View Full Version : A very low P-38 pass....

10-09-2005, 04:30 PM
Just a bit toooooooo low..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Fixed the link.

10-09-2005, 04:40 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif OMG! scratch 1 P-38, 1 Pilot and several other planes?

Geesh what a crash.. that should not happen too often, the world would run out of flyable warbirds all too soon. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

10-09-2005, 04:54 PM
OMG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

10-09-2005, 05:01 PM
D@mn what a terrible loss http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
RIP to the pilot

10-09-2005, 05:07 PM
what one was it, since there are only 7 flyable 38's left the loss of any one of them is tragic

10-09-2005, 05:18 PM
Man that was a horible crash, you coulda warned me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Very sad. When was this? where?

10-09-2005, 05:23 PM
Duxford, California cutie, 1995 or 96 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

It's not beleived to be pilot error as such that caused the incident. I've heard a couple of reports that it may have been a control failure, or that a control became jammed somehow, maybe the pilots suit.

I personally believe this to be the case as you can't see the aircraft trying to get out of it.

Looks like a P-40/ Curtiss hawk got hit also. It's too quick to see but it looks like two aircraft taking off had a very close call. I hope there wasn't a third one there.......

One of my squad pilots told me that an engine, a part of the boom, and the U/C flew across the motorway that is right at the end of the runway.

A **** shame it happened http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

10-09-2005, 05:27 PM
That is really horrible, imagine what that pilot went through! I thought it was Duxford. Was u there arm slinger?

10-09-2005, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Arm_slinger:
Duxford, California cutie, 1995 or 96 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Rgr, concur. Looks very much like it. IIRC an engine suddenly quit/lost power during the roll, hence the wild overrotation and loss of alt.

Crying shame, just glad I wasn't there to see it. The airacobra at Biggin was bad enough.

10-09-2005, 05:31 PM
*****! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

What a horrible way to die;

May the pilot R.I.P http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Really shocking http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

10-09-2005, 05:34 PM
Yes I remember that, Aircraft destroyed in airshow accident, Duxford, UK, July 14, 1996.. I wasn't there but seem to remember it stuffed into the parked visiting aircraft line up, indeed you can see one of them in bits at the end http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Tragic loss of life and so un neccessary..

Wasn't there some injuries on the ground too?

Vike....... for what it's worth he died doing something he loved and would be fighting it to the very end, so it would have been quick and he would have been concentrating on the task in hand so much he probably never got to think about it........ Rather that than dying a slow painful death from some disease.....

10-09-2005, 05:35 PM
I wasn't thankfully Danjama. I wasn't into the airshow bug back then, but a couple of my squad members were. One described the events in my post above. The other was right in line of CC as she went in.

Seeing the Firefly was bad enough for me, thankfully she didnt burn.

10-09-2005, 05:40 PM
Aye i was at the 2003 one too where the Firefly crashed, that was horrible, just a huge puff od dirt and that was it... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

10-09-2005, 05:46 PM
They dont know why the p38 went in, a momentary control jam was one thought, you can read the report on the accident here........


10-09-2005, 05:52 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif When did this happen, and who and what aircraft was it?
I can only assume we lost the pilot aswell?

Oh I see just seen Tayortonys post.

10-09-2005, 06:01 PM
That's harrowing....

humbling too.

10-09-2005, 06:01 PM
Toad the original post at the top has a link to the film, but its not showing as a hyperlink

10-09-2005, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by 73GIAP_Milan:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif OMG! scratch 1 P-38, 1 Pilot and several other planes?

Geesh what a crash.. that should not happen too often, the world would run out of flyable warbirds all too soon. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

I will not bother you, with due respect, but thats the wrong sequence.
A plane can be rebuild, a life not.


10-09-2005, 06:16 PM
indeed, he would be out instantly, to have been burnt would have been much worse..

10-09-2005, 06:20 PM
That report link is very interesting. It concluded temporary loss of movement available to the controls, notably the roll surfaces. Its a very in-depth report. I hate stuff like that. Watching that video over and over again really makes you think how much power and capability these planes have. The report doest really come up with anything that you cant see by video. If you watch the vis you can see he is coming out of a roll and his pitch attitude decreases rapidly and the roll continues, which to me indicates a lack of control with the ailerons. Very sad though all of this... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif Even though it was years ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

10-09-2005, 06:28 PM
thats what happens when you lose integrity. thats really tragic though, not to mention the loss of aircraft at other airshows such as spits and p51s. if you dont want to wreck the 'original ones', then build duplicates AND put in improvements! im sure the facts are simple: if it is an L model, more likely the aileron boosters on one side of the plane failed or jammed even if for a second at that altitude is fatal.

After seeing this video, i still want to fly P38.

the only way to recover such crash is to dump the flaps use differential thrust/rudder and try to snap roll it level and pull up. but with the jammed booster it was even less likely.

10-09-2005, 06:35 PM
Vike....... for what it's worth he died doing something he loved and would be fighting it to the very end, so it would have been quick and he would have been concentrating on the task in hand so much he probably never got to think about it........ Rather that than dying a slow painful death from some disease.....

I could not agree more with this - not only in this case but for any pilot who dies. I have been flying hang gliders and sailplanes for 6 years and have lost 3 friends - 2 in low level "freak" accidents and 1 from pancreatic cancer - believe me if I had to pick let me fight a plane to the ground for a moment than my watch my body decay around me.

10-09-2005, 06:52 PM
I disagree actually...if it was not a mechanical failure, and nothing in the cockpit, then it was pilot error. i reviewed the video over and over, and saw something very interesting. during the inverted portion of the flight, he was pushing forward on the stick, and then once it was more then 90 degrees banking to the left with the left wing in the air, he applied left rudder and then when wings were nearly level he applied full back pressure, due to loss of lift on the left wing, it continued to dip to the left, and due to the 'somewhat slow' reaction of the p38's controls surfaces especially at slower speeds there was no way a right aileron input could assist with correcting the left wings loss of lift, except to pitch down and then pull back when each wing was able to deliver full lift.

