• Welcome to the new SAOCA website. Already a member? Simply click Log In/Sign Up up and to the right and use your same username and password from the old site. If you've forgotten your password, please send an email to membership@sunbeamalpine.org for assistance.

    If you're new here, click Log In/Sign Up and enter your information. We'll approve your account as quickly as possible, typically in about 24 hours. If it takes longer, you were probably caught in our spam/scam filter.

    Enjoy.

Youtube -On board a Mark 5 Spitfire

Nickodell

Donation Time
Thanks, Jan, I enjoyed those - all 3 times I played them!

Pity they didn't replace the wingtips. The clipped wings ruin the classic elliptical planform of the Spitfire. It was a wartime mod for increasing low-level speed to catch the V1 Flying Bombs - souped-up engines, cropped supercharger impellers and clipped wings ("clipped, cropped and clapped [i.e. clapped-out]" as the pilots called them), but I'm puzzled why they didn't restore this one to the original wing.

The landing approach was intriguing. Flaps and gear down on downwind and base legs, then up again on final to cool the engine, then gear and flaps down at the last possible moment before touchdown. And "five knots above stalling speed" on approach makes my blood run cold. That's a terrifyingly small margin, even though an incipient stall in a Spit gave lots of advance warning. But you'd only need to sneeze with that small margin, or undershoot a bit, hit some downdraft, etc., and you'd be cutting the daisies. Wow. I'd never contemplate being less than 10kts. above stalling speed, but then I never pretended to be brave.
 

jumpinjan

Bronze Level Sponsor
Yeah, I couldn't believe that either. Its a short strip and he has to bleed off speed to right at stall speed and just at the right moment.
He's good:D
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
During WWII, since the average Spitfire pilot didn't expect to die in his bed from old age, many probed the limits of just what you could do in the Spit, things they would never have contemplated in later years.

Bob Stanford Tuck, the multiple ace, on his October 1941 tour of the US, instructing USAAF pilots before America got into the war, writes in his book Fly For Your Life: "Wright Field had the only Spitfire in America - a Mark V [like the one in the video, Jan.] Unfortunately, almost every pilot in the Air Corps had had a go at her and, like a car with too many drivers, she was sadly the worse for wear. But when, on his last day there, the Yanks asked me to 'put on a show' with her, I felt it would be letting the RAF down to refuse.

"She was very tired, very sloppy, and she'd had the guts caned out of her by too many pilots running her at maximum boost and throttle to see 'what she'll do flat out.' But even so, in the air she was still sweet to handle. I put on a few 'twiddly bits,' like a a progression of loops, upward rolls, rolls-off-the-top, and inverted flying at zero feet, coming out of one manoeuver right into another.

"One thing they seemed to appreciate was a favourite trick of mine. I came in over the hangars fairly slow, at about 135, and then did a stalled flick-roll. It was really very easy, if you knew the Spit well. She literally stalled around her own axis and fairly whipped around.

"Mind you, you had to be careful to correct and check the roll at the right instant, othewise she'd stay stalled and go into a spin. When you did this properly you wouldn't lose more than a couple of miles an hour, and she'd carry on at exactly the same height as if nothing had happened. It was very pretty to watch from the ground.

"The Americans were very chary about aerobatics at low speed, largely due to the fact that their fighters were apt to stall and spin without any warning. They said they's never seen anything like that, and the way some of them looked at me it was clear that they thought I was a case for the psychiatrist - 'Messerschmitt happy' was a phrase I heard someone murmur."
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
For those interested in WWII aces only

I wrote extensively about Bob Stanford Tuck on the forum last year. I had a few PMs asking for more information, but never got around to them. Tuck, as you may remember, was the one who fired at a German antiaircraft gun as he was coming down, deadstick, into a city park, one of his cannon shells opening up the barrel of the gun like a banana.

Like several other top aces, Tuck did not initially take to piloting well, and was almost washed out as he had difficulty mastering landing and basic aerobatics. On the night before his final check ride, that would decide whether he would pass, or fail and be discharged from the RAF, he went on an all-night bender and was so hung over at the time of the test that he couldn't have cared less about it; he just wanted to get it over with and get back to the mess and some coffee and aspirins. Oddly, having lost his anxiety, he passed easily. After a few weeks he became one of the best Spitfire pilots, and on his first combat flight downed three German planes.

Tuck was shot down, parachuted out or crash landed so many times that he earned the nickname Lucky Tuck (and probably an unprintable middle name that rhymed with Tuck). Shot up in one dogfight, he found that his cheek was cut right open and, while nursing his Spit back to base, idly reached through the hole to remove a broken tooth. The resultant scar gave him a piratical look which, coupled with his natural handsomeness, fighter-pilot mustache and uniform, made him irrestistible to the ladies. In effect, he became a living caricature of the RAF pilot.

