[thrill]

FWIW, I have a few thousand hours flying jet fighters and have hit rather large birds at high speed (me, not them), and have been hit by rather large caliber bullets (I assume also at high speed). From the two videos, taken at two locations, I cannot positively id a drone. What is described as a sudden altitude change in the second video doesn't look like anything in the first video, though it's mostly blocked by the inconveniently placed large sign. The appearance of a "large altitude change" could be easily explained by the pilot simply easing off the g in the turn to gain visibility, to gain a little speed if it was needed, or sure, to suddenly try to avoid something. It looks exaggerated in the second video I think because the camera is manually tracking something.

hitting a drone is unlikely to cause significant damage unless it hit in just the right spot. Seeing and overreacting to a drone might cause some damage but there is probably one second of altitude change there if any - that collision was already quite likely from the intercept path being flown. I've not flown either of those aircraft (before my time) but looking underneath during a turn requires effort and may not have even been possible, especially if there was a lack of awareness to prompt the look.

I think Juan's youtube video explaining the airborne change of directive from what in the comments on that video appears to have been an under briefed, and sadly under questioned briefing, is by far the most likely explanation.

[andrew_]

would a strike directly on the prop possibly cause a stall or some other force to move the fighter that far out of position, or change course that drastically? I'm curious given the distinct differences between piston engine and jet engine planes.

[thrill]

No.

While the prop is, uh, properly a wing, and technically hitting something with it would interrupt the airflow, they're quite strong and would likely just destroy the object, slightly damaging the prop. If it did damage it beyond usability, it'd been way more obvious in the video and with the prop breaking off.

If you're talking about the aircraft stalling, then it's unlikely as we don't see that significant of a movement in the brief second of video. Under g-load (an "accelerated stall") the buffer between the onset of the stall and the stall itself is decreased, and as I said elsewhere that while I have no familiarity with the handling characteristics of that aircraft, there's simply doesn't look like enough time for a stall to develop between when the aircraft supposedly hit a drone and for-sure hit the other aircraft. And from what I could see, the movement doesn't at all look like a stall, and from the moment I saw the two aircraft in the video you can see the intercept occurring - that's likely harder for the unfamiliar to see being unfamiliar with the concept of two disparate turning circles crossing at a point in the future, differing because of bank angle (one or even both "circles - i.e. vectors - could even be straight lines) and because of differing speeds.

From the limited videos I've seen, one pilot could not, or simply did not, see the other aircraft, either because of the bank angle blocking the view or not realizing the aircraft was there and being focused elsewhere (such as the aircraft in from of them) and simply ran into the other aircraft. How they got into that position is the difficult investigation, and Juan's YouTube video pointed out that the sudden airborne airboss directive was to cross flight paths, when they didn't brief such and rather unlikely had ever practiced such, and may not have even realized such.

[andrew_]

that's some cool perspective. thanks for taking the time to reply and for sharing.

[K0balt]

Something that many people do not understand is that an aircraft “stall” has nothing to do with the engine or propeller except possibly as a contributing factor.

A stall in aircraft parlance refers to a change in airflow over the wings or control surfaces that causes the sudden or progressive loss of aerodynamic lift. This is an effect caused by the surface moving through the air at an excessive angle, so that the air stops flowing smoothly over the lifting surface, instead breaking down into a chaotic flow.

Stalls typically happen at low speeds, where an aircraft is pitching up excessively, but can also happen at higher speeds in steep turns or other maneuvers where the g forces on an aircraft make the wings have to support multiple times their normal load.

A midair collision with a small object is unlikely to cause a stall, unless it were to provoke a secondary reaction by the pilot or the control surfaces directly.

Either way, in this case the aircraft in question had the bomber in a blind spot and probably could not see the danger of collision, and in fact may have been frantically looking for it, even lowering the nose to get better visibility, having lost sight of it in a slightly distracted moment.

