World War II plane crash

[Eleven]

Ric,
Did you know this guy?

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1110ap_us_arizona_plane_crash.html

Sad deal.

 

[jumpinjan]

The P51 has a bad tendency to flip if the pilot comes in and bounces, then crashes (I was told that by an old pilot)
Jan

 

[Eleven]

One of my agents (I am in insurance) years ago was an instructor on the P-40for Chenault state side when he was training his bunch for deployment for China. He said that they lost a number of pilots on landing. The drill apparently was to fly by the airfield to make sure (I guess, not a pilot myself) that the field was not fouled. Then to circle back to the approach. On the final turn to land, they would not keep airspeed up and drop. He said the P-40was a great airplane but needed good airspeed on low turns. Wonder if the P-51 was the same way.

 

[Nickodell]

One of my agents (I am in insurance) years ago was an instructor on the P-40for Chenault state side when he was training his bunch for deployment for China. He said that they lost a number of pilots on landing. The drill apparently was to fly by the airfield to make sure (I guess, not a pilot myself) that the field was not fouled. Then to circle back to the approach. On the final turn to land, they would not keep airspeed up and drop. He said the P-40was a great airplane but needed good airspeed on low turns. Wonder if the P-51 was the same way.

Number one cause of private pilot crashes, from ultralight on up, is losing airspeed while turning at low altitude. Part of training is learning that although Plane A might have a stall speed with gear and flaps down and power off of, say, 65kts, for every degree of bank you are raising the stall speed (you're trading some wing lift for turning force). So making a 30 deg. bank either downwind leg to base leg, or base leg to final, might need 80kts to be comfortably above stall. And pulling the nose up a tad to correct height adds to the effective stall speed as it also tightens the turn. It can catch the expert as well as the novice. [Technically, air speed is not the controlling factor; what is called Effective Angle of Attack is. A plane can stall at high as well as low speed.]

However, I note that the (non-flyer?) witness said that the plane was approaching the runway "too fast." I wonder what they based that on, bearing in mind that a P51, with its laminar-flow, high loading wings, needs to go fast on approach, much faster than what the guy on the ground may be used to seeing with Cessna 180s and the like.

I think the pilot just undershot, either because that long nose gets in the way of seeing the runway, or he just misjudged his height. Undershooting on approach is probably #2 or 3 (running out of gas is way up there) cause of private pilot crashes, and I believe may be the #1 for commercial airliners. I was taught that if you're going to err, it's better to touch down long rather than short. Short of the runway you will hit rough ground, approach lights, boundary fences and all sorts of crap at high speed and have close to zero chance of walking away. If you land long you will be much slower, be already on the ground, and with luck may just slide off the end of the runway. Or you may elect to ground-loop, even if it means buggering up the undercarriage, which will slow you considerably.

 

[skywords]

I did not know him other than just meeting him for the first time last weekend at the Cactus Fly in at Chandler. They say he was a great guy and well liked by all who knew him. That was Frank Borman's old Mustang, Su Su.

I took this picture last weekend.

 

[Nickodell]

Sad. Both for the pilot and a historic plane.

 

[skywords]

One of my agents (I am in insurance) years ago was an instructor on the P-40for Chenault state side when he was training his bunch for deployment for China. He said that they lost a number of pilots on landing. The drill apparently was to fly by the airfield to make sure (I guess, not a pilot myself) that the field was not fouled. Then to circle back to the approach. On the final turn to land, they would not keep airspeed up and drop. He said the P-40was a great airplane but needed good airspeed on low turns. Wonder if the P-51 was the same way.

The P-51 was the same having a high wing loading. The scuttle butt at the airport is he hit short of the runway and bounced then tried a go around rather than just taking what ever touch down he got after the bounce.

At the fly in there were several mustangs and of all the mustang pilots he seemed the least likely to hurt himself. His start procedure was flawless as the rest of them cranked and cranked. His low passes were very conservative, he seemed very professional. Just bad luck I suppose. The runway at Stellar Air Park his home and where he crashed is very narrow and not all that long. His family is taking it pretty hard.

I would love to chat with your agent friend that was an instructor pilot in the Tomahawks. Ask him if he flew the Tomahawk or Warhawk. There are no more Tomahawks for they forgot to save one.

 

[mikephillips]

Actually that's incorrect. There's one B model flying in England, with The Fighter Collection I think.

 

[skywords]

Actually that's incorrect. There's one B model flying in England, with The Fighter Collection I think.

Wow it must have come out of China for that is where the only possibility of finding one was. A friend of mine went to China on Evergreens behalf looking for one and a Blackwidow, he found the widow but said it was impossible to get anything done because the farmer owned it, the mayor owned it, the fire department owned it, the police chief owned it, the mayor's daughter owned it. By the time you got it paid and shipped you could buy a fleet of brand new 747's.

Note: the intake scoop much nicer than the later model.

 

[Nickodell]

Bill Gunston, one of the great authorities on aero engines and aircraft, maintains that hd the P-40 been Merlin-equipped, like the P-51, it would have been a match for anything the Germans put up until the Me-262.