However, if you are an aviator like myself you will realize that we are taught to 'be ahead' of the aircraft, at least 30 seconds. so we know what were doing 30 seconds before were going to do it. If no mechanical failure (booster failure/jam), then his entry into an aileron roll at such a low altitude was improper and poorly coordinated.

He KNEW what was coming for about 1-2 seconds 'tops' prior to impact; prior to that he was probably trying to understand why it didnt look right and was doing anything to level it out.

10-09-2005, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Taylortony:
Yes I remember that, Aircraft destroyed in airshow accident, Duxford, UK, July 14, 1996.. I wasn't there but seem to remember it stuffed into the parked visiting aircraft line up, indeed you can see one of them in bits at the end http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Tragic loss of life and so un neccessary..

Wasn't there some injuries on the ground too?

Vike....... for what it's worth he died doing something he loved and would be fighting it to the very end, so it would have been quick and he would have been concentrating on the task in hand so much he probably never got to think about it........ Rather that than dying a slow painful death from some disease.....

thats true. its a shame he died but if he had to that was the way i would rather go. fast and sudden. that was a bad crash. its a a shame there is no refly IRL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

10-09-2005, 09:21 PM
aerobatics in those birds is just too risky, unless youre some1 like lefty gardner, bud anderson, or a couple others. A p38 is just too rare for that, as well as a bit hinky. A few high speed passes and sharp banks would suffice for airshow work and photo ops.

ive photographed many of these at airshows, but the only p38 i ever got flying was lefty gardner in his white p38j, white lightning. this was in 89 or 90 at harlingen, and lefty was a b17 pilot in the war. He could do rolls on one engine, but he's probably the last one who could do that reliably.

Even the great Jeff Ethell was killed in a P38, which he loved since his dad flew one in the war. Few warbird pilots had his experience, but a 38 can sneak up on you really quick, as often happened in service. Any1 know who the pilot was in this crash? Im curious as to which one it was and what it looked like.

10-09-2005, 09:46 PM
I'm shocked and speechless http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

When I first saw the vid, I thought the pilot already ejected before the plane crashed, but when I realised he didn't I felt kinda sick...

Getting shot down in-game is one thing, but this...this is the horrible truth when It really happens. Very sad indeed.

10-09-2005, 10:03 PM
yep kinda makes me not want to play any more

10-10-2005, 12:36 AM
.. horrible video...

but that is exactly why in WW2 victory rolls were strictly forbidden when flying low

10-10-2005, 01:38 AM
Please, view the video's here.


You will see this P-38 perform rolls similar to the ones the P-38 did when it crashed. The big differance is in 2 places.

#1, the rolls were aileron rolls along the datum. Very smooth and clean. No elivator. The roll of the crashed P-38 used elivator, and was pointing at the ground when he was inverted.

#2, the P-38 can stop the roll very sharply. As seen in White Lightnin 8 point rolls and other manuvers. The crashed P-38 was still rolling when it hit. The roll never stopped. In order to get out of that bad situation, the pilot had to stop the roll. If he did stop the roll, there was a slight chance of recovering it, or smacking the tarmac very hard. But not augering.

Very sad to watch the P-38 going down for many reasons. The loss of the pilot, the loss of the aircraft, and also the loss of pilots willing to do acrobatics at airshows. You simply dont see acrobatics in WWII aircraft at airshows like you see in Lefty Gardner's video. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Tomorrows young WWII aviation fans may never get to see these birds fly to there limits.

10-10-2005, 05:43 AM
Poor guy. Hope he didn't have family watching.
Wonder what went wrong and why he tried roll like that at all??

10-10-2005, 09:45 AM
Makes you realise just how good it is to have that refly button.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I think she was J varient, so no boost on the controls.

My dad spoke to a friend of the 38 pilot a few weeks back, and it would seem he did two rolls prior to what we have just seen.

We can come up with alsorts of theories, but the truth is, we are never going to find out what happened. I'm just glad it was quick for the poor guy.

As for warbirds not being thrown around, I don't agree with that- they were desinged to be thrown about, having them just go past in a straight line would be a waste to me. Yes i know, it's better than nothing, but it's also a waste of an aircraft being airworthy.

Provided they have the height I dont mind at all them being rolled and chcucked about. It's when they get too low I dont like it, then I'll settle for straight line stuff.

Having said that, i was at the legends air display just gone and Ray Hanna? Put on a reallyt good low and fast display. I estimate he was at 100 feet doing near on 300 mph, and so low that he was hidden from view by taxiing aircraft. I think I'll have to get some film I have of that up on line.

10-10-2005, 01:20 PM
from the look of it he started at too low an attitude angle to start an aileron roll at such low altitude. if he had pitched up even 5 degrees and started it, better results would have followed. i tried this in the game at different speeds and concluded this.

10-10-2005, 01:43 PM
The guy in the white t-shirt and sunglassess about 9 or 10 seconds into the clip just realises the plane crashed and feels the need to point it out in case anyone missed it..... sheesh.

10-10-2005, 02:10 PM
The pilots name was 'Hoof' Proudfoot. His son Lee Proudfoot still flies for the Old Flying Machine Company at Duxford.
Hoof was Display co-ordinator that day and I read that due to some problems with display timings/late arrivals he was stressed and overworked getting things sorted out.
Since this accident, pilots may not display and also be co-ordinator on the same day.

10-10-2005, 02:51 PM
How can you replicate that in game???? We don't know altitude, airspeeds, weights, control input forces.....

Shock has all sorts of effects on people, hence people reacting in different ways i.e. pointing out something obvious, while someone may just stare in horror.....

"#2, the P-38 can stop the roll very sharply. As seen in White Lightnin 8 point rolls and other manuvers. The crashed P-38 was still rolling when it hit. The roll never stopped. In order to get out of that bad situation, the pilot had to stop the roll. If he did stop the roll, there was a slight chance of recovering it, or smacking the tarmac very hard. But not augering. "

Gib got it. The roll does not stop. Which to me implies the controls failed/ jammed for whatever reason.

Looking at the video once again. I paused it when the aircraft was a flat as I could judge. It has a few feet of clearance below it. had the pilot stopped the roll, would he of made it? I ask as there seems to be a fair bit of verticle speed. Could this be because he had stalled the aircraft trying to pull it up?

