Fighter jet strafes elementary school

[mymemory]

BTW... I just can imagine the faces of the mothers of those kids when they knew about what happened! LOL

Well guys, for many people this is such accident but that is how war feels like. Imagine how many US planes are missing targets in other countries, if this was in Irak be sure some general would be saying "there were weapons of mass destruction in that warehouse that look like a school". Yes or not?

 

[Mechcozmo]

Remember!

The Guard was there for years longer than the school. This was, IMO, bound to happen one day when they decided to build a school 3 miles away from a live-fire range!

Good thing it wasn't a bunker buster...

So the Guard, though at fault, was kind of preempted by the building of the school.

 

[rueyeet]

That pilot needs to be grounded, possibly permanently. There isn't room for that kind of error in a military aircraft (or, really ANY aircraft, but less so for military ones with live ammo).

I'm just glad no kids were hurt....and yeah, not to excuse the pilot, but I don't think this would have happened quite as easily in full daylight.

 

[musicpyrite]

Well I don't know the whole story... but I don't think the pilot should be grounded/fired just yet, there could be many things that caused him to open fire on a school (which apparently she/he didn't know that), the night vision goggles for example are known to sometimes distort images.

The aircraft base was there long before the school was; (still not a valid reason imo) but these kind of things are bound to happen.

 

[sushi]

At the Falcon's rate of fire, (6000 rnds/sec), the total duration of the pilots accidental firing would be .25 of a second. My question is where was the F16 when the rounds were released? Was the pilot actively strafing the building, was he test firing the gatling gun, or was it an accidental depression of the trigger during flight maneuvers (doesn't the gun require arming before it is able to fire). Also, the article states the bullets impacted the roof and the parking lot. What was the distance between the impacts. That might provide a trajectory back to the aircraft to determine what the pilot was doing. A straight path of impacts would indicate level flight. However an arcing pattern would indicate either a banking turn or perhaps a greater distance from the firing point. Bullets fly until they hit something, either a target or the earth. Was there actually a target for these bullets?

Good question.

A team will be appointed to investigate. The head will be senior to the pilot. Probably be a bit (a couple of months maybe) before we know the results of their investigation.

Normal range policy is to have an arming point. When you cross it, you are authorized to go hot (arm the weapons systems). At that point, you have a system that is ready to fire. Basically if you press the fire button whatever you have selected to fire will fire. Some aircraft have different buttons on the stick for different weapons systems.

When I began flying with goggles or NVGs as we called them then in early 80's, it was a new era. We wore the full face version. Not like you see today. Our goggles had a 40 degree field of view an no magnification. There was no depth perception. We started experimenting with cut away versions. Eventually they ended up with the flip up versions that you see today.

Believe it or not, we had a small bag that we velcrowed to the back of our helmets to counteract the weight of the goggles. We filled the bag with pennies. And the hot spots we would get. What's a hot spot? Well imagine a railroad spike being driven into the top of your head while at the same time you must maintain your focus with flying, shooting, etc. As helmet design got better, and the goggles weight decreased, things improved drastically.

And we had goggle failures. Imagine being in the most dangerous position/situation, and with merely the movement of your head, your goggles shut down (as in turn off). Usually this was caused by a short in the wires. You would be totally blind. Now let me tell you, being in close proximity to trees that want to reach up and grab you when you have a goggle failure is an exciting time.

Goggles were also easy to shut down due to external light sources. For example, when firing rockets from a Cobra, they would shut down for 4-5 seconds...sometimes longer. So we developed a technique where we would aim for the target, then look down at our laps, and then fire. Upon completion of firing, look up again. We did this action during all modes of fire from hovering to diving fire. Again, if you did not look down, you would be blind for 4-5 seconds which is an eternity when flying -- even at the slower helicopter speeds. And when firing a TOW missle, it was even worse.

Bottom line is that while goggles have improved over the years, using them while flying is a huge challenge and not easy for the pilot. I'm not sure how the pilot screwed up based on what I read. But obviously something was/went wrong. I'll be curious to see the investigating team results.

Sushi

 

[evoluzione]

i've said it before, and i'll say it again....only in america.


sushi...thanks for all the info, very very helpful. and while i don't excuse the actions of the pilot, it does help to understand that it may have happened extremely easily and it does raise a lot of questions about so many things (that i'm not going to get into)

 

[Thomas Veil]

Yeah, that is excellent information, sushi.

Now I don't know what to think. My inclination is to say that if the target range was there first, then it was irresponsible to build a school nearby.

But then how far is far enough? At the kind of speeds we're talking about here, could that guy have gone even farther off-course before he noticed where he was? Could the school have been five, seven or ten miles away and still been in danger?

 

[kylos]

I'm not familiar with military weaponry, but even neglecting to consider how little time it takes to travel three miles at the rate at which those planes are traveling, I would imagine that a bullet could cover several miles before reaching earth if the pilots angle to the earth is anything above 90º. I would say the bare minimum distance between firing range and any civilian structures would be ten miles, and I really wouldn't feel safe at anything less than 20 or 30 miles.

