Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

L-29 crash at Argentine Airshow 12/11/23

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

L-29 crash at Argentine Airshow 12/11/23

Old 19th Nov 2023, 13:00
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,042
Received 56 Likes on 33 Posts
The Swiss Ju 52 comes to my mind. It could not out climb a mountain valley under hot and high conditions. The wreck revealed serious structural aging that had gone unnoticed before.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2023, 17:57
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 2,706
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
... but which had nothing to do with the crash. Also, that was an airframe that was still used commercially (in a sense) and therefore had a very different usage background than a typical warbird.
Jhieminga is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2023, 17:18
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: England
Posts: 408
Received 142 Likes on 74 Posts
In 40 years of going to airshows and being aware of the accidents that have happened I've never heard of a fatal accident to a warbird caused by fatigue. Pilot error, poor maintenance occasional engine failure yes. The only fatigue I can remember was a ww1 replica so a modern aircraft.
DogTailRed2 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2023, 18:19
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,042
Received 56 Likes on 33 Posts
There is a wiki list not of airshows but structural failures in general. My point was better don't stress old aircraft with extreme maneuvering.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tural_failures

And Airshow crashes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...e_20th_century
Less Hair is offline  
Old 21st Nov 2023, 08:46
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: near an airplane
Posts: 2,706
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
There is a wiki list not of airshows but structural failures in general. My point was better don't stress old aircraft with extreme maneuvering.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tural_failures
That is a very unhelpful list... structural failure is a side effect of an airframe breaking up, but it's the reason for the airframe breaking up that is the pertinent issue in an accident investigation. That list contains everything from design issues to mis-handling of a manoeuvre and everything in between. You cannot draw any conclusions from that.

'Don't stress old aircraft' appears to be a good point, but I think it should be phrased slight differently: 'don't over-stress old aircraft'. Any airworthy airframe is more than capable of handling normal stresses. There are loads of manoeuvres that can be carried out safely by any airworthy craft. Actually, the phrase should be 'don't over-stress any aircraft'.

We shouldn't be discussing this, we should await the results from the accident investigation and start from that. It is way too soon to come to any conclusions on what we should or should not do based on this particular accident.
Jhieminga is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2023, 11:29
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 252
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
The Swiss Ju 52 comes to my mind. It could not out climb a mountain valley under hot and high conditions. The wreck revealed serious structural aging that had gone unnoticed before.
It had not "aged", it had corroded due to shoddy maintenance. The accident report basically found that the operator for years had done everything wrong; maintenance, flying standards, everything that they could possibly ignore, neglect and/or do wrong they did...
EDMJ is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2023, 11:35
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,042
Received 56 Likes on 33 Posts
Apart from maintenance done wrong, wreck parts from the inside of the structure, normally inaccessible, were analyzed and found to be badly corroded and fatigued.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 06:53
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by DogTailRed2
You could also add the Duxford P38 crash although that one goes firmly in the `unexplained` category. Outcome the same.
If you mean the Hoof Proudfoot crash he was wearing a kneeboard that we believe interfered with the yoke during the backside roll recovery.
Kneeboards are a VERY bad idea when mixed with level 1 aerobatics.....ESPECIALLY with a yoke involved as is the case in the 38.
Dudley Henriques

DAHenriques is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 15:53
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: England
Posts: 408
Received 142 Likes on 74 Posts
Slightly off topic but wasn't there an ex Battle of Britain (or maybe just a display) pilot who used to stall roll the Spitfire?
DogTailRed2 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 16:16
  #30 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,403
Received 175 Likes on 108 Posts
Do you mean flick roll? Bob Stanford Tuck certainly included it in his wartime repertoir, from memory at something like 100-120kts.

Always fascinated by the Zlins 526s etc which almost seemed to take a deep breath as flick inputs are applied. Extras and the like are so twinkle quick it's hard to say what happened.