10-10-2005, 04:05 PM
Respect to the pilot, anybody who is brave and skillful enough to fly one of these birds deserves recognition. Too often we focus upon the aircraft.

I cannot imagine what the poor guys family went through after that.

10-10-2005, 06:41 PM
I still think Lefty is the last guy who should be doing low level 'batics in a P38. If youre high enough for it to be safe, you cant see them anyway. I took these shots of lefty gardner in 90 at the CAF show at Harlingen Tx. I think his plane is a J model, but may be an L....i cant tell (can any1 else?). Note that he has engine fairings from an F model for air racing purposes (less drag).

this is the kind of low pass that will usually suffice, fast and manuvering in the horizontal, making steep banks and shallow climbs etc. Ive got some good ones of him rolling the thing on one engine somewhere, but of course i cant find them at this moment. At harlingen, the flying was so close that i didnt need to zoom much, as i used only about half my 500mm zoom lens capability at this event in 90. Note that there are no superchargers installed, even for looks.
Pardon the dust particles, as ive not had time to go into photoshop on this old scan.

This close formation take-off with the 51 can be pretty hairy in itself. they really are that close, as the zoom factor is minimal since i was so close to the runway that morning. Since it was Lefty, i didnt do my usual "clinching" excercise.

I didnt take this one, but its a dramatic shot of the Reno 94 races wiht lefty rounding a pylon rather swiftly. The effect is somewhat exagerated by the zoom lens effect, since this is taken from a distance. Didnt know People were allowed taht close to the pylons at Reno. Shows how low and fast they can get though. I think lefty retired and his plane is on display at oshkosh i think. I dunno if any1 flies it anymore, but i doubt it. its a historical machine from the air racing perspective, and was the only flyable p38 for a good while. i found this on a ww2 photo site, uncredited.

10-10-2005, 09:16 PM
Check out this site for news on #13.

10-10-2005, 09:52 PM
thanks for posting that site.....was wondering about that machine.

I found some of the other shots i took in 90....
The first is a head on shot of #13 as Lefty is making a straight in run on the field. Its a bit grainy because my 500mm lens is at max zoom and this is just a crop of about half the area of the photo....i had to get this view, and had stayed about 6 hrs in the tx sun to get this kinda stuff. Of course, i got heat stroke and sat puking in my motel room the last of the 4 days, but it was worth it...i guess.Notice the hieght of the power pole in the background he just skimmed over. Makes you wonder if Old Lefty was having a combat flashback http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

This is about 2 seconds later and is not cropped nearly as much. He's beginning to pull up in deference the FAA rules im sure. He did a sharp break at the top of the pull out and rolled it if i remember correctly. He did alot of that in his performance.

He's rolling in a climb. I think it's the culmination of the previous pass, but im not sure; it was 15 yrs ago this month. The lens is only partially zoomed out, as he was pretty low. Harlingen was the best place for an airshow, and they put on the best ones i ever attended in 89 and 90. I think this was in 89 now that i think about it.

Here he's returning after the performance. Note the dive brake extended...thats not a flap. This was the solution to the compresibility problem that plagued the early p38s.
I wonder if the use of such would have made any difference in the duxford incident, not that he had the time or the altitude to use it.Look at the bracing on that thing. I havent flown the one in the sim much, but i wonder how accurate it is.

10-10-2005, 10:02 PM
Thats horrible.. I can see how it would not be pilot error since he just kinda wheelbarreled to the ground in a 45 degree angle...sad day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

10-10-2005, 10:18 PM
Nice shots, Enforcer. Gotta go back and d/l the BB vids....

10-10-2005, 10:21 PM
oh my god...i just visited the gardner #13 site....i had no idea it crashed and was so heavily damaged 3 yrs ago with leftys son flying it. I didnt know they sold it recently, but at least it will be restored by that beverage company that bought it.

you guys need to click on the link to the website agbout the p38 in the above photos...lots of info and video.

I noticed that it had a supercharger fire....the plane had no superchargers 15 yrs ago when i saw it. I only saw it one other time at chattanooga in 96.

the blasted supercharger caught on fire when it came apart. I wonder why they even fooled with installing them since they were for use at high altitudes....maybe for Reno use? havent had time to read the history, but thats a sad site. Been a rough few yrs for p38s.After 3 yrs of trying to raise money for restoration, they sold it to a company that will restore it. I just hope they get a pilot that will fly it conservatively. too valuable to loose.

im really glad that link was posted.

10-10-2005, 10:22 PM
honestly, you're not a pilot i imagine since you didnt introduce yourself as. Your comments still have validity, but not 100%. He started the roll at too low an angle of attack (AOA), lost too much altitude during the rolling out, as the wings were not fully level as he pulled back FULLY with the controls the left wing continued in its stall and continued to roll the plane to the left, thus crashing instead of in a level attitude in an unusual 30 degree banked left turn, which makes it look like a control failure. Due to the video not showing enough of the very beginning of the film (IE a few more seconds worth), i cant for sure tell you the start of the roll was off, but i am almost positive he had too low an AOA initially. had it been a little higher then results would have been better, but STILL would have been nearly too low to pull out. His lack of initial altitude and poor attitude during the start of his roll caused the crash. not VMC, not Fuel problems, not control failure. Although I dont rule either of those out.

10-10-2005, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Enforcer572005:

Here he's returning after the performance. Note the dive brake extended...thats not a flap.

Sorry. I had to correct this. The P-38's dive flap was under the wing, not over. Also White Lightnin is also a P-38L and was a racing aircraft. The dive flaps are removed. Lefty put P-38F engine cowels on, and removed the intercoolers. Less drag. Again, racing.

The P-38 White Lightnin had a supercharger blowout a few years ago and belly landed in a fiend. The Gardner family could not afford to return her to the skies, so they sold it to Red bull. I hope RB puts it back into the racing circut. Also Lefty was well known for cutting brush at Reno. The dude spent his life in the P-38. His flying shows.

10-10-2005, 10:34 PM
My dad spoke to a friend of the 38 pilot a few weeks back, and it would seem he did two rolls prior to what we have just seen.Quote/

So what we are seeing would be the third roll....