My question is what retard ever allowed any buildings, much less a school to be three miles from a firing range? That's unacceptable. There needs to be restrictions on civilian installations near firing ranges. Why there apparently aren't any is beyond me.

 

[Apple Hobo]

My question is what retard ever allowed any buildings, much less a school to be three miles from a firing range?

Probably the same type of idiot who moves next to an airport and then complains about noise.

I wonder what would've happened if an A-10 strafed the school with its world-ending GAU-8 Avenger gun. I think the kiddies would end up at another school entirely.

Kid: "Mom, I'm not going to school today."
Mom: "Why not?! You are going, young man!"
Kid: "But the Air Force blew it up!"
Mom: ......

 

[sushi]

sushi...thanks for all the info, very very helpful. and while i don't excuse the actions of the pilot, it does help to understand that it may have happened extremely easily and it does raise a lot of questions about so many things (that i'm not going to get into)

Here is a picture of the AN/PVS-5 goggles that I started out flying:

Here they are attached to a regular helmet:

When we started out, there was no limitation on the moon illumination or angle. So you could fly with zero illumination at zero moon angle. As time went on due to accidents/deaths, if memory serves, this was modified to 10 percent illumination and 30 degrees moon angle.

On my Pilot-In-Command checkride, we had zero/zero. Which means that until you are about 10-15 feet above the ground, you couldn't see much. Then about 3-5 feet, you could get some ground definition. The Cobra has a 5 degree slope angle limitation. The IP (Instructor Pilot) asked me to land at a certain area which looked to be a gentle slope. I landed left skid and slowly lowered the right skid. It got to a point were it felt uncomfortable -- something didn't feel right. So I announced that I was returning to a hover and would move a bit to the right and try again. This time the reverse happened. The right skid touched first, so I gently lowered the left skid. Again, I started to feel that something wasn't right, so I announced that I was returning to a hover.

Again, we could see sh_t! Everything looked fairly flat. Which due to the Cobra's slope limitations, looked to be a good place to practive slope landings.

After I did my attempts, the IP wanting to check things out and turned on the illumination light (IR type). Still couldn't see much, but it looked like there was a low spot in the middle eventhough the growth was level.

Next day we flew out to the same area that I was trying to land. Basically if I had lowered the collective in either case, we would have crashed by having a rollover. Sure glad that I had a good control touch and was gentle on the collective.

The problem was the googles. We could not see what was there. In the early days, the view would become very grainy under low light conditions.

Additionally, the cockpit lighting was not goggle friendly. So you had to turn down your cockpit lights so that you could not see them with the unaided light, but would use your homemade ET light to look at the instruments. Now you had two choices. One to tilt your head back so that you could look under the goggles above your cheek your instruments. The second was to focus one tube for the dash and one for the outside. Neither was a good choice let me tell you.

Today with the current goggles it is almost like cheating compared to before. You have your peripheral vision and the goggles are easy to flip up if you have an emergency. Additionally, the quality of the image is much improved.

I don't want to go down the war story route, suffice it to say that I've lost many close friends in the aviation community -- most accidents involved goggle flying (in the early days).

But when you consider the alternative, which is flying by the unaided eye, goggles were a great improvement. Nobody that I knew complained. You just drove on with your job.

When I think back of the close calls that I've had while flying goggles, I am very lucky to be alive!

Sushi

 

[sushi]

Probably the same type of idiot who moves next to an airport and then complains about noise.

So true!

I wonder what would've happened if an A-10 strafed the school with its world-ending GAU-8 Avenger gun. I think the kiddies would end up at another school entirely.

The A-10 is an awesome plane. Worked with them many times.

One time while flying a Scout helicopter, one flew over very low above us (he didn't know our specific location as we were in the trees). When he fired his gun, it shook our helicopter. You could feel him firing.

On a side note it is fun to guide them in when they bump up and are trying to access the target while being upside down.

Sushi

 

[Ugg]

The Guard was there for years longer than the school. This was, IMO, bound to happen one day when they decided to build a school 3 miles away from a live-fire range!

So the Guard, though at fault, was kind of preempted by the building of the school.

There's lots of different ways to spin this one isn't there and it just points out the increasing difficulty of having military training areas close to major population centers. I lived in Tacoma, WA for a couple of years and when the boys were playing with their toys, it was hell much less the cargo planes that were constantly swooping overhead.

It's sort of silly to say that the military was there first. What's the point of that? Is the military supposed to be granted some 100 mile zone of exemption around every installation? Think of the huge loss of tax dollars that would cause. Or should schools be the only exemption? That seems even sillier as childrens' lives are no less special than adults'.

In the end I hope there is a major re-evaluation of what their mission is. I can't see tearing down schools and housing and businesses as being a viable alternative.

As someone above so rightly put it, oops is not an excuse.

 

[kylos]

It's sort of silly to say that the military was there first. What's the point of that? Is the military supposed to be granted some 100 mile zone of exemption around every installation? Think of the huge loss of tax dollars that would cause. Or should schools be the only exemption? That seems even sillier as childrens' lives are no less special than adults'.

