Grace Spitfire landing incident
Grace Spitfire landing incident
Author
Discussion

mrloudly

Original Poster:

2,815 posts

264 months

Sunday 18th September 2016
quotequote all
Believe there was a landing mishap at Sywell last week, crew all OK. Anyone know what damage was sustained?

eharding

14,648 posts

313 months

Sunday 18th September 2016
quotequote all
Looking at the pictures, I'd say new prop and as a minimum engine shock-loading inspection.

Financially painful enough (when insurance betterment comes into play) in my experience with Lycomings and Vedeneyevs, suspect a Merlin is going to be an order of magnitude more so.

Main thing is, no crew injuries.

JeremyH5

1,834 posts

164 months

Sunday 18th September 2016
quotequote all
From Facebook:

Message from Carolyn Grace:

The Grace Spitfire ML407 recovery process is going well. The shock load testing showed that the engine remains serviceable. Other inspections including NDT have had results (as anticipated) showing no problems. Our Air Leasing team are being supported by the very best and most helpful specialists, and my personal gratitude goes out to them all!

mrloudly

Original Poster:

2,815 posts

264 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
What was it, nose over?

Flooble

5,755 posts

129 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
Looked like it.

JeremyH5

1,834 posts

164 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
Don't know what happened. All I've seen is a statement that "The Grace Spitfire ML407 had a minor incident during the rollout after landing at Sywell Aerodrome today. No one was injured, the aircraft has only minor damage and is safely back in Air Leasing's Hangar at Sywell.

Flooble

5,755 posts

129 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
http://www.northampton-news-hp.co.uk/spitfire-airc...


Journalist doing their best: "While slowing down, the nose of the aircraft dropped into the ground, bringing it to a sudden halt. It is believed the Spitfire had been pivoting on its under-wing wheels without its back wheel also touching the ground, forcing the front of it to drop."


JeremyH5

1,834 posts

164 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
Brilliant!

Simpo Two

92,662 posts

294 months

Monday 19th September 2016
quotequote all
Flooble said:
Journalist doing their best: "While slowing down, the nose of the aircraft dropped into the ground, bringing it to a sudden halt. It is believed the Spitfire had been pivoting on its under-wing wheels without its back wheel also touching the ground, forcing the front of it to drop."
Too much brake or a ditch?

Flooble

5,755 posts

129 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
Too much brake or a ditch?
I would probably go with too much brake, but doubt we will ever know. There is a little hump at the 21 end of the grass at Sywell, if the Spitfire was being plonked down right on the numbers it may have caught that.

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
Journalist doing their best: "While slowing down, the nose of the aircraft dropped into the ground, bringing it to a sudden halt. It is believed the Spitfire had been pivoting on its under-wing wheels without its back wheel also touching the ground, forcing the front of it to drop."
Technically accurate but a very mangled use of words - and not really using the normal terms for the relevant bits of the aeroplane.

Simpo Two

92,662 posts

294 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Flooble said:
I would probably go with too much brake, but doubt we will ever know.
The pilot will know. Maybe they just had the brakes fixed...! 'Just a little dab and... oh arse!'

jamieduff1981

8,092 posts

169 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Spitfire brakes aren't said to be the most user-friendly things.

I'm glad ML407 and the Grace family are more-or-less intact!

Flooble

5,755 posts

129 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
The POH I found online suggests the landing run for a Spitfire Mk II (ML407 is a Mk IX) was only just over 400 yards even with defective brakes. I'd guess that not having the weight of guns or ammunition would balance out the second cockpit (which would also add drag).

As Sywell has taken 15-33 out of use, the shortest runway now is 603m long (and there's loads of overrun) which would suggest that the brakes would not need to be used particularly heavily (658 yards available and if you look on a chart or image you'll see that you wouldn't hit anything if you weren't stopped by the end anyway, so realistically you would have available probably double what the book said - and I'd guess you would want to be gentle anyway given the age and cost of replacement shoes).

So sounds like the pilot was just unlucky, probably hit a bump.


Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Have Spitfires operated out of Sywell regularly before?

Flooble

5,755 posts

129 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all

mrloudly

Original Poster:

2,815 posts

264 months

Tuesday 20th September 2016
quotequote all
Just glad all were OK, the last warbird to nose over there didn't end quite so well...