Aircraft General Discussion

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Posted by Martin Kyte on 20/10/2016 15:30:36:

"And yet the instructions to the Red Arrows when flying over London is that if there is a problem ditch in the Thames.

Martin"

Sort of depends if you are attempting to save the pilots or the civilian population doesn't it?

regards Martin

There is a limited amount of open country plus they have ejector seats!

Neil

[John OlsenParticipant @johnolsen79199]

It's a few years back now, but I had a friend at one time who was studying to be a pilot under the Australian authorities, and he had a document of theirs about ditching. From what I recall, large aircraft were regarded as a better bet than small ones. This was partly because they usually have retractable undercarriages, the advice being to leave the gear up and keep the nose as high as possible. Waves of any significant size are a big problem and there was some discussion about the merits of trying to ditch along the line of the waves rather than at right angles to them. I forget the conclusion…it is not straightforward since the wind is likely to be blowing at right angles to the wave front, but may not always be if the waves originated some distance away. Small aircraft with fixed undercarriage have a particular problem with waves, as might be expected. Of course it is small single engine aircraft that are most likely to find themselves over water with no power, so the outcomes are not likely to be good.

Ditching is not actually something that would be attempted unless things were looking pretty grim…how many actual attempts have there been in total I wonder? I seem to recall a DC8 going down short in Tokyo Bay with not too bad a result many years ago. Pretty much the only reason to deliberately ditch would be that all engine power has been lost, and that is not actually that common these days. Apart from flying through volcanic ash clouds of course.

I agree that putting down on dry land would be better, since you can exit the aircraft easier and rescue services have easier access, and the aircraft might even be reusable afterwards. My feeling about repairing an aircraft that has been is salt water would be much the same as the advice that I saw for cameras years back. They said "If you drop your camera in water, leave it there and claim on the insurance. If you get it out, they will try to fix it and it will never be any good again." On the rescue access thing…the airport in Auckland NZ has extensive mudflats at one end and for many years kept a hovercraft as part of the rescue service. I'm not sure if they still do, and I seem to recall some scandal about it being out of service for long periods. So if something like the Ariana thing happened, passengers might find themselves struggling in sticky mud. Not much fun.

It is always a bit tricky…how much should you spend planning for accidents that may never happen? Should aircraft actually bother with flotation devices for passengers or should that weight instead be used to make systems more robust ?

John

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

With the Hudson river crash, some of the success might be put down to the fact that the pilot was an ex US Navy carrier, so would have some training in ditching an aircraft.

Ian S C

[Ex contributorParticipant @mgnbuk]

the fact that the pilot was an ex US Navy carrier

Chesley Sullenberger was an ex-Air Force pilot, not Navy. Probably still had ditching training, though.

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

Yes your right Nigel. Both pilots were 20,000 hr men, although the 2nd pilot had only 35 hrs on the type. Don't know where I got the navy idea.

Ian S C

[Roger Williams 2Participant @rogerwilliams2]

Hello all, up in Lincolnshire last week, so we called into East Kirkby for another visit……..fantastic to see the Lancaster again. Went on it for a taxi ride a few years ago, a humbling experience.

[robjon44Participant @robjon44]

Hi all, on my latest expedition into Cambridgeshire in the campervan, I had checked out aircraft related places of interest & singled out the RAF Wichford Museum, it is situated on the Lancaster Industrial Estate ( Ely CB6 3NW ) which is one of the largest such enterprises I've seen, taking up what must be the entirety of the WW2 airfield, however on approach you will arrive at a roundabout which you must negotiate to the entrance road with its security cabin, I mention this only because the are other exits to recycling centres etc, drive up to the top & turn left then go to the end (its a cul-de-sac) where you will find a large green slate memorial to 115 Squadron with its history engraved on it, situated where the main runway began. Turn around & go back & you will find yourself on the main road through the estate, this itself looks like you could land a Jumbo Jet on it ! negotiate your way to the far end & look around for museum, it is in an office building & not readily apparent, however even on a Sunday there were plenty of folk about who could point you to it.

Where do I start? a medium sized set up on 2 floors absolutely jam packed, an immaculate diorama of the airfield back in the day, large solid scale models of both the Merlin engined & later Bristol Hercules sleeve valved radial engined versions, throughout the rest of the space every square inch of space covered with photographs of everyday life on the base, documents, maps, technical drawings, paintings, the list was endless. Now I got the impression from reviews that it would maybe wile away half an hour & yes I admit that I have been obsessed with aircraft since the age of 4 when my dear old dad plonked me in the seat of a fighter & lit up the gunsight, I was sold ! However, we where there for over 2 hours, my missus has become an enthusiast of the V22 OSPREY & the Eurofighter Typhoon due to our sightings,airshows,museums etc, the visit to the MEX at Brooklands added fuel to the fire I think, a walk to the top of the banking, round their Concorde, but I think what got to her the most was the Napier racing car with its 29 litre triple bank Napier Lion aircraft engine, I had to prise her off that! Anyway do definitely give the RAF Wichford museum a go.

robjon44

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

Here's a photo of a Napier Lion engine in a NZ aviation museum. Ian S C

Edited By Ian S C on 17/11/2016 11:58:15

[JAParticipant @ja]

The Napier Lion had a strange crankshaft main bearing arrangement that I have never seen used anywhere else. The crankshaft was one piece and crowded roller bearings were used. The bearings were held in place on the crankshaft by split sleeves (bushes).

