off a bit but it was our home field. We flew 2000 ft patterns and often came down initial a little hot to do a 5G break. The final turn was tight and bumpy, often in and out of mil power. I had more than one fighter lead-in student express shock at what they experienced. The idea was to show them that flying by the numbers like UPT wasn't always necessary.
Ask that question to anyone who flew fighters out of MacDill.
1000 feet separation...
@@brandspro I used to see F-16's in the pattern at McDill as I passed overhead in my airliner landing at TPA 36L. They would appear to disappear when they would turn nose on to me in the climbing turn to downwind....Spooky!
Well other than very extraneous circumstances civilians aren't going to be cleared to land at military bases.
I am glad you did a video on this. I saw the ATC video on the other channel earlier. But I'm not a pilot and so I had no idea who was in the wrong here. You explained this so well that it made everything crystal clear.
"Cancel landing clearance" has to do with LUAW (line up and wait) rules. Some operations don't allow an aircraft to hold in position with and aircraft cleared to land. Taking away the landing clearance allows the other to line up. At airports with the authorization to use LUAW, equipment limitations/outages in the tower or positions being staffed/unstaffed may require suspension of LUAW ops. Great video Mover!
That's interesting because I've looked it up after making this video and cannot find it. I don't believe that is standard phraseology. If someone told that to me in an airliner, I'd do a go around - UNLESS they added some sort of amplifying data like "continue the approach" or "expect clearance."
@@CWLemoine I'm currently active with FAA ATC, we use this phraseology as Austin did, however, I personally add "expect landing clearance on 2 mile final, traffic holding in position" to make sure the arrival understands what's going on. If their AMASS was in limited mode due to errors or false targets, or Local control (tower) was combined with another position, etc, LUAW would be suspended.
(AMASS - Airport Movement Safety System) monitors the runway environment and warns of occupied runways, part of our ground radar equipment.
I’m not doubting you. I just couldn’t find it and have never heard it like that. It would trigger a go around at my company without other info.
@@CWLemoine Roger that. I completely agree. Keep up the great work - excellent analysis!
5:16 A cool addition to this is that, like you briefly mentioned, the CF-18 can use ILS. However, other countries F/A-18C/D models such as those of the Finnish and Swiss airforces have later upgrade packages, which include the civilian ILS system. Also, if you look at cockpit videost, those Hornets look more like Super Hornets.
Round engine intakes so no Superhornets.
@@erazorDev he said the cockpit looks like a Super Hornet, not the airframe
@erazorDev Nothing mentioned about anything that your reply would relate to, so I don't really get what you mean.
I fly a Citation Sovereign part time, which is similar to the Latitude Execjet 699 was in. If the hornets truly were 4 bagging, and the Latitude was light, then the Citation going around could've really startled the hornets. Those Citations in that class have got some amazing climb performance, I've seen 6k fpm *while below max climb power* on empty legs with low fuel.
Yeah, a go-around when they were that close would've ended badly.
Yeah, you have to plan on go arounds. I wouldn't have anybody overfly traffic on final below the published go around altitude. What if someone lost comms?
6000 FPM is what a WWII fighter does. It’s fast.. but not that fast.
@@calvinnickel9995 Sure, but if you're only separated by 1000ft that is still almost at blink-and-you'll-miss-it reaction times. I have no doubt a fighter can dodge that, but if they were looking down or whatever, or the aircraft is below them and out of view, it could surprise them. You don't want to be doing ACM in the traffic pattern...
@@calvinnickel9995 It is fast enough to cause bad things to happen if the civilian had followed that TCAS and aborted landing with the speeds the 18s were closing at.
I've had an F-16 knife-edge around me with vapor trails and all during a cross-country once near McEntire AFB. I was close enough to see the pilot looking at me in the cockpit as he/she zipped past the nose of my aircraft. Pissed me off because flight following didn't bother to tell me the F-16 was even in my area. The F-16 was cookin' and zipped past me faster than I could say "WTF!". When I bitched about it to flight following, snarky AFB controller just responded with "Maintain VFR". While it was cool to see the F-16 doing it's thing. It startled the crap out of me to be cruising along and suddenly there is an F-16 off the nose at my altitude, and not much more than a haircut away.
