News:



  • May 26, 2024, 01:30:45 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Reno Accident. Not Good.  (Read 10950 times)

Offline Chad Hill

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #50 on: September 21, 2011, 08:52:33 PM »
Not the case; the tailwheel has a mechanical uplock - the hydraulics actuate the tailwheel up & down.

Although I don't have a P-51 manual, I do have a copy of the 1951 NATOPS manual for the F4U-5 Corsair and the systems may be similar. On the F4U-5 the tail wheel was held in the retracted position by hydraulic pressure. With loss of hydraulic pressure it would extend with the aid of a spring. Chris, do you have any info on '51s?

The extended tail wheel on GG caught my attention. Since there was no fiery explosion at impact I wondered if Mr. Leeward had secured the engine, which in turn would have disabled the engine-driven hydraulic pump and allowed the tail wheel to extend when g was applied. This may be a moot point since I have been told that audio suggests the engine was running at impact, and there has been speculation that the fluid in the modified coolant system may have kept fuel from igniting.   

Offline billbyles

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 648
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #51 on: September 21, 2011, 10:05:41 PM »
Although I don't have a P-51 manual, I do have a copy of the 1951 NATOPS manual for the F4U-5 Corsair and the systems may be similar. On the F4U-5 the tail wheel was held in the retracted position by hydraulic pressure. With loss of hydraulic pressure it would extend with the aid of a spring. Chris, do you have any info on '51s?

The extended tail wheel on GG caught my attention. Since there was no fiery explosion at impact I wondered if Mr. Leeward had secured the engine, which in turn would have disabled the engine-driven hydraulic pump and allowed the tail wheel to extend when g was applied. This may be a moot point since I have been told that audio suggests the engine was running at impact, and there has been speculation that the fluid in the modified coolant system may have kept fuel from igniting.   

The Mustang tailwheel does have a mechanical uplock; the hydraulics retract & extend the tailwheel.  Your second paragraph is pure speculation & is not correct except that the engine was running at impact.
Bill Byles
AMA 20913
So. Cal.

Offline Chris McMillin

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
  • AMA 32529
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #52 on: September 21, 2011, 11:14:54 PM »
Chad,
Bill has it right.
Chris...

Offline Paul Smith

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5807
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #53 on: September 22, 2011, 06:32:25 AM »
Anyone with aeronautical intrests can be gratefull it didn't pan out like Pierre LeVaughs Le Mans prang ,
it looks like the engine went hurtling across the airfield at a great rate of knots .
In light of the potential damage , casualties were very light , and thankfully no fireball on impact .

The Lemans crash (circa 1955) killed about 57 people and caused Daimler-Benz to quit racing (immediately).  Jaguar (the primary cause of the crash) competed and won the race.  The tragedy stopped ALL car racing in most European countries for several years, until adequate spectator protection was provided.

It will never be possible to provide "adequate spectator protection" at air races.  If you can get close enough to see the race, a plane can get you.   It's a great sport and I wish it would continue.   But, after this crash, it's hard to see where anybody would dare sponsor another.

Paul Smith

Offline PerttiMe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1175
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #54 on: September 22, 2011, 06:45:03 AM »
Many seem to believe that if lawsuits don't kill the Reno Air Racing Association ( http://www.airrace.org/ ), getting an insurance for the event will become impossible and kill it anyway.
I built a Blue Pants as a kid. Wish I still had it. Might even learn to fly it.

Offline john e. holliday

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22781
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #55 on: September 22, 2011, 08:39:53 AM »
Thanks for the video Elwyn.  Hate to think of the casualties if the plane had actually impacted into the box seat area.   Also ifthe main debris had went toward the crowd.  Might have to move spectators back further. H^^
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Offline Douglas Ames

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1299
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #56 on: September 22, 2011, 04:30:44 PM »
Could have been alot worse had it not been for the coolant and water (ADI, spraybar water) being vaporized on impact, smothering the area with water vapor.

I was surprised it didn't ignite.
AMA 656546

If you do a little bit every day it will get done, or you can do it tomorrow.