10-10-2005, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by Enforcer572005:

I noticed that it had a supercharger fire....the plane had no superchargers 15 yrs ago when i saw it. I only saw it one other time at chattanooga in 96.

Again, another correction. The P-38 had 2 stage turbo-supercharger. The Allison engine itself had a Supercharger in the back of the engine. The intake for it is on the side of the boom just below the wing by the flap. Then there is the GE Turbo charger. That LARGE lump of ugly metal in the back of the boom. That was only for high altitude flying. Since White Lightnin was typically mowing grass and busting brush, it did not need it. That area was faired over for racing.

This P-38 was HIGHLY modified for racing. Standard rules no longer apply http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

10-10-2005, 10:39 PM
ok, let me get this straight, that is a flap your saying.....with all that bracing? im not saying youre wrong, im just really impressed wiht the construction of the flap system. I couldnt imagine a flap being built like that. Well, lockheed built em tuff.
Heres a couple of shots from the site about the crash.....jeees, alot of fire and impact damage, but lefty's son did an incredible job of flying.

And i also didnt know it had that kind of supercharger system...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif well duhh...
YOu can see the melted aluminum and how lousy htis damage is.....good god. at least she is recovering.

10-11-2005, 02:43 AM
As you can see in the last photo, the fire started behind the engine, and in front of the GE turbo (You can see the front part of the turbo ducting to the right). One of the blades broke off the super charger, toar through the housing, and of all lucky things hit a fuel line. The fuel line spilled AV gas onto the hot exhaust pipes running to the GE Turbo. Very bad luck. Just kicking a turbo blade you could of made it home. But hitting the fuel line? 1 in a million. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

I hope Red Bull takes care of her. They seem to be big into aircraft.

10-11-2005, 06:39 AM
Originally posted by wayno7777:
My dad spoke to a friend of the 38 pilot a few weeks back, and it would seem he did two rolls prior to what we have just seen.Quote/

So what we are seeing would be the third roll....

Thats what i beleieve yes, although having read the investigation report, it sounds like there was only two rolls. I'm going to ask my two squad pilots who saw it all happen and get their take on it.

Also has anyone got a bit of web space they could host a PDF file on? It's the crash report for the P-38. Im sure some of you would like to read it.

10-11-2005, 06:53 AM
Here we go guys, I managed to copy the report.

It would seem that the 38 completed two rolls and was going into a third one, when it ploughed in

Lockheed P-38J Lightning, N3145X
AAIB Bulletin No: 5/97 Ref: EW/C96/7/4Category: 1.1
Aircraft Type and Registration: Lockheed P-38J Lightning, N3145X
No & Type of Engines: 2 Allison V-1710 (1,425 hp) piston engines
Year of Manufacture: 1943 (Rebuilt 1992)

Date & Time (UTC): 14 July 1996 at 1451 hrs

Location: Duxford Airfield, Cambridgeshire

Type of Flight: Aerial Work (Flying Display)

Persons on Board: Crew - 1 - Passengers - None

Injuries: Crew - Fatal - Passengers - N/A

Nature of Damage: Aircraft destroyed

Commander's Licence: Airline Transport Pilot's Licence

Commander's Age: 54 years

Commander's Flying Experience: 14,500 hours (of which 60 were on type)

