Miss Helen AAIB Report Update

Out of interest, what is the composition of the grass strip at Duxford ?

Is it just hard packed grass and earth ?. Or is there more to it ?

Please bear in mind that the metalled runway is essentially a W.W.II development, only pioneered in some locations prior to the war.

Most ‘airfields’ were just that, grass and earth fields only specialised by better drainage (where required) and buildings off to one side and a white circle to identify it.

It was the density of traffic, the increasing weight of aircraft and take off and landing speeds that made metalled or temporary-surfaced runways required during the war. That’s why pre-war many long distance and ‘heavy’ aircraft were flying boats and the Air Ministry were experimenting with catapults to get heavy, loaded bombers (Avro Manchester) into the air.

Even today a properly maintained grass field is quantifiably better for vintage and early warbird aircraft to operate from.

Regards,

Probably a subject for another thread,
there were at least twelve types of prefabricated airfield surface, including Chevron Grid, Bar & Rod, Army Tracking, Irving Track, Square Mesh track (SMT), Prefabricated Bituminous Surfacing (PBS), however Sommerfeld Track and PSP became the most widely used.
Intially Somerfeld Track was populor with the RAF on home airfields and PSP with the USAAF, probably as a result of being devloped repectively by their home nations, PSP became more universal across the allies services as production and safe supply increased. It was more deployable, easier to lay, and reuse.

The Army and Royal Air Force Airfield Construction Service were responsible for deployment and laying of the surfaces, particularly in emergency and tactical theatre airfields overseas.
The American Engineer Corp & US Engineers did the same for USAAF airfields.
The Royal Canadian Engineers (who developed PBS) also did a huge amount of work in this respect in the UK and overseas.

Thanks for the info. 😎

Have to agree with you all, that bump looks very dangerous and lucky the Mustang only received what looked like minor damage. 😮 Well done to the Sally B pilot too, no wonder they use the hard runway now.

Mustang had quite a lot of damage to U/C legs & gear door also L/H gun fairing panel.

Out of interest, what is the composition of the grass strip at Duxford ?

Is it just hard packed grass and earth ?. Or is there more to it ?

….& 5 million rabbit holes…

Very pleased to see the aircraft airborne once again, I remember Mark Hannah displaying it a very wet UH ,not long after it’s first flight way back when and have always had a soft spot for it ever since.
It looked sad and abandoned in the old MT shed at DUX,after its accident,covered in droppings and dust etc and I started to wonder what her future would be.(Strange that it wasn’t put into a hanger for safety :()

So thanks to Rob and the team of engineers for getting her airborne again, long may she continue to grace our skies.

I could be wrong but as i recall i dont think its anything different, as in the mid to late seventies it was still an arable field surrounded by the hard runway and peri-track.
I have photos somewhere of warbirds taxiing past the front of the tower with a cornfield behind.

Out of interest, what is the composition of the grass strip at Duxford ?

Is it just hard packed grass and earth ?. Or is there more to it ?

What I find interesting is the fact that many of those who are involved with airshows, flying warbirds, and correct R/T procedure, severely admonish those who stand in fields adjacent to DX airfield, branding them irresponsible, and potentially endangering the lives of the pilots, yet a known problem within the airfield boundary is ignored, on the basis that A/C aren’t meant to be there?

Very good point !

What I find interesting is the fact that many of those who are involved with airshows, flying warbirds, and correct R/T procedure, severely admonish those who stand in fields adjacent to DX airfield, branding them irresponsible, and potentially endangering the lives of the pilots, yet a known problem within the airfield boundary is ignored, on the basis that A/C aren’t meant to be there?

If it had been ten years later the outcome could of been so different. For if the then ‘Superhangar’ was still going to materialise it would most probably have been on the very spot where the M11 is now!

But that could probably be said for many outcomes in the world of historic aviation.

Maybe they should do what they have done at Charles De Gaulle – roof over the M11 and reinstate the full runway (we can all have a dream!). Considering the total cost of building the M11 it seems almost penny pinching that they were unable (or unwilling?) to divert or tunnel the road to save truncating the runway in the fIrst place.

You sound surprised ;).

The DX bump is so bad, the forum thread hit it and drifted completely off course:rolleyes:

No it wasn’t there before the M11 was built. Its the replacement taxi-way to runway 24. The original travelled through the area where the ARCO hangars are situated but was subsequently lost together with a section of runway on the eastern side of the motorway!

Is it a taxiway or access road that is the cause of it? I’m thinking it wasn’t there before the M11.

Edit:

Just looked at GoogleEarth, that taxiway wasn’t there before the M11. If you use the time thingie you can clearly see the old peri track etc on the 10/03 image

Did this bump exist in the early 1970’s before the end of the airfield was chopped off for the motorway, or did it grow as a result of the land reworking after runway amputation?

Bouncing off that bump at Dx causes a lot less damage than if the aircraft had bounced off the *other bump* just outside the peri fence…

For heavens sake, its not at the threshold the ‘ramp’ is in the undershoot. If your trying to be smart at least give it some cedibility!

Anyway, it was a skilled piece of flying by Pete John at Legends in 08, could have been much worse.
Glad to see ‘Miss Helen’ back again.

By the way Ernie, thanks for posting that video, that looked a superb display by ‘Miss Helen’, made great use of the terrain very much in the style of Ray Hanna.

Great helo display as well, that guy should get more bookings!

Ah, i see. we can quote things…Actually I do know a bit about this subject, both the airfield and the aeroplane. which is why i clarified things in the first place to end the hysteria. I could say “don’t quote ICAO at me when I know more about it than you”, but I wouldn’t ever say that!:cool:

Actually, the CAA’s CAP168 applies to UK Licensed aerodromes, which is broadly ICAO Annex 14 rules with a few differences. I can’t be asked to cut and paste, but it’s CAP168, Chapter 3, Paragraph 5 which applies.. Duxford grass is a Code 2 runway, and you’ll see that it is only compulsory (90m) for Code 1 & 2 instrument runways which this isn’t.

It is recommended that there is at least 120 m for all Code 2 runways, so even if Duxford 24 grass had 120m of RESA, the Mustang still would have landed outside!! Don’t you think that if there were any shortcomings, the AAIB would have recommended it? They normally cant resist recommendations…..

I’m off out to fly my aeroplane now; you anoraks can argue amongst yerselfs…:D

PS. DC-3’s with 30 pax would be Commercial Air Transport and wouldn’t land on the grass!