Offline Serge_Krauss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1330
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #57 on: September 23, 2011, 02:24:24 PM »
The Lemans crash (circa 1955) killed about 57 people and caused Daimler-Benz to quit racing (immediately).  Jaguar (the primary cause of the crash) competed and won the race.  The tragedy stopped ALL car racing in most European countries for several years, until adequate spectator protection was provided.

Off topic, but just a bit of historical clarification for context:

The LeMans catastrophe was worse than that, with early estimates at 80 spectators killed, but final count somewhat higher. The earthen embankment served as a launch ramp into structure that tore the 300SLR apart, rather than a barrier. Mercedes' magnesium structure aggravated matters.

Mercedes Benz discussed the matter among themselves and withdrew later in the night while leading. They did not, however, withdraw from racing until season's end, after securing the manufacturers' (sports car) and drivers' (F-1) championships.

Monaco, Belgium, England, France, Germany, and Italy ran their accustomed F-1 and sports car races throughout the next (1956) season and thereafter. The Swiss banned racing (an edict that still stands). There was no Spanish GP that year, but I don't know why. Other principalities and countries maintained minor races.

Hawthorn had swerved his Jaguar to enter the pits, which is the accepted initial cause (Macklins AH moving left into Levegh's path), but that's still argued. Hawthorn did win, but not with his heart in it.

The Mille Miglia, last of the great open road races, ended a year later, due to deaths among uncontrolled spectators. However there were more multiple spectator fatalities in races well into the 1960's. Fans and organizers alike have always been sensitive to these losses, often taking them personally, but racing has never been truly threatened since 1955, even by accidents like those at Indy in 1964 and 1973.

I doubt that anything threatens air racing as much as the litigious nature of our present society. As usual, it's economics. Racing of any kind has always been dangerous. Certainly auto racing in the 1950's was lethal, and many great drivers did not complete their careers. So, if anything else has swung the pendulum, it's been the rise of NASCAR, whose fan base does not remember those days. That and the increased safety of throw-away cars requiring large sponsorship to replace has made racing deaths like Earnhart's much more prominent than those of past greats like Ted Horn, Jimmy Bryan, Bill Vukovich, ...arguably among the all-time best.

I hope that Jimmy Leeward is remembered for much more than this awful incident and that we continue to hold some perspective in this aftermath. It's well past time that we recognize human responsibility for more than just a handy way to cast blame. As spectators, we know the risks of proximity to motorsports events and should be allowed to continue making these decisions for ourselves. My front row seat at IMS is perfectly clear to me in its risk, and I doubt that anyone from now on will underestimate the risk of planes pushed into the range of transonic effects. I hope also that the aerodynamics of the unlimiteds in this range will be further explored. As always, there are things to be learned. Finally, I hope that the uneducated, like the two idiots who authored the first AP report I read, will stop blowing that crap out of the end where "the sun don't shine." They are the truly dangerous people, and I'd like them to mind their own business, and stop trying to impose their ignorant wills on those who can think and have some expertise.

Ah, well. That's a bit of venting to go with the history check. 'hope sanity and freedom prevail.

SK

Offline Steve Fitton

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2272
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #58 on: September 23, 2011, 05:04:27 PM »
Great post Serge.  I wish the news idiots could read it.
Steve

Dwayne

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)

Offline Chad Hill

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #60 on: September 23, 2011, 06:36:57 PM »
The article quotes a pit man stating GG pulled 22.5 Gs. It's hard for me to accept that. The wings would have folded.

Offline Douglas Ames

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1299
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #61 on: September 23, 2011, 06:50:16 PM »
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/how-a-small-piece-of-metal-caused-the-reno-air-race-crash-6481596

Very good analysis.

Very POOR analysis...

* The "Author" states that -

"But for air racing, the planes are heavily modified to maintain speeds near 500 mph. At these speeds, the tail generates enormous downward pressure, and as a result, the nose wants to rise. Keeping the nose down would require constant physical exertion by the pilot. So, like any pilot in this situation, Jimmy Leeward would have engaged a flap on the back of one of the plane’s elevators (the horizontal moving surface on the tail). Called the "elevator trim tab," this piece, in effect, reduces the elevator’s angle of attack and thereby reduces the downward pressure."

