Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dnil on July 11, 2003, 12:34:25 AM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Central/07/10/bomber.crash.ap/
Don't know if its been posted yet here or not. Sad.
-
Wow, that sux. Is the AZ wing the same wing that flies Sentimental Journey?
-
Damn. That sucks. :(
Condolences to their families.
-
Yet another unrecoverable piece of the history lost, along with two lifes :(
-
The AZ wing? Would that be connected with the place at Falcon Field,AZ? I was there in 1998, and took this pic inside a H-111 cockpit - could it have been the same one?
(http://www.alanadsl.legend.yorks.com/heinkel111cockpit.jpg)
-
Very sad. My grandfather was pilot of a He111.
-
While it's great to keep this old machines flying, I am growing more and more concerned about the safety of these airplanes, with little to no official replacement parts, and a condition that goes a long long way from "mint".
I was offered the possibility to learn to fly a Bücker-Jungmann but I have heard so many bad things about their condition that I may very well just say no. I'd love to, but when you talk to so many good pilots who say they don't trust the plane... makes you think.
Daniel
-
Originally posted by CyranoAH
While it's great to keep this old machines flying, I am growing more and more concerned about the safety of these airplanes, with little to no official replacement parts, and a condition that goes a long long way from "mint".
If you are in insinuating that because these vintage machines are rare, that they should be grounded, I suggest you educate your self as to why these aircraft are still able to fly. THat is plain and simple, because private individuals (as well as some organisations) spend millions of their money to restore and maintain theses aircraft. Therefore, it is THEIR choice as to whether these aircraft should fly or not. Don't forget, had it not been for these enthusiasts, the only place you would see any of these aircraft would be in the Smithsonian or Dayton, as static displays, mostly long gone and scrapped.
As for there being no "official replacement parts" that is far from the case. Most operators of warbirds have a supply of replacements or, they seek out a certified DDR Engineer and come up with alternatives. Last effort is to fabricate replacements. WHich is being done more and more.
We work long and hard to keep these aircraft flying, and are always striving for safety. Unfortunately there are some who just do enough to get by.... if you want a better solution, support the FAA's "total compliance" program, it is there to force all owners to ensure these aircraft comply with all known literature and publications regarding the type. It is a more expensive, but better idea, and will further ensure these aircraft are properly restored and maintained. Unfortunately, there will never be a way to completely rule out incidents. But this program is a step in the right direction, not a step in the opposite by forcing the aircraft to be grounded.
My condolences are with the families of the He111 pilot and his passengers, godspeed to them both.
-
Bodhi, it's a well known fact that brand new, low time, medium time and high time engines never ever failed in flight during the war.
It's just since the war that engines have failed in flight.
So we must stop flying all warbirds.
-
//I'm quite lazy to day :)
Original french version :
Pour recentrer le débat ils serait peut être bon de regarder le nombre d'avions existant dans un type. A savoir qu'il est plus ennuyeux de détruire un avion unique qu'un avion dont plusieurs exemplaire sont encore en état de vol
googleized version
To centre the debate they would be can be good to look at the number of planes existing in a type. Namely that it is more tedious to destroy a single plane than a plane whose several specimen are still in in-flight status
(even tired I won't have wrote that :p)
-
Originally posted by CyranoAH
While it's great to keep this old machines flying, I am growing more and more concerned about the safety of these airplanes, with little to no official replacement parts, and a condition that goes a long long way from "mint".
I was offered the possibility to learn to fly a Bücker-Jungmann but I have heard so many bad things about their condition that I may very well just say no. I'd love to, but when you talk to so many good pilots who say they don't trust the plane... makes you think.
Daniel
They have a He111 at Cavanaugh Flight in Addison. It is going to be fully restored to working condition and NEVER flown.
-
yea same one beetle. I had been around it to, many times. I was at the airshow where the last A-20 crashed and when the P-82 cracked up on landing. This planes are much more interesting in the air then in a hangar.
-
Dnil must not be allowed to attend anymore warbird flyovers......see the pattern :eek:
-
Bodhi, I'm well aware of the situation of these warbirds. The Bücker I mentioned belongs to the PAC (Aeronautical Fleet of Catalonia) whose only goal is to restore old and rare airplanes.
Having said so, it's very difficult to be absolutely sure that the restored airframe of such an old airplane is going to hold together in flight just fine unless you take it apart bolt by bolt, which is not the case in many, many airplanes.
I respect the work and will of those who spend their time and money on these warbirds. I was only stating the fact that I've grown concerned about the safety of the operation of these planes, that's all.
Daniel
-
Originally posted by CyranoAH
...Having said so, it's very difficult to be absolutely sure that the restored airframe of such an old airplane is going to hold together in flight just fine unless you take it apart bolt by bolt, which is not the case in many, many airplanes....
