I recall reading somewhere of a Ju-88 that actually settled, engines running, on top of a barrage balloon which immediately began to sink rapidly earthward. As it descended the Ju-88 slid off and was able to fly away.

And the WW1 pilot who stood up to dislodge a jammed magazine on his upperwing mounted Vickers which caused the plane to turn upside down leaving him hanging on to the jammed magazine while frantically trying to get back into the cockpit and right the aircraft. Which he did.

IIRC also there was a pre-WW1 imcident where a pilot survived an inverted crash of a Bristol Boxkite because he had fallen onto the lower surface of the upper wing, and was sort of held in place by the birdcage like bracing wires.

No one has mentioned one of the oddest, which was Richthofen being shot down by a single round from an Australian infantryman’s SMLE.

Does anyone here know any unusual dogfights that have happened in the recent century with 2 of the most unusual aircraft to duke it out . such as the PBY Catalina that took on a h8k mavis or the B-26 that downed a me-323?

Well the Wirraway that downed the Zero off Rabaul is an obvious example. The Wirraway was flying along when the crew noticed a Zero cruising along at a low altitude. They made a hasty dive at it and then got away as fast as they could. Later the Zero wreck was discovered on a reef.

It was said that no one knew who was the most surprised – the pilot of the Zero or the crew of the Wirraway.

Please leave the :smoking: jokes at the door :rolleyes:

Here, and elsewhere, I’ve seen various pictures of Sutherlands and early model Cat’s landing on grass strips.

My question is how did they get them back up in the air??? Jack them up and install the beaching gear? is that even feasible?

Matt

I believe a giant rubber band was used. 😀

Seriously if the aircraft landed on its hull then the only recourse I suspect would be to dismantle it and truck it out for repairs or scrapping. The beaching gear was not designed to act as a functioning undercarriage.

Thanks Malcolm. Oh, it was an event alright, it was a disaster. One of the downed crew were killed by natives, too.

Yes I reckon you’ve summed it up James 😀 Getting killed by one of the locals was piece of bad luck. But then I suspect the locals were getting a bit peed off with all these foreigners fighting wars in their country.

However, that aside, I agree that it was a reasonably handy aircraft, but that was never enough against faster more manoeverable opposition like the A6M. There is a parallel incident where such aggressive behaviour in an outmoded aircraft was noted and that was that famed fight between an RAAF Hudson and an A6M, the pilot of which noted that he had never seen such a brave defensive action fought by a bomber. The Hudson was downed but it was an epic contest.

As you say its not the planes its the pilots who fly them that matter.

Wasn’t that a contender for the first non-stop trans-Atlantic flight?

Indeed http://www.limericksoviet.com/CHAPTER_EIGHT.doc

Modified Short Shirl.

Expert:

Almost all of fighter aeroplne, which built aft Zero, such as Shiden Raiden etc also has long range with reasonable arm. and weapon. So I think there is some partial emphasis of their engine design, but I don’t know what…..

Engine design is an important factor – the Japanese by and large used radials, which like their American counterparts were very efficient at nominal cruising rates. These engines were designed for relatively slow cruising speeds with excellent fuel consumption and for short periods when actual combat required high power and high fuel consumption.

I recall reading some years ago that the American aviation engine manufacturers were concerned as much with designing engines for longer term economical civil use more than combat use. This was one of the philosophies that enabled them to corner civil airliner production at the expense of the European countries. I suspect also that greater internal civil domestic air route distances in continental America encouraged this practice, and this led to the development of excellent engines with excellent cruising potential.

Japanese engine design was influenced greatly by American practice and the potential for long civil passenger routes in Asia probably created a similar effect to that of American domestic airline practice. European air routes were relatively speaking much shorter, while only the British with their Imperial connections had a similar outlook and also developed very efficient radial engines. Unfortunately they rather lagged in airliner development.

But regardless of that, I think that despite, an apparent Japanese superiority in this area of long range economical usage of radials, the American radial engine designs were just as efficient. There were more factors at play than just engine range etc. Aircraft manoeverability in combat, weight of numbers and pilot experience were just as important in the first year of the Pacific War. Japanese superiority eroded swiftly once the more heavily armed American aircraft came to be flown by pilots who understood how to take advantage of their aircraft’s strengths.