I was under the impression that Gyroscopic Precession of the propeller at high rpm wants to pivot the airframe up and the aircraft must be trimmed nose down to fly level. ...unless the stab has an inverted airfoil shape? Don't know...

Yes the Trim Tab would be fully deflected, but... "reduces the elevator's angle of attack" HUH? It forces the elevator DOWN to increase tail lift and relieve stick pressure (feedback).
I think what the author meant was it reduces the angle of attack of the stabilizer with the slipstream!


* "From what I understand he hit 22.5 g’s, which no pilot can take," Chiavetta says...

Another subjective opinion - unconfirmed.

* Had Leeward’s plane come apart, the situation would have been even deadlier. In 1999, another highly modified P-51 called Miss Ashley II, piloted by Gary Levitz, lost its trim tab during an Unlimited race. It pitched violently upward just as Galloping Ghost did. "When it went vertical, the plane broke up," Chiavetta says. "The engine came off, the wings broke, it pretty much shredded the airplane in the air. It was very lucky that this plane didn’t do that, because it would have put a debris field over the crowd"—in essence, a giant shotgun blast of metal and fuel...

BULLS*#T!

Here's the NTSB report on "MISS ASHLEY II" and the death of Gary Levitz.

http://aafo.com/news/accident.htm

Snippet from the report -

Video taped recordings of the accident show the empennage stabilizer and control surfaces of the aircraft separating abruptly as the aircraft made a left turn about 400 feet agl around the number 1 pylon east of the airport. The nose of the aircraft then pitched down and the left wing separated near the root.  

Ugh, we'll know soon enough when the final report comes out on Jimmy Leeward's fatal accident.
AMA 656546

If you do a little bit every day it will get done, or you can do it tomorrow.

Offline Joe Mig

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #62 on: September 23, 2011, 06:57:41 PM »
Jimmy Leeward, of Ocala, FL, was a well-liked, and very experienced stunt pilot/air racer. His P-51 Mustang “Galloping Ghost” had a racing history dating back to the Cleveland National Air Races of the late 1940s. The aircraft was freshly restored and heavily modified, in hopes of wining a Gold Unlimited title at the National Championship Air Races in Reno.

Like Paul Harvey would say , and now the rest of the story.    http://ignomini.com/reno.html


Offline Steve Helmick

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 9950
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #63 on: September 23, 2011, 08:34:05 PM »
My friends that usually went to the Reno races finally reported in. Big sigh of relief on my part. The guy is a Boeing welder, ex-modeller, licensed pilot, and pretty savy of most things. He was our shop welder for several years, and his wife also worked there for some years, before I retired. Good people.

Tom's email reply, copied and pasted: "The plane was heading right at us got within about 50 ft and turned into the box seats in front of us. We just knew we were dead, but some how he turned . I have some pictures I'll send you when I figure out how to attach them to my email, we a new program and I haven't figured it out yet. Talk to you later."

I'm sure that "50 ft" was probably more like 500 ft. but that's understandable enough! Eyeballs the size of saucers, while kissing hindquarters goodbye, etc. Tough situation.

Does anybody know the correct pronunciation of Jimmy "Leeward"? Nautically, it should be "loo-ard". Just wondering if the news got it right. What would be the odds of that happening?  :-\ Steve   
"The United States has become a place where professional athletes and entertainers are mistaken for people of importance." - Robert Heinlein

In 1944 18-20 year old's stormed beaches, and parachuted behind enemy lines to almost certain death.  In 2015 18-20 year old's need safe zones so people don't hurt their feelings.

Offline billbyles

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 648
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #64 on: September 23, 2011, 09:58:19 PM »
My friends that usually went to the Reno races finally reported in. Big sigh of relief on my part. The guy is a Boeing welder, ex-modeller, licensed pilot, and pretty savy of most things. He was our shop welder for several years, and his wife also worked there for some years, before I retired. Good people.

