Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:28 pm
Jack Cook wrote:Dottie Mae's" demise was due to its pilot buzzing the lake. He was so low that his prop struck the lake's surface resulting in the crash.
Henry Mohr was not buzzing the Lake. He was rejoining his flight which was low over the lake while on a armed recce
of POW camps and touched the surface of the lake. He wasn't goofing off, flathatting or whatever.
Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:36 pm
Wow! That's quite a conclusion. Have you ever done any formation flying?Shade Ruff wrote:I guess it was just a matter of bad piloting then since no one else in his flight shared the same misfortune.
The owner is restoring a twin Beech which is quite far along. He has previously restored a T-28.Jiggersfromsphilly wrote:Can you give us a rough timeline of when work may be started on Dottie May? Just out of curiosity, what is the project and is it near completion?
The owner is quite aware of the history of this aircraft and I'm sure he will restore it to airworthy condition with a focus on preservation, including the original name of "Dottie Mae." I am not a spokesperson for the owner however.Django wrote:I hope they keep her "Dottie May" and not something else.
Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:43 pm
bdk wrote:Wow! That's quite a conclusion. Have you ever done any formation flying?Shade Ruff wrote:I guess it was just a matter of bad piloting then since no one else in his flight shared the same misfortune.
Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:52 pm
Are pilots in formation all at the same altitude? Who is responsible for the altitude of the entire formation? What should a pilot in formation be looking at?Shade Ruff wrote:Absent a mechanical failure (to which Henry never alluded), what explanation is feasible?
Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:56 pm
bdk wrote:Are pilots in formation all at the same altitude? Who is responsible for the altitude of the entire formation? What should a pilot in formation be looking at? :wink:Shade Ruff wrote:Absent a mechanical failure (to which Henry never alluded), what explanation is feasible?
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:14 pm
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:23 pm
To fly so low as to risk your prop hitting a surface is questionable at best. Henry wasn't flying a Blue Angels or Thunderbirds demonstration - even they have safety of flight standards.
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:25 pm
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:33 pm
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:40 pm
bdk wrote:Shade Ruff wrote:Frankly these are questions I would have never thought to ask. I'm just glad to see it isn't on the bottom of the lake still and that it is in the hands of someone who thought the effort was worthwhile and will appreciate it.
Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:53 pm
Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:45 pm
The pilot made the same mistake ace Don Gentile did in his P-51B Shangra La' he just got a few inches too low!
Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:49 pm
Thu Jun 08, 2006 6:08 am
Jack Cook wrote:
Jesus get out the freaking tar and feathers.
He was the #4 man in the flight and fell out of formation in a very tight turn. At the time of the rejoin the flight was very low over the lake setting up for another run over a POW camp. There is also the issue of glare off the water. Henry was the follower not the leader and was rejoining the flight. This was a war time low level armed recce of POW camps to see if the Germans were killing Allied POWs. What does the fact that it was a low level combat mission mean to you?
If he'd landed safely, the plane would have been scrapped post-war and not sitting in a hanger awaiting restoration. Duh.......................
Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:57 am