Which fighters did pilots feel safest in for crash landing?

FLYBOYJ · 06-10-2005, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmaxt

It depends on the surface your trying to land on.
For pavement it would offer a "crumple zone"

wmaxt

Ya know, I got to agree with this. I've seen a P-51 air intake scoop up close with the skin removed from the area. Inside the scoop from what I could remember is either an oil cooler or a coolant radiator. In either case, these things aren't the strongest pieces of hardware on the airplane, and the surrounding structure isn't that beefy. I think the scoop will crush or rip away first before it causes a real problem, of course the only way to know for sure is to ask a P-51 vet who bellied one in or go find a P-51 and crash it!

This reminds me of a story my brother told me. A guy walks into a Ford dealership parts department (where my brother works) and asks "how do I test my Mustang's airbags?" My brother told him "drive it into a wall."

DAVIDICUS · 06-10-2005, 04:09 PM

"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

FLYBOYJ · 06-10-2005, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAVIDICUS

"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

Its true you can't pick and choose where you're going to crash but i could tell you one of the first things you lean when getting checked out in an aircraft is emergency procedures IE, engine out/ off field landings. I would guess if a low-time P-51 jock during the war got a limited 10 hour training and check out in a -51, probably 5 of those hours were emergency procedures.

There was (and still is) an actual AF TO for aircraft ditching procedures which was normally viewed as a supplement to the -1. Whether this was in it or not, I don't know, but i think the best way to know for sure is to talk to someone who actually crashed.

wmaxt · 06-10-2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

Ya know, I got to agree with this. I've seen a P-51 air intake scoop up close with the skin removed from the area. Inside the scoop from what I could remember is either an oil cooler or a coolant radiator. In either case, these things aren't the strongest pieces of hardware on the airplane, and the surrounding structure isn't that beefy. I think the scoop will crush or rip away first before it causes a real problem, of course the only way to know for sure is to ask a P-51 vet who bellied one in or go find a P-51 and crash it!

I've seen a few pics of P-51s bellied in on runways it didn't seem to be a big deal. There is both a radiator and in front of it is an oilcooler.

I've seen a number of P-38s (pictures) bellied in on a multitude of surfaces, as long as they had a straight shot they seem to do well. Most of those pics mention the pilot was fine - I've never seen a caption state a serious injury or fatality.

wmaxt

FLYBOYJ · 06-10-2005, 04:27 PM

In my general aircraft experiences - scoops and other things protruding from the airframe don't do well in a crash, and I would think that unless the P-51 scoop could support the whole aircraft (which I know it can't) its going to rip away or crunch, reguardless of what you're landing on. At 110-100 knts (I believe the speed of a P-51 over the numbers) hitting water or earth are going to produce the same results.

wmaxt · 06-10-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAVIDICUS

"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

That is the procedure out of the F/P-51 TO-1 Flight Manual. Aparently they felt the risk was greater if you landed straight ahead. My manual is a reprint of the '47 edition it's safe to assume they have researched the possibilities. It also noted that a P-51 sank in ~2 seconds.

wmaxt

plan_D · 06-10-2005, 07:41 PM

It mostly depends on the pilot and situation, as you can see this Mustang of the 339th came down pretty well.

FLYBOYJ · 06-10-2005, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmaxt

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAVIDICUS

"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

That is the procedure out of the F/P-51 TO-1 Flight Manual. Aparently they felt the risk was greater if you landed straight ahead. My manual is a reprint of the '47 edition it's safe to assume they have researched the possibilities. It also noted that a P-51 sank in ~2 seconds.

wmaxt

Kicking the aircraft "sideways" puts it in a skid, which also slows it up. I am also guessing that there WAS concern about the air intake scoop, but again from what I remember seeing from it "up close" I think the thing would just turn into a "big crushed aluminum can."

dinos7 · 06-10-2005, 08:01 PM

yes that is still my belief. the better one would be the zero. hte japs always crash landed in those things. and most of them lived.

plan_D · 06-10-2005, 08:03 PM

Good point, dinos. The low stall speed of the A6M would make it easy to crash land. Always though, in my opinion, the Hurricane would be the best. Low stall speed and strong structure.

dinos7 · 06-10-2005, 08:19 PM

thank you

FLYBOYJ · 06-10-2005, 11:22 PM

It really isn't the stall speed, its the engine out glide speed that makes the difference. The engine out glide speed for the Zero is very low. This gives a lot of time for a pilot to make decisions in where he needs to land. This is a big is factor during emergency procedures.

plan_D · 06-11-2005, 02:34 AM

If he's stalling at high speeds, it's not exactly ideal. It's going to smash him into the ground.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-11-2005, 08:14 AM

If you were to turn any aircraft sideways (not just a P-51) you really stand the chance of flipping the aircraft. It all depends on the speed. At low speeds I think it would work but at high speeds the wings will dip under the water and the bird will flip

I agree it depends on the terrain you are landing. On pavement such as a run way I agree with FlyboyJ that it would just crush the scoop and the bird would land just fine but in dirt or water I think it would be more of a hinderness.

Not that I want to crash land an aircraft but If I had to I would pick a P-38, P-47, or a Fw-190.

BombTaxi · 06-11-2005, 08:50 AM

If I was crashing anything, it would be an IL2 or HS 129...the runway would probably come off worse!