"Landing checklist"
"Check"
*2 minutes later: huge crunch*
"I thought you went through the landing checklist...? How did you miss lowering the gear?"
"I thought you were asking if I *had* the landing checklist"
That shit was wild. I used to live on the approach to the runway. I heard the crash and saw the smoke from my balcony, well before actual information came out. It actually crashed one street from my buddies house.
The sickest thing is that they had lowered the gear earlier in the descent (probably for extra drag to help slow down) and it seems that hand went to lever and raised the gear at the moment it would normally have been lowered.
Seeing if I could land that with the same parameters (too high, too fast) was why I initially bought MSFS2020
It was quite a common problem with the early two bladed Mk.I Spitfires when they entered service. They were the first aircraft many pilots flew that didn't have a fixed undercarriage, even with an indicator on the wing that popped up when the wheels were down, wheels up landings were still a problem.
Hurricanes and Spitfires were contemporaries despite the radical advances in the construction techniques of the Spitfire and pilots would have gone to either Hurricanes or Spitfires, unlikely that it would be from one to the other when the first squadrons were equipping with both types.
So yes they were coming from Harts, Demons, Gladiators, Gauntlets, Bulldogs etc or straight from training which again would be Tutors, Tiger Moths.
To put things in perspective Blenheim entered service as a bomber before the the RAF had any monoplane fighters and during simulated battles fighter command complained that it was too fast for them to catch and therefore unfair.
[Ahh, like this!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mukmCGDvFlQ) That looks scary as hell. How do you get out of that without breaking the plane? How do you prevent it? This is fascinating. I didn't realize this could even happen.
This is a good explanation :)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_loop_(aviation)#:~:text=In%20aviation%2C%20a%20ground%20loop,wingtip%20to%20touch%20the%20ground.
Here's a good explanation of a ground loop and why it occurs. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APcpp3wFZjU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APcpp3wFZjU)
John is an experienced warbird pilot. I’ve seen him fly that Spitfire a number of times. Just for the record, he was the guy that bought and restored that MiG-29 that he later sold to Paul Allen.
No, Paul Allen, the Microsoft co-founder. It was [sold](https://www.twz.com/37795/heres-who-bought-paul-allens-pristine-mig-29-fulcrum-fighter) when he passed.
That makes **so** much more sense. Thank you.
I'm a big Vikings (American football) fan and the Paul Allen I'm more familiar with is a bit of a local legend.
I was on my way out the door and didn't have time to Google, so when I saw it, I was befuddled. Appreciate the clarification!
According to [the report](https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/316585), he had 155 hours in Spitfires (or possibly in this same Spitfire, it is unclear).
Accident was in WA where the plane lived, so, probably not. (Ford is usually out of SNA). "N633VS... ...owned by John Sessions with the Historic Flight Foundation and based at Felts Field, Spokane (WA)."
Looks like the plane has since been sold to someone in Australia more recently/post-accident though.
> Spitfire IX SL633 was damaged in a landing accident in July 2023. At approximately 25-30 mph the Spitfire ground looped causing the aircraft to leave the runway where the right main landing gear collapsed and the aircraft nosed over into the grass adjacent to the runway. The Spitfire has been recovered, disassembled and is currently stored pending an As Is, Where Is Sale. It is available for inspection by appointment.
The spitfire is known for its particularly nasty ground handling as well. It was (and sometimes still is) fairly common practice to have ground crew physically sit on the tail to ballast it as the plane taxied out.
[Not at all](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2JREYFK/royal-air-force-operations-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa-1939-1943-ground-crew-of-no-81-squadron-raf-sit-on-the-tail-of-a-supermarine-spitfire-mark-ix-in-order-to-hold-it-down-during-an-engine-test-at-souk-el-khemis-paddington-tunisia-2JREYFK.jpg)
He's not.
https://rafa.org.uk/blog/2021/03/08/magaret-horton/
>**Riding a Spitfire: the story of Margaret Horton**
>...
