The Gang That Can't Get Their Facts Straight, Also Can't Fly An Air Race

News/Analysis By Jim Campbell, ANN CEO/Editor-In-Chief/Troublemaker

It may rank as one of the weirdest series of stories we've done in quite the while (though the Cirrus/COPA mess is promising to beat it by a fair amount... shameful details to come), but the bizarre saga of the Ultimate Air Race Challenge appears to have been based on little more than hot air... and quite a lot of people either did, or should have, known it.

An aggressive racing program once described as "Mixed Martial Arts In The Air" was claimed to have been approved by the FAA long ago -- it never was.

It was supposed to have been crewed by seven of the best pilots in the world -- it isn't and they aren't.

The team was said to have trained and practiced for months on end and qualified to rigorous standards -- well, they didn't.

And when the FAA publicly denied any approvals for the team, they ignored reality and told media representatives, far and wide, that the race was on, gave television and newspaper interviews to that effect and made dozens of claims with little basis in reality. Oooppsss...

And finally, the airshow organization and the airport authority for Camarillo Airport's airshow was warned multiple times by a great number of persons of the many hazards, falsehoods and concerns inherent in the wild claims of the UARC program. Regardless, they promoted the organization despite knowing full well that the site, team, aircraft, pilots and racing program not was not approved by the FAA... but had been turned down in no uncertain terms...

And, as of this moment, Wings Over Camarillo and the UARC organization continue to claim that they will have an air race this weekend...

In the meantime; the FAA has made it clear that there will be no such thing.

Mind you, both UARC as well as airshow personnel, appear to be setting the FAA up as the bad guy in all of this, but ANN's extensive discussions, investigations and consultations leave us in the oddly unusual position to not only defend the FAA's actions but to admit admiration for the very comprehensive, professional and SAFETY oriented course they have taken in dealing with the controversial and often errant actions of UARC.

And despite a number of attempts to get some help and attention paid to this matter... one in which ANN saw all manner of potential hazards (some of them quite terrifying--really), it basically came down to this news service (again), the FAA, and a lone California blogger with a love for aviation (Kristy Graham, who was the admin for www.aviationcriminal.com), to bring this matter to a point where the hazards became clear enough to put a stop to a program that truly appeared to be, at best, ill-advised.

Don't forget that while there was a tremendous of controversy surrounding UARC pilot David Riggs as well as Chris Rounds... whose history led some to question the safety and legality of this program from the get-go, the actual details surrounding the actual racing plan, itself, are frankly... ridiculous. The FAA confirmed, while responding to ANN's interrogatories, that UARC presented its original air race proposal to the FAA in the form of an operations manual. The FAA conducted a standard analysis of the manual in which (they) looked at four areas: pilot qualification; pilot currency; safety operating rules; and race course diagram. FAA PAO Ian Gregor noted that, "We found the manual was acceptable, contingent upon site surveillance, for the first three areas but not for the race course diagram. UARC invited an FAA evaluation team to conduct on-site surveillance of their proposed race program at Camarillo from August 8-12." 

The FAA found that:

1. Pilot qualification. UARC pilots did not provide evidence to show they had the required amount of formation flight, and airplane/hour experience levels to train under the UARC race program. Five of the seven pilots did not have log book evidence of the required airplane/hour experience.
    
2. Safety operating rules: One pilot demonstrated flight around the proposed race course and through the pylon field in front of FAA inspectors last week. The inspectors believe the pilot flew past the maximum allowable fly-by bank angle of 75 degrees. We also had concerns that multiple aircraft flying in close proximity, at approximately 15 feet altitude through pylons, could pose a wake turbulence danger, and that an aircraft could be caught in wake turbulence could possibly crash with debris going into crowd. Finally, UARC did not provide scatter pattern diagrams for either the proposed race course or the pylon course. Scatter pattern diagrams are based on aircraft altitudes and predict where debris would go in case of a midair collisions.    
    
3. Race course: UARC did not submit a suitably safe race course for Camarillo. The proposed race course layout shows multiple roads being crossed, and some roads lead into a spectator area that's inside (the) proposed race course. Roads of this kind must be closed during (the) air race. The local airport authority was not able to coordinate road closure.
    