"Don't be a douche", sure, but that citation pilot was a few feet away from being killed, and he knew it. Citations don't have hot seats, and a collision at that altitude would have been a death sentence for him. He has every right to be pissed.
You'd think fighter bros are good enough to spot a slow citation on final ahead of them, given that they need to spot an opponent in BFM doing 7Gs, but no. Apparently you just expect everyone to get out of the way cause you're in a fighter...?
I wonder if that's the case.
I think they expected other traffic to not be in their way because ATC controlling that airspace had cleared them to do what they were doing.
Had something similar happen at Selfridge ANGB several years back, not nearly as close, but ended up with us going around. Pre Pacer CRAG KC-135R, so no RA (we didn't have ETCAS at the time) and we did have SA on the Tomcats, jusr that they came off the perch ahead of us after being directed to extend their downwind. We offset & went around as -2 ended up a bit too close for comfort. We blocked in next to them (a VF-32 2-ship), and the RIO form one of the Tomcats actually came over & apologized for sending us around. Got a free tour of a Tomcat out of it so all good, LOL.
Awesome channel as always and I hope that your books are doing well
Really interesting. Love these videos, thanks for doing these.
Reminds me a bit of people that race on a public road with traffic. That little bit of excitement buzz you get is just not worth the risk.
It sure is fun though
@@georgeforeman1097find the video of the dude cut in half on the road because he hit the back of a truck at speed, lower half stayed in the car, upper half on the road, still alive, with his entrails scattered under him
@sgtjonzo would never happen to me ;)
@@georgeforeman1097 *YOU* are not the one that decides if you're John Force or Dale Earnhardt, let alone which day you are.
Don't track on the street and don't street on the track.....
@lt1nut its worked for me so far ;) best driver in the world, and that isnt an exaggeration.
40 years ago I was cleared to land in my cardinal in front of an F-4 phantom. It was night and as I turned final. I could see the F-4 quite a ways out. the controller ask that I keep my speed up. I followed I like to do an immediate left turn out of the pattern and Let the jet go first. He said I was ok to land. followed by the F-4 flying over the top of us in Afterburner. It was deathning.
No one was in danger, but it is the kind of thing that you will never get to do again.
So, there I was, puttering along in my Caravan on a high right downwind for 4R at HNL when an F-15 lined up on 8R asks for the 'hang-10 departure' (aka, straight up). Tower denies the clearance but F-15 does it anyway. Tower to F-15: "I have a number for you to call, advise ready to copy." Just another crazy day at HNL....
“Unrestricted” in the civilian world doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want. It is a shifting of the responsibilities of separation from ATC to you.
I will call field and traffic in sight and get an unrestricted visual approach. That doesn’t mean I’m allowed to buzz the traffic on the parallel approach even though I’ve got him in sight and can pass right over him as I cut across-even though I do exactly that in my other job flying a lead plane for aerial firefighting and can do it safely.
The Execjet pilot.. a guy who’s on final in a busy stage of flying doing checklists and calls with zero visibility behind him and SA constructed based on ATC conversations and the expectation that he’s sharing the sky with the best of the best is in his right to lay it on those guys.
It was a concentrated and deliberate effort on their part that got them into that position.. not an accident or misunderstanding and they deserved hell from everyone.
The whole kerfuffle was caused by two unchecked egos. Period.
Wut?
@@duane8829Below-deck nuggets acting above-deck?
And the issue of incomparable clearances by OTC
Thanks for this breakdown, it was helpful picking apart the components of the incident.
Gotta give fault where fault is due…this is 100% on the F-18 lead. There is no reason to ever get that close to a civilian non-participating aircraft for that maneuver. In the pilot’s own words he “had the traffic in sight” which makes it even worse. He almost killed several people in a huge mishap. Guy should be flying a desk after this…
Until there are real consequences for military pilots involved in this crap nothing will change…
@@PNZ73yup... Sad part is that it was a training squadron that did it. Teach them stupidity early I guess
@@PNZ73 there very well could be real consequences. But it will be within the Marine/military jurisdiction, and may not be accessible to the public.
So he told Foot Hills about the jets, but didn’t tell ExecJet, right? Having a fighter scream overhead would shake anybody not expecting it. That’s all, no other commentary. Thanks, Mover - always appreciate your thoughts. Glad to catch this video, heard you and Gonky talking about it last night.