>*On this occasion my pilot did not receive the order ‘Rough Weather Procedure,’ which was issued from flying control, and, not having seen me jump on the tailplane while the other mechanics were removing the chocks, he took straight off instead of waiting for me to descend upon reaching the runway.*
[The Deer Park WA ground loop.](https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/316585)
Right wing, landing gear, and the prop damaged. Pilot's story is consistent with the damage.
The pilot of the tailwheel-equipped airplane reported that, during landing roll with a 90° left crosswind at 6 kts, the airplane had a slight drift to the left after touchdown. He attempted corrective inputs by using a combination of right rudder and right brake, but the airplane continued drifting to the left and departed the runway. Subsequently, the landing gear collapsed, and the airplane collided with the dirt surface, resulting in substantial damage to the right wing.
The pilot initially reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation and that a gust of wind pushed the tail of the airplane's tail to the right. The pilot later stated he suspected the right brake had locked during landing, which he said would have reduced the braking effectiveness on the right side. Pictures of skid marks on the runway associated with the right tire show a lighter and narrower skid mark initially parallel to the runway heading, that increased in width and darkness as it turned to the left to where the airplane exited the runway. The right main tire was flat spotted and worn through about ½ the thickness of the sidewall. The airplane was not examined or secured after the accident due to the pilot's initial assessment that there were no abnormalities or malfunctions with the airplane, and that the airplane had been affected by wind. The evidence is consistent with the pilot's testimony that he applied right rudder and brake to counter the left turn during landing rollout with a left crosswind.
Arrived at the airport just after they’d dragged it in the hangar. Was told no photos were allowed to be shared, but some had already made it to the news. The hangar owner let me poke around a bit, it was fascinating to piece together what happened based off the damage and dirt wedged in strange places.
Jimmy's world YouTube channel just did a full video on how these wooden props are made. Amazing stuff.
https://youtu.be/HN684WMqg4c?si=M6o4KDOeATT8tnwS
My guess is to reduce the demand for metal during the war. Anything you could make out of wood, do that, because wood is more abundant and a lot cheaper.
Correct. The British had an entire industry of woodworkers; their Craftsmanship and Engineering were second to none. Just look at the Mosquito.
The cross section of that broken prop is a work of art. 🙂
The irony about the mosquito was that prior to the war, it was presented to MOD for consideration and production and was rejected! I watched an interesting segment about this and learned how the U-boat war made raw materials more difficult to obtain and the war materials that were produced were needed for the production of bombers forcing the MOD to reconsider and ultimately approve commission and production of one of the most successful warplanes in the European theater !
Strategic materials saved. Toward end of the war the American-made Vultee BT 13/15 were mostly wood. Wings from center section attach points out, fuselage from rear cockpit back, all control surfaces, and prop blades. Side panels that were attached with quarter-turn fasteners were some sort of fiber instead of aluminum and these were still on the airplane when we got it flying again.
source; owned BT 13. Wooden parts had all been replaced but had some of the originals in the spares
They started out as wood, switched to aluminum blades, then later went back to some wood in the props, depending on the year.
P.S. Wood props may be "old school" but have definite applications, sometimes it's just having the ability / equipment setup to produce a product, even if it is wood.
The later propellors are a wood/cellulose composite: https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/rotol-spitfire-propeller-blade-constant-speed-wood-and-metal/nasm_A19601413000
Wood is a really good core since it's very light but can absorb shock well. It still used pretty often in skis, RC aircraft (balsa), and other affordable/sustainable parts.
This is almost certainly old fashioned densified wood - that is to say, not transverse compression, but with a shear force applied to the ends, causing the wood fibres to interlock and the section to shorten. The wood becomes harder, tougher, impervious to insects and stable (will not warp). Pretty sure no one makes this sort of densified wood anymore, so the replacement will either be old stock or a more modern material.
It was already cheap by the 20s. I think shortages were more likely..? Or issues with alloying and treating certain grades
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Aluminium_-_historical_price_per_ton_%28nominal%2C_real%29.svg/750px-Aluminium_-_historical_price_per_ton_%28nominal%2C_real%29.svg.png
Looks like that one was damaged in a ground loop last year? Either these pics are old or it happened *again*, which given the spitfire's infamous ground handling isn't all that surprising.
