Interesting. Can you post a link?

Sadly not, it was several decades ago - the story was posted by Steve on the late lamented forerunner to WIX in the very early 2000s (I know it was around the time he turned 50!), from where I contacted him; my hard copy of the mag is god knows where, I might unearth a PDF copy of the Pagemaker file on a DVD but it would take me a long long time searching through hundreds of DVDs to find it...

The Spitfire was PS980 which flew in Europe for several years when Planes of Fame sold her to Christophe Jacquard with the contra prop mod, now reengined with a Griffon 65 and happily rebuilt after turning over in France a few years ago.

"The Impossible Turn"
What a crazily misleading expression!
Without specifying all sorts of criteria that statement is as empty and false as baldly stating that sunbathing will kill you with skin cancer. It makes good newspaper headlines but no more than that.

The ability to return to the t/o runway, or even the t/o airfield depends on a myriad of factors. Power-weight ratio, angle of climb, angle of descent in a glide, descent angle in a steep turn, distance from the field the event occurs at.
A Pitts might make a successful return before crossing the far threshold, a DC3 would never manage a glide return from any t/o profile..

I imagine even this bastardised and brutalised machine mightwell make it back if the return was instigated far enough from the field, but there must be a point inside which it physically cannot be acheieved, with the inevitable result.
It's the pilot's job to know his aircraft's performance characteristics and assess whether or not a turnback with a tailwind anding is either possible or prudent. I wonder how much experience any racing pilot has in assessing his aircraft's ability to wrack on a steeply descending 180' turn with a stopped paddle-blade prop and glide to a landing with a g/s far in excess of what they've ever seen before? Blimey! That's really stacking the odds.

The general advice then, that a 180' return to field in EFATO is' impossible' is actually pretty sound. It may not be striclty accurate in all cases but as general advice it will probably save a vast proportion of those so afflicted who might be tempted to defy all wisdom andthe laws of momentum/physics too.

Thanks Treadders; I thought that R-B had a feather system ,but must have got it mixed with the Spitfire one.I really think that the operators of big s/e engined aircraft should really think about prop feathering when re-building,changing engines,etc..Most warbirds have a `pre-oiler`pump system,to pressurise the oil system prior to start,as that is where the greatest wear generally takes place,especially if the aircraft has not been run regularly; however the oil is usually taken from the normal oil tank,so it might need a separate smaller tank....however,an engineer will come along and say `it can`t be done`....!

Salute!

Looks to this old pilot that he had no other big problems and had the energy/altitude to make the turn back to at least the field boundary. Being with him so familiar with the plane, I go with that starting point.

So some new problem occurred and was beyond his control for altitude, speed, configuration regardless of his skill- thinking of Art back filming Top Gun spin.

RIP, man, see ya at the great rejoin bar.

Gums sends...

Seafire VP441 also had an ex-Shackleton Griffon installed during its restoration and they included the feather button. This airframe hasn't flown much since being restored. Fortunately, they haven't had to use that feather button yet.

Sad to hear of Sherman Smoot's passing... RIP.

Are these accidents exacerbated by effort invested in the aircraft by the team? The pilot feeling indebted to the team to get the aircraft back in one piece?

This surely played a role in the decision making. Plus the fact that an off airport landing with such a beast would have probably nullified the chances of participating in this year's race.

With these huge propellers a simulated engine failure will be light years off from the 'real thing' especially if the propeller due to dropping oil pressure will go to fine-pitch. That will leave you probably with a glide ratio of 5-ish.
At a weight of 7200lbs and a wing area of 15,4m^2 (In another forum someone counted the ribs of the wing and they were the same as the original, so wing area might be same as original) one would end up with a landing speed around >110kts (assuming workable cl max around 1 -if I interpret https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/at...te2-jpg.115444 right it doesn't even have flaps anymore). At a glide ratio of somewhere around 5 - 7 sink rate would be >2000fpm, maybe 2500fpm. And that would be flying in a straight line. 'A handful' is probably a massive understatement. Between a rock and a hard place springs to mind.