City urged to keep vintage aircraft YYC - Mosquito

[TG]

Like the last one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag5ut3tP3ZM

Accident report.
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 501355.pdf

[ogc]

Well Hedley has a very good point.

"His main experience was on transport aircraft although he had flown about 529 hours on light aircraft."

I don't see how he could have had much aerobatic experience.

However it seems like they are trying to lay blame on a faulty carburettor.

[Hedley]

Right - if he had kept the G positive - which was clearly what the aircraft liked, from previous experience - then he would have been fine, regardless of carburetor upgrades.

If you can't do a postive-G aileron roll - the most basic aerobatic maneuver there is - you have no business flying low-altitude aerobatics at an airshow, regardless of your connections.

It is mind-boggling, the contempt with which people treat low-altitude aerobatics. Mere words fail to express how unqualified this guy was.

[boeingboy]

You can see the progress of the Vancover Mosquito here:

http://vicair.net/

[warbirdpilot7]

I remember when Kermit Week's mossie came to the Hamilton airshow in 1990 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Britian. Dame Vera Lynne came as well.
What a great sight to have his mossie fly with a spitfire, our lancaster and hurricane from CWH. Sadly, that mossie is not going to fly again.

Yes there are wood delamination isssues with the glue(Cornells, Ansons can have the same problem) but it takes proper hangering and care. I really hope this aircraft can fly someday, and make a stop in southern ontario.

[Pirate Pilot]

130 in. MP out of a Merlin....Yep....I was wandering around in the pits at Reno in 2008 and I was talking to one of the P-51 guys in front of his pit area. (don't remember which plane) He pointed out a nice clear top acrylic coffee table made out of a sheet of acrylic and the completely blown up block of a Merlin as the base. That was one very visual lesson in "limits" to hopping up a Merlin. Turned a liquid cooled engine into an aircooled unit in 1/100 of a second!! Reno is a good place to see just how far an individual or group of individuals can push an aircraft to its "ultimate" performance.
I've written earlier about how much I like the Grumman Tiger Cat. Ignoring their different roles and sizes does anyone know the comparison straight and level top speed between the Mosquito and the Tiger Cat? The Grumman is a later design is it not? I'm not sure but I think the Tiger Cat we see racing in Reno is somewhat "tweaked" as it does race unlimited and although I think its the sexiest thing going it never does well. It just sounds the best! Could the Mosquito out-run a ME-109?

[mbav8r]

Hedley, you have said when he started the roll, but the accident report states he was executing a wing over and describes the maneuver as a course reversal. The other important aspect is the apparant fuel starvation of the left engine due to improper inspection and flow rigging of the carburetor, there was also a report of left engine rough running previously but was, in my opinion, incorrectly diagnosed and rectified. If you were to be executing a wing over, would the technique not be to pull up and gain some altitude while reducing airspeed, probably kicking in some right rudder at the top of the maneuver, pushing the nose over abit, losing some gforce, perhaps even into abit of negative? Now, if you lost your left engine right at the top, how detrimental would that be to completing said maneuver? I'm asking seriously, not being critical, but after reading the report, it appears that he wasn't doing anything he shouldn't have been doing. A wing over to me, seems no more complex than a canon turn, which we all likely learned at around 30hrs.
Carburettor problems: historical aspects
Early on in the Second World War, it was found that Merlin poweredRAF aircraft were
disadvantaged when taking evasive action dueto a tendency for the engine(s) to cut under negative
g conditions. Essentially, this was a two-stage phenomenon. Initially, theonset of negative g
resulted in the fuel moving to the top ofthe float chambers, thus starving the jet well (ie theentrance
to the needle valve assembly) and causing a 'weak cut'. This was followed by a 'rich cut' as fuel,
under pump pressure,flooded into the chamber through the fully open float valve, thefloats having
adopted their lowest position.
The SU company, in conjunction with the Royal Aircraft Establishment(RAE), developed a
modification which led to the 'RAE Anti g Carburettor'. Both carburettors in G-ASKH were found
to be of this type.
The left engine (Serial Number 104573) was last overhauled, bythe Channel Islands company in
1986 and, after seeing servicein another aircraft, it was installed on G-ASKH in November 1993. In
April 1994, the left engine suffered rough running, togetherwith a red 'low fuel pressure' light. The
symptoms could be reproduced(according to the technical log), by reducing below 1 g with aslight
control column push. This problem was eventually tracedto an incorrectly wired fuel gauge, leading
to the selection ofa nearly empty fuel tank, and consequent fuel starvation.
Summary and discussion
The investigation established that the accident resulted froma loss of control of the aircraft
associated with a temporaryloss of power from the left engine.

