Spitfire Belly Landing Masterton...Bummer!

[Njbb1995]

QUOTE (K5054NZ @ Jan 16 2009, 04:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, remember how a wee while back someone brought up the idea of an NZFF-owned aeroplane?





Anyone keen?

Was just thinking that before Zac......... Maybe Doug could give it to us for this year.........

[K5054NZ]

[HercFeend]

QUOTE (Adamski @ Jan 16 2009, 06:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm only guessing here ... but is it possible that - with forward view being so limited - and the runway dropping off in height at the threshold, that Doug had his eye on the runway level much further down (which may be much higher in elevation)?

I often wonder how pilots landed the Corsairs on carriers. I presume they "crabbed it" quite a lot then straightened up at the last moment <??>.

Makes you wonder (and give even more Kudos (if that's even possible)) how the Brylcreem Boys during WWII got these beauties up - fought - and returned them to the ground with only 10 hours or so flight training...........remarkable. " Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. "

[Adamski]

QUOTE (HercFeend @ Jan 19 2009, 01:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Makes you wonder (and give even more Kudos (if that's even possible)) how the Brylcreem Boys during WWII got these beauties up - fought - and returned them to the ground with only 10 hours or so flight training...........remarkable. " Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. "

Lop-sided history writing, I think. The training accidents/non-combat just aren't talked about much. Earlier on, in WWI, training accounted for more fatalities than from the Germans (I think I remember reading somewhere).

Even so - many new [British] pilots had only a few hours solo flight time - and none in a single seat Spit. However - the RAF only supplied around 35% percent of BOB pilots. The *majority* were made up by Poles, Czechs, French, Canadians, even some Americans - plus the odd Kiwi - and all these pilots were not only experienced but fairly combat hardened as well.

[HercFeend]

QUOTE (Adamski @ Jan 19 2009, 02:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lop-sided history writing, I think. The training accidents/non-combat just aren't talked about much. Earlier on, in WWI, training accounted for more fatalities than from the Germans (I think I remember reading somewhere).

Even so - many new [British] pilots had only a few hours solo flight time - and none in a single seat Spit. However - the RAF only supplied around 35% percent of BOB pilots. The *majority* were made up by Poles, Czechs, French, Canadians, even some Americans - plus the odd Kiwi - and all these pilots were not only experienced but fairly combat hardened as well.

35% British?!?! Sorry to contradict you old boy, however, I think you may have your figures arse about face! 'The Few' were 2353 men from Great Britain and 574 (that’s 24.3%) from overseas, pilots and other aircrew, (broken down by nationality below) who are officially recognised as having taken part in the Battle of Britain. Each flew at least one authorised operational sortie with an eligible unit of the Royal Air Force or Fleet Air Arm during the period 10 July to 31 October 1940. 544 lost their lives during the period of the Battle.

Nationality and Number
Poland 139
New Zealand 98
Canada 86
Czechoslovakia 84
Belgium 29
Australia 21
South Africa 20
France 13
Ireland 10
United States 7
Jamaica 1
Palestine Mandate 1
Southern Rhodesia 1
Unknown 8

Of course you are correct that the number of training fatalities is scarcely mentioned, however, the skill, bravery and dogged determination shown by these men, the majority of whom were pretty much just thrown in at the deep end with little or no prior aviation experience and told ‘off you go!’ is undeniable.

[Adamski]

QUOTE (HercFeend @ Jan 19 2009, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

35% British?!?! Sorry to contradict you old boy, however, I think you may have your figures arse about face!

Ouch! I think I'm going to have to eat my words! Or at least find out where I got my half-baked figures!

I did see a very good *German* documentary once - that set things a little more in persepective. Things like the limited fuel/time German fighters had (considering much of a dogfight is conducted at full throttle), chronic tactics dictated by Goering etc. etc. but also interesting things like the time of turn-round for Me109's being significantly faster. The engine could be dropped and worked on in no time at all, and re-arming was much faster too. Apparently there was also much tighter control over tolerances for airframe and panels, so it meant Me109's could be cannibalised far easier. Often, panels Spits just could not be made to fit another Spit - even from the same factory/batch. It's possible that this same documentary presented those biased figures (though it was a long time ago now and my memory could have skewed it). Even now, statisitics about claims/losses differ greatly - but then that's understandable.

[HercFeend]

LOL, no worries. I'm English and ex-RAF so I've got to stick up for the Mothership and the boys as it were.......

No surprises re: ME109 parts, reliability etc - have you seen German cars? British cars, like our planes are awesome and unique and beautiful i.e. Aston Martin, Austin, MG, AC, Morgan etc etc but never reliable and the uniqueness means just that - no two parts are the same

If, like me, you're interested in WWII & BOB history this book The Ultra Secret is fantastic and a real eye opener. It details Churchill's ULTRA Secret - Enigma and explains, in the words of Eisenhower just how 'Ultra was decisive" in the outcome of the war. In a nut shell the Poles were made to make Enigma machines pre war and one of the engineers escaped Poland and showed the British how to make them. The Allies were breaking enigma code before the war broke out. What also makes this book a great read is it's written by F W Whiterbotham, a man who during the war was the RAF liaison to SIS and in charge of Ultra!!!!! Wow!!!! The chapter about the BOB blows you away - the RAF knew the Luffwaffer's plans and strategy and altered their own around it. The bitter pill to swallow throughout the book is the 'greater good' message - numerous times good men were sent to their deaths because if things altered too much as result of intercepted Ultra messages then the Germans would have twigged and the war may have gone on for many more years....... Worth a read

[beaufighterguy]

QUOTE (HercFeend @ Jan 19 2009, 07:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL, no worries. I'm English and ex-RAF so I've got to stick up for the Mothership and the boys as it were.......