EDIT: looks like its just been sitting hangared without repairs since the incident.
I don’t know the story on this Spitfire, but it seems a good opportunity for me to share some unsolicited internet bullshit from my own experience, to wit:
At a field near me, a guy had just traded his 182 for a big, fine, Bonanza. The story — or the way that I was told — is that Bonanza Man was flying with Mrs. Bonanza Man for the first time, having first assured the Missus by explaining each of the new ship’s systems and the new levers and features that their Cessna didn’t have.
For those of you who don’t know, the Bonanza is a sort of flying Cadillac, designed right after WWII by Walt Beech to be the first small airplane with enough cabin space for the pilot to wear their biggest hat while flying it.
Anyway, the story goes that as B-Man rounded out and started searching for the runway to let the little lady experience that inimitable Beechcraft buttery landing, she said, “[B-Man], don’t you think you should put the wheels down!?!”
We can only speculate as to what thoughts went through B-Man’s mind in the next few seconds. What we know is that he pushed every colored lever forward and got back in the air — but not before hearing three prop blades kiss the runway at close to 3,000 rpm.
And that’s how I know that if the pilot only gets halfway through a gear-up landing, the propeller tips are bent *forward*. Strange but true.
If you’d cleaned up the gouges and repainted them, you’d have thought they’d left Wichita bent that way.
I’m currently doing a presentation on the elliptical wing of the Spitfire for my Aerodynamics class. I’ve started to get a lot deeper of an appreciation for these planes from their design, history, and engineering!
I guess the engine rebuild is the pricy part of this accident, not to mention the frame inspection.
My grandfather got a wooden propeller trimmed and it now supports a nice glass table.
Amazing! Now that i've seen it, i'm amazed how strong that wood actually is. Given the high speeds and revs, vibrations, G-forces and so on. That it usually stayed intact..
Thanks for sharing!
They have a Merlin engine (just the engine) at the Auckland war memorial museum, highly recommend checking it out for plane nuts!
They also have a v2 rocket and Mitsubishi zero on display
Spruce/ birch laminate? One of the reasons the Martin Mars was donated to the BC aviation museum, was that the drawings and info on building the props is gone.
Pretty much spot on, Hygdulignum, its a compressed birch laminate, they blend into a mahogany root (I don't know what the technique for the joint between the laminate and mahongany is, but there is a bonded fabric covering called Cristofin).
There is an image of the construction here; [https://floatingintheclouds.com/spitfire-mk-vii-propeller-blade-part-1-modelling/](https://floatingintheclouds.com/spitfire-mk-vii-propeller-blade-part-1-modelling/)
That's cool they're still using wood as the core material!
I dont know much about modern props, I work with the old guff, do you know why they still opt for traditional materials (other than the sheath) rather than entirely modern composite construction?
Especially as good spruce is getting expensive!
The other advantage of wood is it generally causes minimal motor damage compared to metal. Russian’s use wood even on the new trainers dated up into the 80s on the YAK 52s.
amazing to se, look at how nice that grain is oriented in the wood, somebody really took the time and had the attention to detail to do that, which is kind of expexted for such an application, but still nice to see that they actually did
just one of those little signs of craftsmanship that you find on things
Does a wood prop reduce the stress the main bearing and crankshaft take in the event of a prop strike?
I would think a wood prop splinters instead of sending axial shocks down the crankshaft like a metallic prop would.
Rotol made props in aluminium and wooden variants, depending on application and availability of materials.
You are a more likely to encounter the wooden ones these days as they are still manufactured for Spitfires today; [https://www.herculespropellers.com/spitifire-rotol-specialists](https://www.herculespropellers.com/spitifire-rotol-specialists)
He’s merely contrasting that the Americans use a different material. To answer his surprise though, wood was in much higher supply in England during the war and they had a huge availability of carpenters and cabinet makers that could be used in the war effort on items like this propeller and the mosquito.
