Well, sometimes the dead guy does deserve the blame.
As a disclaimer I have to say that my days in Army aviation were in the 80s and 90s.
Crashing a helicopter is not an automatic career killer. An extensive investigation is made and if it’s mechanical rather than pilot error there is no negative marks on your career. I arrived at my second unit right after they got back from Desert Storm. There were known problems with sand in the fuel lines that they were trying to fix. One night an OH-58 had total engine failure. The pilot was able to autorotate but there was no good area to put it down. There was a dynamic rollover and the aircraft was destroyed. The crew walked away. It was ruled mechanical failure due to a clogged fuel line.
In fact there is a highly regarded award called the Broken Wing Award which is awarded to pilots who either save lives or minimize damage to an aircraft in an emergency situation as long as the emergency isn’t self induced.
I’m aware that this is going into active military operations, and is not OP, but your post and its incoming drift so strongly reminded me: was there punitive disciplinary action in the Iran Hostage rescue debacle? That is, beyond the strictly military analysis and personnel repercussions of any mission failure, but following an analysis along the lines within far-ranging echelons in the Air Force following Bud Holland, of finding (and punishing/fixing) failure points within a systemic failure?
The Wiki mentions the publicly announced “investigations,” etc. but does not give any other details.
Superb as this post is, it is nothing compared to LSL’s patient pedagogy–with excellent assists from many other pilots–in the thread Do pilots really fly a length of time not knowing they are inverted?
There, the car analog was also brought up, and in his answer I don’t believe he mentioned wingover, presumably because I was having enough trouble realizing a hand doesn’t come from the sky and swivel a plane on an x-y plain (heh), like a kid with a toy car.
Maybe I’ll revive that one for more on wingover, where aerodynamics is center stage. (Windy theater.)
I was out of USAF when the mishap occurred. I have no knowledge beyond what wiki says.
Certainly USAF had (has?) a reputation of liking to hang low-level folks in preference to far-reaching investigations and procedural changes. The fact (per wiki) that some higher-ups got canned gives extra credence to the version of events wherein this was not Holland’s first reckless move.
How much extra credence is a valid question. Certainly family members almost always have reasons of their own for why their loss is somebody else’s false. Ideally a somebody else with deep pockets.
Very interesting discussion. In his book Chickenhawk, about Army helicopter pilots during the Vietnam War, Robert Mason writes about a hot-dog instructor he once had. The guy loved to fly low and fast - sometimes over railroad tracks and just under the parallel telephone wires. When a passenger complained or even screamed, he would just fly lower and faster. Helluva pilot and never disciplined that I recall.
And really, whether it was the pilot’s first goof or the last of a long series of mistakes*, the critical thing is the pilot is in charge of the aircraft, and responsible for what happens to it, to a pretty significant degree. And of course, it being his first mistake wouldn’t have changed the outcome at Fairchild.
*I’m reminded of a lecture by a First Sergeant early in my career, where he stated that many times when someone claims they made a mistake, they actually chose to do the wrong thing. The First Sergeant in question, of course, made a big distinction between mistakes and deliberate choices. Fortunately, I wasn’t the one who had made the choice being discussed.
Not sure what you mean by “wingover”.
Reminder: We’ve managed to hijack the heck out of a thread about administrative punishments for damaging government property. Probably smarter for you to create a fresh thread with a fresh question asked as clearly and non-poetically as possible. With links to the older thread(s) as desired.
FWIW, I’m friends with a top level pilot who crashed a military plane in a spectacular fashion, in front of a large audience, and it indisputably was 100% because of a dumb error on his part. He survived. His career was not ruined and he went on to other prestigious positions in the service. But he never flew for that outfit again. They only let you crash one plane.
(Being intentionally vague about details out of discretion for my friend.)
Just to extend the hijack a little further… escaping a stall IIRC is counter-intuitive - you have to rudder opposite of what you would do if the motion were the result of controlled flight. As mentioned, using the ailerons and trying to correct when the wing is not flying makes the situation worse. So, it’s a reliance on pilot training to recognize the situation and react accordingly despite seat-of-pants flying instinct.
The Wiki article says the big problem with the Iran hostage Rescue crash was attempting a low hover created a zero visibility sandstorm. I can’t see how anyone could fault the too much pilots (badly burned?) for that. I assume the failures of the other helicopters en route were equipment problems (blocking cooling vents with equipment) so ought not have reflected badly on the pilots.
For comparison (old news but reposted just today):[URL=“http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/that-time-a-marine-mechanic-took-a-joyride-in-a-stolen-a4m-skyhawk”] stealing a military plane (a Skyhawk) and looping it around for a while before giving it back unbroken gets you four and half months in the slammer.