 

[Eleven]

I would love to chat with your agent friend that was an instructor pilot in the Tomahawks. Ask him if he flew the Tomahawk or Warhawk. There are no more Tomahawks for they forgot to save one.
You would have enjoyed the chat, good guy. You never would know his history by looking or talking with him. Very reserved. I only found out when I asked about a P-40 photo on his wall. He lived in Couer D'Alene, Idaho. He passed away some years ago. Took care of his customers and treated folks with respect. Good fellow.

 

[mikephillips]

there were Packard Merlin powered P-40s, the F and L models. However the overall increase in weight of the plane, plus I suspect the large frontal area of the radiators, negated much of the performance value. Not to mention they were mostly using the Packard version of the early Merlin with less power.

Proper development might have cured all this but with large numbers of engines going to North American and to the British, plus the P-40 being thought of as obsolete, I don't think it was going to happen.

 

[Nickodell]

I think Gunston was thinking of later versions of the Merlin, with 1,700 hp. He reckoned that the basically sound and tough airframe could have taken a lot of modification. I imagine that the coolant & oil rads would have been disposed under the wings, as in the Spit., creating less drag. They would have had to do away with those synchronized M/Gs in the nose, however. Some of the RAf P-40s were fitted with 20mm cannon.

 

[Nickodell]

Rick: I just dug out my old and battered RAF flight training manual. This is part of the chapter on missed approaches:

The missed approach comes as an unhoped-for climax to what has usually been a routine flight, and requires a total and instantaneous reversal of the pilot's state of mind and objective just when he is at the most critical altitude and in the most critical configuration possible.

One moment he's descending quietly with the engine at flight idle or low revs, taking quick looks out of the windscreen for the runway that he knows is there and fully expects to see at the right distance and orientation, the next he's in a full-throttle climb with an out-of-trim aircraft and the embarrassment of having tried and failed. That is, if he has had the discipline to instantly switch his thinking from "get down" to "get up!" Hesitating, until the critical height has passed, or trying to "will" the aircraft to the touch-down point, are the most often-committed mistakes in missed approaches. The "press on" temptation is magnified if you have passengers.

You must discipline yourself to resolve never to go below minimums unless the runway is in sight and the aircraft is at the right height, speed and orientation to land on it with room to spare.

 

[skywords]

Rick: I just dug out my old and battered RAF flight training manual. This is part of the chapter on missed approaches:

The missed approach comes as an unhoped-for climax to what has usually been a routine flight, and requires a total and instantaneous reversal of the pilot's state of mind and objective just when he is at the most critical altitude and in the most critical configuration possible.

One moment he's descending quietly with the engine at flight idle or low revs, taking quick looks out of the windscreen for the runway that he knows is there and fully expects to see at the right distance and orientation, the next he's in a full-throttle climb with an out-of-trim aircraft and the embarrassment of having tried and failed. That is, if he has had the discipline to instantly switch his thinking from "get down" to "get up!" Hesitating, until the critical height has passed, or trying to "will" the aircraft to the touch-down point, are the most often-committed mistakes in missed approaches. The "press on" temptation is magnified if you have passengers.

You must discipline yourself to resolve never to go below minimums unless the runway is in sight and the aircraft is at the right height, speed and orientation to land on it with room to spare.

Yes thats been the demise of many a pilot. My dad said in the L-1011 you merely pushed the go around button and ring the stew for some fresh coffee.

 

[Nickodell]

With GA pilots I can possibly understand, but commercial pilots, with thousands of hours, and the responsibility for hundreds of souls behind him, some of the last cockpit recordings make you shake your head in disbelief. As you probably know, there is an online site where you can listen to many of the last recordings. Here's a typical one. C = Captain (21,000 hours; 5,400 on type); F = First Officer:

22:21 F: I don't think we're going to make the threshold, John;
22:26 C: Watch my style;
23:03 F: John, we're not going to make it!
23:06 (Sound of engines spooling up)
23:14 (Unknown voice) Oh poop!
23:17 F: Oh great, John. I told you!
23:30 Sound of impact.
23:33 Recording stops.

 

[Rodewaryer]

As previously stated, a loss in both life and the all too limited number of Mustangs left. The banking at low speed conversations earlier are quite well put, there have been so many losses this way. Unfortunately the one that comes to mind most annoyingly is the big headed B-52 pilot that crashed that BUF at low altitude in an IMPOSSIBLE manuever. I think there's a kind of 'go fever' that some pilots get (not suggesting this was the case of the Stellar Airpark incident) when performing at low altitude around airports or airshows.

Some other pics of this Mustang.

A ex-Air Force buddy of mine that lives out by Williams field swears he saw this guy earlier (that day I presumed) and it stood out to him how daring he was flying. He's a regular air show attendee and is quite used to being around aircraft both on the ground and seeing them in low altitude flight. If the way this Mustang was being flown got his attention then he wasn't flying it in any way 'routinely' and was probably pretty confident and possibly too much so.

 

[Nickodell]

This aphorism is as old as the hills:

There are old pilots and bold pilots, but few old bold pilots.