Lancaster fire

Author
Discussion

Ginetta G15 Girl

3,220 posts

183 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
It really rather depends on the a/c.

One of the most impressive things I've seen was the Dutch Fokker Friendship where the Captain feathered a prop while executing a barrel roll.

Tom_C76

1,923 posts

187 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Just out of interest, what would a Lanc fuelled for a short flight with only flight crew on board weigh compared to one with full fuel, crew, ammo and a full bomb load?

I believe my Grandad came home on one with at least one engine missing, but as he sat in the tail I don't think he can claim that much credit for it landing safely. Some credit for it not being more damaged though.

Eric Mc

121,784 posts

264 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
It really rather depends on the a/c.

One of the most impressive things I've seen was the Dutch Fokker Friendship where the Captain feathered a prop while executing a barrel roll.
I remember seeing that too. It was always a great routine.

Boatbuoy

1,941 posts

161 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
It really rather depends on the a/c.

One of the most impressive things I've seen was the Dutch Fokker Friendship where the Captain feathered a prop while executing a barrel roll.
'twas always an airshow highlight for me.

http://youtu.be/wajOrm8UpmY

ChemicalChaos

10,360 posts

159 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Tom_C76 said:
Just out of interest, what would a Lanc fuelled for a short flight with only flight crew on board weigh compared to one with full fuel, crew, ammo and a full bomb load?

I believe my Grandad came home on one with at least one engine missing, but as he sat in the tail I don't think he can claim that much credit for it landing safely. Some credit for it not being more damaged though.
Wikipedia said:
Empty weight: 36,457 lb (16,571 kg)
Loaded weight: 68,000 lb (30,909 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 72,000 lb (32,727 kg)

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
ChemicalChaos said:
Tom_C76 said:
Just out of interest, what would a Lanc fuelled for a short flight with only flight crew on board weigh compared to one with full fuel, crew, ammo and a full bomb load?

I believe my Grandad came home on one with at least one engine missing, but as he sat in the tail I don't think he can claim that much credit for it landing safely. Some credit for it not being more damaged though.
Wikipedia said:
Empty weight: 36,457 lb (16,571 kg)
Loaded weight: 68,000 lb (30,909 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 72,000 lb (32,727 kg)
So for a short flight say 500 gallons of fuel and crew of 2 or 3, that's less than 2 tons. Even with stuff I've forgotten about that sounds comfortably less than 2/3 of max takeoff weight. In wartime they might even have risked it.

aeropilot

34,302 posts

226 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
One of the most impressive things I've seen was the Dutch Fokker Friendship where the Captain feathered a prop while executing a barrel roll.
He was mad Fokker...... biggrin



Hooli

32,278 posts

199 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
aeropilot said:
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
One of the most impressive things I've seen was the Dutch Fokker Friendship where the Captain feathered a prop while executing a barrel roll.
He was mad Fokker...... biggrin
I remember something on TV where the pilot did it while pouring a glass of water & claimed the hardest bit was pouring 'backwards'.

Eric Mc

121,784 posts

264 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
That was Bob Hoover in the Commander 580.

Ledaig

1,694 posts

261 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Thanks Ledaig and Eric for the snide responses, that was really grown up of you.
Nothing snide about my response at all, and frankly I would consider it a highly mature response to someone who has just told me to "fk off" on a public forum.

Nobody doubts you history or knowledge, but you attitude towards people on this forum stinks.

RDMcG

19,096 posts

206 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Very sad news, and I very much support the view that she should be kept flying if at all possible

When I flew on the Canadian Lancaster, I recall feeling how much of a privilege it was, and wondering how much longer she would keep flying. With a fair number of static aircraft,it would be tragic if we never heard a Lancaster in the air, or saw a landing,or even had a chance for a flight.

There is no comparison in seeing a silent, spent corpse of a plane, however visually perfect, and seeing and hearing it as it was intended to be…in the air.

Ginetta G15 Girl

3,220 posts

183 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Ledaig said:
frankly I would consider it a highly mature response to someone who has just told me to "fk off" on a public forum.
I did not tell you to "fk off", had I done so you would have known about it. It would appear that you have taken my post out of context.


Steve_D

13,737 posts

257 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all
Talking of power imbalance with a dead/feathered engine and the associated lack of control authority. Am I right in remembering that an aircraft displaying at Farnbourough many years ago turned onto a dead engine and ended up crashing through the roof of the fire station.

Steve

Eric Mc

121,784 posts

264 months

Tuesday 19th May 2015
quotequote all

Steve_D

13,737 posts

257 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
Thanks Eric.
Remember my father (airline captain) watching the news and saying you would always turn with your good engine(s) on the inside/low side of the turn.

richw_82

992 posts

185 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
WRT the Lancaster photo', he may well have got away with it if the speed was high enough to trade for altitude and time to unfeather at least one engine, however it's a bloody silly thing to do. Aside from the fact that the propellor might fail to unfeather, the process itself causes an increase in drag (and hence exacerbates any handling problem).

If it didn't all end in tears, I would warrant that the Captain got a 'hats on' interview with no coffee.
It seems that during the immediate postwar years it was done fairly regularly as a showing off kind of stunt. There's similar photos of a Lincoln carrying a low level beat up on one engine, and of course the well known photos of an MR2 Shackleton at Farnborough also on one.

A Shackleton features again in how it can go badly wrong, in that at a Battle of Britain display in Gibraltar one year the wrong feathering button was pushed shutting down the live engine and resulting in an expensive mess...

V8LM

5,166 posts

208 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
Steve_D said:
Thanks Eric.
Remember my father (airline captain) watching the news and saying you would always turn with your good engine(s) on the inside/low side of the turn.
The Korean Air Cargo 747 crash is evidence of what can go wrong if you don't.

ecsrobin

17,024 posts

164 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Ledaig said:
frankly I would consider it a highly mature response to someone who has just told me to "fk off" on a public forum.
I did not tell you to "fk off", had I done so you would have known about it. It would appear that you have taken my post out of context.
I would suggest the fact multiple people have felt it was rude to Ledaig and that we have all misinterpreted your post then the words you used were probably not the best.

Hooli

32,278 posts

199 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
That was Bob Hoover in the Commander 580.
I suspected you'd know, cheers Eric.

Squawk1066

2,939 posts

170 months

Wednesday 20th May 2015
quotequote all
The damaged number 4 engine has been taken away, by lorry from the BBMF today. This is for specialist repair. On that note, does it sound like they are hoping to get her flying again this year?