Last 90 days - 11 hours on type

Last 28 days - 5 hours on type

Information Source: AAIB Field Investigation
The aircraft was performing at the 'Flying Legends' Air Displayat Duxford, which was being staged
over the two days of the weekendof 13/14 July 1996. The display on 13 July was completed
withoutincident. On 14 July, the aircraft had taken off at 1435 hrsas the lead aircraft in a formation
comprising one Curtiss P-40BTomahawk and one Bell P-63 King Cobra fighter aircraft. The
display'slot' commenced at 1439 hrs and after several formation passesin front of the assembly of
spectators, the trio split up in orderto enable each aircraft to carry out a solo display. The P-38was
the final aircraft to perform its solo routine and was dueto clear the display area by 1455 hrs. The
aircraft commencedits run in from the east of the airfield, in a shallow dive togain speed, then
carried out a loop. This manoeuvre was followedby a 'Cuban Eight' manoeuvre, which involved
two short periodsof flight under negative 'g'. As the aircraft returned to normalpositive 'g' flight
after each of these periods, a slight trailof light coloured vapour was noted coming from under the
mainbody of the aircraft (post-accident consideration of the aircraftsystems concluded that this was
most likely to have been vapourescaping from the fuel tank vent lines).
At the end of the 'Cuban Eight', the aircraft was passing fromeast to west (crowd left to right). It
pulled up and to the leftinitially, levelled the wings, then performed a 270? rollto the left. The
aircraft then came back to pass acrossthe front of the crowd from west to east.
With the aircraft appearing to be at a normal entry height andspeed, an aileron roll to the left was
commenced as the aircraftcrossed the western threshold of the hard surfaced Runway 06. The first
360? roll was completed apparently normally butthe aircraft continued, without pause, into a
second full roll. While the aircraft was inverted in this second roll, the nosepitched towards the
ground and the aircraft began to lose heightwhile the roll continued. By the time the aircraft
became uprightagain, it had descended to a very low height above the runway. The aircraft
continued to roll left and struck the runway withits left wing, with some 30? of left bank applied,
abouttwo thirds of the way along Runway 06.
The left outer wing ruptured and collapsed, followed by an impactof the left engine. At this time, a
large fireball erupted asthe aircraft began to cartwheel across the airfield, breakingup into multiple
fragments as its trajectory took it diagonallyaway from the main spectator area towards a row of
parked lightaircraft on the south side of the airfield. Several of theseaircraft were destroyed or
severely damaged in the wreckage'spath. One of the engines bounced further than the rest of
thewreckage, crossing the airfield boundary and then the M11 Motorwaywhich runs almost
perpendicular to the end of the runway. A passingfreight truck sustained some minor damage from
pieces of wreckagebut was able to continue travelling northwards along the motorway. The engine
came to rest in a field just to the east side of themotorway, close to where several members of the
public had beenstanding in order to watch the flying activities from outsidethe airfield boundary.
The airfield Fire and Rescue services were quickly at the sceneand brought the numerous areas of
fire under control in a shorttime. The pilot was found in the seat, with his four point harnessstill
fastened, amongst the wreckage of the main fuselage pod. A post-mortem examination found that
the pilot had been killedby a severe head injury. No physical condition was found whichcould have
caused any incapacitation of the pilot and no tracesof drugs nor alcohol were found to be present. It
was assessedthat the destruction of the cockpit was such that survival wasimpossible.
The pilots and passengers of the visiting light aircraft had beenrequired, by the airport operator, to
move to the spectator sideof the runway in order to watch the air display. Fortunately,there were no
injuries to any spectators.
The display routine followed by the P-38 formation was identicalto that flown at the display on the
day prior to the accident. The significant difference was that during the Saturday display,only a
single 360? aileron roll had been carried out, butat the time of the accident two consecutive 360?
rolls hadoccurred, with a continuation past the wings level at the endof the second roll.
Soon after the accident, the air display organisers made an announcementover the public address
system for any spectators who had photographed,or taken video footage of, the final manoeuvre to
hand in theirfilms/tapes on loan for the purposes of this investigation. Anexcellent response was
forthcoming, which resulted in AAIB havingaccess to some 60 video tapes and 40 sets of
photographs of theevent.
The weather at the time was a surface wind from 270? at 6kt, variable in direction between 240?
and 300?, visibilityin excess of 10 km, scattered cloud base 3,000 feet, QNH 1026mb.
Video Analysis (Figure 1)
Photographs and video coverage of the aircraft's manoeuvres wereanalysed with a view to assessing
not only the pre-impact flightpath characteristics but also the pre-impact aircraft integrityand the
operation of aircraft systems. A full flight path analysiswas carried out using several video
sequences which had been filmedfrom a variety of viewpoints.
A recording was available of the Saturday display, where one aileronroll to the left was performed.
The time taken to complete theroll on this occasion was 3.4 seconds and it was noted that
theaircraft had an upward trajectory throughout this manoeuvre.
The analysis of the accident coverage showed that the aircrafthad performed two continuous aileron
rolls, taking 4.4 secondsand 3.6 seconds respectively to complete. This had been startedat a height
of about 250 feet above the runway, at a speed ofabout 250 knots and with an initial nose-up pitch
attitude. The roll, to the left, was initiated by a rapid roll controlinput to produce a considerable
aileron deflection. This ailerondeflection remained more or less constant until the aircraft
hadcompleted about 675? of roll. At that point, the aileronswere returned to the neutral position
where they remained untilthe aircraft struck the ground.
During the first roll the aircraft climbed to an apogee of about360 feet when inverted, descending to
about 260 feet by the timeit was erect again. At this point the aircraft pitch attitudewas
approximately horizontal or very slightly nose-down. Therewas no pause before the second roll was
executed. During thisroll, the nose dropped progressively and an increasing rate ofdescent built up.
At the inverted position the aileron positionwas observed to be being maintained in the almost fully
(leftroll) deflected position and a considerable elevator displacementin the 'stick back' sense was
made. Considerable left ruddercontrol was also added at this time and the roll rate increased. About
45? of roll before the aircraft became erect, therudder and aileron inputs were moved to neutral, but
were notapplied in opposition to the roll. The rate of roll was seento increase slightly as the aircraft
rolled through wings level(from about 110?/sec to 125?/sec), with a rate of descentof about 7,200
feet per minute, to the point of impact. Groundspeed at impact was assessed as 230 kt. The final
angle of descentwas 14.5?, giving a speed along the flight path of 238 kt.
Impact was seen to occur on the left wing tip at an attitude ofabout 30? left roll with the fuselage
level in pitch. Theaileron and rudder positions were approximately neutral and theelevator was
deflected up.
An analysis of the propeller speeds from video showed that theyremained constant throughout the
rolling manoeuvre. Both propellerswere turning at about 1,300 RPM, the right slightly faster
thanthe left. With the engine propeller reduction gearing ratio of2:1, this accorded with the aircraft
operating limitations whichquoted the engine limits for use in aerobatic manoeuvres as
2,600RPM/40 inches manifold pressure.
It was also noted on the video coverage that the coolant radiatorexit flaps were not symmetric for
each engine. Those for theleft engine were noted to be fully open, while those for the rightengine
were in trail, for a large part of the final display sequence. Correct engine operation during the
manoeuvres was assessed byother means and any possible effect of the asymmetry on the
handlingof the aircraft was not considered to be significant.