[Beefitarian]

I'm no aerobatics pilot but in the video it seems to me the plane rolled and is inverted for way too long just before things go wrong inducing the spin, I'm guessing because of the yaw from losing an engine at such a high power setting?

[Hedley]

I might mention that Bob Hoover had no problem doing aerobatics on one engine in a (twin engine) P-38 during WWII, or afterwards at airshows with one engine feathered in his Shrike Aerocommander.

Heck, Bob did aerobatics with BOTH engines feathered!

I am sure Bob didn't have the pedigree of the Mosquito pilot, but I am sure he could have easily flown a flawless low-altitude aerobatic routine during his FIRST SOLO FLIGHT in the Mosquito.

Don't blame the Mosquito. It did what the idiot at the controls told it to do.

The following is Bob's first (and solo) flight in an unfamiliar aircraft:

Strapped securely in the cockpit of the super-sleek Yak-18, I glanced out at the Soviet dignitaries standing on the ramp. They were celebrating their overwhelming victory over the United States in the 1966 International Aerobatic Competition. “I’ve got a surprise for you, Ivan,” I thought as I checked out the instrument panel in the unique Soviet plane.

Despite my years of experience as an accomplished aerobatic pilot, I’d never participated in a formal aerobatic competition. That had made it even more of an honor to be named the non-flying captain of our team.

Unfortunately, I’d experienced ten days of frustration watching the power-packed Yak outduel our nation’s finest aerobatic pilots. We’d come out the big loser in the Cold War propaganda battle. Now that the competition was over, the pompous Soviets had agreed to let me, as a courtesy, fly their crown jewel.

Over a million Soviets, and reporters from around the world, were positioned at TushinoAirport in Moscow for the closing ceremonies. I was sure they all expected me to taxi out and take off in a normal fashion. Instead I added full power for takeoff and held the plane close to the ground.

The Yak had plenty of airspeed. I lifted the plane off and raised the nose slightly until the landing gear was up.

Rolling the aerobatic plane, I leveled off upside down and aimed dead center for the thirty-foot-high dike surrounding the airport. It looked as if I were going to blast right through it, but an instant before reaching the dike, I raised the nose of the Yak, leapfrogged the dike, and flew out of sight still upside down.

A smile came to my face. I knew I’d caused confusion on the ground. To stay low and out of sight of the crowd, I rolled the Yak right side up and headed back around the airfield alongside the MoscowRiver below the height of the dike. I was sure everyone would be looking for a fifty-foot-high fireball to blossom somewhere on the other side of the dike from where I had disappeared from sight.

I remained at ground level out of sight until I reached the other side of the airport. Then I turned back toward the dike and rolled the plane upside down again. I could feel the adrenaline rush as I flew down directly in front of the crowd. Then I put the Yak-18 through the same series of pinpoint aerobatic maneuvers that had been demonstrated for so many years at air shows all over the world. It was a delight to fly. No wonder our pilots never had a chance.

I was performing at near ground level even though I was aware that Soviet pilots were not permitted to fly aerobatic maneuvers below three hundred feet. After a touchdown on one wheel, an aileron roll, and a touchdown on the other wheel, I landed the Yak. I was a little nervous about the reception I’d receive from the Soviets, but I’d proven my point. Now everyone would know that the American pilots were just as capable as the Russians and that the plane had made the difference in the competition.

Not much comparison with the Mosquito pilot.

Here's the master at work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZPyM2PJcFM

Now, he probably never had lunch with the Queen, but boy that guy could fly. And keep the G positive the whole time.

Am I the only person that remember the famous clip of Bob pouring iced tea during a roll? Gosh, do you think he kept the G positive during that roll?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xp2Uc9XvmjY

[Beefitarian]

I'm pretty sure I'd need someone else to pour the iced tea.

Hedley, I suspect you're not the kind of guy that cares what us "idiots" think but maybe people would warm up to you a bit more if you didn't have to be so harsh on dead guys. I realise he shouldn't have been in that seat and clearly he made a big mistake but I promise he won't crash anymore Mosquitos.

