Fatal S-3 Mishap last year

[exagony]

That's where you said it. And if you think alot of guys go Hot Dogging in military aviation, take another pill.

Sorry to hurt your feelings but you know the truth is that some of military guys hot dog around - they are just like everyone else - get off your high horse. In my time I've known plenty of military pilots who stood before the man for flying too low, fast, etc.. Doesn't make them bad pilots but they are not the "gods of aviation" that you seem to think.

Until these guys are poven to have done something wrong, SHUT IT.

Did I say they were hot doggin around? Did I say that THIS CREW was doing this NO!!! So why don't you shut it?

And if they did, so what. People make mistakes and sometimes die. Honor them regardless.

I honor them reguardless - I still would like to know what happened.

Don't ever compare me to you. You have no idea what i've done. I've been shot at, had an SA-6 go by my wingman, I lost 2 students in an S-3B, saved 23 people, and lost a girl in my partol boat. I'm not going into details, you don't deserve it. I did over 11 years active duty and over 6 reserve and I'm still serving, you?

I've been shot at more times in one firefight than you could dream of. Wow a SA-6 that you can most likely see and try to avoid vs a couple thousand rounds from some AK's that most of the time you can't even see where they are coming from- you're right I shouldn't compare you to me - you couldn't even come close. I've held more budies that were wounded and some that were dying in my arms then you have ever imagine- your right you can't compare again - You want to go toe to toe I've got you covered and then some. Not very tough to drop some bombs go home drink a beer and never see the results of your actions. Ever pick up the body parts of your friend? Probably not but if you did maybe you'd be close to me in that area. I don't know if I've ever saved anybody- I don't need to pat my own back- but by doing my job I sure as hell probably have.

The only one being disrespectful is you. I would NEVER look down upon any honorable serving member in the service in ANY BRANCH! You have talked down to the Navy, to pilots, and to the reserves. Your quote dishonors all Marines. You obviously don't have the maturity to recognize the difference.

Most Marines I've told the quote to laugh at it also. Its not meant to be disrespectful and most don't find it that way. I would bet I know a s#*tload more Marines then you do. Its just another way of expressing the fact that as Marines we are told that we are "expendable". That no matter how **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED**ty the situation we are going to go in and kick some ass and some of us will die due to the percieved stupidy of those ordering us into situations. Noticed I said percieved - the guy on the ground never has the big picture like the guys giving the orders and sometimes vice-versa.

You truly believe there are no heros alive? Tell that to the honorable wounded or those that saved lives.

I agree whole heartedly with you on this and I obviously didn't write this even though I meant to include them. you are absolutely 150% correct.

You want to go toe to toe, i've got my sleves up.

And your skirt down? Just kidding. Lets just agree to disagree about my belief that finding out what happened to this S-3 could help other pilots.

 

[SIG600]

And your skirt down? Just kidding. Lets just agree to disagree about my belief that finding out what happened to this S-3 could help other pilots.

No ones saying (especially me) that the public shouldn't be allowed to know what happened... but there ARE specifics that will not, can not, should not be discussed. Some of those could involve tactics, equipment, capabilities etc for you to get the full scope of what transpired. You'll know what the Navy thinks the public should know.

 

[exagony]

No ones saying (especially me) that the public shouldn't be allowed to know what happened... but there ARE specifics that will not, can not, should not be discussed. Some of those could involve tactics, equipment, capabilities etc for you to get the full scope of what transpired. You'll know what the Navy thinks the public should know.

I agree with you but if its something that doesn't compromise the said above let it out. I'm the last one who wants to give away our secrets but if the accident was caused by lets say disorientation or maybe an engine failure maybe we can learn something about it. The only reason I have even wasted time on this is because Bjammin seems to think that this is some 007 senario and that Navy pilots can do no wrong. We all know that the only ones who can do no wrong are the men's dept of Navy Aviation ie Marine Corps pilots. (just kidding)

 

[Bjammin]

I agree with you the S-3 accident could bring something good out. But only if the military thinks so.