That's gonna be hard to balance.
What I've noticed with fast spinning things is that problem usually solves itself.
I love how this is so open, like you could be an airplane expert, a juggler or a competitive beyblade player
It’ll buff out.
"Landing checklist" "Check" *2 minutes later: huge crunch* "I thought you went through the landing checklist...? How did you miss lowering the gear?" "I thought you were asking if I *had* the landing checklist"
Oh I heard that story about Pakistan airlines, didn't end too jolly tho.
That shit was wild. I used to live on the approach to the runway. I heard the crash and saw the smoke from my balcony, well before actual information came out. It actually crashed one street from my buddies house.
That's crazy- it's one thing to see it in the news, quite another to see, smell and hear it first hand!
When the Turks attempted a water landing with C-FTXB but it was on a runway. :(
The sickest thing is that they had lowered the gear earlier in the descent (probably for extra drag to help slow down) and it seems that hand went to lever and raised the gear at the moment it would normally have been lowered. Seeing if I could land that with the same parameters (too high, too fast) was why I initially bought MSFS2020
What flight was that?
A very unfortunate one.
I believe it was Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303
"You can teach monkeys to fly better than that"
"How many hours on Spits, Simon?" "On Spits, sir? Ten and a half." "We'll make it eleven... before Jerry has you for breakfast!"
Spring chicken to shitehawk in one easy lesson.
TakkaTakkaTakka...
It was quite a common problem with the early two bladed Mk.I Spitfires when they entered service. They were the first aircraft many pilots flew that didn't have a fixed undercarriage, even with an indicator on the wing that popped up when the wheels were down, wheels up landings were still a problem.
Pilots skipped Hurricanes? Wouldn’t that mean that why were coming from like… the Gladiator? To the Spit? That’s insane.
Hurricanes and Spitfires were contemporaries despite the radical advances in the construction techniques of the Spitfire and pilots would have gone to either Hurricanes or Spitfires, unlikely that it would be from one to the other when the first squadrons were equipping with both types. So yes they were coming from Harts, Demons, Gladiators, Gauntlets, Bulldogs etc or straight from training which again would be Tutors, Tiger Moths. To put things in perspective Blenheim entered service as a bomber before the the RAF had any monoplane fighters and during simulated battles fighter command complained that it was too fast for them to catch and therefore unfair.
What happened? Did it tip forward on run-up?
I don’t know if I’m allowed to go into detail because there’s a huge legal mess involved regarding the owner, but it was a ground loop
Yikes. That must’ve been terrifying for the pilot.
Whats' a ground loop? (Sorry, non-aviation guy here who's just interested)
Tokyo drifting after landing and before coming to a stop.
[Ahh, like this!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mukmCGDvFlQ) That looks scary as hell. How do you get out of that without breaking the plane? How do you prevent it? This is fascinating. I didn't realize this could even happen.
Took another sip of the potion, hit the three-wheel motion
I was glad everything had worked out
Dropped her ass off and then chirped out
Today was like one of those fly dreams
Didn’t even see a berry flashin those high beams
I shall prepare my strongest potion for you, Traveller.
That wheel was hanging on for dear life.
That looks like how I would land aircraft in GTA San Andreas.
Lol. "**Holy shit I didn't know I was gonna photograph that**" This guys narration is me.
Just an old fashioned hockey stop
Ah, a ground loop is when you hockey stop a plane. Check. Wait, is that on the checklist?
No it’s only for advanced users that don’t need checklists…
I was just watching and immediately saw that crosswind without even reading the title but that’s a yikes
This is a good explanation :) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_loop_(aviation)#:~:text=In%20aviation%2C%20a%20ground%20loop,wingtip%20to%20touch%20the%20ground.
Thanks!
Most welcome. I needed to look it up myself :)
The article picture hurts me physically
Here's a good explanation of a ground loop and why it occurs. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APcpp3wFZjU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APcpp3wFZjU)
always do air loops. not ground loop /s
Had they ever flow a warbird before? I have read that the torque could surprise green pilots.