[cgzro]

Hedley, I suspect you're not the kind of guy that cares what us "idiots" think but maybe people would warm up to you a bit more if you didn't have to be so harsh on dead guys. I realise he shouldn't have been in that seat and clearly he made a big mistake but I promise he won't crash anymore Mosquitos

It is better to be harsh, right and alive than nice, wrong and dead.

In an ideal world you could deliver a "right "message a non harsh way but unfortunately human nature causes us to perceive a message we don't want to hear as harsh no matter what kind of verbal ribbon it is wrapped in.

I'm reminded of a very serious medical emergency involving a close member of my family. The emergency room doctor was extremely direct in her assement and advice which was based on a vastly broader experience of the options and outcomes than we could ever have .. we did not get annoyed that she was not nice .. we appreciated the successful outcome.

[Hedley]

you're not the kind of guy that cares what us "idiots" think

You completely misunderstand.

Just because you can't do surface-level aerobatics doesn't make you an idiot.

What makes someone an idiot is when they can't do surface-level aerobatics, and they attempt to do so. In a priceless airplane. In close proximity to thousands of people. Can you see how he might have made some really bad decisions?

If you can't fly surface-level aerobatics, and you do NOT attempt to do so, that does not make you an idiot. That makes you a pretty wise person, because you are NOT attempting maneuvers that you are NOT qualified to perform, in an unforgiving environment.

I'm not sure how to explain this any clearer.

What I don't understand is the complete contempt that the straight-and-level crowd have, for aerobatics. Especially low-altitude aerobatics. I don't care how many tens of thousands of hours that you have watched an autopilot fly your Airbus - that experience does NOT transfer.

The above paragraph applies to both military and civilian pilots, including the fast jet military types, who always lose altitude in a roll, which is a death sentence down low.

[Meatservo]

I always lose altitude in a roll. More than one, and I usually barf, too.

[Hedley]

It's very simple. Before commencing aerobatics, ask yourself, "Self, does this aircraft have inverted systems? And if so, for what duration?"

If the answer is "Yes", then you can do a 1/2 roll on takeoff like this:

http://www.pittspecials.com/movies/takeoff.wmv

However. If the aircraft doesn't have inverted systems - or you just don't want to do any negative G because all the crud on the floor off people's boots gets in your eyes, and on the inside of the canopy - then you can do a completely postive G roll, like this:

http://www.pittspecials.com/movies/roll.wmv

See the difference? Apparently the guy flying the mosquito didn't.

Bob Hoover and Tex Johnston knew all about positive G rolls. The airplane doesn't know it's upside down, so inverted systems are not required.

I can't believe this is so difficult for everyone to emotionally accept. The physics of it really aren't that complicated. Flown by a skilled aerobatic pilot, a roll is a gentle, positive G thing of beauty. Flown by an idiot, you have to call the TSB.

You don't have to believe me. Go to Oshkosh and watch Steve Hinton roll the P-38 from the surface. Heck, if you're a good enough stick, you can do a positive G, 4-pt roll immediately after takeoff. My buddy Freddy used to do that in a T-28 before the owner sold it and bought a Sea Fury.

maybe people would warm up to you a bit more if you didn't have to be so harsh

ummmmmmmmm ..... ok. Here's a suggestion. Go talk to Gerry Younger at Kitchener-Waterloo about this. Get back to me about how much he stroked your ego.

[Tubthumper]

If the guy flying it during the crash was the same guy flying here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=don2J7S8 ... re=related

...then I don't think he was actually trying to roll it when he lost control of it, I think he may have been following the same routine as the video I linked. In the crash video it looked like just before losing control, the aircraft was banked beyond 90 degrees, maybe about 110 degrees for a second. This whole issue of rolling the aircraft at such low level is slowly taking this thread off track of the original Mossie discussion.

It doesn't matter how much of an 'unqualified idiot' Hedley thinks the Mossie pilot was, it's not going to bring him or the DH98 back, nor prevent future pilots from making mistakes that could kill them.

[Hedley]

nor prevent future pilots from making mistakes that could kill them

That's where you're wrong.

I can teach any pilot to safely roll any fixed-wing aircraft in 2 minutes.

My oldest daughter flew her first positive G aileron roll when she was 9 years old.

You can, too.