AFAIK there is no evidence of any condition here aside from inadequate planning, inadequate separation, and pilot error.

As a pilot I am only too aware of the possibility for this kind of accident to occur when operating in the vicinity of other aircraft. It’s surprisingly easy to collide with other aircraft despite the huge amount of empty space lol around you.

It usually takes a few confounding factors to line up to cause disasters to occur in aviation… it’s almost never just one or two.

[bombcar]

If anyone reading is interested in the various types of stalls and unusual attitude recoveries, you may be able to find a flight instructor at the nearest airport willing to take a flight and show you some.

Beware that it will count as flight instruction and you may end up hooked and forking out $20k for a private pilot license.

[gregors]

tangential topic - but this stall/spin recovery training is INSANE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVGtsK7vvnA

[EdwardDiego]

I'm really hoping that the times you were hit by bullets while flying in a professional capacity in a warzone...

...otherwise those noise complaints are getting extreme.

[bombcar]

Let's just say that arguments over who gets the good jet can get a bit hot.

[akiselev]

Any advice for a aspiring fighter jet pilot? (goal is to eventually fly an L39 Albatross)

[thrill]

If you're talking civilian, then about all I could recommend is to take your time and let the experience build instead of trying to do too much at once. Most civilian pilots I know that have learned to fly fast jets tend to have to cram all their training into limited free time, and that makes it harder to keep a consistent training attitude. the military of course has a very formal and long tested training process, and while they've introduced a lot of technology in the last decade to try to shorten that time, it's still done under the supervision of well experienced and qualified instructors training consistently on familiar equipment, so in a way it's "easier" or at least easier to maintain a good focus

[akiselev]

Yep, civilian.

How many hours of training did you receive before flying without a more senior pilot with you? The L39 type rating requirement is a thousand hours but it won't be in the jet itself. I plan to do aerobatic training and everything but last I checked the Jet Warbird Training Center program was under 20 hours over a few days which terrifies me. Is that really enough training?

[clamprecht]

Once you have 1000 hours of real experience (hopefully in different types, not all in the same Cessna 172), 20 hours should be plenty for an L-39 type. Guys with previous military experience may only need 10 hours. I had no military experience, I did my L-39 type rating in 2020 and it took about 20 hours. Before that, about 500 hours of my experience came from a Columbia 400, which is a fairly fast, slippery piston single. I also did about 4 aerobatic lessons in a Mudry CAP-10B. Here's my first day of L-39 training, if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DN_vMq-l9w

Matt Guthmiller also has some recent videos on getting an L-39 up and running, and his first flights in it.

[akiselev]

I've got your first day downloaded on my Plex and I've watched that video so many times in the last few months! Thank you so much for making it! Are you planning on putting the other days up? I remember you mentioned somewhere else that you have 5TB of video left to edit.

That definitely makes me feel better. I've gone into pilot training with a lot of fear and it's always come out "omg this feels like home" so I'm hopeful once I'm in the L39 it will be a similar experience :)

What other airplanes should I practice in for the 1000 hours authorization after getting my PPL in the 172? Once I get it I'll join PlusOne Flyers here in SD so I should have a diverse set of planes to practice with.

Edit: I have my email in the profile if there’s any way you could share the video. I’d love to see all the content from the ground school portions especially

[clamprecht]

I definitely plan to edit the remaining footage and put it on youtube.. I will try to find the time over the winter holidays. Editing takes me a ton of time.

My recommendation is, 1) get your instrument rating and fly IFR enough to get comfortable doing that, 2) get some aerobatic lessons, including some unusual attitude recoveries, in any aerobatic plane, even if it's a Cessna 152 Aerobat, and 3) get some hours in a fast, slippery plane that requires you to plan your descents from 30+ miles out; could be a Cirrus, a Columbia, a Mooney, a Lancair, or a Bonanza, etc. Retractable experience is a plus too (get 10-20 hours in a Piper Arrow or something). And be prepared to pay for it all!