Engineering Investigation
The aircraft had struck Runway 06, straddling the centreline andabout 450 metres short of the
eastern end. The initial impacthad been of the left wingtip on the runway and the sequence ofmarks
of the immediately subsequent impacts was consistent withthe aircraft being on a heading of about
079?M (the runwayheading is 062?M), in a substantially level pitch attitudeand significantly
banked to the left. Examination of the cutsmade by both propellers in the runway surface indicated
that bothengines were developing considerable power and that the aircrafthad a high rate of
descent. Initial assessment of the propellermarks, without making allowances for rate of descent,
indicatedthat the aircraft had struck the ground with engine speeds ofthe order of 2500 RPM
associated with a ground speed of about200 kt.
After the initial impact, the left outer wing, empennage and bothtailbooms separated from the
remainder of the airframe which yawedsharply to the left before crossing the southern edge of the
runwayand cartwheeling across the grass. The main wreckage came torest, inverted, in a wheat
field, about 420 metres from the pointof initial impact, just outside the southern boundary of the
airfield. Both engines became detached from their mountings after impact;the right had been
thrown 60 metres beyond where the main wreckagecame to rest and the left 180 metres beyond,
crossing the M11Motorway. Although the aircraft had burst into flames very shortlyafter the initial
impact, there was little evidence of substantialfuel spillage between the point of initial impact and
where themain wreckage came to rest, there being only isolated areas ofblackened grass. There
was, however, evidence of a moderatelysevere ground fire around the main wreckage and a
considerablearea of the wheat field, generally to the south (right) of anextension of the line between
the initial impact and the mainwreckage, had been burnt.
The wreckage was removed to the AAIB facility at Farnborough formore detailed examination.
This revealed no evidence of any pre impact structural distressof the airframe nor loss of
attachment of control surfaces. Therewas no evidence of pre-impact loss of integrity of the
controlsystems, all damage being consistent with the nature and degreeof structural break-up after
impact. The extent of the disruptionto the control systems precluded eliminating the possibility
ofany transient obstruction of the systems. Assessment of the scrapemarks on the left outer wing
and aileron, made during the initialcontact on the runway, showed that the aileron had been at a
substantiallyneutral position at that moment. Damage on the left end rib ofthe elevator and on the
closing rib at the left end of the tailplanecut-out indicated that the elevator had been deflected up at
thetime the left fin base struck the runway. The impact positionsof both ailerons and elevator
surfaces were confirmed by the videoanalysis.
The aileron boosters were examined. The position of the by-passcontrol piston of the left booster
showed that, when it becamedisrupted at the time of impact, hydraulic pressure had been available.
Damage to the input rod of its control valve indicated that therehad been no aileron movement
demand at that time and damage tothe output rod of the actuating cylinder was consistent with
itsbeing at a neutral position. All damage to the left and rightbooster assemblies was consistent with
the damage to the structureto which they were attached and there was no evidence of any preimpactfailures.
The blade pitch change mechanisms both propellers were examined;the initial dismantling being
performed with the assistance ofthe operator's maintenance organisation. This revealed no
evidenceof malfunction nor damage inconsistent with that sustained asa result of impact. It was not
possible, from examination ofthe pitch control gear quadrants from the blade roots, to
establishexact blade pitch settings at impact. However, impact damageto the teeth of the quadrant
gears indicated, on balance, thatboth propellers had been working within their governed pitch
rangeand consequently at selected speed. It was not possible to determinethe selected speed from
the engine mounted governors.
Pilot's Flying Experience and Documentation
The pilot held an Airline Transport Pilot's Licence and was typerated on Boeing 737 series, Boeing
757/767 and Piper PA-23/34/44series aircraft. He was a Captain with a UK charter airline
flyingBoeing 757 and 767 aircraft and was the Chief Pilot for the operatorof the P-38, responsible
for the crewing and operation of a variedfleet of some 15 vintage 'warbird' aircraft types.
The pilot was also the Air Show Display Co-ordinator for the 'FlyingLegends' display at Duxford,
being responsible for the planningof the display items and for the choreography of the show
finale,which also involved leading a mass flypast of some 40 historicaircraft. He gave the daily
display briefing to the participatingpilots and undertook some in-show replanning on the Sunday
afternoonwhen the planned show sequence was interrupted by the arrivalof a significant display
item almost an hour ahead of the plannedschedule. This undoubtedly added to the pilot's workload
forthe afternoon. Shortly after this, the pilot participated inthe show in the lead aircraft of a pair of
DH89A Dragon Rapides. After landing from this, there was then some 12 minutes beforehe then
taxied out in the P38 for the start of that displayitem.
The pilot was operating the P-38, an aircraft registered in theUSA, under the privileges of his FAA
Commercial Pilot's Licence. Under normal circumstances, as the aircraft maximum take-offweight
was in excess of 5,700 kg (12,500 lb), a specific aircrafttype rating would be required. In this case,
the pilot held aletter, issued by the FAA Flight Standards District Office inOakland, California
during 1988, which authorised him to operateas pilot-in-command in experimental category aircraft
- "Alltypes and makes of high performance piston-powered aircraft." The letter also noted that it
did not, in itself, authorise theperformance of aerobatics in airshows. A separate authorisationfor
this activity is required, but only in respect of participationat airshows within the USA.
The FAA indicated that the documentation held by the pilot didcomply with the appropriate
US Federal Aviation Regulationsand the special operating limitations for the aircraft duringthis
flight. However, the FAA did note that since the issue ofthe letter of authority, the procedures had
since been changedto reflect current requirements, but the letter remained valid.
A Biennial Flight Review certification (to validate the FAA licence)was entered in the pilot's flying
log book by an FAA CertificatedFlight Instructor on 16 July 1995.
The pilot held a CAA Display Authorisation (DA) covering manyaircraft types including the P-38.
He also held an appointmentas a Display Authorisation Evaluator on behalf of the CAA.
The pilot's DA had a current validation and permitted the performanceof flypasts down to 30 feet
agl and aerobatic manoeuvres (in certaintypes) down to 100 feet agl. For the P-38, the minimum
aerobaticheight was specified as 200 feet agl. Formation flyingwas also permitted.
From the video evidence available, it was apparent that the pilotcommenced the final rolling
manoeuvre at a height which was inaccordance with his DA.
On the Saturday, the day prior to the accident, the pilot flewa similar display profile but with only
one aileron roll at crowdcentre. Some minor transgressions of the pilot's DA limitationswere noted
by the attending CAA Air Display Inspector, notablyin terms of the minimum aerobatic height
during the aileron rolland for being marginally inside the minimum lateral separationdistance
appropriate for aerobatics. Both of these comments weremade by the Inspector to the pilot after the
event and the pilotgave assurance that the Sunday display would fully conform tothe DA
The pilot had conducted a display practice in the P-38 on 11 Julyand had flown in the public
display on 13 July. In the 28 dayperiod prior to the accident, the pilot had also flown each ofthe
following types: Boeing 757, Spitfire V, Hellcat, Skyraider,Bearcat, Rapide, Aztec, Baron and Cub.
Aircraft History and Documentation
The aircraft was manufactured during 1943 at the Lockheed AircraftFactory in Burbank, California
and had the serial number 42-67543. It operated in service with the United States Army Air
Forceuntil being discharged in February 1945. It was found by itscurrent owner in a derelict state in