Robert_Stanford_Tuck_.jpg

(The BURMA on the side of Tuck's plane denotes funds raised in that country for the purchase of some Spitfires and Hurricanes, a practice repeated all over the British Empire.)

Tuck learned to speak fluent Russian from a grandmother. At 16 he went to sea, and served for several years on freighters, learning to defend himself in fistfights in various parts of the world, and, from one of the crew, to throw knives with deadly effect.

His first CO was Sq. Ldr. Roger Bushell. Fans of The Great Escape will remember the Bushell character played by Richard Attenbrough, as Squadron Leader Roger Bartlett (I've no idea why they changed his name). When Tuck was taken POW, he was sent to Stalag Luft III, where he met his old CO Bushell and joined the tunnel scheme. He was slated to be one of the escapees, but was posted to a camp farther east just before the breakout, probably saving his life; (Bushell and 49 others were murdered by the Gerstapo). Tuck's Luck again.

When the Russian juggernaut rolled in from the east, Tuck and a companian escaped and joined the Russians as a footsoldier (his Russian coming in handy) until VE Day.

In a sad irony, Robert Stanford Tuck, DSO, DFC and Bar, died at only 70.
 

skywords

Donation Time
That was great footage.
We have a fella (Mr X) here that owns and operates a Douglas A-26 invader. He has always told me what a man eater it is on approach. He always uses 4500' to 5000' of the runway. One day we were watching another A-26 on down wind that was from out of town and turned out to be Steve Hinton passing thru as he often does. Anyway he had that invader slow and turned base to short final and made the first turn off. I then said to Mr X hey they fly like a Cub.
I have had people tell me the T-28 and P-51 are man eaters also. Not true!! They fly very easily and predictably otherwise 100 hour pilots would not have been able to master them. The Spit is even more so for it weighs somewhere around a thousand pounds less than the P-51 with the same power giving a much lower wing loading, the Spit has a narrow gear that can prove to be a little tricky but that is what your feet are for.
I have flown the T-28 and they fly like a big Cessna 172 "nothing to it".
Now a Lockheed Starfighter will reduce the best of pilot to sobbing little child on approach, moral of the story the higher the wing loading the bigger the balls required.
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
Rick; I can't agree with you about the P51. I've spoken to a couple of P51 pilots from WWII, and they both said that the biggest pilot-killer was trying to appy power to correct for an undershoot landing. Gun the engine when you're low and just above stalling speed and torque reaction will roll it into the deck, even with the stick in the opposite corner. There's just not enough aileron authority to countract it. It was the biggest killer in training, and even caught out experienced pilots.

It's still killing pilots:

NTSB Identification: SEA07LA196
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, July 15, 2007 in Camarillo, CA
Aircraft: North American F-51D, registration: N51TK
Injuries: 1 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.

On July 15, 2007, at 0805 Pacific daylight time, a North American F-51D, N51TK, sustained substantial damage when it impacted terrain following a loss of control during a go around at the Camarillo Airport, Camarillo, California. The private pilot, the sole occupant, received fatal injuries. The airplane was registered to Defiance Aviation LLC of Ketchum, Idaho. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the solo instructional flight, and no flight plan was filed. The 14 CFR Part 91 flight had originated from Camarillo Airport a few minutes before the accident.

According to preliminary information provided by Camarillo Air Traffic Control Tower personnel, the airplane, with the private pilot and a flight instructor on board, flew into the airport and made a full stop landing. The flight instructor exited the airplane after informing the tower that the pilot would be performing his first solo flight in the airplane. The airplane departed on runway 26, remained in the traffic pattern and returned for a landing on runway 26. Two controllers observed the airplane touch down and then become airborne again. At that point, it appeared to them that the pilot initiated a go around, and the airplane immediately rolled left and impacted the ground beside the runway in an inverted position.


It was similar with the Corsair, which was not called the "Ensign Killer" because of difficulty flying or forward visibility in carrier operations, but because newbie pilots tended to revert back to their previous training in SNJ Texans (aka T-6, aka Harvard) where you could firewall the engine and go around and maintain controllability. With the Corsair, going to full power without correcting with an immediate counteraction of torque with rudder and aileron would result in an immediate roll inverted and crash off to the side of the runway or carrier. The other problem was that the massive propwash caused the left wing to stall before the right. This was partially ameliorated when a stall strip was placed on the left wing, but the torque issue remained.

Reminds me of what I (and I'm sure you) were taught in basic: it's better to hit something at the end of the runway, when you're going slow, than before the runway threshold when you're going fast. In other words, on a short runway, if anything it's better to over- than undershoot.
 

mikephillips

Donation Time
I have read that with in flying the P-51 you needed to empty the fuselage tank before the wing tanks were used otherwise the center of gravity could move back and alter the handling.
 

fj55mike

Donation Time
Spitfire pilots also had a great deal of trouble adapting to the Griffon-engined marks (starting with the MK XII) because the engine spun the opposite direction from the Merlin. So when they'd go to take off, the torque would spin them the opposite way that they were expecting and correcting for.

