Widowmakers
One of the most remarkable aviators that I have ever had the pleasure of meeting was the late Gp Capt Dickie Maydwell DSO DFC. Among his many accomplishments was to be the Commanding Officer of No.14 Squadron in Italy when they received the Martin Marauder Mk.1.
He had a very high regard for the aircraft and the amount of punishment that it would take and still get you home. He was always of the opinion that those who did not read "what it said on the side of the tin" were quite likely to pay a high price for not doing so but those who flew it properly had a very high regard for the machine.
Interestingly enough, Dickie and his crew shot down an SM82, a Ju290 and an Me323 Gigant from their Marauder. The Me323 crash landed on a beach in Corsica and Dickie visited the wreckage some days later. He sawed off some propeller tips and kept one on his mantelpiece.
Many years later he met the captain of the Gigant and presented him with one of the propeller tips. They became huge friends and went hunting together but not with machine guns!
He had a very high regard for the aircraft and the amount of punishment that it would take and still get you home. He was always of the opinion that those who did not read "what it said on the side of the tin" were quite likely to pay a high price for not doing so but those who flew it properly had a very high regard for the machine.
Interestingly enough, Dickie and his crew shot down an SM82, a Ju290 and an Me323 Gigant from their Marauder. The Me323 crash landed on a beach in Corsica and Dickie visited the wreckage some days later. He sawed off some propeller tips and kept one on his mantelpiece.
Many years later he met the captain of the Gigant and presented him with one of the propeller tips. They became huge friends and went hunting together but not with machine guns!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Germany's Starfighters
I am old enough to remember the hoo-har about German F104 losses.
As I recall, the reason given at the time for these losses was that the Luftwaffe wanted the aircraft to be capable of a wider range of roles than those for which it was designed. (I don't recall what these were). As a result, a good deal of additional equipment was stuffed into it, making it heavier than its American counterpart and a bu**er to fly.
That's my recollection anyway.
Broomstick.
As I recall, the reason given at the time for these losses was that the Luftwaffe wanted the aircraft to be capable of a wider range of roles than those for which it was designed. (I don't recall what these were). As a result, a good deal of additional equipment was stuffed into it, making it heavier than its American counterpart and a bu**er to fly.
That's my recollection anyway.
Broomstick.
So it would have been OK for Rommel to have his supplies uninterrupted by the Royal Air Force?
By the same token one could say that U-boats sinking merchant ships was scarcely cricket either.
War is hell!
By the same token one could say that U-boats sinking merchant ships was scarcely cricket either.
War is hell!
Paxing All Over The World
I should like to make a further point about the inherent qualities of the a/c and the training of crew. Specifically, what we now call 'the learning curve'.
As military jet a/c were being introduced, the problem of teaching crew to adapt form piston to jet powered was significant. The time lag of the power was being learnt the bard way. (for the layman - in a piston, if you advance the throttle, the power will arrive very quickly. In a jet it will not, in the ram jets of the early 1950s, the time delay in moving the throttle and the power arriving was significant. This led many learners to apply power to late and then - concerned that nothing was happening - apply more. Whereupon ALL the power would arrive in one rush and cause great difficulties that might not be overcome.) I sit to be corrected.
This learning curve took the lives of many students and their tutors. Nowadays, this is taught in the SIM.
As military jet a/c were being introduced, the problem of teaching crew to adapt form piston to jet powered was significant. The time lag of the power was being learnt the bard way. (for the layman - in a piston, if you advance the throttle, the power will arrive very quickly. In a jet it will not, in the ram jets of the early 1950s, the time delay in moving the throttle and the power arriving was significant. This led many learners to apply power to late and then - concerned that nothing was happening - apply more. Whereupon ALL the power would arrive in one rush and cause great difficulties that might not be overcome.) I sit to be corrected.
This learning curve took the lives of many students and their tutors. Nowadays, this is taught in the SIM.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The (Martin) B-26 was still 'making widows' as late as 1995, when a restored example crashed during the CAF's annual show; prompting this article in the next newsletter.
Doolittle took the airplane on tour to dispel the impression it was a killer and often would beat up an airfield with *1* engine shut down just to show how, if procedures were followed, the B-26 was not a widow maker.
