Now this is Low… (Yes, another Spitfire thread!)

Originally posted by Chris Broad
I saw her display at biggin last year. It was a lovely sight but i was surprised at how underpowered it looked. Struggling to get airbourne it seemed.
But i do not recall the routine being very aerobatic, it looked like a well orchestrated slow flat display.
I certainly enjoyed it very much and came to the conclusion that the RNHF had resorted to a simple, effective and safe flat display for her. Therefore i was a little confused when i saw the footage of that fateful day, and seeing it crash as a result of an aerobatic manouvre.
Terrible shame.

I recall the Firefly being dogged with (mainly) powerplant problems almost as soon as it was restored to flying in ’72. IIRC it was out of action for several seasons and flown very conservatively – which I have absolutely no problem with if you have been reading my earlier posts! Dont know if it was the ex Shack Griffon giving grief, after all the BBMF PR19 Spits have the same.
Early ’90s saw a new display routine that included rolls and “beefier” flying all round – it looked great!- nothing too strenuous. By this time it had lost the wing tanks which may have benefitted the handling and weight issues.

Felt like I had lost an old friend with it’s loss.

My experiences of the Firefly over the years also provided a conclusion that this was an aircraft bordering on underpowered.
It always seemed to need so much runway to get airborne,and airspeed was always critical in such a heavy aircraft.(makes me wonder how they ever operated from carriers!!) although my own amateur video shows that properly executed manouvers were not a problem,although personally I’d never seen it perform derry turns,loops or rolls.
I was quite concerned at the airspeed and the amount of altitude lost in the first derry turn,but thankfully for me ,I was watching the breitlings getting airborne when it all went tragically wrong.
This prompted me to look at old footage that I had which also showed the aircraft not performing fancy manouvers.
Not being a pilot I suppose I’m not qualified to comment really,but I sometimes wonder why pilots trusted with almost irreplaceable aircraft repeat manouvers that they only just got away with previously,e.g….P.38,P63,Firefly all destroyed by apparently expert pilots with judgement second to none and that all important service training.

I saw her display at biggin last year. It was a lovely sight but i was surprised at how underpowered it looked. Struggling to get airbourne it seemed.
But i do not recall the routine being very aerobatic, it looked like a well orchestrated slow flat display.
I certainly enjoyed it very much and came to the conclusion that the RNHF had resorted to a simple, effective and safe flat display for her. Therefore i was a little confused when i saw the footage of that fateful day, and seeing it crash as a result of an aerobatic manouvre.
Terrible shame.

🙁 If the report in one of the aviation magazines was correct it was a matter of hours in a strange plane doing low level aeros in a very public and high pressure situation.
Alot of display pilots have 1000’s of hours logged [ok ,not always in 1 plane] but even they fall short and make mistakes which we can see coming from the spectators point of view.
How many times as a spectator have you muttered under your breathe that that manouvre was’nt right and it was a fine line between making it or flopping out of the sky,in my case several times.:(
It’s not the high speed and low level high energy that causes problems ,it’s the opposite ,the slow,floppy,low level manouvres.

I think it was Bill’s first season on the Firefly. Everytime i saw it fly i got the feeling it was being flown on too low a power setting. It was especially drawn to me at the Kemble airshow where i thought he came close to stalling in a couple of manouveres. He certainly had to open the throttle after the roll at the end of his routine.

What fascinates me is how an experienced pilot can fly the same routine without incident in the same aircraft for a season or several seasons and then one day it goes horribly wrong.

Correct me if I’m wrong but was it not Bill’s first public display in the Firefly. He may not have much more than a few hours on type. I think he had flown the Swordfish for a number of seasons.

Originally posted by Bradburger

What fascinates me is how an experienced pilot can fly the same routine without incident in the same aircraft for a season or several seasons and then one day it goes horribly wrong. 🙁

Lets hope the 2004 season is a safe one.

Cheers

Paul

Second that last comment.

Concerning the pilot and the routine, I believe this was the Fireflies first season after being grounded for many years.Thus the routine and pilots familiarity with it were not extensive and probably only a few displays had been flown.