I've got some time in a T-34B, and that has got to be the most wonderfully stable aircraft in the world.
 

skywords

Donation Time
Rick; I can't agree with you about the P51. I've spoken to a couple of P51 pilots from WWII, and they both said that the biggest pilot-killer was trying to appy power to correct for an undershoot landing. Gun the engine when you're low and just above stalling speed and torque reaction will roll it into the deck, even with the stick in the opposite corner. There's just not enough aileron authority to countract it. It was the biggest killer in training, and even caught out experienced pilots.

It's still killing pilots:

As your doctor would say after dropping the anvil on your foot "Don't Do That"
 

skywords

Donation Time
That was cured by fitting conra-rotating props.

As I remember a few years back a Spitfire owner in New Zealand who owned two Spits and flew them both regularly. One had a Griffon and The other had a Merlin. He jump in one of them and rolled the rudder trim the wrong direction and promptly torq rolled himself into the ground killing him.
 

Wombat

Donation Time
It has been puzzling me for years as to why the Griffon rotated in the opposite direction to (most) Merlins. Anyone know?
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
Many people make the mistake of thinking that the Griffon was a Merlin bored out from 27 to 35 liters, or some other development of the Merlin. In fact they were quite different engines, and nothing was interchangeable. Futher to add to the confusion, the Griffon was fitted to all later marks of Spitfire, even though it was actually a much earlier design than the Merlin, from 1933.

The reason for the different rotation was that the Griffon was essentially a down-rated "R" engine, as used in the Schneider Trophy racers. The rotation decided on for the R was because torque reaction meant the Schneider seaplanes began their takeoff at 90 degrees to the intended heading, and had turned that much before leaving the water. I was told by a RR engineer who was working on some Lincolns on our base in 1959 that the way the slipway and other stuff like buoys were laid out at Calshot, that 90 degrees had to be to the right, so the propeller had to turn to the left.

This is the Supermarine S6B that gained the third Schneider Trophy race for Britain, thus retiring the trophy. Consider that it was designed in 1927, but set the world air speed record in 1931 at 406 mph, dragging those huge floats! Can't see the radiator? Much of the fuselage and wing surface was the actual radiator. I'm also amazed that anyone managed to control such a small plane with an engine putting out some 2,400hp, on a triangular course.
Supermarine20S6.gif


When development of the Griffon was picked up in 1939, nobody saw any reason to change the rotation.

The Mosquito, with two Merlins rotating the same way, was also a handful on takeoff, and many pilots bought it by forgetting to "lead" the left throttle an inch more than the right. On one station my dad was on in WWII, they had to take down a hangar because so many Mossies left the runway and headed that way. When the Hornet, which was even lighter than the Mossie, was developed the problem became crucial, so a special Merlin rotating the opposite way was developed, and the Hornet had one of each to balance the torque reaction out.

They had the same problem with the Typhoon, and again they took down a hangar on the station where they trained the pilots. Despite this, more pilots were killed in training accidents than in action. That was another plane that would kill you in a heatbeat if you tried to firewall it in a low slow undershoot.

A bit of Typhoon trivia: The winter before he was posted to the Far East, my dad was on a base in southern England where they had a couple of squadrons of Tiffies, kept to counteract the Fw190 "tip and run" raids. That huge Napier Sabre 16-cylinder engine, with sleeve valves and using non-multigrade straight mineral oil, became impossible to start if it had sat in the cold for more than an hour, so evey hour, on the hour, round the clock, fitters started and ran up the engines for 10 minutes, with bursts to 3,500 rpm (the Sabre was a fast-rotating design). Apart from the deafening noise of 16 open exhaust stacks, the Sabre used the Coffman cartridge starting system, which begins with a deafening bang all its own (and it often took two or three goes before the engine took). So nobody got much sleep until they finally billeted personnel not involved with the Tiffies in a nearby village.
 

Bill Blue

Platinum Level Sponsor
I'm not a pilot, certainly not an aeronautical engineer, but it seems to me that any high performance, huge propped, single engined airplane is going to be trouble when hitting the throttle at anything close to stall speed. If your just barely flying, how can anything keep it from turning over under such conditions?

Bill
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
Bill: some machines were more forgiving than others. If you dig out the movie Battle of Britain, in one of the early scenes a rookie pilot is coming in to land wheels-up. Just before touchdown someone fires a red flare ahead of the plane to warn the pilot, who immediately firewalls the throttle in fine pitch and goes back up. The Spit appears to be one of the single-engine high performance planes you could do that in.
 

mikephillips

Donation Time
The Corsair with it's huge r2800 radial was another of those that you had to careful of advancing the throttle too quickly or you'd find yourself upside down.
 
Top