Just a reminder to us tactical guys what may be comfortable to us as either party in this scenario may not be to a strictly civilian experienced pilot. We are trained to be aggressive and they are more about smooth. When on their turf, it’s probably better to play their game. Plus we have ejection seats..they dont
A good example of how fast fighters and straight in slower aircraft do not mix and cause large loss of life is the Pope AFB accident between an F-16 and a C-130. I flew both those aircraft, and I have an FAA CTO certificate with two tower ratings at mix use fields. For safety of flight, fighters can suck it up, and fly the straight-in where the preponderance of traffic is slower straight‐in aircraft. It will make it easier on everyone for them to sequence like all the other traffic. They can whine all they want about speeds and time and fuel, but you said it yourself. It's a normal procedure they are trained for in instrument conditions, so suck it up and sequence like everybody else.
Thanks Mover! I watched the original video yesterday and pretty much understood the situation and dangers - hearing you describe it only added more clarity.
It’s the “See ya.” from Delta for me LOL definitely one of those take offs where you accelerate turning onto the runway there’s a TOGA call before my movies started
"That's unsat" Tell me you’re an IP without telling me you’re an IP. Even though it is a very serious safety of flight discussion, I got a good chuckle out of that one mover.
Great channel. I watched the raw video of the incident and really couldnt tell what was going on other than somebody was pissed. Your video clarified everything including all the acronyms that I had no clue about.
17:20 be a professional? How bout you tell the fighter to be professional and not ALMOST KILL THEMSELVES AND THE CITATIONS CIVILIANS. THATS not profesional.
Two things can be true at once.
@@CWLemoine yes but the greater truth must be highlighted in this case to make any future fighter pilot absolutely disgusted with himself if he were to think about requesting something like that with people on final already. Social shame and whatnot. Do you believe in the butterfly effect mr Lemoine?
There’s nothing wrong with requesting the carrier break with people on final. The radio is no place for “social shame.”
If Austin is as busy as you’ve described, wouldn’t it be prudent not to pose any increase risk to both them and others?
A normal overhead does not pose an increased risk.
Thanks!
Thanks Fred!
Saying, "Approved as requested," to a request you don't understand is not air traffic control. Not issuing some sort of restriction to the F18s is not air traffic CONTROL.
Bingo!
Good discussion. Thanks.
I am used to USAF Initial. (Flew USAF, corporate jets now) Fifteen hundred. Well above anybody on short final. Not having flown Navy, I had not realized their Initial is lower, more in the straight in pattern altitude. Good point. I am smarter for having listened to you.
Would love to have had video of what the exec jet saw. I’m inclined to give him some grace for announcing the ASAP as we only know something like the maximum vertical separation when the F/AGs passed; he might have gotten something close to a face full of AB and a bit of a scare as they went by like that.
When the TCAS system gives you a RA, it puts a green box on the PFD for you to put the flight director into. It can be a climb, descent, or a level off. It’s not stated here what the command was. That being said, I’d have been really pissed if this happened to me! That’s way too close and too low, not giving much margin in there. And him stating on the radio he’s filing an ASAP is probably more for the controller’s benefit. They have their own, similar program. He’s notifying him that the incident is going to be reported and looked at, and he needs to file a report too to cover himself.
Frankly, there should not be any world in which Hornets are cleared to descend to 800 feet at high speed (or any speed) when there's a low and slow jet already in the way. Like...of course that's a huge problem. Military or not, you're going to have problems when your traffic control accepts directing multiple planes into the same airspace at the same time.
You say that those Hornets were not in any danger of a collision with the Exec Jet, but then shortly afterwards they come within 200 feet of each other where the only thing protecting them is visual avoidance, which is notoriously unreliable. The industry weeded out that attitude a long time ago, and it seems like the military still hasn't caught on.
ATC cleared multiple planes into the same airspace at the same time, and this is apparently only not routine in that the planes came stupidly close this time?
Dude, watching you fly while you’re talking is so awesome! More of that if possible, we won’t get sick of it or think you’re showing off… Your flying footage is just bad-ass!
