Ah, Tim! Perhaps we should have come to you first…

Very best wishes

J

Assuming a skilled pilot…and the undercarrriage leg doesn’t bite into the grass:)

The other thing is the energy in the system…if we think of kinetic energy (1/2mv squared), an increase in mass and velocity means a significant increase in total energy. Since the heavy taildraggers have much greater energy than the 170 or Tiger Moth (as do the small taildraggers like Pitts Specials, with their high high wing loading and high landing speeds), that energy must be expended somehow…Hopefully it’s just a longer landing roll, but if control is lost or there is sideways drift, that energy is working behind the c of g to swap ends, the infamous ground loop. It can happen with balletic grace at low speed(I had it happen to me in a Cub once, and the Tower assumed it was a graceful manoevre executed to leave the runway expeditiously – they couldn’t have been more wrong, at that point I was just a passenger) or with metal bending violence, which would be the case if a wheel dug in on touchdown in a heavy taildragger.

So I think that total energy plus comparitively narrow track would be why the Spitfire ( and Bf109) would be considered trickier that a Hurricane or P51 etc, and all would be more of a handful that a light, low wingloading taildragger such as the 170 or Tiger Moth, assuming same wind conditions.

Cheers

Using published figure then calculating VSo * 1.3 gives you 85 mph for the Spitfire IX as against 120 mph for the P51D

I suddenly know which I am preferring.

Moggy

120mph is a reasonable approach speed but actual touchdown is around 90mph, still a fair old lick. If you knew the tire was u/s ie spotted by wingman, then a gear up landing might be the safest option.

“I think someone’s been having some fun with you…”

The Corky Fornof incident is extremely well-documented, by a variety of newspaper and TV teams that quickly went to the scene as soon as a few phone calls were made, and is quite well-known among U. S. aviation people, though apparently it didn’t make it to the UK. Say “Corky Fornof” to just about any pilot in the U. S. and they’ll either respond “Bearcat” or “that Interstate landing.”

A little very primitive searching should turn up for you a number of news reports and photographs, I should think.

And yes, the incident was in effect reproduced for the Bond film, since it predated the film.

Hi Stepwilk

I posted after a few beers last night, I hope I haven’t caused any offence…Your tale did seem a bit fanciful, not the landing itself but the calm insouciant ‘Fill er up please…”. Despite the movies, witty banter is not usually the first port of call for those who have faced death in the cockpit and got away with it. So I did a search and I found the story related as you describe but as to the punchline…

“Actually, I made up the last sentence, but he might as well have…”

I know journalists and pilots love a good story and this is certainly one of those, though clearly a bit gilded for effect. No problem with that, but since you seemed a bit miffed by my response, I thought I’d tidy it up a bit.

All the best

D

By the way…film? “Always”…Catalinas, Invaders, a bit cheesy but a lot of fun.

Stores probably had a surplus of black paint.

as USUAL -having taken folks cash with no flight & no return!

Is this a fact?

I believe they lost the hangar at Goodwood and have suspended operations…