Daniel, that is plain and simply a crock of sh*t. It is not imperative to take everypiece of an aircraft apart. If the structure is properly inspected and X-rayed and / or Dye penetrant, or Electrically resistance checked, it is just as good. We routinely leave structures together that do not have fasteners that are required to be removed to be inspected. Bolts as a whole are removed and if specialty, checked then treated and placed back in the airframe.
Do not babble out a blanket safety statement regarding an entire industry unless you are better educated on what makes it safe. Cripes, seems to me all you non-mechanically incline pilots should be forced to get an a/p so you won't "know-it-all" :rolleyes:
-
Pheeew easy there! It'd seem like I struck a cord there...
I was just pointing out MY concerns about their safety. Not yours. Not anybody else's.
I'm well aware of the tests. Visual inspections, magnaflux, x-rays if necessary, so please chill out and try to talk civilized. I think I have so far.
Daniel
-
All id say is for the truelly rare examples , i.e. if its the last of its kind they should be kept on the ground and simply taxied at airshows OR they only fly at the airbase they are kept at, flying these aircraft all over the US or Europe seems to be a foolhardy thing to do.After the recent spate of airshow crashes I too am questioning the safety aspect a bit. I think if an aircraft is funded by public donations or is owned by a museum it should be grounded as a peice of history that should be preserved for all but i wouldnt dream of denying a private owner the choice of whether to fly one or not.If there are 2 or more examples flying then i can think of no reason they shouldnt be flown even if the pilot is flying the most dangerous types and of course as long as his flight routes avoid civilian residential areas.
This particular crash is not only sad its also very annoying, the reason is I have never seen the He-111 in static or flying displays and now it seems i never will. Already many WW2 warbirds are lost forever to history and i cant condone people flying the very last example of any type we have left unless like bohdi says they are privately restored and owned (it is theirs to ly or not as they wish)but even then it seems an awfull risk to fly them like they often are at airshows.Today i went to duxford UK for a warbirds show and they were looping and diving around like madmen! This after 2 pilots died in a crash yesterday.
True it was exciting to watch but it wasnt always what i would deem 100% safe. A hurricane actually flew directly over our heads at one point and i always thought the idea was to fly over clear areas not the crowd.Im really torn on this though, I love to see and hear them fly, but i dont want them to dissapear forever either.Id accept them not flying if it meant our children and grandchildren will still be able to see them for years to come.
What we need to do is have more programmes like the me262 and fw190 ones that are building replicas and making the jigs and tools to produce many of the types.Replicas could fly the airshows and the originals could be kept safe in museums.I know its FAR more expensive to build them from scratch but hey there are many damn rich enthusiasts out there.
damn its hard.As i type this im still in two minds on the subject. :)
-
Hola Daniel,
I will have to disagree with you. Flyign day in and day out from Chino, those rare planes have more than their share of attention. As far as the parts getting rare, it's fairly irrelevant as they are ususally brand new, just fresh out of some metal shop.
As far as the structure is concerned, those planes are not that "complicated". I mean by this, there is no rocket science in the restauration process and on how to put everythign together rigth. Plus, metal sheets, ribs and rivets, a standard on "solidity".
Hey I'm way more concerned about doing aerobatics in my 1967 Cessna 150 inspected by a sunday mechanic than riding in any of Chino's museum bucket.
How often do you see a wing ripping of one of those WBs at airshows? It's usually pilot error, or engine failure (which alos happen "a lot" in General Aviation, but GA planes gliding way better, it's usually a less dramatic consequence).
-
I have to trust you guys because you have plenty of experience with this kind of birds, but (as I said) *I* had grown concerned after many experienced pilots talked me out of learning to fly the Bücker because they didn't trust the plane.
I guess that the problem is that not all warbirds are in the same state of conservation, and while some can be extremely airworthy, others may not.
Which takes me to the question: how can you be sure it a plane is trustworthy if you are not the one who has been working on it?
You have to trust the mechanics, the people working on its restoration... and if you don't know them that well... then it's 50/50 really. Therefore, I'm still thinking about it.
I'd love to fly old planes, but I'm not all that convinced they can be trusted 100% unless you personally work on them.
Daniel
-
You know that new planes are not "safe" either right? It's not because they are out of the factory that nothing will happen to you.
Out of my head, a Malibu took of from Vero Beach couple of years ago, to be ferried to the owner, he went nose down at 700ft after take of. Something with the elevator control. From Vero, a guy from my school lost an engine in flight in a twin, while flying a brand new seminole that he just brought back to get checked.
It's aviation, men were not meant to fly ... it's not a "safe business".
Now Daniel, some planes have a reputatuion, probably what those old timers told you about. As far as I'm concerned, I will trust rivets and metal ANYDAY over the new composite planes.
-
Well most of the airplanes in the club are from the 60s-70s, so they are not exactly "new" ;)
I concur with your opinion: some planes have a reputation and this must be one of those...
Thanks for the advice everybody. I might give the old Bücker a try... (I just learned you fly those with a parachute on) :)
Daniel