Edit: got a feeling I've heard that Tony Bianchi performed an Aresti sequence in Patrick Lindsay's Mk1 back in the '70s probably at Booker. Whether he included a flick I know not.
treadigraph is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 16:49
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: England
Posts: 408
Received 142 Likes on 74 Posts
Maybe flick roll is the term. I was told you stall one wing and then convert it into a (flick?) roll or something like that.
DogTailRed2 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 18:02
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 10 Posts
It's really nothing more than a snap roll, or more accurately an induced spin in the horizontal plane. It's not a maneuver we usually do in WW2 propeller driven fighters but can be done if done carefully and with good stick and rudder skills.
Airspeed is critical as initiated with too much airspeed the aircraft can easily be over g'd.
In the combat sense it would be considered a defensive maneuver used to shake an attacker out of a guns solution and cause an overshoot in the plane of the defender's turn.
Generally however, (I displayed a P51D on occasion) we don't consider flick rolls as a normal display maneuver as it's an energy loss maneuver leaving you with little maneuvering energy to continue on with a display routine.
Dudley Henriques
DAHenriques is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 23:21
  #33 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,403
Received 175 Likes on 108 Posts
Dudley, in some 50 years of watching WW2 fighters displayed, I've certainly never seen one snap/flick rolled!

The first flick roll I can recall seeing was probably Neil Williams in Aerobatics International's other Pitts (think 'ZPH had a broken longeron at the time and was rebuilt with a new fuselage), might have been Mike Riley or James Black, but Williams was certainly there and flying. Second aircraft I saw flick rolled was a Chipmunk at the same show. Only warbird I've ever seen flick rolled was a Harvard performing a nicely flown avalanche quite recently.
treadigraph is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2023, 23:51
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by treadigraph
Dudley, in some 50 years of watching WW2 fighters displayed, I've certainly never seen one snap/flick rolled!

The first flick roll I can recall seeing was probably Neil Williams in Aerobatics International's other Pitts (think 'ZPH had a broken longeron at the time and was rebuilt with a new fuselage), might have been Mike Riley or James Black, but Williams was certainly there and flying. Second aircraft I saw flick rolled was a Chipmunk at the same show. Only warbird I've ever seen flick rolled was a Harvard performing a nicely flown avalanche quite recently.
When it comes to snap rolls the Harvard or AT6 as we call them here in the states is an exception .he Harvard does a beautiful snap roll due to the wing sweep outer leading edges on the wings. We snap the old T6 all day long. In fact, I've displayed the T6G in airshow displays and snapped it myself.
WW2 fighters on the other hand are a different story. They can of course be snapped and the "flick roll" as done on the Spitfire can attest, but generally speaking, we don't "snap" these aircraft as a general rule.
A normal display routine for a WW2 fighter during an airshow is performed within an envelope within +5g and -1g. In the case of the Mustang there is a negative g limit due to oil pressure loss. Generally true for other WW2 era fighters as well.
Dudley Henriques
DAHenriques is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2023, 00:02
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 5,824
Received 342 Likes on 181 Posts
Dudley, in some 50 years of watching WW2 fighters displayed, I've certainly never seen one snap/flick rolled!
Some where in the library there is a story written by a WWII Spitfire pilot, who having trouble with an enemy on his tail, basically flick rolled the aircraft into a spin, one wing was so twisted by the exercise that the slowest he was able to fly was some 150 knots, wing being so twisted that he ran out of aileron control.

An accidental flick into a spin was said to be some thing that saved inexperienced P-51 pilots when pulling a tight turn to evade the enemy behind.
megan is online now  
Old 6th Dec 2023, 00:10
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by megan
Some where in the library there is a story written by a WWII Spitfire pilot, who having trouble with an enemy on his tail, basically flick rolled the aircraft into a spin, one wing was so twisted by the exercise that the slowest he was able to fly was some 150 knots, wing being so twisted that he ran out of aileron control.