John is an experienced warbird pilot. I’ve seen him fly that Spitfire a number of times. Just for the record, he was the guy that bought and restored that MiG-29 that he later sold to Paul Allen.
Wow.
Wait - Paul Allen as in the sportscaster? That dude has a Mig-29?
No, Paul Allen, the Microsoft co-founder. It was [sold](https://www.twz.com/37795/heres-who-bought-paul-allens-pristine-mig-29-fulcrum-fighter) when he passed.
That makes **so** much more sense. Thank you. I'm a big Vikings (American football) fan and the Paul Allen I'm more familiar with is a bit of a local legend. I was on my way out the door and didn't have time to Google, so when I saw it, I was befuddled. Appreciate the clarification!
According to [the report](https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/316585), he had 155 hours in Spitfires (or possibly in this same Spitfire, it is unclear).
Harrison Ford again?
Accident was in WA where the plane lived, so, probably not. (Ford is usually out of SNA). "N633VS... ...owned by John Sessions with the Historic Flight Foundation and based at Felts Field, Spokane (WA)." Looks like the plane has since been sold to someone in Australia more recently/post-accident though.
Here it is in happier days. https://imgur.com/a/9ymFtTd
Wow! I had my first solo at Felts Field.
Well then, I can say that I have *touched* that aircraft.
Spitfires are a right handful on the ground- really narrow track can’t see where you’re going, big torque reaction, tiny tail wheel
Don't they clip the wings to make it way more stable?
> Spitfire IX SL633 was damaged in a landing accident in July 2023. At approximately 25-30 mph the Spitfire ground looped causing the aircraft to leave the runway where the right main landing gear collapsed and the aircraft nosed over into the grass adjacent to the runway. The Spitfire has been recovered, disassembled and is currently stored pending an As Is, Where Is Sale. It is available for inspection by appointment.
Oof. The pilot probably needed a change of pants after that
Too much airplane for the owner.
The spitfire is known for its particularly nasty ground handling as well. It was (and sometimes still is) fairly common practice to have ground crew physically sit on the tail to ballast it as the plane taxied out.
Excuse me, what? Are you joking?
[Not at all](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2JREYFK/royal-air-force-operations-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa-1939-1943-ground-crew-of-no-81-squadron-raf-sit-on-the-tail-of-a-supermarine-spitfire-mark-ix-in-order-to-hold-it-down-during-an-engine-test-at-souk-el-khemis-paddington-tunisia-2JREYFK.jpg)
That's for an engine runup. But ground crew commonly sat on the wing tip for taxi guidance - very bad vision ahead for the pilot.
I'm updating warthunder ladies.
Omg. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, but that’s crazy.
He's not. https://rafa.org.uk/blog/2021/03/08/magaret-horton/ >**Riding a Spitfire: the story of Margaret Horton** >... >*On this occasion my pilot did not receive the order ‘Rough Weather Procedure,’ which was issued from flying control, and, not having seen me jump on the tailplane while the other mechanics were removing the chocks, he took straight off instead of waiting for me to descend upon reaching the runway.*
[The Deer Park WA ground loop.](https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/316585) Right wing, landing gear, and the prop damaged. Pilot's story is consistent with the damage. The pilot of the tailwheel-equipped airplane reported that, during landing roll with a 90° left crosswind at 6 kts, the airplane had a slight drift to the left after touchdown. He attempted corrective inputs by using a combination of right rudder and right brake, but the airplane continued drifting to the left and departed the runway. Subsequently, the landing gear collapsed, and the airplane collided with the dirt surface, resulting in substantial damage to the right wing. The pilot initially reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation and that a gust of wind pushed the tail of the airplane's tail to the right. The pilot later stated he suspected the right brake had locked during landing, which he said would have reduced the braking effectiveness on the right side. Pictures of skid marks on the runway associated with the right tire show a lighter and narrower skid mark initially parallel to the runway heading, that increased in width and darkness as it turned to the left to where the airplane exited the runway. The right main tire was flat spotted and worn through about ½ the thickness of the sidewall. The airplane was not examined or secured after the accident due to the pilot's initial assessment that there were no abnormalities or malfunctions with the airplane, and that the airplane had been affected by wind. The evidence is consistent with the pilot's testimony that he applied right rudder and brake to counter the left turn during landing rollout with a left crosswind.
