Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:29 pm
Hey the pilot and airplane will fly another day. The story doesn't add up but maybe it was the reprter got a few things mixed up.
If the controls locked up 600' after take off, I have to wonder if the pilot used a checklist and verified that the controls were "free and correct" before takeoff. He only owned the new million dollar toy a week. Did he use a checklist?
What would the landing gear have to do with control stick malfunction? DId he check his hydraulic reservoir on pre-flight, and did he do a preflight walkaround? Did he check his engine temps and hydraulic pressure gage before takeoff? Please tell me he didn't takeoff with any hydraulic pressure indicated. That's kind of a big deal!
He had two inflight emergencies including loss of controllability and he 'CHOSE" to land in a soft cornfield instead, risking going over on it's back, instead of at his famiuliar home airport with a nice long flat foamy runway, fire and emergency crews beside the runway and his maintenenace hangar nearby?
The experts tell me the pavement is the preferred landing surface as grass often has stones near the surface that wreak havoc on the aluminum belly of the plane.
I wasn't there and I don't know the story but it almost sounded like they forgot to put fuel in the plane, realized it, couldn't make it back, picked a field and set up for landing. When he knew he had the field made they lowered the gear but it didn't get extended in time before making contact. The P-40 has an agonizingly slow landing gear retract system.
If the controls locked up 600' after take off, I have to wonder if the pilot used a checklist and verified that the controls were "free and correct" before takeoff. He only owned the new million dollar toy a week. Did he use a checklist?
What would the landing gear have to do with control stick malfunction? DId he check his hydraulic reservoir on pre-flight, and did he do a preflight walkaround? Did he check his engine temps and hydraulic pressure gage before takeoff? Please tell me he didn't takeoff with any hydraulic pressure indicated. That's kind of a big deal!
He had two inflight emergencies including loss of controllability and he 'CHOSE" to land in a soft cornfield instead, risking going over on it's back, instead of at his famiuliar home airport with a nice long flat foamy runway, fire and emergency crews beside the runway and his maintenenace hangar nearby?
The experts tell me the pavement is the preferred landing surface as grass often has stones near the surface that wreak havoc on the aluminum belly of the plane.
I wasn't there and I don't know the story but it almost sounded like they forgot to put fuel in the plane, realized it, couldn't make it back, picked a field and set up for landing. When he knew he had the field made they lowered the gear but it didn't get extended in time before making contact. The P-40 has an agonizingly slow landing gear retract system.
Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:09 pm
Before you start ASSuming and throwing someone under the bus you should get all your facts from the people involved. Instead of GUESSING what happened or what should of happened sit back and wait, you may learn something.
It may take some time to get the full report of the incident or accident, but if you wait you won't show your ASS by ASSuming.
Gary Norville
It may take some time to get the full report of the incident or accident, but if you wait you won't show your ASS by ASSuming.
Gary Norville
Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:25 pm
If your familiar with and have flown a P-40 and your familiar with a mustang - it's not that hard to figure out what could have happend with the gear and why it did not get extended all the way. One possiblilty is of course that the pilot had lots of time in the mustang and his natural reaction to the situation may have been fine if it were not for the different procedures and additional time required to fully extend the gear in a P-40. Very believable mistake to make in a tense situation like that. Mustang takes a few seconds to extend and lock - it takes about 15 seconds in the P-40 in addition to having to hold the trigger for the electric hydraulic pump. In a P-40 you must make the decision to get the gear out WAY sooner than in a mustang. As for the control jamming, a number of things could do that - a loose harness strap for instance. My point is this - the "chip light" comment is way out of line in my opinion - Sounds like a pretty wild few minutes for the pilot. 
Definitley believable. I of course was not there and am very glad that he is O.K.
JC
Definitley believable. I of course was not there and am very glad that he is O.K.
JC
Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:42 pm
Mr. Chiplight,
The story I heard matched very closley to what was written in that article. From the post accident inspection it was very clear as to what jammed the elevator. As to the reason for only one gear extending, perhaps (I don't know for sure) it is as John Paul mentioned (a very busy pilot in a new airplane). Whatever it is you can hardly fault the pilot in this case.