4. Airworthiness of aircraft. The UARC manual requires video monitors in all aircraft. The FAA examined six of the seven aircraft that would take part in the program. None of the aircraft contained this required equipment.  

Mind you, the FAA was well aware that Wings Over Camarillo had a mess on its hands and had either been sold a bill of goods or simply failed to check the bona fides behind all of UARC's hype (hard to believe in light of the fact that they were warned multiple times, by multiple parties). Since WOC/UARC seemed destined to disappoint a LOT of people that would be coming to their airshow, the Feds did offer a very mild, low-key, non-racing alternative demonstration that might mollify the crowds that would be coming to Camarillo to see honest-to-goodness air racing. Gregor told ANN that the 'kinder/gentler' UARC demonstration flights would have allowed them some very limited privileges to perform at WOC... "The pilots would be restricted to flying single file through the course, with no passing and no aerobatic maneuvers. Before being allowed to perform in the show, each pilot must demonstrate for FAA inspectors single file flight around the pattern at 500 feet, then through the pylons without performing aerobatic flight. Only one of the pilots has done a demonstration flights, and UARC has not contacted us (E-I-C Note: as of late Tuesday, 08.16.11) as to arrange a time for the others to do so."

There were other problems... really simple requirements that UARC apparently did not seem to be all that concerned about, but are a part and parcel of some of the most basic airshow flight demonstration programs. For instance, Gregor revealed that, "...only one of the UARC pilots provided us with a Statement of Aerobatic Competency, and his was limited to 800 feet AGL."

In comments directed toward the FAA personnel overseeing this operation, ANN inquired, "A number of the pilots appear to have little or no real air racing experience… what is being required of them in regards to demonstrating their individual competency to attempt these flights (much less the far more aggressive race that was proposed earlier)?"

The FAA's inspection team responded that, in regards to the substitute demonstration flights, UARC pilots, "...would have to demonstrate they could fly the course without performing any aerobatic maneuvers."

They added, "Concerning actual air racing: Race organizations that have FAA-accepted training programs issue air race cards to pilots who successfully complete the training. UARC's operations manual details pilot ground and flight training. To ensure the pilots have the skills to fly in a race environment, the FAA was to observe the training and qualifications of the UARC pilots. This training was not done during the Aug. 8-12 Camarillo visit." As a matter of fact, no appreciable/verifiable attempt at training the entire team in either program (the original UARC race plan or the substitute flight demo proposed by the FAA) has been documented... and there are now some 4 days to go before the so-called race.

With all this revealed, UARC is not going down quietly... and neither, it appears, is the Camarillo airshow support group.

Over the weekend, despite direct knowledge of the FAA's refusal, pilot Torrey Ward did one of the early morning TV shows on local station KTLA... showing up in a spiffy flight suit and making some breathless claims (which seemed to impress the heck out of the female anchor...) about the upcoming AIR RACE and the very macho, devil-may-care, dangers he faced in the process. The interview was long on entertainment value and somewhat less accomplished in terms of accuracy and reality. Ward, by the way, is another of the UARC pilots who seems to be working under a claimed bio that is, so-far, failing to hold up to scrutiny. Various UARC docs/quotes claim that Ward is a military pilot who has flown 'covert missions' in the Middle East... and yet, he has admitted that he is just a "hobbyist" where these matters are concerned. The so-called military background seems a bit over-played since he is, reportedly, only a civilian UAV Flight Instructor. No covert missions (by Ward) have been confirmed by any military or government agency consulted thus far and even some recent statements (again, by Ward) cast severe doubt on such activities...

In a Tuesday story in the local Ventura County Star, Wings Over Camarillo Air Boss Norman Hall, claimed that the pilots are currently 'trying to get approval not as UARC members, but as a pylon demonstration team under the show's general waiver.' According to the VC Star article, Hall claims that 'FAA officials gave the original race plan a tentative thumbs-up months ago.' According to every FAA staffer consulted at the Regional and National level, that statement is unverifiable. Hall appears to have joined UARC in attempting to paint the FAA as the bad guys in all this... "It's just been one issue after another... We are left holding the bag because if they don't get approved, that makes us look bad. We are trying to put a good product out there and we are still waiting, even though we have already met all the requirements they have requested."

