Bluebird K7 Latest

Back on topic:

One thing that I have noticed from viewing dozens of blowover accidents is that they seldom or never occur very suddenly - you can usually tell several long seconds before the boat reaches the obvious 'point of no return' that things are getting out of hand. The reasons that people pin on the accident are frequently only the straw that broke the camel's back, on top of a cumulation of other adverse circumstances.

By modern standards, the quality of film footage of K7's accident is relatively poor and makes analysis difficult (and we have no datalogging as we'd have on a modern unlimited, of course), but for this reason, again, I wouldn't restrict my analysis to the final moments only.

The Craig Arfons crash is another good example: LINK. The footage here (starting at about 1:26) doesn't show enough of the lead-in, but it's clear that he was in big trouble already, by that point, and probably had been for many seconds.

Speculative, of course, but engine 'failure' 7 seconds before impact (not take-off, mind you... impact... she was in the air for 3 seconds or so) would say to me that K7 was already likely in deep st, by that point, and Campbell would have known it. I'd therefore take some convincing that that any 'failure' wasn't simply as a result of him lifting off the throttle.

Agreed. Must be one of the longest running threads for it now.

Good afternoon Gentlemen.

I’m quite glad I started the thread although I must admit it wasn’t done so without a sense of trepidation, or consideration. It was certainly in my thoughts not to give the Mods another headache after myself watching all the others closed down. I never contributed on any of the old ones, although the subject has always been a big interest to me.

However I sensed the situation had changed considerably when it was official that the boat was to be handed back.

I thought I knew a little about this story, however there was so much that I didn’t know. A big thank you has to go to Equus and more recently Neil for their invaluable inputs which have been excellent reading.

I’m having a day off work on Friday, I must have a run up and see it.

Fair enough. We've all been there!

I think what I'm getting at here is that Campbell was driving a prototype, with no computer simulations, and very few opportunities to run up to the his target gradually. The circumstances of the day almost forced him to take a calculated risk too many. The first run was by no means perfect, as had previously been thought.

He entered the measure distance at c. 285mph, continuing to accelerate and lifted just as he exited the measured km at 311mph. Average for the kilo 297.6mph. Some 1.5 seconds after leaving the kilo, Bluebird developed a significant nose-up trim (perhaps as much as 4° or more) and, at a speed
of some 310mph, the starboard sponson left the water. It remained clear for a period of 15 frames (0.63 seconds), and in that time Bluebird traveled some 136 metres before settling back with a series of shorter bounces. It is approximately 2.5 seconds before the craft re- established level trim. The engine flamed out at some point during this period. DC had experienced similar virtually airborne incidents before in 1956 and 57 at around 290 - 295mph, under its intermediate Beryl powered configuration. The team thought they had to a large part cured this tendency to pitch up on release of full power, but this illustrates that all that had been achieved was to marginally widen the safe operating envelope.

The only way of testing this was for Campbell to be a test pilot out on the lake. By January 4th 1967, he had been at Coniston for 9 odd weeks and was keen to take his chance when the conditions allowed. Time and money were running out. It is pure speculation, but If he had essayed a return run with a max speed of 310mph at the end of the kilo, and an entry of 300mph, he might just have got away with it. The peak of 328mph before the measured kilo sealed his fate.

K7 leaves the water on its starboard side as it exists measured kilo on 1st run

I don’t think DC was foolhardy in any measure, I truly believe he took his own calculated risks based upon on his own experiences.

He was after all a ‘Test Pilot’.

This was the sixties after all. A very brave man.

When Andy Green pushed Thrust SSC and smashed the LSR back 1997, that vehicle would seem absolutely analogue in this day and age.

And it had a bit of data back then to consider for reference.

Nearly 30 years ago.

I think it makes you realise why these records are not attempted more often. Especially WSR.

DC was doing both records back then.

Incredible really.

But DC was far from a test pilot.

Test pilots perform a carefully planned, incremental series of tests to validate the design & establish the safe operating envelope of the aircraft they are testing.

They are debriefed after each flight, the telemetry is examined, and that is used to plan the next series of tests.

This is not a criticism of DC.

There are/were at least 4 people seriously trying, mind you:

• Ken Warby and his son had a boat finished and in testing. Ken died last year, but I believe that his son intends to carry on. According to their Facebook page, they're booked to be back at Blowering Dam next month. Ken's loss must be a setback, but I still consider this one to stand a very real chance of success - it's basically an 'Evo' version of the boat that currently holds the record.

• Daniel Dehaemers from Belgium had a boat close to being ready to run, but unfortunately died of cancer.

• Nigel MacKnight's Quicksinker, sorry, Qucksilver project has been plugging away for literally decades, but does seem to be making some progress (though he's been at it so long now that it's become something of a joke).

• Current LSR impresario Richard Noble is in the early stages of a project, though at Noble's age (he's 78, now), I'd be surprised if he lives long enough to see it through.

There are several other contenders (including at least another couple of British projects - one called Longbow, by the people who built the Bluebird K777 replica, and another by Tony Fahey, who built the failed British Pursuit/Alton Towers back in the '80's) but I'm not sure that I rate them seriously, for the time being. It wouldn't surprise me if Bill Smith launched a project, now that his toy has been taken away from him... which would be nice: it would mean we'd stand at least a 50% chance of being rid of him.

The two 'serious' UK contenders - Noble and MacKnight - suffer, in my opinion, by doing it the 'old school' way that Campbell did it, of trying to build a big, high-tech 'prestige' engineering solution... which requires shedloads of money and therefore major backing from industry, which as you suggest is difficult to come by these days.

Warby and Dehaemers pursued much more sensible, 'leaner' solutions, with smaller, simpler boats and engines... hence much more affordable/fundable.

That's interesting, but also quite sad that they all seem to have been kicking it about for decades and nobody has heard of them.

It's sad to say, it's just not news anymore.

I bet if you asked any eleven year olds what the land and water speed records were, they couldn't tell you to within 100mph.

I believe its against rules, but in a way it is surprising they didn't have a flap or two on the front that you could engage during deceleration.