TAFs for Cambridge and Stansted:

EGSC 090655Z 090716 34012KT 9999 SCT015 BKN035 TEMPO 0710 9000 -RA BKN008 TEMPO 1016 -SHRA BKN014

EGSS 090610Z 090716 32012KT 9999 SCT015 BKN030 TEMPO 0708 -RA BKN007 PROB30 TEMPO 1516 SHRA

So, cloudbase for most of the time scattered at 1500 feet and broken 3000-3500 feet; showers this afternoon with cloudbase at 1400 feet; wind northwesterly, 12 knots

YR

Air Atlantique DC6, perhaps

At last year’s Project Propeller fly-in at Elvington, Capt Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown gave a talk on all the aircraft he had flown. One of these was the carrier trials of the Mosquito.

Apparently, the problem they had was that the stalling/landing speed of the Mossie was way above what the arrester wires could handle (from memory of what he said, this was about 80-85 knots for the wires).

That is why they fitted four blade props and more powerful engines, so they could drag the Mossie in slower using power at a higher angle of attack. He said that if an engine had so much as coughed in that configuration the aircraft would have been inverted in less than 2 seconds.

A very brave man, who simply took these things in his stride. Obviously, as these aircraft went into service, a more effective solution was found to the problem – maybe the arrester wires could handle higher speeds/loads. the Sea Hornet would have been just as much a handful to land.

I think the original idea was to use the Mossies in the Pacific with smaller versions of Barnes Wallis’ bouncing bombs against Japanese shipping.

Interesting thread. I’ve learned a lot.

YR

The flight on that clip was in 2001 ? the first ever inverted under-bridge flight in Kaunas, Lithuania. In 2000, he had performed a Special Millennium flight under all 10 Bridges in Vilnius, also in Lithuania. I agree that these under-bridge flights were irresponsible, especially when spectators were allowed on the bridge as well, and wouldn?t be permitted in the UK. Though different countries have varying views on safety standards.

This flight was not some spur-of-the-moment stunt, although he was fined afterwards ? for displaying cigarette advertising. The relevant aviation authorities presumably permitted these under bridge flights (though I stand corrected if they did not). The large numbers of spectators showed it was well publicised beforehand.

Jurgis Kairys has a website, which it is worth having a look at for other more traditional display flying clips:

http://www.jkairys.com/english/index.htm

However, this does raise an interesting question of what is, or should be, permissible. My understanding is that a display pilot has to demonstrate to an examiner what (s)he plans to do, so that safety and competence can be assessed before a Display Authorisation is issued. This will include a minimum height at which the pilot is allowed to display. The venue will also have a minimum distance of the display axis from the crowd line to protect the spectators in the event of a mishap.

Classic warbirds such as a Spitfire or Mustang have a completely different flight envelope from the modern unlimited class aerobatic aircraft, which sometimes seem to defy the basic laws of flight because of their power to weight ratios and the gyroscopic effects generated by their engine and propeller. The two types of aircraft require different energy management, have different G limits and are consequently displayed differently.

Aerobatic display pilots can, and do, get DAs to do flick rolls after take off, to perform a loop ? putting the undercarriage ?down? at the top of the loop and landing from the manoeuvre (Gennady Elfimov). The ?barnstorming? displays of limbo flying and ribbon cutting are also flown low down and with support crew holding the poles ? and are permitted and considered safe to perform. And to see a Tiger Moth doing a crazy flying routine, one wonders how it does not stall and spin in.

I don?t know how low inverted flight would be allowed. Perhaps someone on the board has more knowledge of this.

Manoeuvres, which would horrify me if flown by a Spitfire, for example, wouldn?t trouble me if flown by a Sukhoi 26 or an Extra 300. Of course, it is possible to screw up, have a mechanical or structural failure and pay the ultimate price, whatever type of aircraft you fly.

For another ?stunt?, look at the Haute Voltige web site:

http://www.haute-voltige.com

… and check out the Movies link. There are three clips of an aircraft flying through the Tianmen Cave. Crazy? It got in the Guinness Book of records, apparently.

We?ve had lots of debate about warbird displays after the tragic losses of the past few years ? with differing views about how low or hard they should be flown. But what do people think is permissible, while being as safe as anything can be in a display environment?

YR

Dezz – I was in the black one with the Yak nose art. It’s on our flying suit patch too!

I know a lot of the guys involved with PAFRA, so I’m always glad to give any support I can.

YR 😀

ML407 is credited with shooting down the first German aircraft on D-Day, a Ju88. The Spitfire was flown by Johnny Houlton of 485 NZ Squadron. Some of his original groundcrew were at the Annual Gathering at DX on Saturday. ML407 is now back in the original D-Day colour scheme.

YR

Being “home-based”, I’ve offered to give veterans arriving by road a flight. Now waiting to hear. Certainly enjoyed going to Elvington last year with a Lancaster rear gunner and Halifax radio operator as crew!

YR