Should the USAF ban flying displays by large aircraft?

ABC News aviation consultant and career C-141 pilot John Nance believes so.

Breaking from a book-writing holiday in Cabo, Mexico, yesterday, Nance told me the C-17 crash video and full report by the accident investigation board show the US Air Force leadership is broken.

"Here we go again," Nance said. "This is going to put aerial demonstrations for large airplanes under scrutiny. I think they need to stop."

The C-17 crash on 28 July at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska, occurred as the pilot practiced a self-planned routine for the upcoming Arctic Thunder air show, according to the USAF AIB report. In an effort to "put on a good show", the pilot's routine pushed the aircraft to edge of its performance envelope, including a maneuver that required a 260-deg right turn with 80-deg of bank shortly after takeoff and well below the USAF's prescribed altitude for display profiles. On top of that, the pilot's approved flight profile deliberately called for ignoring the C-17's stall warning stick-shaker, which he determined by himself to be inaccurate, according to the report. (One former C-17 test pilot told me: "The stall warning system isn't inaccurate. That's why it's there.")

Moreover, the USAF's system of checks and balances intended to stop reckless maneuvering failed to work. The C-17 pilot's boss and peers considered him an excellent flier, requiring little supervision. It is not clear in the report if the pilot's flight profile had been approved, but several USAF pilots and safety experts have told me that is required. The co-pilot and safety observer on the flight deck, who were also killed, may have been trained by the pilot to also ignore the stall warning system, removing the last check and balance in the USAF system.

For Nance, who also developed an aircraft safety program for the USAF, display flying by pilots of large aircraft is asking for trouble. "We do not fly near to that envelope," Nance said. "We are trained to stay right in the middle of the envelope. This is not like a F-15 pilot. He is going to know where that edge is. He'll fly right up to where the test pilot stopped. But that's not transport people and that's not bomber people."

The C-17 crash is believed to be first loss of a large aircraft caused by a flying display routine since the 1994 crash of a Boeing B-52 at Fairchild AFB, Washington. In that example, there was the additional dimension of the pilot's character. Lt Col Arthur "Bud" Holland was considered by his peers to be a dangerous, egomaniacal flier. When Holland was scheduled to fly, his own fellow pilots evacuated their families from base housing, fearing they could become casualties of Holland's recklessness. No one has accused the pilot in the recent C-17 crash of being so dangerous. It appears he simply wanted to make the best airshow routine he could.

"But we have once again a massive lack of oversight," Nance said. "They have to stop this element of pushing [the envelope] regardless of whether the spirit and intent were pure or not."