Tom's email reply, copied and pasted: "The plane was heading right at us got within about 50 ft and turned into the box seats in front of us. We just knew we were dead, but some how he turned . I have some pictures I'll send you when I figure out how to attach them to my email, we a new program and I haven't figured it out yet. Talk to you later."

I'm sure that "50 ft" was probably more like 500 ft. but that's understandable enough! Eyeballs the size of saucers, while kissing hindquarters goodbye, etc. Tough situation.

Does anybody know the correct pronunciation of Jimmy "Leeward"? Nautically, it should be "loo-ard". Just wondering if the news got it right. What would be the odds of that happening?  :-\ Steve   

Leeward is pronounced "Lee-ward" just as it is written.  I've known Jimmy for years, since he started racing at Reno in the mid/late seventies.  As far as someone not believing the 22 g figure, Jimmy had a onboard data recorder that fed many pieces of information from various sensors to an onboard data card contained in, for want of a better term "black box".  The data was not telemetered to the ground; it was only contained in the data card.  The little blue data card was found on the ramp & downloaded to a computer.  The airplane did indeed momentarily hit 22 g's at the separation of the elevator trim tab, and proceeded into a high-speed stall just as Chris McMillin estimated early on.  The 22 g's was extremely brief, the airplane was going about 480 mph when the tab separated and immediately after pitch-up the speed had diminished to about 375 mph when the airplane was flying upward.  There is strong evidence that Jimmy was not conscious after the pitch-up.
Bill Byles
AMA 20913
So. Cal.

Online Dan McEntee

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6902
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #65 on: September 24, 2011, 12:33:36 AM »
Had Leeward’s plane come apart, the situation would have been even deadlier. In 1999, another highly modified P-51 called Miss Ashley II, piloted by Gary Levitz, lost its trim tab during an Unlimited race. It pitched violently upward just as Galloping Ghost did. "When it went vertical, the plane broke up," Chiavetta says. "The engine came off, the wings broke, it pretty much shredded the airplane in the air. It was very lucky that this plane didn’t do that, because it would have put a debris field over the crowd"—in essence, a giant shotgun blast of metal and fuel...
 
      I watched Miss Ashley go by the grandstands that year and watched it pull smoothly and gradually up and out more or less parallel to the runway heading, obviously pulling out of the race. I look back to my left to look for Rare Bear and heard the crowd gasp and looked back just in time to see it tuck over and shed the left wing. There was a minor flash of fuel burning off at the same instant, then the remnants dropped out of sight. I got to see video when I got home and you could see the whole tail rock back and forth, then rip away. He was definitely not at race power at that point. Definitely didn't "go vertical."

    There wasn't much of Miss Ashley that was still a P-51 either. I think it was referred as the Levitz-Rodgers Miss Ashley because of all the major changes. Wings and horizontal stab were from a Lear jet, and lots of fuse parts modified to carbon fiber. It was an awesome looking airplane also, and it would be a dream fulfilled to see both airplanes flying at their full potential.
     A friend of mine here in my area that owns a small motorcycle parts shop has another customer that was a crew member of the Galloping Ghost back in the Cleveland days. He worked at a local technical school and acquired the ADI system from a P-47 that was installed in the Ghost at that time, making it the first Mustang so equipped I think. He still has all of his credentials, pit passes and such from then and I got to see them and photograph them. It was all in a neat album that also had a write up from Jimmy Leeward's website about the early history of the airplane. I had been meaning to down load it all but never got around to it. I hope Mr. Leeward's family puts the website back up so we can all enjoy it some more and preserve the information for ourselves.
   Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee 
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

larry borden

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Reno Accident. Not Good.
« Reply #66 on: September 24, 2011, 10:42:00 AM »
In the February 2011 issue of American Motorcyclist magazine there was an interview with Bob Hannah and he described what had happened to him. The motorcross champion quit racing as a result. Very good interview and he is still active in aviation, just not the racing part.


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here