Texas in 1988. After purchase,it was taken to California and restored to flying condition.Test flying
was carried out early in 1992 and the aircraft wasimported into the UK during the summer of that
year. Since then,the aircraft has operated under a CAA Exemption to the Air NavigationOrder
which permitted the aircraft to fly without a valid Certificateof Airworthiness for the purposes of
Demonstration and Exhibitionflying only, provided that the FAA Special Airworthiness
Certificateand Operating Limitations dated 9 January 1992 were current.
The FAA Special Airworthiness Certificate was issued in January1992 in the Experimental
category, for the purposes of Exhibitionflying and was current at the time of the accident. The
aircraftwas being operated in accordance with the Operating Limitationsdocument. The aircraft's
maintenance documents showed that ithad been correctly maintained in accordance with the FAA
requirementsand had been properly certified by an FAA approved licensed engineer. The FAA
Certificate of Registration was issued on 21 February1992 to an owner with an address in Las
Vegas, Nevada.
The aircraft was also subject to an exemption issued by the CAAin order to allow it to operate at
speeds greater than 250 ktwhile below 10,000 feet. A current Aerial Work Operating Permitfor the
aircraft had also been issued by the Department of Transport.
The pilot had compiled a set of aircraft operating notes for theP-38, which indicated that, for
aerobatics, the engine limitswere 2,600 RPM and 40 inches manifold pressure (the maximum
continuouspower setting for the aircraft), the entry speed for rolling manoeuvreswas 200 kt and that
no negative 'g' manoeuvres were permittedbecause of possible hydraulic problems. It was
ascertained thata previous occurrence of negative 'g' had caused a hydraulic aerationproblem which
prevented the landing gear down function, whichrequired manual hand pump operation to recover.
It was also indicatedthat the preferred rolling direction was to the left in orderto prevent the
unlocking of the nose landing gear door mechanism,which was known to have occurred during
previous rolls to theright. These hydraulic problems were not known to have causedany adverse
effects in the aileron booster systems.
Information from the aircraft's Maintenance Instruction Manualstates that with aileron hydraulic
boosters operating, the pilot'scontrol input applies one sixth of the total aileron load.
Theimplication of this is that, in the event of a failure of thehydraulic booster system, the aileron
control forces felt by thepilot would be six times greater than normal for a given ailerondeflection
under the same flight conditions. From examinationof the aileron booster system, it is considered
that, in the eventof a hydraulic failure while the ailerons were deflected duringthe rolling
manoeuvre, the aileron deflection would have tendedto reduce as a result of the aerodynamic
Copies of the original 1944 Pilot's Flight Operating Instructionsfor this type of aircraft were also
available. These containedthe following relevant extracts:
"AILERON CONTROL HYDRAULIC BOOSTER - ...On these airplanesmost of the aileron control
force is provided by hydraulic boost; the remainder is applied by the pilot....Control cables
whichcontrol the boost mechanism are mechanically connected to thecontrol surfaces, allowing
manual flight control in an emergency. The aileron boost shut-off valve is located on the right
sideof the cockpit near the pilot's control column. In addition tothis valve an automatic by-pass
valve is incorporated in the mechanismto allow free movement of the ailerons in case the hydraulic
pressureshould fail."
In the "Flight Restrictions" section, it was noted that"Snap Rolls" and continuous inverted flight
were prohibited. The section also contained the cautionary note:
" Extreme care must be taken during acrobatic manoeuvreswhich require a downward vertical
recovery. Acrobatics shouldnot be attempted at altitudes below 10,000 feet."
Duxford Airfield Information
Duxford airfield has a main Runway 06/24 of asphalt/concrete construction,dimensions 1,503
metres long and 45 metres wide. Additionally,to the north of this, is a parallel grass runway, 890
metres longby 30 metres wide (Figure 1). For air display purposes, the displayaxes are defined by
reference to either the grass or hard runways,dependant upon the speed of the participating aircraft.
For this display, participants were briefed that the display axisfor aircraft performing at speeds up
to 200 kt was the northernedge of the grass runway. The P-38 display speed was in excessof 200 kt,
so it was using the northern edge of the hard surfacedrunway as its display axis, in order to comply
with the minimumdistance requirements laid down in CAP 403.
When detailed measurements were checked during this investigation,it was found that there were
some anomalies in the display axisdistances at the western end of the airfield which did not meetthe
specified minima. This situation was advised to the airfieldmanagement at Duxford by AAIB and
the necessary changes were implementedin time for the subsequent public air display in September
1996. These involved the relocation of the display line (for aircraftup to 200 kt) to the southern
edge of the grass runway, and themovement of the crowd line northwards by 23 metres at the
westernend of the airfield.
The airfield General Flying Orders contain Annex B, Rules forDisplay and Demonstration Flying.
The Orders contain the statementthat "Aerobatic manoeuvres should be flown such that theyare
capable of being completed by 500 feet AGL." Thisrequirement was also stated in the daily briefing
notes producedby the airfield management.
Consideration of the final rolling manoeuvre
Evidence was obtained which showed that the aircraft had successfullycompleted a double rolling
manoeuvre in the past, with a significantupward trajectory apparent throughout. However, the
majorityof other pilots, who also flew aircraft belonging to the sameoperator, indicated that a single
aileron roll manoeuvre was byfar the more common. This view was supported by Air Display
Inspectorsfrom the CAA.
The pilot used a metal knee-board which was usually strapped aroundhis right leg. This was found
with the strap fastener undonein the debris adjacent to the main wreckage. Checks carried outon a
similar aircraft in the USA found that a similar knee-boardcould, if dislodged, become jammed in
the flight controls in anyof several places. The pilot also habitually carried (in hisflying suit) a
'multi-tool' and a screwdriver set with detachablebits. These were also found adjacent to the main
wreckage. Therewere no significant witness marks, either on the knee-board oron the tools, to
suggest that they had become jammed in the flyingcontrol mechanisms. The pilot's torch and other
personal effectswere found in-situ in his flying suit.
Consideration of the flight profile (Figure 1) indicates thatthe start of the final manoeuvre occurred
over the western endof the hard surfaced runway. At the end of the first roll, theaircraft was still in
a location which was to the right (west)of the centre of the crowd. It is considered unlikely that
thepilot would have intended to stop manoeuvring at this positionas the display would then have
appeared 'asymmetric' from thecrowd's viewpoint.
It is known that the pilot was a very experienced display pilotand produced high quality,
aesthetically pleasing displays. Thereis no evidence to explain why the aircraft entered the
secondpart of the final manoeuvre in a less than optimum pitch attitudewhich developed into a
significant downward trajectory. The possibilityof a temporary restriction to the flying controls
(especiallythe roll control), or some other form of distraction of the pilot,could not be dismissed.
Air Display Safety Review
In response to this and several other UK air display accidentswhich occurred during the 1996
display season, the CAA set upa Civil Air Display Review Group. The group identified some
18areas for detailed investigation and comment, covering many aspectsof display organisation and
participation. The work of the groupis currently ongoing but relevant recommendations should be
implemented,either by means of amendments to CAP 403 or by other means, intime for the start of
the 1997 display season. There is alsoan intention for the CAA to develop additional guidance
materialfor display pilots in a similar fashion to the RAF Flying DisplayNotes.
In view of the Review Group activity already being undertaken,AAIB considered that no further
Safety Recommendations were necessaryin this case.

