Is/Was it possible?

You could well of, negative G is bl**dy awful, most I ever did was plus 7 and
Minus 1.5 i think it was in a turn, give me plus anytime… Was like going over the top on a fair ride big dipper with about 14 pints and a dodgy curry onboard.

A G suit wouldn’t do much unless a full body one, as it is to prevent blood pooling in the legs and away from the brain under positive G…. Under neg it is going to the brain, hence you red out as opposed to black out..

Was one reason Bader was supposed to be good in combat, no legs meant the blood couldn’t drain as much from the brain so he had in effect a g suit on so could withstand higher g loadings than the pilots he was up against so could turn harder.

Slight thread diversion……In the 90’s, I was sure I saw a Jet Fighter…poss. F16 at an airshow do an inverted loop…i.e start at the top and negative G all the way round.
Was I imagining it? (Quite possible, I was walking towards my car at the time and it was one of the closing items, I wasn’t paying too much attention).

My doubt is the pilot ability to sustain neg. G (Even with a suit) for long enough to do this at what would seem (Relatively)
a low altitude.

A properly executed barrel roll is a positive g manoeuvre not a 1g manoeuvre. The g will vary between 0.5g to 2-3g but always positive. Large aircraft can roll but it will depend on the roll rate that can be achieved before too much height is lost. A loop is a different matter and can involve large positive g forces during the recovery. Many large aircraft will not generate enough pitch rate to perform a loop before too much airspeed is lost.

A loop is always under a positive ‘g’, therefore the engine ‘wouldn’t know’ it was upside-down, also, a loop requires a certain amount of speed to complete, so a dive would normally be needed ‘for the vertical climb bit’. A loop is a very deliberate manouvre and apart from the Wellington incident above, I guess it would be quite rare. The roll however (barrel) is a constant 1g manouvre and I have read of several cases with 4 engined bombers completing it.

baz

Yes.
I was confusing myself with Neg. G and being upside down.
Miss Shilling and her oriface solved the problem I was thinking about.

Hi Tony. Well, it appears one may have done it, but as one poster stated, the story has to be taken with a pinch of salt, but In my heart of hearts, and knowing our boys in blue I quite believe the story.;)

Jim.

Lincoln .7

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=58366

someone else read it too

would have been an old old Flypast or Aeropl*ne, may have it will look……..

TonyT. Hi. Very interesting info, can you remember if possible where you read this incident?, and how long ago?.

I am not doubting what your saying, just would like to know the full account so I can read the full report.Or, you can P.M. me.
Cheers.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Remember reading about the prototype dambuster lanc Up on a test flight that was stripped of everything, turrets, guns, ammo racks, bomb racks, the lot..so was a hot ship, they had a faster B 17 coming up behind so the pilot slowed down and let the laughing B17 crew overtake them, (which was a common occurrence) once past they firewalled the Lanc and barrel rolled it around the B 17 before dissapearing into the distance leaving a stunned US crew in their wake.

The roll however (barrel) is a constant 1g manouvre and I have read of several cases with 4 engined bombers completing it.
baz

Or the 707 prototype.

I seem to remember somewhere information that a B-17 could be looped once but not twice and that this act and the trying to fulfill this act had resulted in the destruction of some b-17’s and I believe their crew.

But as most people know with altitude and speed it is possible to loop any aircraft but not perhaps survive the procedure.

A short article or perhaps letter in either Aeroplane Monthly or FlyPast in the early-mid 1990’s or so talked about an RNZAF pilot who had a tradition of looping his Lancaster after every op. It talked about how he braced his feet on the dashboard to pull the yoke back so it got over the top. The crew were always warned before he did it apparently. Someone will have to search their collection to find it, it was near the back page so i think maybe an Aeroplane Monthly letter page, around 1993-1996ish.

Dunno about that, if a piston engine was never meant to be upside down, it’s fuel feed wouldn’t cope. And, the power needed for the vertical climb bit, I doubt if it was there.

A loop is always under a positive ‘g’, therefore the engine ‘wouldn’t know’ it was upside-down, also, a loop requires a certain amount of speed to complete, so a dive would normally be needed ‘for the vertical climb bit’. A loop is a very deliberate manoeuvre and apart from the Wellington incident above, I guess it would be quite rare. The roll however (barrel) is a constant 1g manoeuvre and I have read of several cases with 4 engined bombers completing it.

baz

I know a pilot who accidently looped a Wellington over/near Blackpool after he dived out of a cloud and (surprised!) found himself ‘close’ to the ground. He pulled back on the controls and then found himself climbing at a steep angle, re-entered the same cloud. He lost his orientation and instead of ‘rolling off the top’ (he feared stalling and spinning in) he continued pulling on the controls and broke cloud (again) in a ‘very steep dive’, however, now ready for the low altitude, he levelled out safely and landed at Blackpool. Although his aircraft was damaged by the manoeuvre, he was not punished in any way.

baz

Dunno about that, if a piston engine was never meant to be upside down, it’s fuel feed wouldn’t cope. And, the power needed for the vertical climb bit, I doubt if it was there.

The 707 did a role but not a loop.