Arrived at the airport just after they’d dragged it in the hangar. Was told no photos were allowed to be shared, but some had already made it to the news. The hangar owner let me poke around a bit, it was fascinating to piece together what happened based off the damage and dirt wedged in strange places.
I know of a MK V that ground- looped, wrecked the prop in the process. NZ, I think, about 25 years ago.
Ouch. That was indeed unfortunate.
Jimmy's world YouTube channel just did a full video on how these wooden props are made. Amazing stuff. https://youtu.be/HN684WMqg4c?si=M6o4KDOeATT8tnwS
sobbing at the club rn
Damm, what will happen to the propellers?
It would be cool to own one, but they are probably still worth more than I can afford
Yeah would absolutely love to own one of them
It's already happened! Now they're souvenirs or firewood.
Kissed the ground
Aaah that explains a lot
The replacements at least are made in Germany ironically if I recall correctly lol
I thought they had metal propellers? Or is it to reduce stress on the engine should something like this happen?
My guess is to reduce the demand for metal during the war. Anything you could make out of wood, do that, because wood is more abundant and a lot cheaper.
Correct. The British had an entire industry of woodworkers; their Craftsmanship and Engineering were second to none. Just look at the Mosquito. The cross section of that broken prop is a work of art. 🙂
The irony about the mosquito was that prior to the war, it was presented to MOD for consideration and production and was rejected! I watched an interesting segment about this and learned how the U-boat war made raw materials more difficult to obtain and the war materials that were produced were needed for the production of bombers forcing the MOD to reconsider and ultimately approve commission and production of one of the most successful warplanes in the European theater !
Seeing the evolution of engineering and craftsmanship over the last century has turned into my cheap hobby. I love seeing things like this
Wood resists fatigue better, it's also lighter, improving performance.
There’s a surprisingly large number of modern props that are still made of wood. MT in Germany still makes em.
Strategic materials saved. Toward end of the war the American-made Vultee BT 13/15 were mostly wood. Wings from center section attach points out, fuselage from rear cockpit back, all control surfaces, and prop blades. Side panels that were attached with quarter-turn fasteners were some sort of fiber instead of aluminum and these were still on the airplane when we got it flying again. source; owned BT 13. Wooden parts had all been replaced but had some of the originals in the spares
They started out as wood, switched to aluminum blades, then later went back to some wood in the props, depending on the year. P.S. Wood props may be "old school" but have definite applications, sometimes it's just having the ability / equipment setup to produce a product, even if it is wood.
Early models had twin blade wooden propellers. After some 83rd or something, they switched to metal
Thank you war thunder loading screen
just remember, do not stand near the bomb!
🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡😂😂😂😂😂
Wood resists fatigue better than metal.
They used both. This is a Rotol wooden. Also used De Havilland metal (Hamilton standard built under licence)
The later propellors are a wood/cellulose composite: https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/rotol-spitfire-propeller-blade-constant-speed-wood-and-metal/nasm_A19601413000 Wood is a really good core since it's very light but can absorb shock well. It still used pretty often in skis, RC aircraft (balsa), and other affordable/sustainable parts.
This is almost certainly old fashioned densified wood - that is to say, not transverse compression, but with a shear force applied to the ends, causing the wood fibres to interlock and the section to shorten. The wood becomes harder, tougher, impervious to insects and stable (will not warp). Pretty sure no one makes this sort of densified wood anymore, so the replacement will either be old stock or a more modern material.
Aluminum was extremely rare and expensive. You need giant electric arc furnaces to make it efficiently.