"Snake" is the callsign of VMFA-323 based out of Miramar, so I can easily see this being a cross country training flight. Wikipedia notes that the "Death Rattlers" took over training duties a year ago when VMFAT-101 was deactivated on 1 October 2023, and it appears VMFA-323 will continue in this role until 2027
Thanks, great to hear your analysis of this incident!
“Push it up, give me burner”…definitely trying for a SH break. That’s AUS, though, not the Carl Vinson or Eisenhower 800 miles out to sea. No reason to be hot dogging like that. The skirt on the ground you’re trying to impress is going to be plenty thrilled with 300 knots at 1500 AGL.
Brilliant content. Your level headed explanation is always appreciated, mover.
Those F-18's were flying like "Maverick" - not safe. If I did that, I'd be getting a phone number.
Wait… Maverick wasn’t safe?! 😮
seems like a culture problem that goes way back as you can see from mover defending them
I feel bad for the ExecJet guy. He seemed genuinely excited for the opportunity to watch the break happen, imagining how cool it would be to see it from his perspective on the runway. What an unfortunate turn, literally.
Probably not a good idea to co-mingle civilian and military aircraft. When in Rome, do as the romans. Landing at a civilian regional airport requires civilian/FAA rules. Drop the military techniques and get inline. If you need to conduct a 360 for separation, do it.
Published the same comment on another channel and got blasted by every military jock with 100 excuses. They should probably have watched this video because it was broken down very well on the different types of breaks whether it be navy or Air Force and God knows what else. In other words, the military can’t even standardize the way to fly a pattern and somehow all the civilian traffic and civilian controllers are supposed to be up to speed on this shit. Give me a break (no pun intended).
There’s been a brand of FBO that has proliferated around military routes, strictly to take advantage of their cross country trips for fuel sales. Never understood this when sometimes they sit within 15 or 20 miles of a military base where this type of traffic could fuel .
What's not in this is that Snake 21 also blew past at 200ft over a Piper PA-28 that was holding short of the runway waiting for The Exec jet to land when they did their approach numbers break. That was the reason the controller told them to do their break at the departure numbers which they didn't adhere to. The FAA and the Marine Corp investigated it because this had been the third near miss that year at Austin.
I was playing golf at Champions next to Alliance airfield here in Texas when a group of 4 or 5 18's did this kinda maneuver. They all came in formation then one by one broke off later and later then eventually came screaming by low & slow. It was lit 🇺🇸
The EJA pilot was not in any way wrong, and every reason in the world to be indignant. You said he shouldn’t have reacted that way and you’re wrong. His RA would have been “descend” and not enough altitude to do it. This error was 100% totally on the USMC pilots and I hope they were grounded for a period for retraining. Airplanes aren’t toys, it was a total lack of airmanship or professionalism on the part of the Marine pilots. You can tell by the inflection in the Marine’s radio communications that he has the maturity of a pre-pubescent boy.
Nope. Tower freq is not the place to throw a tantrum, nor is it a good time to do it on short final. Fly your plane. Land. Make a phone call if you need to when you shutdown. I understand he’s angry, but that comm was unnecessary and unprofessional.
@@CWLemoine You have a very liberal definition of a tantrum and not your say if you weren’t in the EJA. Did you ever think the guy saying he was going to file as ASAP was his way of ensuring the AUS tower or Marine pilots didn’t try to hide this stupid stunt?
Nope. There is no reason for that. He doesn’t need them to know in order to file an ASAP. He could have easily waited 5 more minutes until he was shut down in chocks. It was him being pissed off and not controlling his anger. Fly your plane. Land. Deal with it. Anything else is nonsense.
@@CWLemoine 💯 %
@@stoneagearcher3477 he was a professional pilot, so yes, he should be able to be professional and not throw a tantrum over the radio.
I can appreciate the fact that you don't want to disparage a fellow military aviator however your lack of candor is less than expected. Making excuses for Snake 21 and flights lack of basic airmanship and situational awareness are concerning. I operate daily in the airspace and expect my fellow aviators to operate in a safe and professional manor. The Execjet pilot stayed on task and landed safely, likely with some terrified passengers to calm. Snake 21 could very easily have killed 2+8 his wingman and himself. Leave the Sierra Hotel shit for the fleet. As to your comment about the ARSA report voiced over comms, it was a professional way of calling Snake 21 and flight assholes.
