F4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 15521 times:
Another reason are to keep the element together when penetrating weather.
Aircraft carrying live ordnance will not take off in fingertip formation. I was in a large formation at a 1983 Red Flag where the flight and element leads departed off of one runway while their wingmen rolled simultaneously off of the parallel.
Formation flying simplifys air traffic control by keeping the flight together until over the airfield.
Cottage Grove, MN, USA
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 15492 times:
We do formation flying in helicopters because it offers mutual protection, and mission integrity.
If you ever get a chance to see a true air assault, with multiple aircraft, I highly suggest it. When I flew with the 101st, the division was renowned for having perfected the art of formation flying, and air assaults. I always got a rush when we performed an assault, landing 6 birds together - all touching down at the exact moment, all unloading the troops, and flying off together.
Not to mention, there is a psychological impact on the enemy when they see a formation of aircraft coming their way. A nice, "We're coming for you" message.
Now a days, I don't do as much large formation flights, but I do get the opportunity to do some aerial refueling, which is quite the rush. Nothing like being up close to a C-130 at altitude!
Dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 15385 times:
Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 2): In respect to this, does formation flying as term only include close formations or is any "flying together" referred to as formation flying?
All different kinds of formation flying. Parade formations are typically what you see at airshows, it is the close formations that everyone can easily recognize. They are not very good for individual manuevering though. For example, with a flight in a tight echelon formation, the lead is somewhat limited in that it would not be very good to make an evasive break turn towards his wingmen. Sure it is the wingmans responsibility to maintain seperation, but if he is not expecting the turn, it can get ugly.
Tactical formations are typically more spread out to allow for manuevering. Still considered formations though, with flight leads and wingmen. Usually you do not want to be so far that you can not cover your wingman with your weapons though. I was a helo guy, we usually tried to stay withen 500-800 feet laterally of each other because thats withen the effective range of our door guns. Now jet guys, they could be quite a bit further apart, because their weapons range is much further.
Another reason for formations is for emergencies. If a plane goes down, his wingman is right there to mark the spot, circle, radio relay, etc. Also, for single cockpit planes with inflight emergencies, the wingman can handle radio calls, back up reading emergency procedures, troubleshooting, visually inspect the other aircraft, etc. This allows the guy with the actual emergency to focus on the flying of his broke bird.
Quoting NicoEDDF (Reply 2): What are the chances you can use formations to deceive radar pictures?
This is possible. Basically you are trying to hide the number of aircraft you have. You can fly close enough that a radar will only pick up one target. The closer you get to the radar, the more difficult this is though.
In lay mens, think of a radar picture as a bunch of cells going out. As long as both aircraft radar returns are coming from the same cell, they will show up as one blip. The cells get smaller the closer you are to the radar reciever, so it is much harder to keep both aircraft in one cell. Same idea behind chaff clouds. A plane comes along and drops a long string of chaff, causing a whole string of cells that are giving returns, and the radar reciever can not see the blips of the aircraft moving because his screen just shows a whole mass of blips. Eventually as the aircraft get closer, the radar returns from them will be stronger than the returns from the chaff, and the reciever can see the aircraft again. Usually called burn through.
Thats it in a nutshell. I am sure there are those who are more knowledgeable on the topic who can give ya more details or correct anything I was off on.
The main purpose is so that each aircraft can provide mutual support to the others, in the same way that an infantryman in a trench is supported by the trench to either side of him. There are other benefits, as mentioned- in the bad old days of unreliable INS systems, it was better to have 4 guys checking the route navigation rather than just one.
As for the tight airshow formations- I think they're mainly for training value. You would certainly learn to pay attention & keep your corrections small!
Venus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1457 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 15240 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4): Now a days, I don't do as much large formation flights, but I do get the opportunity to do some aerial refueling, which is quite the rush. Nothing like being up close to a C-130 at altitude!
Did not know our Army brethen were doing AR's with their UH-60's, you flying MH-60's now in the USAF or just catching a ride with the blue to see how they do it.
Heavens no! I'm nowhere near that good. But having watched:
The Thunderbirds dozens of times in F-4, T-38 and F-16 over more than thirty years
The Blues hundreds of times in F-11, F-4, A-4 and F-18 over more than forty years
...I just thought it sounded like something they might say. Let's say it is easier to get all four in a single frame with the Blues than it is with the Thunderbirds.
My bragging rights - I was once in a 144-ship of mixed fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft. We were in cells of six (two vee-of-three) of each of 12 different aircraft types, but we sequenced ourselves past the airshow crowd as if we were a massed group. I was in the next-to-last element. The OV-1 Mohawks followed us. It looked to my 23 year old eyes like the bomber stream out of England.
I should mention for the o/p that if a dozen or so military aircraft departed point A for the same point B at about the same time they would probably have collisions if they were not in formation. It is safer to keep sight of each other. Talking non-combat mission here.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 27659 posts, RR: 50
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 15148 times:
Another reason is for radar signature, particularly a tight formation can appear as a single target on more basic radar systems.
I've known more then one occasion when either civilian ATC, or even military controllers identified only a single target that turned out to be a flight of 3+ planes.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 14945 times:
I remember doing an EMCON launch with about 50 or so helo's out at Yuma, AZ. Pretty amazing to get that many helo's started, taxied in sequence, and then take off without a single radio transmission. The whole idea is to keep anyone from listening to the freq's and knowing we are coming. Tower ruined the whole thing as we made our turn on course though. Cessna was approaching towers airspace...."Cessna N27275 cleared for the downwind, you have traffic at 1 oclock, a whole bunch of helicopters". Geez thanks, haha.