Besides don't worry the airplane will be fixed and the pilot is gonna fly it again.
The story I heard matched very closley to what was written in that article. From the post accident inspection it was very clear as to what jammed the elevator. As to the reason for only one gear extending, perhaps (I don't know for sure) it is as John Paul mentioned (a very busy pilot in a new airplane). Whatever it is you can hardly fault the pilot in this case.
Besides don't worry the airplane will be fixed and the pilot is gonna fly it again.
Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:37 am
Hey guys, did I throw fuel on a hot topic?!!! That's what the WIX hangar is suppposed to be about dialogue and conversation on the warbird topics of the day. I don't represent myself as the FAA, NHC, writer for an aviation magazine, or whatever, and don't expect anyone to take the WIX any more seriously than any other chat line, blog or whatever. Why wait for the NTSB report on this one? No one was hurt, there was no property damage except to the owner operator's airplane, I haven't discredited anyone. I'm just saying the story "smells funny." What do you think the chatter around their local airport and warbird community is about right now. I guarantee everyone was calling everyone.
Blame the maintenance staff!! Apparently you guys are telling me that it is assinine to assume it could be pilot/operator oriented? The FAR's say it is the pilot that assumes the responsibilty to ensure the aircraft is safe and ready for a safe flight. It's a single place aircraft so the buck stops with either the pilot, maintenance staff, or the manufacturer, or meteorlogical conditions. I assure you the maintainers and logbooks are being reviewed today as we speak. If weather and manufacturing can be discounted then the cause of the mishap will be appropriated to either the mehcanics or the pilot. I may be a lone voice because mechanics typically are not rich "celebrities" at the airport, but I'm taking up for those decent guys whose livelihood and reputation could be on the line.
They always get blamed!!
Blame the maintenance staff!! Apparently you guys are telling me that it is assinine to assume it could be pilot/operator oriented? The FAR's say it is the pilot that assumes the responsibilty to ensure the aircraft is safe and ready for a safe flight. It's a single place aircraft so the buck stops with either the pilot, maintenance staff, or the manufacturer, or meteorlogical conditions. I assure you the maintainers and logbooks are being reviewed today as we speak. If weather and manufacturing can be discounted then the cause of the mishap will be appropriated to either the mehcanics or the pilot. I may be a lone voice because mechanics typically are not rich "celebrities" at the airport, but I'm taking up for those decent guys whose livelihood and reputation could be on the line.
They always get blamed!!
P-40 incident
Wed Jan 25, 2006 12:39 pm
I think that marine air is seeing the situation in such a way that I understand, but the fact that Bob and the P-40 are o.k. and will fly this summer means that he could have made decisions that could have been more severe and fatal. I am just saying that he had the skill to bring the plane down in a safe manner and he is alright, and that is all that matters!
Wed Jan 25, 2006 12:46 pm
Not so much the accident or crash but the flowery approach the reported used writing the story.
Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:12 pm
Actually what "Chip Light" inferred was that Bob ran it out of gas. He pulled that right out of thin air and there was not one single hint that it was even a related factor or a contributing cause. That's just out of line in my opinion.
JC
JC
?????
Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:04 pm
My only question is was he trying to make the field. Otherwise why'd
he drop the gear? After seeing Bill Compton's F6 spread all over that field you understand why they say that rule is written in blood.
he drop the gear? After seeing Bill Compton's F6 spread all over that field you understand why they say that rule is written in blood.
Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:10 pm
It wasn't a case of "chiplight" pulling it out of the air, he pulled it out of his ass.
"chiplight's" quote of "almost sounded like" is FAR from the cause of the incident, so why make the statment if you have no clue? It's not my business or job to say what the cause was, but "chiplight" isn't even close by any means.
Gary Norville
I wasn't there and I don't know the story but it almost sounded like they forgot to put fuel in the plane, realized it, couldn't make it back, picked a field and set up for landing. When he knew he had the field made they lowered the gear but it didn't get extended in time before making contact. The P-40 has an agonizingly slow landing gear retract system.
"chiplight's" quote of "almost sounded like" is FAR from the cause of the incident, so why make the statment if you have no clue? It's not my business or job to say what the cause was, but "chiplight" isn't even close by any means.
