Warbird Information Exchange

_________________
45-47=-2

I looked at the NTSB report, there was not much of anything that was not bent, burnt, twisted or mangled, they are selling the data plate and some new parts

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

About eight years ago ( I think ) there was a two seat P-51 crash near Galveston with two on board, another two seat P-51 crash about 18 months ago near Kerrville,Texas with two on board, and this one above.I don't know what caused the other two crashes, but are the two two seat Mustangs unstable or more difficult to fly with the second seat installed?Thanks.

As stated in the accident report, the POH warns against acrobatic maneuvers with 30 or more gallons (150lbs) in the fuselage tank. The additional weight rear of the pilot can potentially make the aircraft unstable in certain maneuvers. The answer to your question is, apparently, yes.

_________________
45-47=-2

Thanks Mike.

you have to look at the weight and balance, in military service it would have had guns, armor, heavy radios, fuselage tanks, oxygen tanks, all of which is removed in most civilian owned planes, if you ran the numbers, you might find the W&B is well within limits. A mustang does not like it when it is ham fisted, pull too had and snap the plane, you better hope you have lots of air under you, because you are going to need it. That is what did Harry Tope in, if you ever see the video, you can see the plane approaching the snap, then it happens and the plane does a turn and buries it's nose down.

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

Agree Matt, These crashes have nothing to do with a second seat or weight and balance.

The “second seat” in most mustangs is not even a seat at all, it is a place to sit on cushions and ride. The D was flown with a fuselage tank in combat that gave the plane its tremendous range when flying with drop tanks. What is true was that the fuselage tank carried 85 gallons of gasoline; a weight of 569.5 lbs. the manual is very clear regarding what is possible when the tank is full, and what maneuvers are not.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... pril44.pdf

Page 23 of the manual begins to discuss the flying characteristics of the plane. The Mustang is an exceptional design. I use the word because it’s in the manual, stating the maneuvering characteristics are “exceptional”. At the time it was the best we had. What can be gleaned from the manual for new pilots is the Mustang can be very critical of lapses of judgement or foolhardy actions. Most if not all civilian crashes stem from logic section cranium failures that place the plane close to the ground at speed and attitudes where recovery is impossible.

Galveston Gal essentially flew into the water because of pilot spatial disorientation and atmospheric conditions -- the airplane didn't have any stability or control problems.

_________________

Looks like the manual writers at North American liked to use that word. Here's that same phrase in the T-6C manual.

I wonder what standard the T-6 and P-51 the exception from?

_________________

In the T-6 if you are inverted more than 10 seconds, the oil pressure drops to 0. You can go full throttle and full rich to keep the fuel going to the engine for 15 seconds.

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

Just a couple cents to add...in hundreds of flights in Betty Jane, with all shapes and sizes of people in the back, I never had a control issue. The Mustang is unforgiving in spins and you avoid them at all costs and when it is ready to depart into a stall it gives you a lot of warning. In all the flights I did I had 1 guy that owned a Pitts S-1, and he insisted on flying the Mustang like an S-1...after demonstrating a loop and letting him try, he couldn't break himself of "reefing" on the stick. After several attempts at instructing him not to do that I let him get in to an accelerated stall coming over the top...he stopped pulling on it pretty quick. It is no joke that it takes a lot of altitude to arrest a spin, the accelerated stall over the top cost us about 1,500ft. I never initiated a loop below 5,000 with a "student" in the back, and generally went up to 8-9,000ft...3-4 mistakes high. Too many guys get behind that curve and your situational awareness and reactions have to be on point. As easy as it is to fly, you aren't done flying it until you are in the chalks.

jim

_________________
www.spiritof44.com

What dat?

_________________
Cheers,
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas

PIC, Ford 6600 pulling Rhino batwing up and down the runway

Pulling even more.

Which is a bad thing to do when you've already pulled enough.