DH Venom crash in Colorado

This one?

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/2/4/0/0719042.jpg

correct

here are some of her in better days in Colorado

5th link slide 4 and 5

2nd link all 3 slides

They arent very valuable I’m afraid, and I cant see much happening to change that either.

Bruce

OK – a few answers to questions!

Firstly, yes, the Venom is a bit tailheavy – there are bloomin great weights fitted up front to counteract the weight of the engine.

The engine is fitted on the centreline, but a good bit of the weight is aft of the CofG

The wooden pod goes to the front of the engine cowls – the engine is mounted off the centre section spars.

So – would it be possible to re-engine a Venom? Yes, don’t see why not. However, the value of the bird with a Ghost is only around £30K flying, maybe a tad more. However much would it cost to re-engine one? I dont even want to think about that one!

Bruce

Many thanks Bruce!

wouldve thought the asking price flyable wouldve been a bit higher than that!

really??? the cost of an airworthy venom is about £30k?

OK – a few answers to questions!

Firstly, yes, the Venom is a bit tailheavy – there are bloomin great weights fitted up front to counteract the weight of the engine.

The engine is fitted on the centreline, but a good bit of the weight is aft of the CofG

The wooden pod goes to the front of the engine cowls – the engine is mounted off the centre section spars.

So – would it be possible to re-engine a Venom? Yes, don’t see why not. However, the value of the bird with a Ghost is only around £30K flying, maybe a tad more. However much would it cost to re-engine one? I dont even want to think about that one!

Bruce

I think the wood parts of Vampires and Venoms extend only back to the wing root / air intake areas. David Collins would know this.
I would have thought the carcass temperatures of the J44 and similar turbofans would be lower than an Ghost. The burners on the old engine are visible on the outside. They are buried inside a turbofan, and the bypass air runs outside them. Add to that it’s burning a hell of a lot less fuel, so it ought to be a bit cooler. The jet pipe would probably be a similar temperature.

Sorry !… We’ve hijacked this thread ! 😀

To the kind of people who restore and maintain classic warbirds or design new aircraft, it’s not an overwhelming job. It’s another engineering job. Sure… the certification issues would just about rule it out in UK/Europe. If it was done it’s likely to happen in USA.

I was thinking more of using an engine like the Williams J44 . A centrifugal engine like the Ghost/Nene/Goblin is very large for it’s thrust, and leaves a big space to design in an adaptor for mounting the engine. I suspect there might be problems with the intake geometry, and then the tail pipe would need work. J44 is already retrofitted in the Saab 105 (ex J85)

Less thrust than the original would be compensated by the weight saving. The J44 is about 1/3 of the weight of a Ghost, and the lower fuel consumption would require less fuel to be carried. The weight saving is also the killer, though (at least in a Venom)…. The Ghost looks like it is aft of the aircraft C of G. A much lighter engine would make a Venom nose heavy.

In this case it’s probably a non-runner, but I don’t think the idea of turbofan conversions for some classic jets should be ruled out quite so easily.

Oh im not ruling such a conversion out, merely pointing out that it is an effective re-design of the aircraft, the C of G issue is just another part of the difficulties one would face doing such a conversion, and id say for the very reasons we have discussed already is mosy likely why no-one has yet attempted it.

on the C of G i believe that Venoms are a little tail heavy, although Bruce would have a far better idea of that than i do, so it would possibly not be as big an issue on the C of G front as i first thought.

The FJ44 would be a good choice i think, if of course things like intake capacity of the inlets are sufficient ect, id say due to the close proximity of the tailplane to the exhaust flow that an afterburning engine would not be suitable, ruling out the more powerful members of the J-85 family, 1 more issue i would suppose could be a potential problem is heat, as id assume that the J-85/CJ610 and FJ-44 run much hotter than the Ghost does, which may come into play with the wooden structures of the fuselage pod.

