Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

idahonews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 278 posts

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#41

Post by jterrys »

avalys wrote: post #3

These are pretty expensive and specialized electronic warfare planes that are identical to a regular F18 in aerodynamic performance. Sucks to lose two of them for an airshow display. Isn’t that what the Blue Angels are for?

This actually begs the question...why the fuck would they use THESE for an airshow? They're aesthetically identical to F18 from a ground silhouette perspective. They blew through some really expensive planes from a much smaller fleet for a pony show that any regular F18 could've been part of.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#42

Post by dbcurtis »

binary132 wrote: post #26
Waterluvian wrote: post #2

I don’t know anything about anything but it feels kind of amazing that all four ejected with good looking parachutes given the orientation of the conglomerated plane.

I had the same thought, but those cockpit modules are really designed to maximize the odds of safe ejection, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they consider the possibility of failure and escape as part of the stunt design. Still, it’s amazing everything worked out, especially at that low of an altitude.

Do we know if the pilots are OK? Yes, ejection can save your life, but even in a best-case scenario the forces on the human body are incredibly ugly. I know a former combat-rated RAF pilot that had to eject from a Harrier because of a low-altitude bird strike. After 6 months in the infirmary, he emerged 2cm shorter, combat rating gone forever.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#43

Post by rootusrootus »

Groxx wrote: post #9

Is there much of a way to recover from that kind of glomping? Kinda seems like the aerodynamics might hold them together (as the noses are somewhat pointed together), or with enough speed rip them apart chaotically since they're a bit skewed (which could be worse than ejecting early). It seems pretty obvious that ejecting is the right choice either way, but it makes me wonder if there's any alternative in this kind o…

Depending on how much damage was incurred during contact, since they were already flying predominantly the same direction & speed, at a higher altitude they might have uncoupled and regained controlled flight. Examples of more grievously damaged airplanes have landed in the past. I don't think they had any real hope if they stayed joined, tho.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#44

Post by rootusrootus »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #27
ericmay wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crashes are rare. Exposure to the civilian for what their tax dollars are paying for, opportunities for pilots to become more skilled and train other pilots for advanced maneuvers. Things like that. Overall there’s not too much meat on the bone as far as criticisms are concerned.

You can do advanced maneuvers without getting so close to another plane in some weird attempt at simulating a scenario that will never happen. Did some cursory searches/math and it looks like about 1-2% of aerial shows in the US have a fatality (1-2 deaths annually with about 2000 shows on average over the last 20 years). If those numbers are correct (and they may very well not be as it’s a mix of LLM and Google quic…

> You can do advanced maneuvers without getting so close to another plane in some weird attempt at simulating a scenario that will never happen.

That is likely true. However, it is a heck of a demonstration of pilot skill. The Blue Angels somewhat regularly post in-cockpit views of their airshow practice and it is wild how tight a formation they fly; I really recommend seeking out some of those videos, it is totally worth it. Well, for me at least :). It is not unheard of (but not common) for them to inadvertently make contact, since they fly like 18 inches apart, but given they have nearly identical vectors it does not often result in a crash.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#45

Post by userbinator »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #23
barbazoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the real purpose of airshows anyway? It always seems like very elevated risk for very little reward but I might just be missing what the reward is.

Posturing, showing of your military capabilities towards the enemy. Raising morale (aka war propaganda) towards your own population. Contrary to popular belief, war is mostly about public opinion, not raw strength. Even since (before) roman times, you almost never fight to the last man, you fight until you route the enemy.

military capabilities towards the enemy

...and unfortunately sometimes also military mistakes, but fortunately this doesn't happen often.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#46

Post by rootusrootus »

ElProlactin wrote: post #31
barbazoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the real purpose of airshows anyway? It always seems like very elevated risk for very little reward but I might just be missing what the reward is.

[flagged]

Healthcare is expensive because we buy fancy airplanes? It seems at least as likely to do with the incredibly high salaries we pay doctors. And the fact that we use like 50% more healthcare services than a typical single-payer society.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#47

Post by operatingthetan »

rootusrootus wrote: post #40
barbazoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the real purpose of airshows anyway? It always seems like very elevated risk for very little reward but I might just be missing what the reward is.

Too many comments are trying to overanalyze, or just show off their insightful cynicism. We do airshows because they are cool . Lots of us love airplanes. Humans do all kinds of activities for entertainment that are not strictly justifiable returns on investment. I hope we never get that boring, though every year we do seem to go that direction.

No. They are for recruitment and showing other nations what is on hand in case they want to mess with them.

>insightful cynicism.

So in response you select the most naive take?

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#48

Post by Forgeties79 »

bigfishrunning wrote: post #34
Forgeties79 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do advanced maneuvers without getting so close to another plane in some weird attempt at simulating a scenario that will never happen. Did some cursory searches/math and it looks like about 1-2% of aerial shows in the US have a fatality (1-2 deaths annually with about 2000 shows on average over the last 20 years). If those numbers are correct (and they may very well not be as it’s a mix of LLM and Google quic…

You might want to double check that LLM... If theres 2000 shows and 1-2 deaths, that's 0.05%-0.1%. still too high, but given the simple math error I think the other numbers are probably suspect too Don't trust LLMs. They are bullshit machines.

That was my mistake with quick mental math tbh

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#49

Post by bigyabai »

rootusrootus wrote: post #40
barbazoo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the real purpose of airshows anyway? It always seems like very elevated risk for very little reward but I might just be missing what the reward is.

Too many comments are trying to overanalyze, or just show off their insightful cynicism. We do airshows because they are cool . Lots of us love airplanes. Humans do all kinds of activities for entertainment that are not strictly justifiable returns on investment. I hope we never get that boring, though every year we do seem to go that direction.

It's worth questioning what the costs are, though. I love military aviation more than the average Joe, and seeing these jets pushed to their limits is pretty gratifying. But this isn't a football/soccer pasttime, the E/A-18 is an expensive F/A-18 block and the aviators are an asset of national security that take decades of experience and millions of taxpayer dollars to train. The losses sustained by the Blue Angels alone is stomach-churning, and they're widely known as one of the most professional groups around: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Angels#Team_accidents_and...

The net benefit is marketing, and little else. As much as I enjoy watching airshow jet maneuvers, I have to acknowledge that the USSR only sent their Sukhoi pilots on-tour as a publicity stunt to increase their exports. Same goes for the US, France and China.

Re: Two EA-18 fighter jets collide at Mountain Home airshow, pilots ejected safely

#50

Post by lelandbatey »

operatingthetan wrote: post #47
rootusrootus wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too many comments are trying to overanalyze, or just show off their insightful cynicism. We do airshows because they are cool . Lots of us love airplanes. Humans do all kinds of activities for entertainment that are not strictly justifiable returns on investment. I hope we never get that boring, though every year we do seem to go that direction.

No. They are for recruitment and showing other nations what is on hand in case they want to mess with them. >insightful cynicism. So in response you select the most naive take?

Sure that's why the bean counters wrote the checks for them, but that's not the reason people attend. People attend because they are a spectacle.
Post reply on HN