No surprises re: ME109 parts, reliability etc - have you seen German cars? British cars, like our planes are awesome and unique and beautiful i.e. Aston Martin, Austin, MG, AC, Morgan etc etc but never reliable and the uniqueness means just that - no two parts are the same

hahaha yeah but some english cars aren't the best ie: moris 1000's etc etc.

ps I love german cars and planes like the bf-109 and focke-wulf fw-190... oh boy ever herd a db-605 engine during a fly past?
Although the merlin still sounds nice.

[HercFeend]

QUOTE (beaufighterguy @ Jan 20 2009, 08:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

hahaha yeah but some english cars aren't the best ie: moris 1000's etc etc.

ps I love german cars and planes like the bf-109 and focke-wulf fw-190... oh boy ever herd a db-605 engine during a fly past?
Although the merlin still sounds nice.

That's the point I was making beaufighterguy. German engineering is great, as demonstrated by their cars and aircraft. And although British engineering is also great, it's, well, lets say a little 'quirky' at times

[beaufighterguy]

QUOTE (HercFeend @ Jan 20 2009, 09:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the point I was making beaufighterguy. German engineering is great, as demonstrated by their cars and aircraft. And although British engineering is also great, it's, well, lets say a little 'quirky' at times

haha yeah sorry about that I just woke up.

[Alfashark]

QUOTE (HercFeend @ Jan 20 2009, 09:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the point I was making beaufighterguy. German engineering is great, as demonstrated by their cars and aircraft. And although British engineering is also great, it's, well, lets say a little 'quirky' at times

As my signature on the VASK forums reads: If Lucas made firearms, World Wars wouldn't start either...

[PeterA]

QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 15 2009, 10:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Showing the extent of the damage (which is really rather minor thankfully).


I was really looking forward to seeing this new Spitfire put through its paces at the show, atleast I got to see it fly for a bit.
Looks like a beautiful aircraft, and I really hope they rebuild her so that perhaps we might finally get to see this bird at an airshow.

ACE,

May I ask if you got either of my two messages?

Regards,

PeterA

[markll]

QUOTE (Adamski @ Jan 16 2009, 06:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm only guessing here ... but is it possible that - with forward view being so limited - and the runway dropping off in height at the threshold, that Doug had his eye on the runway level much further down (which may be much higher in elevation)?

I often wonder how pilots landed the Corsairs on carriers. I presume they "crabbed it" quite a lot then straightened up at the last moment <??>.

So heres what I heard at the airshow - a guy sitting next to me (well, within earshot of me anyway!! ) claimed to have talked to Doug Brooker about what happened, and said that apparently he misjudged the width of the runway, and landed with one wheel on the tarmac and one on the grass....looking at the pic of it sitting on the runway at an angle like that, and right over to one side of the tarmac, that could possibly be how it happened...

Also, regarding the damage, hopefully there isn't much structural damage...if that *is* stress damage to the leading edge of the wing, and thus the spar could be damaged then thats bad news indeed, since the spars attach to fuselage frame 5, along with everything else - the engine mountings, etc, etc...

Mark

[ardypilot]

From the the CAA accident report:
The aircraft hit the ground in 3 point attitude after going into a rapid descend from about 10-15 ft A.G.L with the pilot not visual with the runway. The undercarriage gave way and the aircraft came to rest on the runway after sliding for about 100 meters from initial contact. Pilot thinks the sudden loss of height was caused by dramatic changes in wind direction and speed.

[Ace]

From what I saw that sounds about right. Good find Trolly.

[markll]

QUOTE (Trolly @ Feb 2 2009, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From the the CAA accident report:
The aircraft hit the ground in 3 point attitude after going into a rapid descend from about 10-15 ft A.G.L with the pilot not visual with the runway. The undercarriage gave way and the aircraft came to rest on the runway after sliding for about 100 meters from initial contact. Pilot thinks the sudden loss of height was caused by dramatic changes in wind direction and speed.

Yeah, thanks Trolly - I read that too...shows that you can't listen to the conversations of a couple of complete strangers and assume that they actually know what they are talking about!!

Mark

[ardypilot]

Saw Doug's Spit outside the hanger for the first time since the crash on Friday, and also heard him on the radio that same day in his Extra at Mercer- just wondering if anyone can confirm the Spitfires back in the air again as I'm 99% sure that I was awoken this afternoon by what very much sounded like the purr of a V12 Merlin!

[Naki]

Yep its flying again

http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?board...mp;thread=10316

Dougs Extra is actually a MX-2

[Efliernz]

QUOTE (Naki @ Nov 29 2009, 08:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep its flying again

http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?board...mp;thread=10316

Dougs Extra is actually a MX-2

Good to see he has something to fly again. Doug scratched the MX2's prop in a "hangar" incident so wasn't at Mercer today.