An accidental flick into a spin was said to be some thing that saved inexperienced P-51 pilots when pulling a tight turn to evade the enemy behind.
In combat you do what you have to do. Generally speaking when defensive a "flick roll" could be a last ditch maneuver to force a shooter into an overshoot.
The airspeed at which a "flick roll is initiated" is critical. Too fast and you can easily over g the airplane. So slowing it down to where you can safety "snap it" is the key.
Because ANY snap roll in ANY airlane is an energy loss maneuver, doing one in combat should be considered a "desperation" maneuver, not something you would wnat in your normal "bag of tricks" as a combat pilot.
Dudley Henriques
DAHenriques is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2023, 09:46
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Down south
Age: 68
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DAHenriques
In combat you do what you have to do. Generally speaking when defensive a "flick roll" could be a last ditch maneuver to force a shooter into an overshoot.
The airspeed at which a "flick roll is initiated" is critical. Too fast and you can easily over g the airplane. So slowing it down to where you can safety "snap it" is the key.
Because ANY snap roll in ANY airlane is an energy loss maneuver, doing one in combat should be considered a "desperation" maneuver, not something you would wnat in your normal "bag of tricks" as a combat pilot.
Dudley Henriques

What a priviliege and a pleaseure to have such an authority as Mr Henriques posting in this forum, I advise all of you to get acquainted with him via google and read his many artcicles and posts.
He his one of the last "Gurus" of aviators and pilots with such an experience, knowldege and narraitive. Welcome
markkal is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2023, 15:03
  #38 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,403
Received 175 Likes on 108 Posts
Here's what Bob Tuck had to say about flick rolling a Spitfire, as recounted to Larry Forrester in Fly for your Life:

"One thing they seemed to appreciate was a favourite trick of mine. I came in over the hangars at around 800 feet fairly slow, at about I35, and then did a stalled flick-roll. It was really very easy, if you knew the Spit well. She literally stalled around her own axis and fairly whipped round.

Mind you, you had to be careful that you started to correct and check the roll at the right instant, otherwise she'd stay stalled, and go into a spin. When you did this properly, you wouldn't lose more than a couple of miles an hour-and she'd carry on at exactly the same height as if nothing had happened. It was a very pretty thing to watch from the ground."

The Americans were chary of aerobatics at low speed. This was largely due to the fact that their fighters were apt to stall and spin without any kind of warning, whereas the Spitfire gave her pilot ample notice by juddering and rocking gently several seconds before she was liable to drop a wing. They said they'd never seen anything like that before, and from the way some of them looked at him it was clear they thought he was a case for the psychiatrist "Messerschmitt happy" was a phrase he heard somebody murmur.
treadigraph is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2023, 21:53
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by treadigraph
Here's what Bob Tuck had to say about flick rolling a Spitfire, as recounted to Larry Forrester in Fly for your Life:
As an American fairly familiar with flying WW2 fighters I would say without hesitation that were I to go up on a display that included "flick rolls" I would choose as my mount to do that a Spitfire over all other planes of choice, preferably a clean Mk 9 or earlier. Mitchell designed the perfect fighter for the BOB mission. Granted it was the Hurri's that bore the brunt of the battle but the Spit was indeed something else when it boiled down to a good old fashioned dogfight.
I never got to meet Tuck but Bader and I were friends for years. I also got to know Winkle fairly well and we had a wonderful time trading letters back and forth where he would go on and on about the high Mach dive testing they did after the war. Douglas was no slouch when it came to arguing a point and we would go at it tooth and nail comparing my Mustang and his Spitfire. LOL. Douglas mentioned doing "flick rolls" in the Spit, usually at reduced gross weight and at low airspeed. He agreed with me that the 51 was a bit heavy even at 1/2 fuel to be doing snap rolls. It was easy to load up a 51 with excessive pitch rate. I have to admit I never actually tried to do a snap in the Mustang. It was considerably heavier than a Spitfire and carried a lot more fuel.
I will say also that some of the finest pilots I have ever known were friends from Great Britain. What they did during the BOB in my opinion has never been equaled in the annals of aerial combat.
RIP Douglas and Eric. I truly miss you both very much.
Dudley Henriques
DAHenriques is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2023, 00:28
  #40 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 62
Posts: 5,587
Received 55 Likes on 39 Posts
I have questions: What is/is there a difference between a flick roll" and a "snap roll"? I understand a snap roll to be a spin on a horizontal axis (essentially, the inertia of the airplane carries it along the horizontal path long enough to enter and recover a one turn spin along a horizontal axis - which I have been taught is a snap roll). Was I taught correctly? The forgoing description make the flick roll also sound like a well recovered horizontal spin to me....
Pilot DAR is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.