And of course, there are the original issues surrounding convicted criminal and erstwhile UARC Team Leader David Riggs (who at one point, was supposed to have been thrown off the team). His background and that of some of the UARC personalities leave one wondering if the FAA does actually get to the ponderous point where they will allow UARC to fly what has been humorously nicknamed the "Camarillo Conga Line", whether or not these guys, individually or collectively, can be trusted to fly the highly restrictive, very mild demonstration flights that may all they are qualified to undertake (and, lets face it, the jury is still out as to whether they're capable of even that oh-so-simple flight profile).

Riggs, you may remember, is the flyer that cast quite a negative pall on aviation (and aviators) with a pretty stupid stunt in which he buzzed the Santa Monica pier with an L-39 and scared the bejesus out of hundreds of people... some of whom reportedly wondered if they were under attack. The stunt, which occurred in November of 2008, was allegedly an effort to generate "buzz" for a movie. The FAA almost immediately revoked Riggs' pilot certificate, but on March 17th of 2009, an administrative law judge modified that revocation order to a 210 day suspension, and it was eventually reinstated.

Riggs was criminally charged and eventually sentenced by a California Superior Court to 60 days in jail, 36 months probation, and a $900 fine in connection with the incident. He was also ordered to perform 60 days community service cleaning up Santa Monica Beach -- and all of that sentence reportedly still awaits imposition -- and could come at any time. It was not the only legal/criminal altercation for Riggs  -- who has a long history, documented in a number of press reports, of his legal altercations... one of which got him incarcerated in a foreign prison for a year. He has created great enmity among a significant portion of the aviation community... at least one of whom, the aforementioned Kristy Graham (who appears to have done a heck of a job documenting a large part of Riggs's history) has gone so far as to dedicate a web site to his alleged transgressions (www.aviationcriminal.com). Above and beyond all that, there are multiple accusations of aircraft damage and theft, illegal flight training operations, extensive issues with how he conducts business (including a great number of allegations of fraud), and quite a few other concerns. Add up just these 'few' details and its a wonder why anyone would give Riggs, UARC, and his other claims and ventures the time of day...

UARC Pilot David Riggs

Of greatest concern, though, is this... had UARC managed to pull off this race at Camarillo; there are great questions as to whether it was possible to do so safely (and in the opinion of this pilot, not a chance). The principal issue focuses on the fact that instead of the proven Red Bull race profile (which has been known to have its own set of hazards) of multiple gates, with turns in both directions, allowing ONE AIRPLANE AT A TIME through those gates, the UARC proposal would have allowed for a number of aircraft to compete to get through the gates ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

Think about this... Ever see what happens when a half dozen people all race toward a turn-style or door at the same time? The result is chaos... and when you consider the dilemma inherent in clearing a 50-60 foot tall 'gate' with multiple airplanes trying to get through the same tightly confined physical space, at speeds approaching 200 knots, with a great deal of focused energy, the only word that comes to mind is...

... BOOM!!!

And while we, as citizens, have the right to put our own lives at some risk, we do not have the right to do so when and where it can hazard others... and according to the FAA folks who monitor airshows year after year, the UARC proposal had the potential to create hazards for persons on the ground. Had any of that been allowed to occur, and had an accident happened, innocent people could have been hurt (or worse) and the air-racing and airshow business could have been dealt a fatal blow.

We doubt that this is the last we have heard of the UARC Saga/Fiasco... and will keep you apprised as the story develops (whew....).

ANN E-I-C Note: ANN thanks accomplished aviation photographer, Eric Van Gilder, of Van Gilder Aviation Photography, for the use of the UARC photos.   

FMI: www.faa.gov, www.aviationcriminal.com, www.uarc.tv, www.airshows.aero, www.wingsovercamarillo.com