This now sounds uncannily like the RR Spitfire – a very hot day, RR Griffon, vertical manouvering (though certainly not a loop). The Griffon fit in the Firefly has always been subject to scrutiny – was’nt it a borrowed Shack engine “bent to fit”?

I apologise for railroading this thread but am very interested in everyones comments and feedback – not so much on the tragedies, but your views on display flying.

Well as we’ve drifted off thread but it’s relevent…

Whilst talking to an American visitor at Legends on the Sunday, he said he was concerned with the height lost during the first Derry turn at the western end of the field and was surprised it didn’t go in then.

I was not aware of the exact routine of the Firefly at the time, but having since seen footage of it’s Display on the Biggin Hill DVD, I was surprised at the amount of height and energy that appeared to be lost during the Derry turns.

I read Eddy Kurdzeils account of flying his Firefly a while back and he says it fly’s much like an underpowered jet. Entry speeds are a clue to its performance – 350 knots for an upward roll according to him.

What fascinates me is how an experienced pilot can fly the same routine without incident in the same aircraft for a season or several seasons and then one day it goes horribly wrong. 🙁

Lets hope the 2004 season is a safe one.

Cheers

Paul

Originally posted by TempestNut
I too saw it all. After the manoeuvre at the western end of the field I had a sinking feeling of gloom as the Firefly flew from West to East, This in complete contrast too ANY display I have seen Ray, Mark or any of the other OFMC pilots perform. (and the BBMF, FC and most other recognised display Pilots) .

I must admit to only seeing the video footage of the final few tragic seconds. What manouvere was flown at crowd right that gave you cause for concern? The flat fly through prior to the turn seemingly showed a perfectly controlled machine at a good height and the griffon sounded fine.

Derry wing overs/turns are a pretty standard display manouvere. I attended the show on the Sunday and the BBMF Spit flew its more energetic routine featuring several derrys.

I wasnt there but saw the display at Kemble and cant see what singled this routine out from the ones you list.

Originally posted by Firebird
I’m glad it’s not just me that thought a Derry Turn was attempted….:(
Deleiberately never saw any of the TV footage, so only relying on ‘Mark One eyball’ footage in the memory bank.

I too saw it all. After the manoeuvre at the western end of the field I had a sinking feeling of gloom as the Firefly flew from West to East, This in complete contrast too ANY display I have seen Ray, Mark or any of the other OFMC pilots perform. (and the BBMF, FC and most other recognised display Pilots) I have said a bit on this subject on other threads and have my own conclusions. I am confident I will not be changing those conclusions.

I am sure there is going to be a major debate soon, and I would rather we now wait until April as has been indicated so that we don’t upset family or those who don’t like too much speculation.

Originally posted by kodak
the jurys still out on the Firefly accident but if he hadnt have been flying a derry turn……..

I’m glad it’s not just me that thought a Derry Turn was attempted….:(
Deleiberately never saw any of the TV footage, so only relying on ‘Mark One eyball’ footage in the memory bank.

Originally posted by TempestNut
Lets get back on track and cut the nonsense. .

OK we’re off thread here but this sure ain’t nonsense!
Obviously a contentious issue.
I have never drawn comparisons with any of the tragic fatal accidents and Ray Hanna. All I have said is low level aerobatics are a risky business and we’ve lost too many priceless aircraft and great pilots (fathers/sons/grandfathers) through them.
My point from the start is , OK it was different in the ’70s and ’80s- there were far fewer civvy warbirds and display flying was far more “flamboyant” for want of a better word. With a recent history of accidents caused inherently by low level aeros, I say lets be more cautious with the display flying.
As has been said , the jurys still out on the Firefly accident but if he hadnt have been flying a derry turn……..
The RR Spit at Woodford did have power setting problems if IIRC from the BOI. It was a very hot day and the BBMFs PR19 pilot also said he had problems. BUT he didnt fly a loop whereas Dave Moore did. The video tells all – that was a very low entry even for a Griffon engined spit.
RIP.

Lets get back on track and cut the nonsense. I was at that display in 1982 and I too was spellbound by Rays flying. I would love to see the video count me in when its available please please

I’m sure that I saw Ray fly Spencer Flacks spit at a Biggin Hill display. Maybe it was in 1980 in conjunction with the Hunter flown by Stephan Kowalski?? (forgive the spelling) Again I would love to see it again and the commentary was priceless.

