One less B-17 flying.

In reply to AAZCD-Jon (Forum Supporter) :

Thanks, I agree on not speculating and letting the professionals do their work.  

On a more upbeat note, the P3s were already stationed in S Weymouth by the time we moved in 1976 so very familiar with them. They were smooth and quiet compared to the old piston pounders. I loved watching the Scooters go over too but it was usually with our hands over our ears.  There’s almost nothing left of the base now, a lot of housing has been built and the runways are mostly gone, you wouldn’t recognize it.

The loudest things that ever took off over us that I remember were a pair of F4 Phantoms.  They must have taken off in tandem, I’ll guess they may have been using the afterburners as those runways weren’t super long and our neighborhood was pretty close.  I remember feeling it in my chest as much as anything else.  

I lived in Tillsonburg, Ontario for 17 years. The local airstrip is home to the Canadian Harvard Association so it was pretty normal to see 4-6 Harvards flying in formation over town. I still look up every time I hear a radial engine. The bombers of the Yankee Air Force routinely fly over my Michigan home on Wednesdays.

Remember this: Aviation is not inherently dangerous. But even more so than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of carelessness and neglect.

Juan's weigh in on the collision.

In reply to fasted58 :

I always enjoy his detailed technical analysis of these incidents. Yes, I'm waiting too. No malfunction of either plane, and perfect piloting of the B-17. 

I didn't realize that the P-63 was actually mid-engined. How do they get the drive shaft around the pilot? Now I want to see one of those in real life. 

I don't know about the Collings Foundation or Commemorative Air Force, but I looked up close at some of the planes that the Cavanaugh Museum here in Dallas flies and they were in concours condition, probably in better shape than they were during the war. One bomber had a beautiful metallic paint job that would have been a lot of work and expense in a car restoration, much less a large plane. If I had brought $100 with me I would have had a ride in it that day. I still want a ride in a WW  II bomber someday, but after this crash Mrs. Snowdoggie won't let me anywhere near one.

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

I didn't realize that the P-63 was actually mid-engined. How do they get the drive shaft around the pilot? Now I want to see one of those in real life. 

The driveshaft was low, then went into a gearbox for the prop.  The cannon was between the pilot and the prop.

A different look at the engine / gun installation.  In the second pic (seat removed), you can see how the driveshaft comes through the cockpit (and through the control stick).   In case you are wondering, I am pretty sure there where never any driveshaft vibration or whip (!) issues.  One reason for that is that aircraft engines have rather low RPM range generally so not as has high a driveshaft RPM as a car would have.  It's also very solidly mounted (not need to flex as in a car) so a lot less potential for issues.

I will of course disagree with the video above about visibility.  Yes, in comparison (as I noted) to the bubble canopy P51, not as good.  It should be noted that the later p51 (and later P47) have some of the best visibility of pretty much any plane ever made!!  No plane (other than airliners that this guy is used to flying) have good visibility over the nose.  As noted, the P39/63 are actually rather good in this respect.  Go sit in a Cessna 172 (most common civil aviation plane) and talk to me about over the nose visibility as you try to look over that wall of instruments!

I will also make a small note that the common knowledge is that the P39 / P63 where build around the gun (it would certainly look like that), but I believe the truth is the mid-engined configuration was developed for aerodynamics (MUCH cleaner than the contemporary P40), the gun just worked for that configuration.

In reply to aircooled :

I'm pretty sure the P-39 was designed that way for the same reasons as a mid-engine car:  to reduce polar moment of inertia by placing the center of mass as close as possible to the geometrical center of the vehicle.

11GTCS said:

In reply to AAZCD-Jon (Forum Supporter) :

 

The loudest things that ever took off over us that I remember were a pair of F4 Phantoms.  They must have taken off in tandem, I’ll guess they may have been using the afterburners as those runways weren’t super long and our neighborhood was pretty close.  I remember feeling it in my chest as much as anything else.  

For me it was the Concord at Oshkosh back in the 90's. Low pass gear down, nose down over the runway, then gear up/nose up and full power back up and around for landing. I can rememer watching people in lawn chairs falling over from the sound and ground shaking. Truly an amazing sight and sadly one we will likely never see again.

bobzilla said:

11GTCS said:

In reply to AAZCD-Jon (Forum Supporter) :

 

The loudest things that ever took off over us that I remember were a pair of F4 Phantoms.  They must have taken off in tandem, I’ll guess they may have been using the afterburners as those runways weren’t super long and our neighborhood was pretty close.  I remember feeling it in my chest as much as anything else.  

For me it was the Concord at Oshkosh back in the 90's. Low pass gear down, nose down over the runway, then gear up/nose up and full power back up and around for landing. I can rememer watching people in lawn chairs falling over from the sound and ground shaking. Truly an amazing sight and sadly one we will likely never see again.

My paternal grandparents lived less than two miles from HEathrow when I was a kid.  We actually moved in there for about six months to help care for them.  I recall Concord daily.  Hell of a noise, but way to cool for us to care. 

I used to work across the street from Van Nuys airport where there's an owners club who'd occasionally get together for a few hot passes overhead. A wing of P-51s at full song is motorhead heaven. 

I won't even speculate about the crash.  Terrible isn't a strong enough word.

According to Juan Brown, the bombers and fighters were circulating at the same altitude, unlike previous years.  They were lining up for a pass in front of the crowd and the P63 was turning to pass to the left of the bombers, but the B17 was in his blind spot.  

Oh, I was at South Weymouth that day...

In reply to stu67tiger :

One of those things that just gets locked in the memory. Beautiful day, I was maybe 200 yards away. When I saw the plane roll towards the ground my first thought was “she’s too low for that!”  

Also, howdy neighbor!  I live in the town that starts with an F (that’s not Foxboro) next door.  

The preliminary NTSB report is out.  It's not shocking at all in one way, and rather amazingly shocking in another.

Not so shockingly, a primary contributor seems to be the organization of the flybys.  It does not mention the aspect of the faster planes on the inside, which I still say is ridiculous, but does add the fact that the air boss directed the fighter and bombers to cross paths, with no defined altitude separations!!

What is not said is how the planes where initially instructed to fly in the pre-show briefing.  I believe the plan was to have the bombers (slower) fly the outside line and the fighters the inside lane, and that is clearly what they were doing before the accident.

One aspect that is not overly highlighted below is that there where only 5 bombers in relatively close, in trail formation, and 3 fighters.  So this was not a huge trail of plane, just two groups, and the show had just started (I think this was there 2nd pass maybe).  This is relevant because any awareness of the situation would show that such small groups of planes, and clearly very different speeds would overlap in the orbit for a rather short period of time (maybe 15 sec?) and they where directed to cross paths JUST at the point they passed each other.  A really big failure in both organization and execution.

I would again suspect the FAA will make some strong suggestions or rules regarding air display spacing and organization.  

(the other pages talk about the specifics of the crash impact, meteorological conditions etc)

https://www.flyingmag.com/ntsb-releases-preliminary-report-on-fatal-texas-midair-collision/