Did you even watch the video?
@@CWLemoine , from start to finish.
@@brentsmith4206 then perhaps you should watch it again, because I did not give Snake flight a free pass.
@@CWLemoine, Will do. Standby.
@ False.
Those 2 nutters in hornets should be stripped of their wings and never allowed anywhere near a cockpit again. Either they didn't have the traffic in sight or they deliberately buzzed a civilan plane on final. And then they violated directions from atc ontop of all that.
Yeah but Lemoine is out here making excuses for their "showboating," more like reckless endangerment
They’re probably going to get the usual “flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong” speech, right?
All depends on previous behavior of the lead pilot really. You don't need to hammer someone if they are normally safe but made a mistake. If it's repeated behavior though, it will get serious.
I was/am a keen motorcyclist. I used to do a lot of track days and then started racing. Often we’d use track days as unofficial practice days. Strictly forbidden, but as long as you weren’t an idiot, it was fine. As a racer, you start to react faster and anticipate earlier. The reason why we were sometimes taken aside between sessions is because whilst we knew what we were doing, wanted to do and how we wanted to do it, the poor rider in the fast group who wasn’t expecting a close pass didn’t. So the rule was we had to keep out of trouble, not frighten other riders into making mistakes that would hurt all of us. It wasn’t a comment on their skills, just we were doing this most weekends and we knew each other and what we would do. I could be close passed on the inside of a corner and I knew they wouldn’t take me out. Another rider, not so. I see a strong corollary here between the Hornets and the Exec Jet. Both competent, just the fighters knew exactly what they wanted to do. The Exec Jet would have seen the RA and could have reacted in any number of ways. The Hornets placed themselves and the Exec Jet in a high risk situation for zero benefit.
That's a really good comparison! Having someone blow by you at race pace while you're probably just fast enough to get your knee down is pretty damn close to a high-performance jet blowing by your commuter while you're on the approach with your gear down haha. Great way to force someone into a mistake.
Happy trails! Keep the rubber side down and the blue side up!
I've never flown a Hornet. How's the line of sight at 12:00 low, range 1000' and less?
When he said he had the Citation in sight I thought that he was basically admitting to the world, that he's an ass. He knew he would pass that close and thought it was a good idea?
Just a note on the last comment, for civilian pilots, the phone number is a potential get-out-of-jail-free card. It's the opportunity to clear up a misunderstanding BEFORE it turns into punitive action. I'm guessing for military pilots, clearing stuff up doesn't help their careers much if they wind up on TH-cam 😐
I understand this completely.. I had a similar event recently.
I was looking to park my car in a fairly small car park, I spotted a space but another car was manoeuvring into or out of this space.. I was closing at around 5 mph and the other vehicle didn’t appear to have any situational awareness.. I think her radio was out of commission, probably stuck playing some country music.
Anyway, I managed to avoid a mishap & performed a go around, but it was a close call..
If I wasn’t married, she definitely would have been given a number to call..
@woooster17: You were in the wrong by not stopping and letting her have more time. If you have any questions or concerns about this, check with your wife.
The reason it was so stupid is that the separation was so little that the TCAS RA probably started as a "strengthened RA". A normal RA is a gentle maneuver. The strengthend RA can require high vertical speeds to stay out of the red on the IVSI.
Citation guy can't see them until they pass over/under him. A bit disconcerting.
Perhaps Snake21 was looking to have a "negative ghost rider...the pattern is full" moment to impress the civies on the ground.
First time here, thanks for the video, now subscribed.
Many years ago we had a real problem with military jets vs civilian acft. An F4 out of McDill hit a Florida Highway Patrol Cessna and killed the trooper. The F4 landed back at McDill. It was said that the F4 pilot was screwing around making runs at the Cessna. There were many incidents of Navy aircraft making runs on airliners around JAX as well. In the case in this video, I believe they have no business doing military approaches at civilian airfields. Many years ago I was a controller at Lawson Army Airfield at Ft Benning. I had one runway (8900ft) and many times I had three paterns running for that one strip. I had "Fuss" flights (130s, 141s and the occasional C5) hauling the airborne school who many times would return as opposite direction traffic . F4s out of Warner Robbins shooting GCAs and fairly heavy helicopter traffic. We also had transient Navy traffic from Pensicola. We were the busiest airfield in the military. If you had called me for some tally ho crap, I would have sent you away. I would also have Air Farce One and the moblie airborne command 747 as well.
