A friend of mine, a tail gunner on a Liberator, during WWII told me that "runnin' lean" was used to get the plane back to England. This was frowned upon (overheated the engines) and the pilots would get "chewed out" for it. But it didn't stop them on the next time out.
Leo (pearland, tx)
FWIW , I saw it on display behind ropes in Harlingen Tx. 1979. I heard the CAF isn't there anymore cause of the salt breeze , approx.
35 miles from the Gulf.
that has played several times recently on AMC(?), where they actually fly out on an _engine_, wondered how true... the guy that only designed model planes seems to ring true, tho. --Loren
yup
gunner "The French are a smallish, monkey-looking bunch and not dressed any better, on average, than the citizens of Baltimore. True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whiskey I don't know." -- P.J O'Rourke (1989)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow! That was some night. And the Bock's Car too, that would really be something to think about.
I still think that there should be a B-36 on static display in Tokyo, right across the street from the Imperial Palace.
A few years back I got my 6' 7" 240 pound adult son, who is a WW II warbird nut, a chance to sit in the cockpit of an original condition P-51. He was stunned at how cramped the cockpit was.
I don't know if it was a true story but they actually built and flew the modified plane for the movie. The plane is never shown landing, because it crashed and killed the stunt pilot.
Fred
[....]
as a young lad in 1950's Ellensberg, Wa., went to an airshow where a WWII surplus Mustang was taking on riders for 5min flights. what i remember most was the noise, man was that thing _LOUD_, and the amount of fuel they added after just a few flights.
i cannot honestly remember much about the plane, i do understand now that it must have been a type of trainer or had been modified to accomodate a rider. haven't thought about that for many moons.
--Loren
Multi-engine airplanes have a speed designated "Vmc" to indicate the lowest speed at which you can keep it right side up with one engine running. If you are going slower, you have to reduce power or you lose it.
For a P-38, I saw a quote from the operating manual that said somheting like:
While taking off, if under 120 knots and an engine fails, pull power on both engines and land straight ahead.
For most twins, one engine causes more problems with control when it goes. For the P-38, both engines were "really bad". If they turned the other way, it would have made this problem less bad (at the expense of other control issues).
yours, Michael
Really ? How do you find out this # ? I've never lost an engine , my dad was mostly with me and only told me that the Aztex was a bitch in his last power plant shut down on take off , but never instructed me on what the best way to dealt with it should be. Say, like what is it for a king air or a 210 ? I've always liked twin engine planes just cause you can trim the engines so it will follow the VOR.
And that was Paul Mantz, one of Hollywood's best ever stunt pilots.
Is it a Chinese restaurant?
The one in Tokyo is where the Emperor has always lived. My memories of the area are a little dated, circa 1950 or so, but the Imperial Palace was downtown, near the Imperial Hotel (a Frank Lloyd Wright design) and also in the vicinity of the Dai-ichi Building where you could occasionally see Douglas MacArthur coming and going from his staff car (a big black four door sedan something like a pre-war Packard or DeSoto).
The reason I know all that is there was a major bus stop in front of the Dia-ichi Building and when we rode the bus in from Grant Heights housing area we always got off there. It was great then. Lots of shopping on the Ginza, 365 Yen to the Dollar, and Americans still got a little bit of respect from the general populace.
Yup. Good eats :)
Tim
-- In the immortal words of Ned Flanders: "No foot longs!" Website @
Hi Bert,
Saw your rerference to the Vampire and couldn't resist replying as it was one of my favourite aeroplanes as a kid one that has a lot of good memories for me. Did you ever see any flying while they were in service?
One other twin boom beastie from the UK was the Whitworth Argosy, plus the Vamp's cousin the Sea Venom and of course the Sea Vixen.
Ian
Bob, I've not seen the movie however it could have been any one of the following 2 aircraft.
Whitworth Argosy
Or the slightly older Blackburn Beverly
As a kid, I saw them flying over Victoria, B.C. I think the old Spitfire squadron was re-equipped with them. They were the first jet airplanes I ever saw!
Steve Rayner.
The Mosquito was a conventional twin-engined single-tailed layout. Its claim to fame was being built of wood. Aluminum was in short supply when it was designed, so deHavilland employed spruce and birch and some fabric. Very powerful, very fast, very strong. My granddad was a lumber shipper in B.C., Canada, in those days and some of the best spruce went to deHavilland factories.
Dan
It has to do with something called 'P factor'. When climbing, one side of the propeller's disk will have more thrust than the other, Designers prefer to have the side with more thrust be closer to the centerline so that the rudder has more directional control.
Good, they can be hard to find.
A 210 is a single-engine. The Aztec is rather benign as concerns engine out characteristics. Step on the rudder pedal on the side of the good engine and she'll keep on trucking (if she isn't overweight). King Air is the same- very benign if you just step on the rudder pedal of the good engine. Knowing which engine is the good engine seems to confuse some pilots. This is where training, training, and more training are good things.
Uhm... Who told you that? Can I have some of what you're smoking?
D.
Hey Dan,
The local CHAA is rebuilding a Mosquito for museum display. Amazing the strength of the wood. While it will never be certified, they are doing the work as though it will fly, including two brand new RR Merlin engines (story in itself). This particular plane was "lost" near the Arctic Circle in the 1950's, while being used in aerial surveying. It sat there for over 40 years, and was dug out of the sand-banks of lake or a river and brought to Windsor.
For flyers, an interesting pilot story about the crash itself at:
And more about the project at:
I believe there is also a fellow in New Zealand that is building these as new. For sure he is coldforming the fuselages halves.
Take care.
Brian Laws>> What about the moskeeto?
Actually, this wasn't a C-119, but an earlier plane of the same configuration (C-82?). In the movie they do indeed fly out using just one boom and a spliced wing. This contraption was actually built for the movie ... it flew, sort of. It then crashed and killed the stunt pilot.
Dan Mitchell ==========
Loren Coe wrote:
Lost me a bit. Climbing , one side , you mean pitch thrust being different cause the angle of attack of the prop. airfoil? Or yaw? Interesting , but I'm not an areodynamic engineer. I would think that wouldn't be a factor (pun intended) that would over come an intentional yaw.
Sorry , 410? That looks a little bigger than what I was thinking of. I know one when I see one. I just kind of liked it and was thinking it was a Piper. I was tring to list small twins like Beechcraft , Cessna , and Piper is all. Hell , I'd be happy with a Grummin Tiger? A small single engine plane , smooth all over , areobatic , tri-gear , and you can pull the canopy back in flight. No Trade-a-Planes around.
Ahh... My dad/flight instructor and 101 reconnaissance pilot. Why? Is there something wrong with that? Granted, if the air mass is moving too fast. You can trim the rudder , set the rpm's different , or push the rudder for an hour. Hey, that's what he told me , he was an unorthodox person . He typically would tell me where we are going and figure it out , then push the seat all the way back and read a paper back.
It sure seemed to work , now you got me going. Are you saying that if each engine is at a different rpm that it will only crab/yaw and still fly in the same line in the air mass as if the engines and or the props are set the same? I don't think so. I could be wrong, enlighten me. I can understand it being inefficient. If you lost a wing tip would the plane still follow the same line as before it bailed?
Do you need some? Have you tried it? Maybe he was faking me out to see if I would say something. He's been dead for 2 decades and always had a weird instructional way , like 'When I say rabbit , you jump!"
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.