As far as Foxholes and Cockpits, that debate will unfortunatly go on forever. Both have their dangers and both their heros. Just because I see heros in Aviation does not mean I believe there aren't any on the ground, quite the contrary. Aviation and patrol boats is where I have experience so it's where I have seen the sacrifice. Please don't demean my job as I don't demean yours.

I think you open yourself up for beatings with your quotes and sayings, and you thinking no-one else is "worthy" is upsetting. Thinking that guys who "drop bombs" and have a "beer" somehow have it easy is way wrong.

I'm tired of this debate. It's got the smell of 2 guys with too much testosterone. I'm out.

Thanks for your service as well.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

I agree with you but if its something that doesn't compromise the said above let it out.

Which part of "The government said the accident analysis report by the Navy said the crew mistook the image of the island on the radar for that of the ship, and then approached it and crashed."
is confusing to you?

 

[exagony]

I agree with you the S-3 accident could bring something good out. But only if the military thinks so.

As far as Foxholes and Cockpits, that debate will unfortunatly go on forever. Both have their dangers and both their heros. Just because I see heros in Aviation does not mean I believe there aren't any on the ground, quite the contrary. Aviation and patrol boats is where I have experience so it's where I have seen the sacrifice. Please don't demean my job as I don't demean yours.

I think you open yourself up for beatings with your quotes and sayings, and you thinking no-one else is "worthy" is upsetting. Thinking that guys who "drop bombs" and have a "beer" somehow have it easy is way wrong.

I'm tired of this debate. It's got the smell of 2 guys with too much testosterone. I'm out.


If I ever come across ya I'll buy ya a beer or two - Semper Fi

 

[exagony]

Which part of "The government said the accident analysis report by the Navy said the crew mistook the image of the island on the radar for that of the ship, and then approached it and crashed."
is confusing to you?

Hooked on phonics didn't work for me!

 

[WillowRunVortex]

Which part of "The government said the accident analysis report by the Navy said the crew mistook the image of the island on the radar for that of the ship, and then approached it and crashed."
is confusing to you?

Excuse my ignorance, but does the ship not have navaids? The reason I'm interested is that I had a co-pilot in freight aviaton that was a former Viking pilot and one of the funniest guys I ever flew with (also a very good pilot). When you get paged at 0100 for a 15hr gig it makes a big difference who you get paired up with. He was obviously very partial to the plane and would talk about it at every opportunity. He would put a smile on your face every time. Would the crew not have been briefed on such a huge obstacle in the area?

 

[SIG600]

Without any of the crew to talk to... some of those questions may never be really answered. Again, it may delve into the privledged info column. Yes the ship has NAVAIDS.

 

[millhouse21]

Crews don't get "briefed" in any significant way. This isn't hollywood where some one star briefs the crew before their super top secret mission. The island is on the charts but if they were flying off the boat, they probably didn't have an ONC or TPC handy.

Hearing about this mishap made the hairs stand up on the back of my head since I've spent many hours flying around Iwo Jima including at night. One of the missions of the S-3 includes some time spent at low altitude day or night. Since this island was uninhabited, there were few or no lights on it. That could have been any of us. If you don't think so, you've never been there.

 

[SIG600]

Crews don't get "briefed" in any significant way. This isn't hollywood where some one star briefs the crew before their super top secret mission. The island is on the charts but if they were flying off the boat, they probably didn't have an ONC or TPC handy.

Hearing about this mishap made the hairs stand up on the back of my head since I've spent many hours flying around Iwo Jima including at night. One of the missions of the S-3 includes some time spent at low altitude day or night. Since this island was uninhabited, there were few or no lights on it. That could have been any of us. If you don't think so, you've never been there.

Black ocean, on a moonless night, an island with no population and no lights... anyone that thinks it couldn't have been them is retarded.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Crews don't get "briefed" in any significant way.

Huh?

(and by the way, there but for the grace of LBFMs go I.)

 

[Montage]

S-3 Sir

Well, this has been an interesting exchange! I have been lurking on this site for a while now, but never registered or posted. I guess I felt compelled to finally pipe in on this one, thanks for the kick in the pants!