My first with you. Very well done ! I have subscribed.
It would almost be better if Snake didn’t have him in sight. Thumping a civilian AND knowing they were there? Yikes.
Thank you for this very informative presentation.
Former AF ATC....stationed at Hill AFB back in 80 with F16's....all the controller had to do was have the F18's break midfield to follow Exec Jet with plan B to extend downwind if need be to maintain sep. The easy layup would've been to have them break dep end at the get go.
It didn't help that the controller said to break departure end and they still broke numbers.
Totally off the main topic, but as a ground maintenance type in the Navy, cross country flights were one of my favorite things! We were a P-3 squadron. Pilots would plan a cross country flight to X destination thousands of miles away (usually their home town), and post a sign-up sheet for passengers a week ahead in the maintenance office. Anyone could sign up and request a destination airport or military base near where they wanted to go (again, usually home). Towards the end of the week, the flight crew would figure out the flight plan based upon the requests, The flight would depart after work on Friday and proceed to hopscotch across the country dropping everyone off where they requested. The P-3 had about 8 crew slots besides the flight crew, and it was not unusual to make five or six stops all over the country dropping people off. The P-3 has an integral boarding ladder so it was common when arriving at a destination to shut down 1 and 2, kick out the ladder, have a passenger depart, and then have us depart for the next stop within 10 or 15 minutes. On Sunday, the process reversed with the bird picking up everyone they dropped off on Friday. My usual destination was NAS Glenview near Chicago, although I went other places to sightsee and visit friends. A running gag was that on Sunday I would be standing on the ramp at Glenview all alone with my thumb out and a P-3 stop and pick me up. Good times.
Thanks taxpayers, but honestly, besides just building time, the flight crews got quite a workout and gained valuable experience outside their wheelhouse.
400 knots coming into the pattern is insane. Save that stuff for when you're offshore coming onto the boat
Thanks for the explanation of why you use a break over a straight in. Appreciated.
Good review, Mover ...
having AUS in my backyard all my life and having flown out there with the big jet, the Hawg, and ... GA .. back before Bergstrom was "taken over" and it was Robert Mueller (Not that one) next to IH35 ...
Austin ATC (App, Twr, Gnd) started struggling about 10 years ago. It's a busy place and that's not ATC's fault ... but I've had more problems with AUS App/Twr in the last 10 years with the big jet than anywhere else ... even long haul international destinations ... ESL.
if the Hornets DID have that much gas hanging in those bags ... he should have considered a VFR hold north of the field. That was tight from the beginning and only got worse as the feet and miles decreased.
Hat Tip, again, on the video.
I nearly had a mid-air when I was a student pilot due to my inexperience and not verifying information my instructor gave me about the proper radio frequency.
I learned that details matter and you need to communicate clearly... Glad there was no mishap in Austin.
Saying it wasn’t a threat of collision is pretty dumb when TCAS RAs occur when a potential collision is less than 30 seconds away.
Fighters set off TCAS RA due to closure rates. That doesn't necessarily mean a collision is actually imminent. A civilian TCAS is not designed for that.
@@CWLemoine well yea, all TCAS does is look at closure rates to determine when an aircraft is a threat.
They caused a civil aircraft to have a descending RA at low altitude with their bullshit.
And they either knew they would cause one and didn’t give a shit or are incompetent and didn’t know. Either way they screwed up.
@@CWLemoinenah man, in this case the separation was gone... It wasn't a closure rate thing... They were about 100feet from each other... That's waaaaaaaay too low
We don’t know the distance they were from each other.
@@CWLemoineoh well, waaaay below 1000feet
This is a great breakdown … thanks ! Love seeing jet pilots talk about jets
F18 had Citation in sight, but Citation didn't have F18 in sight.
Passing above that poor Citation within couple hundred feet must scared the shit out of that dude.
Didn’t understand half of all that gibberish but still found it very interesting and entertaining. Good video!