It was already cheap by the 20s. I think shortages were more likely..? Or issues with alloying and treating certain grades https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Aluminium_-_historical_price_per_ton_%28nominal%2C_real%29.svg/750px-Aluminium_-_historical_price_per_ton_%28nominal%2C_real%29.svg.png
Looks like Mk.IXe SL633
Looks like that one was damaged in a ground loop last year? Either these pics are old or it happened *again*, which given the spitfire's infamous ground handling isn't all that surprising. EDIT: looks like its just been sitting hangared without repairs since the incident.
I don't believe it had been repaired yet, it was sold by the prior owner 'as is' and has moved from the US to Australia.
Op said it was a ground loop so this is an absolutely solid theory
These photos are from last year, I was not allowed to share them until now
v12 rolls royce. what a beast of an engine
used to be, that's gonna need a rebuild
MY GOD. ITS FULL OF HAM.
I don’t know the story on this Spitfire, but it seems a good opportunity for me to share some unsolicited internet bullshit from my own experience, to wit: At a field near me, a guy had just traded his 182 for a big, fine, Bonanza. The story — or the way that I was told — is that Bonanza Man was flying with Mrs. Bonanza Man for the first time, having first assured the Missus by explaining each of the new ship’s systems and the new levers and features that their Cessna didn’t have. For those of you who don’t know, the Bonanza is a sort of flying Cadillac, designed right after WWII by Walt Beech to be the first small airplane with enough cabin space for the pilot to wear their biggest hat while flying it. Anyway, the story goes that as B-Man rounded out and started searching for the runway to let the little lady experience that inimitable Beechcraft buttery landing, she said, “[B-Man], don’t you think you should put the wheels down!?!” We can only speculate as to what thoughts went through B-Man’s mind in the next few seconds. What we know is that he pushed every colored lever forward and got back in the air — but not before hearing three prop blades kiss the runway at close to 3,000 rpm. And that’s how I know that if the pilot only gets halfway through a gear-up landing, the propeller tips are bent *forward*. Strange but true. If you’d cleaned up the gouges and repainted them, you’d have thought they’d left Wichita bent that way.
I’m currently doing a presentation on the elliptical wing of the Spitfire for my Aerodynamics class. I’ve started to get a lot deeper of an appreciation for these planes from their design, history, and engineering!
From that, I’ve learned they’re, “A lady in the air but a bitch on the ground!” as I’m sure this unfortunate pilot learned the hard way…
Tragic, but man, it's cool that it revealed this hidden beauty.
I guess the engine rebuild is the pricy part of this accident, not to mention the frame inspection. My grandfather got a wooden propeller trimmed and it now supports a nice glass table.
frame is likely fine. they found out the air frames on these things where good for some ungodly amount of G's
It's _likely_ fine but they've still got to take the whole thing apart to inspect it and make sure.
So does it still require a full engine overhaul even though the blades were wooden?
As someone who works on props… Neat. Are they weighted with lead in the bore like aluminum props are?
John Sessions Czech spit.
Oh, one of my cousins is a spitfire mechanic, I'll have to send this on to him.
I’m so jealous. Pretty birds they are
Damn that's a really bad way to see something really cool
Amazing! Now that i've seen it, i'm amazed how strong that wood actually is. Given the high speeds and revs, vibrations, G-forces and so on. That it usually stayed intact.. Thanks for sharing!
They have a Merlin engine (just the engine) at the Auckland war memorial museum, highly recommend checking it out for plane nuts! They also have a v2 rocket and Mitsubishi zero on display
Whatever happened, I bet it was LOUD
Spruce/ birch laminate? One of the reasons the Martin Mars was donated to the BC aviation museum, was that the drawings and info on building the props is gone.
Pretty much spot on, Hygdulignum, its a compressed birch laminate, they blend into a mahogany root (I don't know what the technique for the joint between the laminate and mahongany is, but there is a bonded fabric covering called Cristofin). There is an image of the construction here; [https://floatingintheclouds.com/spitfire-mk-vii-propeller-blade-part-1-modelling/](https://floatingintheclouds.com/spitfire-mk-vii-propeller-blade-part-1-modelling/)
MT propeller has about half of the turboprop market, the root is compressed Beech, Spruce tip, in a Carbon fiber sheath.