[thrill]

Hmm, it's been awhile for me - I entered military training in 1980. ("In those days, wearing an onion on our belt as was the custom" - sorry :), I initially trained with a bog-standard civilian instructor at our local college (for those in ROTC) for about 20 hours, with most of us soloing after 10 hours and mostly being judged on simple airmanship and attitude. I paid for the next 20 hours myself with a different instructor and happily learned to fly off a tiny little grass strip and got my private. At UPT I think I had around 20 hours in the T-37 to first fly solo, and probably less in the T-38, since we had probably 100 hours by the time we go to the higher speed jet. We didn't do a whole lot of solo as I remember because there were specific agenda items that needed to be covered dual (formation work, instrument work, etc.), rather than just giving the kids the keys to the jets and letting them wander around the country. I recall that I graduated with about 175 hours, plus perhaps 100 hours of simulator time. The training all together lasted a year and was a full-time job with a flight or two every other day or so, plus lots of academics. I couldn't properly comment on the scheduling of the flight schools that are run for civilian pilots, other than to think they've got a decent track record and certainly meet whatever the FAA minimums are - the basics of flying indeed are pretty much the same and having 1000 hours of reasonably solid time already would be pretty good for the new aircraft experience training you're really getting, I'd think. Having the personal budget of both time and money to pursue training without rush or struggle is going to be the best thing you can do for yourself if that's within your control.

Edit: to add a little to this since I started thinking about it, while the total flight time seems fairly low, we would go fly in absolutely any weather short of an actual thunderstorm, and the IPs for the most part made the students do the flying/navigating/communicating/planning/etc. Flying close formation in drafty clouds with pounding rain would humble a low-time pilot, and occasionally it'd be bad enough to get a grunt out of the mostly drowsing (it seemed) graybeard in the backseat. My last assignment in the AF was to go teach UPT (at the base I learned at), and hoo boy, did I see that the vast majority of the stress that the students underwent was mostly self-induced and the flying was about as basic as we could do - it just seemed (and was) hard for the students because we all were so, to paraphrase a great philosopher, unknowing about our unknowns.

Anyway, I'm sure you'll do fine learning to fly the L-39. It's a popular and comparatively affordable jet airplane I understand and looks like fun.

[akiselev]

Thank you for all the insight!

How different are the T-37/38s from common civilian trainers like the 172? How good were the simulators back then (I haven't use any sims outside of consumer stuff so I have no real point of comparison)?

What do you mean by pursuing training without rush or struggle? Looking at the cost of fuel and rental for the first thousand hours, let alone the cost of the jet with new TFE engine, I'm much more scared of stretching out the training so much that I'm always rusty.

> to add a little to this since I started thinking about it, while the total flight time seems fairly low, we would go fly in absolutely any weather short of an actual thunderstorm, and the IPs for the most part made the students do the flying/navigating/communicating/planning/etc. Flying close formation in drafty clouds with pounding rain would humble a low-time pilot, and occasionally it'd be bad enough to get a grunt out of the mostly drowsing (it seemed) graybeard in the backseat.

That sounds scary - I've been taught so far that bad weather is one of the leading cause of GA fatal accidents thunderstorm or no. Were your trainers or the jets themselves just better at withstanding adverse weather? Or are we civies too risk averse? I can't imagine doing it in close formation.

[TomSwirly]

Yes: refuse to participate.

The US has engaged in a series of unprovoked wars for decades, killing millions of innocent people and losing almost everyone.

Why would you want to participate in this sequence of genocides and war crimes?

[Rastonbury]

Ah the casual 'my jet fighter has been hit by rather large calibre bullets'

[dctoedt]

> Ah the casual 'my jet fighter has been hit by rather large calibre bullets'

Fighter jocks invented the humblebrag. (Source: My dad was one, plus my own service aboard a Navy aircraft carrier.)