Gary Norville
Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:32 pm
You have to speak navair to understand. Chip light is a fancy term for bullshet. The pilot comes back to the ramp because he doesn't want to fly because he has a hot date. Example "I taxied out and got a chip light and when I taxied back in it went out" kind of stuff but the maintence guys still have to pull the chip dectors= Bullshet
Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:21 pm
Honestly guys, I'm just glad he's ok. And it's a bonus that the P-40 didn't sustain a lot of damage and will be flying again soon. It seems that recently theres been too many 'accidents', and sometimes we lose sight of the fact of there being people in those planes. I guess this one hit home a little bit because of who the pilot was. I'm not trying to restir the pot here or anything, I just feel like adding in my two cents.
I was shocked to see this though. Bob is a great guy. I got to know him a bit last air show season, he helped me get engaged!! I'll never forget him for being so kind to help me out and make a memorable event even more memorable.
Here's to bluer skies for Bob and his P-40. Good luck and Good flying.
Brian
I was shocked to see this though. Bob is a great guy. I got to know him a bit last air show season, he helped me get engaged!! I'll never forget him for being so kind to help me out and make a memorable event even more memorable.
Here's to bluer skies for Bob and his P-40. Good luck and Good flying.
Brian
Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:01 am
Has the FOD problem been resolved?
Luck was on his side; glad he is OK.
VL
Luck was on his side; glad he is OK.
VL
Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:10 am
My point on my posts are twofold; 1) the reporter or the information given to the reporter was very inaccurate. The airplane did not actually fly with the AVG and Gen Scott, it is painted to represent one of his "Old Exterminators". Ie it's not a national treasure per se. WHat happened between takeoff and 600'AGL. to jam the controls? Could this have been caught on preflight? WHy wasn't this caught on the pre-takeoff checklist? The reporter says he was concerned about an ensuing fire so he chose a wet soft field instead of an airport with emergency services? Sometimes when people have an emergency,say landing gear in this case, they will go back to an airport environment, call the tower and have them telephone a Jeff Clyman, or someone that is an expert in that aircraft and go through every possible option to try to remedy the problem. I have heard of this many times and sometimes it helps. SOmetimes they still have to make a gear up landing. Did they do this?
Doug Rozendaal wrote an excellent letter to the editor in the October 05 issue of Warbirds magazine. Not to speak for him, but essentually the article points out that there were ten fatalities last year in Warbirds. Four out of five of the accidents didn't have to happen at all. ATP rated pilots taking off downwind, others hitting powerlines,Stall on takeoff, etc.
Others are trying to say that I am criticizing the owner or his flying ability, or his experience level in the P-51. I'm not and like I said , I don't know him.
If it is not a mechanical failure, then about 90 per cent of the time the "human element" enters into why an aircraft gets damaged.
Doug Rozendaal wrote an excellent letter to the editor in the October 05 issue of Warbirds magazine. Not to speak for him, but essentually the article points out that there were ten fatalities last year in Warbirds. Four out of five of the accidents didn't have to happen at all. ATP rated pilots taking off downwind, others hitting powerlines,Stall on takeoff, etc.
Others are trying to say that I am criticizing the owner or his flying ability, or his experience level in the P-51. I'm not and like I said , I don't know him.
If it is not a mechanical failure, then about 90 per cent of the time the "human element" enters into why an aircraft gets damaged.
Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:11 pm
I think it is worth pointing out the commenting on accidents before the FAA reports is asking for trouble, or at the very least a backlash. I would suggest it is not wise to speculate AT ALL regarding pilot or plane until the FAA reports, and even then leave it to the report regarding the cause and maybe discuss prevention.
The appropriate direction this thread should have gone it would be to chastise the reporter for come clearly poor reporting. Unfortunately it was not the first time, and I would suspect
it won't be the last. 
I hope this helps put some perspective into this debate. Comments? Am I out of line here?
Regards,
Mike
The appropriate direction this thread should have gone it would be to chastise the reporter for come clearly poor reporting. Unfortunately it was not the first time, and I would suspect
it won't be the last.
I hope this helps put some perspective into this debate. Comments? Am I out of line here?
Regards,
Mike