PS I couldn't care less about idiot pilots killing themselves. Losing a priceless airplane is another matter.

[Beefitarian]

Hedley;

I don't want my ego stroked and I'm not going to do low level aerobatics without proper training followed by getting high level experience until I am competent and confident enough to be completely convinced I won't be bending an airplane. I trust your assesment of the need to keep positive G during the flight in an aircraft that is not properly equipt and in excellent working order. Perhaps more important to ensure you can do it without losing altitude before attempting it mid level let alone low.

I'm not suggesting you lie and say the guy was a great pilot and/or it's too bad about the carboretor. I think we can discuss him making mistakes and talk about the idea that he should not have been doing the maneuvers that lead to the crash.

Of course it's better to tell people the truth, I fully understand you would not be doing anyone a favour sugar coating things and setting them up for failure. You can be direct and honest without calling him an idiot.

Or maybe you can't. I guess if you, Gerry and Freddy can help return the plane with name calling, sorry to bother you, carry on.

[Tubthumper]

PS I couldn't care less about idiot pilots killing themselves. Losing a priceless airplane is another matter.

Thank you for your honesty, it's nice to see true colors come out on this forum.

[Hedley]

Sorry if I'm not sensitive enough for you - I blew off those EST seminars in the 70's - but it seems like tilting at windmills to oppose natural selection. Google a guy called "Charles Darwin".

It is hard to argue the fact that there are tens of thousands of marginal pilots in the world, but only a few Mosquitos. From a pure numbers standpoint, which is more rare and precious?

[Tubthumper]

Ah, yes, Mr Darwin, ...the super-intelectual who married his cousin and has a very 'prestigious' award named after him.

'nuff said about that chap!

[. ._]

It is hard to argue the fact that there are tens of thousands of marginal pilots in the world, but only a few Mosquitos. From a pure numbers standpoint, which is more rare and precious?

Spoken like a true engineer.

I'm pretty sure I could roll a mosquito. Get some speed, lift the nose up a bit, add full aileron, stop roll when level again, resume level flight. I'm pretty sure that's the way it goes. If the plane doesn't have much aileron authority, add more nose up before entering the roll.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd experiment at altitude and find out before doing a show- just to be sure I could do it.

-istp

[Beefitarian]

Well istp if you couldn't pour iced tea while you're doing it you'll crash and we'll have to call you an idiot. So smarten up!

Ah, yes, Mr Darwin, ...the super-intelectual who married his cousin and has a very 'prestigious' award named after him.

'nuff said about that chap!

Ziiiiiiiiing!

[cgzro]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd experiment at altitude and find out before doing a show- just to be sure I could do it.

It depends on what percentage of the time you want to be successful down low.....

There are a lot of variables that make it quite challanging and require experimentation under those conditions with some margin.

For example, runway width/length/terrain play a big role in the visual queues that you use. Haze means you may not have a good horizon and can make judging pitch angles difficult. You almost need muscle memory to get these things right in poor/changed visual conditions. Density altitude affects performance of course, roll rates. Aircraft weight, C of G etc. Wind is a big factor and a strong wind blowing you towards the 'do not cross here unless you want your licence pulled' line can require additional corrections that add drag which ...

There really is no substitute for a lot of practice and these warbirds cost 10's of thousands an hour to operate so nobody gets enough practice in them anymore. Hoover and company had a row of planes to pick from .. we don't get that anymore.

To get really good at this sort of thing you actually need to practice down low with progressively smalller and smaller margins. Just practicing up high and then comming down to 100' to do it is a recipe for disaster. You need to have a bunch of hours at altitudes in between too.

[. ._]

Yeah, I guess it's not all cut and dried.

Just when I think I'm an expert, I get taken down a few notches.

[warbirdpilot7]

I appreciate aerobatics and the pilots that conduct them. I have never done this type of flying.

However, we do not need to be rolling or doing aerobatics in vintage aircraft, whether they are rebuilds, from the ground up restorations, etc.........

If anyone ever went to the famous Geneseo warbird airshows in the early and mid 90's, you know what I am getting at. 5-6 passes of show center, with passes consisting of straight/level, Top and bottom passes of beyond 30* angle of banking, is more then sufficient to display historic, vintage aircraft.

Although, I must say the "Tora Tora Tora" act was exceptional. Anyone see this act, other then me?