It was a fast, state of the art airplane when it first rolled out. Complex electrical systems along with increased maintenance procedures helped create the image of a killer.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 63
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many 104's DID have downward ejecting seats. Indeed the Danish a/c had them. They were replaced with MB seatswhich, like the Lockheed C2, were upward firing.
The Lockheed folk were worried about ejecting pilots getting hit by the T tail.
The Lockheed folk were worried about ejecting pilots getting hit by the T tail.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Under consideration
Apologies for late reply and absence from this thread. Not sure of the shortlist yet, since I am having to do more research into many of the suggestions. Even though I specified combat aircraft, I have been more than interested in the Civil suggestions like the MU-2. I guess I hadn't anticipated high attrition rates in 'modern' aircraft. I have also been struck how our attitudes to safety have changed. Today, even a handful of losses (one?) draws massive attention and executive action. The aircraft that seem to stand out - and also offer a spread of interest - would seem to be: Post war: Meteor and Sea Vixen; Modern era: F104, Indian Mig 21, TU-22 Blinder. WW1: BE2; WW2: BP Defiant, Fairey Battle.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not much of a widowmaker (great structure and aero qualities), but the Howard DGA in Naval trainer role (NH-1) was called the "Ensign Eliminator" for its ground-handling qualities. 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK/Philippines/Italy
Age: 73
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would just like to add the Bristol Brigand to this unfortunate category.
Only used operationally in Malaya exploding cannon shells, problems with props coming off and issues with air brakes made this an aircraft with an unenviable reputation. Don't know the exact stats on it but rumour has it that it was often flown one up to reduce casualties until replaced - in haste - by Hornet and Canberra.
Only used operationally in Malaya exploding cannon shells, problems with props coming off and issues with air brakes made this an aircraft with an unenviable reputation. Don't know the exact stats on it but rumour has it that it was often flown one up to reduce casualties until replaced - in haste - by Hornet and Canberra.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: essex
Age: 95
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Widow makers
An aptly named candidate A/C for your list would be the large twin boomed, twin engined, 'Black Widow', --- plus the Bell 'Airacobra' which did'nt get a great write up, as it's 'car type' cockpit door' opening against the slipstream made it almost impossible to get out of in an emergency.
The ME 109 also was a German 'Widow maker' in the hands of trainees & inexperienced pilots.
Dusty
The ME 109 also was a German 'Widow maker' in the hands of trainees & inexperienced pilots.
Dusty
Bear Behind
Me163 is a good example along with the Japanese copy (Mitsubishi Ki-200). Heinkel 177 Greif a beautiful example of an aircraft incapable of it's mission. 4 engined bomber connected to a single prop on each side, so giving the appearance of being a twin. Would burst into flames at the drop of a hat as oil leaked onto the red hot exhaust manifolds.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Botha
An acquaintance of mine of many years ago flew Bothas in WWII.
He said his first sight of a Botha was arriving at OCU and seeing the fuselage and tail of a Botha, standing like a monument, pointing vertically skywards in a neighbouring field.
Apparently, the Botha had a deathtrap of a fuel system. At start up, the fuel selector could too easily be turned too far and into the 'reserve' sector, thereby switching fuel supply away from the main tanks to the separate reserve tank.
This contained just enough fuel to start up, taxi to the hold, run up, line up, take off and get about 50 feet off the ground.
Then both engines would suffer a dead cut and the aircraft, heavily laden for the sortie and with its main tanks still brim-full of fuel, would have to do a dead stick landing off the aerodrome.
Good fun eh?
Broomstick.
He said his first sight of a Botha was arriving at OCU and seeing the fuselage and tail of a Botha, standing like a monument, pointing vertically skywards in a neighbouring field.
Apparently, the Botha had a deathtrap of a fuel system. At start up, the fuel selector could too easily be turned too far and into the 'reserve' sector, thereby switching fuel supply away from the main tanks to the separate reserve tank.
This contained just enough fuel to start up, taxi to the hold, run up, line up, take off and get about 50 feet off the ground.
Then both engines would suffer a dead cut and the aircraft, heavily laden for the sortie and with its main tanks still brim-full of fuel, would have to do a dead stick landing off the aerodrome.
Good fun eh?
Broomstick.