In the end I hope there is a major re-evaluation of what their mission is. I can't see tearing down schools and housing and businesses as being a viable alternative.

As someone above so rightly put it, oops is not an excuse.

Yeah, I think the military should have a dmz of sorts around their live fire installations. It's stupid to do otherwise. Think of it like this: the pilot was flying at 7000 ft, a bullet fired at those altitudes can travel quite a bit further than when fired on the ground, and as others have pointed out, he could cover the entire distance from the range to the school in 18 seconds. Not much room for error. Our armed forces should not be so close under any circumstances. Whether this was the army's fault for building too close to civilization or people crowding out a base, this is simply ridiculous that nobody stopped this from ever being possible.

 

[MacAztec]

"Um....I think you missed by just a tad."

Funny how pilots and personnel are so reliant on electronics to do everything that an active person can never make a judgement call on exactly what they're firing at. All they do is look at a screen and hope it's right. I'm sure if he were actually allowed to look down, he would have noticed that he wasn't above the base or the target.

Depends, what kind of jet was he in? Going, say, 600MPH, thats a mile every 6 seconds right? Thats fast, hard to look down and see what youre going over.

 

[LethalWolfe]

It's sort of silly to say that the military was there first. What's the point of that?

The point is that someone decided that the pros of building so close to a live fire range out weighted the cons. When you choose to move next to a live fire range, an airport, or a garbage dump you willfully accept the pitfalls (or in some cases risks) that come w/living there. W/o knowing more I won't condem/defend the pilot, but anyone who thought it was a good idea to build a school so close to a live fire area is a moron. That is an accident waiting to happen.

"Um....I think you missed by just a tad."

Funny how pilots and personnel are so reliant on electronics to do everything that an active person can never make a judgement call on exactly what they're firing at. All they do is look at a screen and hope it's right. I'm sure if he were actually allowed to look down, he would have noticed that he wasn't above the base or the target.

Unless you know your instruments are f'd up you should trust them. I don't remember all the details, but back in Destert Storm there was a friendly fire incident between an Apache and some ground ponders. Long story short the Apache was gradually blown off course by a cross wind (no visual references in the open desert at night) and the pilot didn't believe is helicopter when it said they were at "X" because he "knew" they were at "Y." So instead of opening fire on a small Iraqi patrol he opened fire on a small US patrol.

 

[iNetwork]

He was just practicing for what he'll be doing soon in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Sudan, Iran, North Korea, or Colombia. This is only news because it happened here.


Crikey

Schools, churches, hospitals and other off limit targets are not attacked unless terrorists use them. They instantly become targets as soon as terrorists use them.

 

[Ugg]

The point is that someone decided that the pros of building so close to a live fire range out weighted the cons. When you choose to move next to a live fire range, an airport, or a garbage dump you willfully accept the pitfalls (or in some cases risks) that come w/living there. W/o knowing more I won't condem/defend the pilot, but anyone who thought it was a good idea to build a school so close to a live fire area is a moron. That is an accident waiting to happen.

The 2,400-acre Warren Grove range, about 30 miles north of Atlantic City, has been used by the military since the end of World War II, long before the surrounding area was developed.

In 2002, an Air National Guard F-16 that had been practicing attacks at the range crashed along the Garden State Parkway. The plane's pilot ejected safely, and no one on the ground was hurt.

Errant practice bombs were blamed for forest fires that burned more than 11,000 acres of the Pine Barrens near the range in 1999 and more than 1,600 acres in 2002.

2400 acres is pretty small for a firing range I would think. It may have been suitable for the planes that were in the air in the 40s but hardly adequate for the planes of today. I wonder what the history of the range is? Was it always used for air practice or ground? Whatever the circumstances, it's a big problem around the US as our population grows it is inevitable that bases, many of which have grown in size through consolidation will be squeezed by encroaching development, especially on the east coast.

Whether it was pilot or equipment error is a moot point, what is relevant is this is something that can and will happen in the future, nothing's 100% foolproof. I know around many bases residents are informed of when live firing practices takes place. Hopefully a thorough investigation will take place and a solution found.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Hopefully a thorough investigation will take place and a solution found.

Kevlar coated school?


Lethal

 

[sushi]

Unless you know your instruments are f'd up you should trust them.

Granted pilots are trained to trust their instruments. At the same time you learn how to crosscheck to determine everything is working okay.

So it depends on the instruments and situation.

I don't remember all the details, but back in Destert Storm there was a friendly fire incident between an Apache and some ground ponders. Long story short the Apache was gradually blown off course by a cross wind (no visual references in the open desert at night) and the pilot didn't believe is helicopter when it said they were at "X" because he "knew" they were at "Y." So instead of opening fire on a small Iraqi patrol he opened fire on a small US patrol.

There is a lot more to the story...

I personally knew the pilot (who was also the unit commander). He violated orders and standard operating proceedures which resulted in a case of fratricide.

He deserved to be relieved. He's lucky that was all that happened to him.

...I will leave it at that.

Sushi