SoPinesHeel

Yeah...Tar and Feather them!!!!! Off with their heads!!!!! Screw Um!!!!!!

In no way do I take this lightheartedly, and I agree there should be serious repercussions, but it has been my experience that those who are ready to rip the wings off of the mishap aircrew are the ones who have the most to cover for.

Thunder, you should have stayed on active duty with that attitude. You would make a great commander and an even better evaluator.

I think I remember hearing about some dude saying something like "Those without sin, throw the first stone..." I can't remember what his name was.

USMCFLYR

SPH -

This is an insult to every one of us who have stayed on active duty, are great commanders and even better evaluators.
I don't know what caused this gear up landing. What I do know is that in earlier posts people were ready to blame: TACC, Tactical mindset, poor ATC, wx, terrain, Talibany, AD crews that have limited experience, duty days, fatigue, NVG issues etc - for instance. No one yet has said what very well may be the cause and that is a crew that messed up, they made a mistake, they didn't do some checklist or perform adequate CRM. But bashing on someone who brings up this possibility and then basically saying that anyone on active duty has a bad attitude is wrong.

USMCFLYR

Thunder1

SoPinesHeel,

As my previous post stated, "IF this recent C-17 landing is just plain old pilot error then they as well as the B-1 crew should never fly again and become greeters at Wal-Mart!".
Intentional emphasis on the word "IF". As far as your attitude....you need to re-evaluate what it means to be a professional. Professionals pilots, both civilian and military, are accountable for their actions. IF this is a repeat of the B-1 gear up a few years ago then my point is only that the crew should be prepared to lose their wings over such a serious breach of basic airmanship, judgement and discipline.
Oh and by the way, I am returning to active duty. It has also been my experience that pilots with attitudes like yours are always the first to blame external factors for their failure to achieve mission objectives in flight instead of placing blame squarely where it lies -- on the pilot in command! Cheers!

Thunder1

USMCFLYR -- AMEN!!

THUNDER1

SoPinesHeel

USMCFLYR,

Hopefully you are different, but I have seen too many commanders Q3 aircrews for transgressions and then go out and do the same thing. Same thing with evaluators. Funny how when they do it though they do not get the same consequences. Anything from running over fire bottles to scraping tail skids to leading formations to the wrong DZs. Some folks I guess are on their way to the top and can't get slowed down by such minor transgressions . You don't like that I said it? I hope you can change your peers and truly do lead by example. Maybe just the Marines are better about it, I don't know.

I completely stand by my statement however. I will let a safety investigation determine what actually happened before I condemn instead of the guilty until proven innocent spearthrowing that I sensed and have seen from "leadership" too often in the past. That is what a real leader does, or at least so says all those PME courses we all are supposed to take.

SoPinesHeel

Thunder, IF you read my post I said they should be held accountable if it was negligence. I just don't like the "I would never be in that situation" attitude. There is alot of truth to the old "those that have and those that will" saying. It has been my experience that pilots with holier than thou attitudes like you take hard falls someday and then try to cover it up because they recognize their own hypocracy.

Good luck in your future endeavors on active duty and I hope your superior pilot skills never fail you. History and human nature says otherwise however. Hopefully for your sake, your supervisors will have more compassion for your situation than you obviously would.

CheyDogFlies

USMCFLYER--

That anti-commander attitude has been fostered by the very tip-top of leadership in the USAF heavy world. Easy to understand why guys feel that way. I'm not trying to excuse it--and I certainly don't subscribe to it--but I understand why some have that point of view.

Dial back the clock (recent past) to the C17 that landed half-on the runway at the same airfield. The independent investigation determined that the #1 factor in the mishap was fatigue. On briefing this to the then-AMC commander (general X), he threw a fit and ordered that the board release that the #1 factor was crew error.

C17 Commanders at base Y have been caught upgrading themselves to instructors and getting themselves in mishaps.

I had a commander on a previous aircraft who took down a crew for "checklist discipline" although there was no evidence for such other than maintenance said so. I believe his ultimate reason was to make maintenance trust him, but at the same time he made his operators distrust him.

I have a positive attitude about most commanders, but there are some that set some very poor examples. Sadly, those are the examples that some remember most.

USMCFLYR

Am I different? I have no idea. You'd have to ask those that I with with and for....but your statement does pick out the ones doing wrong - it was a blanket statement. have i seen higher ups get away with some things that less senior officers (or enlisted for that matter) might be taken to task for/ Yes. Have I also seen superior officers and real up and comers have their flight status revoked for something that a younger, less experienced pilot would be given some leeway on? Yes. I'm not arguing the overall point of your post - just your blanket statement about active duty.

USMCFLYR

USMCFLYR

I see this attitude from many on this forum - and it seems to be especially prevalent among our AF members. I don't know if it is an overwhelming feeling within the AF or just the type of personalities that are attracted to web boards - but it is a little eye watering. Most of the time it is a wholesale distrust and dislike of the *senior* leadership as a whole - yet everytime a senior officer is killed (for instance the F-15 pilot recently on a training exercise or the General in Alaska) - they are heraled as outstanding officers and leaders (as they probably are and should be). So it just doesn't compute. Blanket statements that senior (and notice it is always senior - not junior; but who becomes senior?) leadership is out of touch and out of control and yet everyone gone was a one of a kind officer and leader just doesn't make sense.

If this is accurate then it most certainly would be a travesty; but at the same time - can you not come up with one instance of a commander doing the RIGHT thing to counter balance? Again - I'm not saying that there are bad commanders or bad leaders - I'm talking about a blanket statement that seemed out of place and insulting to those of us still on AD (or leaders in the Reserves or ANG)

Then making sure that the **rights** get as much or more attention than the **wrongs** is a challenge that we each face.

USMCFLYR

PS - Sorry about the thread drift; but I'm interested - what cautions/warnings are in the cockpit on a large transport aircraft to try and help prevent a gear up landing? Bells, whistles, flashing lights, Betty's voice, wheels watch, standard gear calls to tower, etc....?

MD10PLT

Does anyone know what happened to the B-1 crew which landed gear up.

Also, I'll through in my two cents. I personally had very good leaders while in the AF. Both at the Flag and Field Grade level. When I talked to the younger generation I always brought up this point. Look back through history even as recent as 10-20 years and ask yourself are we better at our mission now than we were then. Some will likely so no, because they are the ones who are never happy, but if you're honest with yourself you have to admit, the military gets better at its job every year. We have better training, tactics and equipment than any of our fathers ever dreamed of. All of this occurred because of the leaders making it happen.