10-11-2005, 09:09 AM
My that's the same report I linked you all to on the first page http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif and you still tried to find some other cause when the worlds most professional and renowned experts couldn't lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif About the only thing I never heard theorised about was he was abducted by Aliens and is living on Mars in a London Double Decker Bus with Elvis.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

10-12-2005, 04:52 AM
1st things 1st.
I think this thread title should really have a warning on it.
I was there sitting outside the airfield in line with the runway videoing the P38 when it went in and i can assure you it makes you feel very very sick,suddenly seeing it again was'nt pleasant.
The pilot was indeed "Hoof" Proudfoot who was a very gifted pilot.
A work colleague of mine was on the jury at the inquest afterwards and he doubted that the truth would ever really be known.

10-12-2005, 11:32 AM
"My that's the same report I linked you all to on the first page"

Its true. LOL i gotta say that it looks like he looses use of the ailerons. That is probably the cause of the crash! Also his nose is clearly pointing downwards indicating that he is going to lose too much altitude when the 2nd roll commences It is quite horrible to watch.

VFA-195 Snacky
10-12-2005, 11:51 AM
Hate to see that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

10-12-2005, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by 73GIAP_Milan:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif OMG! scratch 1 P-38, 1 Pilot and several other planes?

Geesh what a crash.. that should not happen too often, the world would run out of flyable warbirds all too soon. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

You are right no doubt about it.
It seems to me (no pun intended) that these days all kind of pilots are flying precious aircrafts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

10-12-2005, 05:05 PM
I was there when that happened and, judging from the camera position, the guy who filmed it was only a few feet away from me.

The pilot was named Proudfoot,I think his first name was Hugh. He had a lot of hours in warbirds and had done film and TV work with them.

I spoke to a technician at Duxford a couple of years later about the crash and he mentioned something about an engine stall but I could never confirm this.

It was a horrible incident and it wasn't pleasant trying to explain to my two lads,then 6 and 3 years old, that someones Dad had just died.

If you watch the video please consider that and do not consider it as trival entertainment.

10-12-2005, 09:05 PM
i photographed a T-28 diving straight into the ground during a high speed stall at titusville Fla around1990, a couple of the photos i took were published in air classics magazine. Yes, it is an absolute sickening sight. Ive never heard a crowd that big be that silent.

it was the worse thing ive seen at an air show, and id seen one previous fatal crash of a decathalon. A huge fireball and a dull clap, and i wanted to barf.

Even the most experienced pilots can have something sneak up on them; note the attrition rate during the war to non cmbat causes. Leftys p38 going 4 decades without an accident is an absolute miracle.....statistically.

10-12-2005, 09:33 PM
A little history on this aircraft:

The pilot's name was "Hoof" Proudfoot. He was a professional pilot. Hoof was a decorated former RAF squadron leader and Britannia Airways pilot.

This in particular P-38J was rolled off Lockheed's Burbank production line in October 1943 as a P-38J, but was converted to a photo-reconnaissance F-5C at its Dallas Love Field facility. After several stateside postings during the war, it was placed in storage, and then sold to a private owner in Austin, Tex.

After more than a decade of being vandalized in Austin, the hulk was purchased by legendary P-38 pilot Lefty Gardner in the mid-1960s.

The P-38J was then purchased by Stephen Grey in 1988, shipped to England and restored to flying condition.

Grey's The Fighter Collection flew the bare-metal Lightning for two seasons as P-38 ace Jack Ilfrey's "Happy Jack's Go Buggy." In 1994, it was painted olive drab with yellow spinners to represent the plane flown by Lt. **** Loehnert in 1944: "California

Photo History:

Under restoration 1990:

First flight unpainted June 1992:

"Happy Jack's Go Buggy" paint scheme 1992:

The final "California Cutie" paint livery just a couple weeks before in crashed:


10-12-2005, 09:42 PM
Well this is not "official" but its the best therie out there. A friend of mine is good family friends with the pilot of that P-38. I spoke to him in detail about this crash a few nights ago.

Apperantly, the pilot Proudfoot had many many hours, and was considered one of the best war bird pilots out there. Mr Proudfoot got a new knee-board earlier that week, but never flew with it on. The old knee-board was a bit smaller. The most likley thing that happened was the yoke got stuck in full aileron deflection when one of the two handles whent up into the straps of the bigger knee-board. This would stick the yoke in both a forward and full aileron position, and getting it un-stuck at that low altitude cost him the few seconds he needed.

A truly sad thing, but thats what the family of the pilot and close friends think happened, and they know him best. If you note, the report speaks

Its amazing how something so small and so overlooked can do something like this so fast.

10-12-2005, 10:56 PM
Just like reaching down to pick up a dropped item while driving. Doesn't take long....

10-13-2005, 12:52 PM
is there a reason why the link does not work? i would like to see it..

10-13-2005, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Armhunter:
is there a reason why the link does not work? i would like to see it..

You might not want to see it or I should say, wish you hadn't.... very sobering.



10-13-2005, 02:06 PM
I understand... but i still want to see it..

10-13-2005, 07:58 PM
It was working a couple of days ago. I dunno...

Mad Moses, thanx for posting those excellent photos....i now know which plane it was. The kneeboard thing sounds very plausible. My dad had a couple of wierd things like that happen in his long flying career, barely moved fast enough to prevent disaster.....like a wasp attacking him in a TH-13 (army bell47) while he's demonstrating an auto rotation to a student. Its ususally the goofy stuff like such that nail the best pilots.