To Speedy, re-engining something like a Venom with its centrifugal flow turbojet to a more modern axial flow engine such as say a J-85 or CJ610 (i am aware of the lower thrust output between these and the Ghost, just used as an example) would be a massive engineering undertaking at best, to say nothing of the difficulties in getting such extensive mods approved by the relevant aviation authority.

To the kind of people who restore and maintain classic warbirds or design new aircraft, it’s not an overwhelming job. It’s another engineering job. Sure… the certification issues would just about rule it out in UK/Europe. If it was done it’s likely to happen in USA.

I was thinking more of using an engine like the Williams J44 . A centrifugal engine like the Ghost/Nene/Goblin is very large for it’s thrust, and leaves a big space to design in an adaptor for mounting the engine. I suspect there might be problems with the intake geometry, and then the tail pipe would need work. J44 is already retrofitted in the Saab 105 (ex J85)

Less thrust than the original would be compensated by the weight saving. The J44 is about 1/3 of the weight of a Ghost, and the lower fuel consumption would require less fuel to be carried. The weight saving is also the killer, though (at least in a Venom)…. The Ghost looks like it is aft of the aircraft C of G. A much lighter engine would make a Venom nose heavy.

In this case it’s probably a non-runner, but I don’t think the idea of turbofan conversions for some classic jets should be ruled out quite so easily.

Yep bad stuff!!

Seen it on Yank new’s overnight and here this morning 🙁

Nice these woodern Aeroplane’s, but even that it upset’s me to see picture’s burning woodern wonder’s of all type’s after the ban’s came in back then I now fully understand now just a bit why, It happen’s.

Great no body count 😉 Luuuucky B@stard to get away with heavy skidmark’s on jock’s I imagine………….:dev2:

I would think the j85 would be ideal. Arent the new-build ME-262s powered by j85s?

CJ610’s i believe, civillian derivative of the J-85

Also the Ghost 103 puts out around 5,000lb at max power, a J-85 needs afterburner to make the same output.

I would think the j85 would be ideal. Arent the new-build ME-262s powered by j85s?

Unlikely – the wooden fuselage pod is almost completely destroyed, especially around the carry through spar area. Added to the damamge to the wings caused by the gear being ripped out – I think this is one for the scrap pile sadly.

A great shame.

Bruce

A great shame indeed, hopefully something might be salvaged from her though.

To Speedy, re-engining something like a Venom with its centrifugal flow turbojet to a more modern axial flow engine such as say a J-85 or CJ610 (i am aware of the lower thrust output between these and the Ghost, just used as an example) would be a massive engineering undertaking at best, to say nothing of the difficulties in getting such extensive mods approved by the relevant aviation authority.

What a shame but no loss of life,although the pilot aged 10 years or more between the 2 news reports.

A ‘basic belly’ landing, new photo!

http://www.9news.com/news/top-article.aspx?storyid=91964

This one?

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/2/4/0/0719042.jpg

Such a pity. 🙁

Which aircraft was this? Can anyone post a photo of it during its flying career?

From the TV report it appears to be ‘J-1527’ ex Swiss Air force, on the FAA register as N9196M

Which aircraft was this? Can anyone post a photo of it during its flying career?

Not good. 🙁

Hopefully she’ll fly again(??).

Unlikely – the wooden fuselage pod is almost completely destroyed, especially around the carry through spar area. Added to the damamge to the wings caused by the gear being ripped out – I think this is one for the scrap pile sadly.

A great shame.

Bruce

That’s a shame, but good the pilot walked away from it.

I’ve often thought it would be sensible to re-engine some classic jet warbirds with small modern turbofans. A lot of losses occur from engine problems caused by age, bad or non-existant engine logs, and unintentional misuse by pilots who are used to more modern engines.
Of course, the aircraft would lose a certain authenticity, but would be more economical to run, and the airframe might be less stressed. There might be some loss of performance, but the full military performance is not generally used in classic jets anyway.

Not good. 🙁

Hopefully she’ll fly again(??).