Warbird Information Exchange

Presuming as it's not mentioned as separated, are we assuming the canopy was not found away from the main wreckage?

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Thanks James K re the other thread lock - it was getting confusing. Also thanks Dudley Henriques for your input - all very interesting.

The report makes no mention of the canopy at all - which I am certain it would had it been jettisoned. I realise this is all conjecture and we are dealing with events that happened a long time ago and with very limited evidence - in fact there is very little "specific" information at all, which in itself is unusual for such a report. I am just trying to get a pilot's view of the circumstances and what would or would not have been normal - and so far the respondants are giving me exactly that - Thank you! Everything that has been said only reinforces my feeling that things were no as clear cut as those investigators in 1945 attempted to make out.

Hopefully this research will lead to an excavation of the aircraft and I will certainly update all on the forum with the results.

_________________
Regards - Nick - Lancashire UK

"Ex tenebris Lux"

http://laituk.org/

Really depends on the aircraft. All the military aircraft I've flown have an immense amount of dirt and dust that comes up when negative G flight happens -- and these are aircraft that get physically stripped down during depot-level maintenance on a regular cycle (every couple hundred hours). While cockpit cleanliness isn't exactly an emphasis item for a military jet, FOD is...and it's still amazing what kind of junk comes floating up even *with* such attention paid to FOD.

Glad to help.

The canopy 'question' is interesting.

I know very little about these wartime investigations, but I've heard that kind of comment from modern researchers several times. I'd also couple it with (again modern) surprise at how long it seems to us for wartime investigators to pinpoint (for instance) carbon monoxide poisoning in fighters, or the trim-tab flaw in Bristol Beauforts.

But I think it's not so much that they implied 'certainty' in the wartime reports, more that there was a war on, and a lot of people were dying - the need was to keep moving on, and eliminate the greater causes of accidental death - the more complex or obscure simply couldn't have resources allocated unless they became a significant growing problem.

It's easy for us to overlook the desensitisation (in a sense) to death and it's causes given the sheer numbers at the time. People in 1945 would be much more aware that there was a lot of casual death caused by chance and accident (the existence of Gremlins being one result) and would have seen deaths caused by shoddy work and maintenance due to the sheer amount of high power dangerous machinery with hastily trained people using it.

Keep us posted!

Thanks,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

An excellent and perceptive post, James...

_________________
Neal Nurmi

---Wingman Photo---

Just a quick update: We carried out a full excavation of the crash site last year, but I was asked not to reveal details by the documentary producer from the BBC, who were filming the dig.

They are showing a short piece on the dig next Monday (14th) on BBC1 (North West Region only) as part of a programme called Inside Out - Though it will be available on iplayer and is also due to be shown on South East Region Inside Out as well - see trailer here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ylrb1

The dig didn’t really add much, apart from the canopy was definitely not jettisoned, though a couple of witnesses came forward, who stated that the pilot deliberately baled out rather than fell out.

The ground was very hard, despite the impact being into a pond and the engine was found embedded almost vertical to a depth of ten feet at its deepest point – this did not leave much room for the rest of the aircraft to follow + there was evidence of an intense fire, though the engine was unaffected.

Below are a couple of photos as a taster:

_________________
Regards - Nick - Lancashire UK

"Ex tenebris Lux"

http://laituk.org/

As a private pilot with akro and slight warbird experience, and an active RC pilot, the crash description leads me to a severe out of GC and/or out of trim or rig.
The maneuvers witnessed may have only been the results of the attempt to abandon the aircraft. To open the canopy one hand had to be off the stick.
The Mustang has fairly high elevator forces when out of trim.

You can get killed easily in this A/C if you are unfamiliar with it.
Accidents often are the results of several failures, not a single failure.
Possibility: Mismanaged fuel system. 85 gal in fuse tank with fuel being drawn from the wings first. Yes, I know it is 65gal with air space, did they?
With or without a miss-rigged trim, you have a flying death trap.