The lesson is don't make a hot shit break in a busy civilian airport.
Retired USAF instructor. Brought back a lot of memories. Spot on analysis.
Shining their a$$ in the pattern like a bunch of clowns.
When acquiring hours to improve my usaf UPT application, another aircraft was performing a teardrop entry while we were turning our downwind (uncontrolled airport). We communicated the conflicting situation (traffic already in pattern having right of way) and that we had them in sight to please let us know when they see us. They were forced to do a 360 without entering the pattern which made them really angry over the radio trying to argue about whatever. We simply ignored them, landed the plane and left. Some people don’t understand what it means to be professional over the radios. I absolutely understand what you mean by “deal with it on the ground”
This is why I advocate for all military pilots to have experience flying as a civilian, now I don't know the numbers for how many fighter pilots fly private, or how that all works with licensing and qualifications and stuff. But it seems like a lot of mishaps and ... situations, could potentially be avoided if certain military pilots(mainly rookies and newer guys) had a bit of, for lack of a better word, humility for the civilian pilot's POV.
The F-18 has great forward visibility, I have no doubt he had the Cessna in sight the whole time, but does that matter if he couldn't see you? what if he makes a sudden shift to avoid a flock of birds or something? This isn't rocket science, it's basic aviation, even 14 year old cadets could see the error here.
I hope the pilots weren't penalized too hard if at all for this, but I sure hope lessons were learned all around here.
Very well said at the end Mover . I love it. 👍
I will never understand why some people get upset when you stop and comment. They can always watch the original video if it bothers them that much. Good job explaining the incident, Mover. 👍
Maybe they're impatient fighter pilots?? :)
I get what you are saying, Mover did not get carried away! But man, some creators will stop and comment WAY TOO often! I just move on to the next vid when it gets irritating!
I live about 15 miles from Bergstrom (AUS) I think this happened close to me. I do remember seeing 2 Hornets flyin over us. Everytime I see Hornets fly over my house going to AUS.....takes me back to my days on USS Carl Vinson and Eisenhower.
And then there are the 'near misses' on purpose. I was cruising at 8000' on an IFR clearance just west of Phoenix AZ. Four F-16s in finger 4 formation on their way to the Goldwater bombing range passed me at my altitude, two on each side of me. They flew out about a half mile and then pulled up in a turn to look back to see my reaction. I was determined to not react and stayed on course and altitude. No question that they saw me and did it on purpose.
Great vid Mover, especially the comments near the end.
@C.W. Lemoine
That picture was not taken at Bergstrom. I live here and there were mountains in the background of that photograph. There are no mountains or tall hills visible from that side of the airport.
Yeah. I pinned the comment (I think?) where the original video creator chimed in and said it was random.
Good insights...thanks Mover!
Yikes, unprofessional aviation by the Hornet guys. Poor comms, little or no SA, accelerating behind civilian traffic (and losing visual on him), using burner in the APPROACH pattern at a major airport, failing to adhere to ATC clearance. They arrived with a fixed idea, not a plan, and demonstrated zero capacity to flex as the dynamic situation around them changed.
You commented on the FAA having zero role when it comes to military aviation. Something I have heard a lot over the years but the wider construct is still odd. International aviation laws direct additional laws to be implemented by the individual State (as in nation). US law delegates this to the FAA alone and, by precedent, fails to include US military aviation. I struggle to think of another ICAO nation who fails to have clear legal primacy and lawful control of aviation. This is one of the threads that leaves US military aviation in the quagmire of doing its own thing, including individual US services making up their own procedures, with little regard to commonality between themselves, let alone other airspace users.
I admit that I have very little civilian experience relative to my 30 years of military flying but I have done a great deal of flying in the US and with the US military across the globe. I am astonished how rigidly some US military pilots stick to their home-grown SOPs with little appreciation to the internationally agreed norms. I have had US pilots based in the UK, particularly those based at Lakenheath and are otherwise skilled at operating in UK airspace, express surprise that whilst they, like their UK equivalents, do not fall within the remit of the UK CAA they still fall under UK law. This includes the UK Air Navigation Order - where convictions in a civilian court can include sentences of imprisonment. Being judged by your own branch of the US military may be the least of your concerns.