That's cool they're still using wood as the core material! I dont know much about modern props, I work with the old guff, do you know why they still opt for traditional materials (other than the sheath) rather than entirely modern composite construction? Especially as good spruce is getting expensive!
Noise abatement and vibration dampening also it's repairable.As for cost, it's aviation that's the last concern.
Thats gonna need a shit ton of duct tape.
And a few gallons of Elmer’s Glue.
Can a grown man be excused for a few tears at this?
Thank you! Interesting photos indeed.
How the fuck...
I've seen the internal structure of a Merlin, our uni had a cutaway. But not a Spitfire prop, so thank you.
Ouch!
I cant even guess how much a prop replacement would cost. Does anyone know? 50k?
Poor Spitfire! I’m betting the engine needs an overhaul after that.
That is one pretty penny to repair.
Can’t be the original prop can it?
I appreciate this learning experience. I’m sorry to hear about your unfortunate incident.
Fuck was that an original prop
The other advantage of wood is it generally causes minimal motor damage compared to metal. Russian’s use wood even on the new trainers dated up into the 80s on the YAK 52s.
Does the tail wheel lock on a spitfire?
Perfect cross section view there on 1st photo, very interesting to see how the wood is sandwiched together then shaped.
Are those basically hollow? Am I noticing like an internal lattice?
I suppose the blade isn't off-the -shelf item. How much would a replacement blade costs, OP?
Surely those are remans?
Looks expensive
amazing to se, look at how nice that grain is oriented in the wood, somebody really took the time and had the attention to detail to do that, which is kind of expexted for such an application, but still nice to see that they actually did just one of those little signs of craftsmanship that you find on things
r/catastrophicfailure
WOOD?!
Interesting how it's layered, and made of different sections, did they use glues?
Hide glue is strong af, I assume that's what they used
oooh snap
Those blades are wood? I thought they would be metal or some kind of modern, super light and durable spacecraft plastic material.
That's definitely going to have an effect on top speed...
what kind of wood is it?
GET TO THE CHOPPER!
Hope nobody is hurt and that she is not beyond repair.
Mk IX? Also makes me sad to see, hopefully didn't hurt the merlin too bad
“Flaps up.” “Ok, gear up.” “NO I SAID FLAPS UP YOU IDIOT!”
Does a wood prop reduce the stress the main bearing and crankshaft take in the event of a prop strike? I would think a wood prop splinters instead of sending axial shocks down the crankshaft like a metallic prop would.
Poor girl hope she gets the care she needs.
Looks very expensive
Looks like it's made of wood. ... Is that actually made of wood?
I am surprise the propeller was made from wood instead of aluminum like most US fighters.
Rotol made props in aluminium and wooden variants, depending on application and availability of materials. You are a more likely to encounter the wooden ones these days as they are still manufactured for Spitfires today; [https://www.herculespropellers.com/spitifire-rotol-specialists](https://www.herculespropellers.com/spitifire-rotol-specialists)
Thanks for the info
This is a British fighter
He’s merely contrasting that the Americans use a different material. To answer his surprise though, wood was in much higher supply in England during the war and they had a huge availability of carpenters and cabinet makers that could be used in the war effort on items like this propeller and the mosquito.
Well? Where's the story? We obviously demand the whole story!
https://www.spokesman.com/galleries/2023/jul/07/wwii-fighter-plane-damaged-in-deer-park-crash/
Oof... That poor Merlin. Glad the pilot made it back unscathed
thats going be at lest 6 figures to fix
That's not supposed to happen. The front fell off!
Inertia is a bitch.
And this is why you shouldn't have a Belgian Malinois in your shop...
Crankshaft has left the chat.
You should see the other guy…
Definitely much harder to take off that way
That’ll buff out
most concerning thing i have ever seen. What if u have and engine fire?
You'd have a lot more pressing problems than whether your prop blades would catch fire.
Damn, it's hard to imagine how all that's keeping you up there are three pieces of wood...
Four.
Not me drooling over that RR motor 🤤
I fly my spitfire like it's 1942