Not that it's any of my business, or that I have any real insight to add, but since this topic falls under my current line of work I decided to add my .02 cents worth.

I can understand the desire to know what happened in any mishap. As pilots with a healthy sense of self preservation we naturally want to know what mistakes were made so that we can better understand how to keep ourselves safe. Since the military is a publicly funded entity there is also a certain sense of entitlement to full disclosure as a taxpayer. (and it was pretty obvious to me at least that exagony felt this way, as opposed to valuing dollars over human life)

If a tragedy befell anybody we knew personally we would also want a better understanding of the issues to help us with the grieving process.

I have read the S.I.R. on this one, (as I'm sure others here may have as well) and can attest to the basic accuracy of the short summary posted above. There are more detailed causal factors in the report of course, but nothing that would provide any great insight or lasting benefit to aviation as a whole. Typically human errors tend to repeat themselves.

An important point to make is that we don't keep secrets. The causes and recommendations are shared, just not outside the Navy. The Safety Center ultimately determines final distribution of the reports, but in this case the report went out to all of Naval Aviation. It's not a coverup.

The reasons for privilege have been discussed already to some extent, but I wanted to add just a little for the non-ASOs in the crowd...

From the 3750:
"Military and federal courts grant protection under Executive Privilege to information given under promises of confidentially, and to the analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the AMB and endorsers."

And also:
"The Naval Aviation safety program has long benefited from the willingness of our personnel to confide in AMBs and ASOs."

In short, the concept of privileged information exists precisely to PREVENT a coverup by the individuals involved. And it's not just fear of punishment. People are rarely punished for honest mistakes. Rather it is to protect our military members from a litigous society.

If a Safety Investigation Report were made public and widow "A" learns that technicial "B" installed part "C" backwards because the manual was confusing, you can bet that the matter would end up in civil court. How willing would technician "B" be to admit to a mistake with that possibility? All involved would clam up and call their lawyers. Kind of hard to prevent future mishaps by examining the causal factors and implementing corrective action when everyone is taking the 5th.

So, we grant them confidentiality in writing and ask for the truth. We usually get it. To release any privileged information is to betray that confidentiality and put the future success of the Naval Aviation safety program in jeopardy.

I hope that this may help some of you understand the underlying reasons a little better.

 

[rhinodriver]

Huh?

Hard to believe but true. We spend a ton of time briefing the small particulars of a mission but don't necessarily get briefed on the big picture stuff such as a 2500 foot island sticking out of the middle of the ocean in the middle nowhere. Remember that the vast majority of the S-3 mission is spent down low. I can't remember how many times I was with a crew below 1000 feet on a totally moonless night.



When I was in CAG-5 we used to call that island the chocolate drop cause it looked like a Hershey’s kiss. If millhouse21 is who I think he is we spent some time around there in the same cockpit. If you could see this island you would understand how this happened.



I was on the Stennis that night and it was as dark as any other that I can remember. I also remember the terrible news coming that an S-3 hadn't reported back. I was an IP with Z-man. He was probably the best dude in the Navy. I don't think I have ever met a guy who was as upbeat as him. You just couldn't not like him. I also gave Patty his initial qualification check in the S-3. Another great dude. This was an absolute tragedy and every Hoover driver is lucky it wasn't them.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Remember that the vast majority of the S-3 mission is spent down low.

That makes me wonder if the S-3 NATOPS has something akin to the P-3 MOSA (Minimum Operational Safe Altitude). Amazingly, it wasn't until 1983 that the VP community came up with this procedure. If memory serves, it was defined as 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within 30 NM. Anytime we were below that, radar had to be on (or a littany of other nav items had to be complied with).
Anyway, what's amazing to me is that there were quite a few CFIT incidents in the patrol community before they finally came up with this after a crew hit a cliff in Kauai in '83. There hasn't been a VP CFIT case since. If the VS bubbas don't have MOSA procedures now, I'm guessing they will in the near future. When we implemented it, it was via an urgent change.