Originally posted by duxfordhawk
RR spitfire did not have the power or height to complete loop,

What’s that all about?? Nothing to do with power, unless you want to turn the aircraft into a mole! The Spitfire could have extended the loop on the climb up to the top of the loop, where do you go once you have passed the vertical coming down ? power will make no difference to the loop at that point, only the velocity you hit the ground at!

Originally posted by Ewan Hoozarmy
Hmmmm??? Since when have aerobatics been ‘dangerous’ at high altitudes? Correctly flown at ANY height, any aerobatic manouvre is safe.

Yes, when “correctly flown”. Anytime you push the envelope of an airplane your chances of not doing something correctly are increased, especially when near the stall. The harder you push, the more likely a mistake will be made. Remember, it only takes one mistake to kill you. I’m not arguing that all aerobatics should be banned. I just find it amazing the some folks are not willing to admit that aerobatics down low are inherently more dangerous than less aggressive types of flight. If the pilots and owners of vintage aircraft are willing to take those risks then it is their right to do so. However, my opinion remains that there is CONSIDERABLY more risk to man and machine when aerobatics are engaged in at low level. My .02 cents.

KODAK, I can’t for one agree with your comments regarding any level of comparison with Ray Hanna’s displays in general and the P38, P63, Invader and Firefly accident. Have you read the accident reports available of three of the four mentioned. OK the P38 & P63 reports don’t actually go as far as attributing the crashes bluntly to pilot error but both were flown outside of the pre-planned envelope with little regard to energy gates before they hit the ground. Whilst the Firefly accident speculation remains just that at the moment lets be perfectly honest I’ll be amazed if the conclusion is wildly different to those already mentioned.

I think it is silly to say that aerobatics, which have a certain element of danger at high altitudes, are not more dangerous when flown at low altitudes.

Hmmmm??? Since when have aerobatics been ‘dangerous’ at high altitudes? Correctly flown at ANY height, any aerobatic manouvre is safe. When flown badly, with poor speed control, low energy etc at low level, the aeroplane is going to bite you eventually. At high level, Its going to look and feel awful, but not ‘dangerous’ unless you eventually hit the deck by putting the aeroplane in an unrecoverable situation.

In 2000 or 2001, Strikemaster G-BXFX spun in from something like FL150 when a test flight spinning exercise went wrong….both occupants had servicable ejector seats which were fired at a very low height (much less than 2000ft). 10000ft after entering the spin (i.e 5000ft at the very lowest), with no apparent recovery, I’d have been reaching for the handle!

Low level display flying effectively means that even if a parachute is worn, the options for escape in an emergency are limited – which is why aerobatic manouvres HAVE to be flown accurately every time, every display, 100% of the time.

If there was any evidence that low level aerobatics, correctly flown, were dangerous, they wouldnt happen (in UK flying displays anyway)

Aeroplanes rarely fail….pilots often do

I think it is silly to say that aerobatics, which have a certain element of danger at high altitudes, are not more dangerous when flown at low altitudes. Many pilots who were considered to be “the best of the best” have died from their own mistakes and Ray Hanna is no less human than anybody else and the machines he flies are no less susceptible to failure. I think the real question is what is acceptable risk? Chances are no two answers to that question will be the same.

I have picture of Ray’s pram, wheels up, zooming along a New Zealand street at naught feet, many years ago…

I just found my pics of Ray flying MH434 at the 50th Birthday party; He’s low on take-off and climbing out at the end of the field.

I’m not ashamed to admit that I couldn’t believe Ray would still be alive today after watching his displays in the 80s – but he is. I think it’s a really, really skilled pilot, who knows what he’s doing. Energy management is part of it too.

I’m not a pilot, not qualified to comment – but if I were a pilot he’d be one of those guys I’d reckon are in a league of their own – and VERY dangerous to try and copy.

Re: Re: Biggin Hill video

Originally posted by duxfordhawk
his flypast can be ulta low but then again he has done that since his Red Arrows days and is more than qualified at this.

Well before his Red Arrows days in fact. Legend has it that Ray deliberately chose his first service posting to a Meteor Photo Recce unit in Germany because of the amount of low flying invloved…..:D