JA

[Geoff TheasbyParticipant @geofftheasby]

My paper yesterday printed a picture of an SU-33 jet fighter as it "takes off" from the Russian carrier in the Med. Now, call me Mr Picky if you will, but the engines do not appear to be running, the wings are folded and it is chained down to the deck. If it goes anywhere, it will take the ship with it!

Geoff

Edited By Geoff Theasby on 17/11/2016 19:20:48

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Posted by JA on 17/11/2016 17:48:11:

The Napier Lion had a strange crankshaft main bearing arrangement that I have never seen used anywhere else. The crankshaft was one piece and crowded roller bearings were used. The bearings were held in place on the crankshaft by split sleeves (bushes).

JA

Not that new, when Stephen Wessel showed me his engine at MEX (ENV of 1910 – under construction) he pointed out exactly the same way of keeping the bearings in place

Neil

[JAParticipant @ja]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 17/11/2016 21:38:46:

Posted by JA on 17/11/2016 17:48:11:

The Napier Lion had a strange crankshaft main bearing arrangement that I have never seen used anywhere else. The crankshaft was one piece and crowded roller bearings were used. The bearings were held in place on the crankshaft by split sleeves (bushes).

JA

Not that new, when Stephen Wessel showed me his engine at MEX (ENV of 1910 – under construction) he pointed out exactly the same way of keeping the bearings in place

Neil

Then I guess that Napier could have used such an arrangement on the early, pre1906, cars.

JA

[pgk pgkParticipant @pgkpgk17461]

I was just reading the first post in this thread where the OP sat in a sunderland. It triggered a memory from way back when i was 4 or 5 yrs old and I'm sure my Dad said that the round bits I was playing with to make a 'bicycle' were sunderland porthole cut-outs he'd salvaged from the base. It would have been around the time he got posted to singapore ??? 1953??

Edited By pgk pgk on 20/11/2016 11:51:25

[Cornish JackParticipant @cornishjack]

Being aircraft pedantic (pedantry is VERY fashionable on the forum!!), I believe that sunderland may be a place somewhere North of the Watford Gap but the Sunderland flying boat (Sunderboat to the initiated) requires a capital 'S'. Crews needed additional skills in the culinary arts as well as seamanship!! The 'opposition' treated it with some respect, giving it the nickname 'Flying Porcupine' because of its armament. I had Service friends who had crewed them and loved it but managed to avoid them for the short period they were in service when I joined.

rgds

Bill

[John OlsenParticipant @johnolsen79199]

Actually if we re going to be pedantic, wouldn't a place name also normally receive a capital letter too?

There was at one time a boat in Auckland made out of a Sunderland wing float.

John

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by John Olsen on 20/11/2016 21:44:56:

Actually if we re going to be pedantic, wouldn't a place name also normally receive a capital letter too?

.

 

.

Edit: on second thoughts … Maybe deduct one star for tautology.

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 20/11/2016 22:12:15

[JAParticipant @ja]

To be pedantic all proper nouns, that is names, should start with a capital letter. Sunderland, the place the aeroplane or anything else should do so. I believe that this should apply to the names of element and perhaps metals such as brass.

JA

[Cornish JackParticipant @cornishjack]

Baited and cast and … strike!!

rgds

Bill

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

in 1964 when I joined the Air Force I wanted to be a Flight Engineer, inspired by the Mk 5 Sunderlands of the RNZAF, these were just about to be phased out and replace with Orion maritime reconnaiance aircraft. Still got the Orions, and will have them for the next ten or a dozen years.

Ian S C

[Clive HartlandParticipant @clivehartland94829]

I live in the Medway towns which includes Rochester, Chatham and Gillingham, During the war Sunderlands were made in Rochester by Shorts and the Hard is still there. The bits were fabricated in tunnels in the chalk cliff on the East side and the planes launched from the hard standing. After the war a single Shorts Sunderland was moored in the Medway above Rochester bridge for some years. I did onetime see some maintenance on it when engines were run. When I joined the army at 14 and came back a few years later it was gone.

Clive

PS. of course it was also made in Belfast where Shorts were also established

Edited By Clive Hartland on 21/11/2016 11:22:15

[Ex contributorParticipant @mgnbuk]

PS. of course it was also made in Belfast where Shorts were also established

And also on Lake Windemere

**LINK**

Nigel B

[MuzzerParticipant @muzzer]

I've only got a vague understanding of what I'm looking at here but when browsing in the local charity shops this afternoon I spotted a group of aircraft manuals. Leafing through them, there are line drawings of the innards of instruments etc. Clearly for training purposes. One was titled something like "the use of water rescue equipment", for those unlucky enough to have ditched in the soup.

If anyone is sufficiently interested I could retrieve them. Given that this is a charity shop, they wouldn't be expensive.

Anyone recognise them?

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

There used to be a Sunderland 'gate guardian' in Pembroke Dock when I was a lad.

Neil

[Cornish JackParticipant @cornishjack]

Muzzer – you could try flagging that up on the Spotters forum on PPrune (Professional Pilots' Rumour Network) http://www.pprune.org. Might well be some interest!

rgds

Bill

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Catching-up on yesterday's T.V. …

I've just watched 'Click' [which should be available on the BBC iPlayer]

Very interesting snippet about BAE Systems' "autonomous" test aircraft

Jetstream: Reg. G-BWWW

MichaelG.

.

Edit: https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/G-BWWW may be of interet

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 11/12/2016 15:21:36

[Author]

Posts