Spitfire incident at Ardmore this morning (3 Dec)

[nudemetalz]

Appears no-one is hurt but how is the Spit????? :(

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3123771/WWII-spitfire-fighter-plane-crash


Looks like it's this one.
<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=DSC_0117awoc.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/DSC_0117awoc.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

[Pussy]

Bugger me!
That Spitfire has only JUST returned to the air after the landing mishap at Masterton!

[nudemetalz]

Here's hoping it's ready for Easter at Wanaka next year !!

[Fatjim]

You reckon they'll be able to get it ready to crash by then?

[Katman]

Get a new pilot.

[Pussy]

Get a new pilot.

That suggestion is right on the money!
There will be a big "please explain" from the insurance company, I'll bet!

[slofox]

Perhaps Douggie-babe needs to learn to fly the thing...

[Forest]

That double-seat canopy is incredibly fugly.

[Hans]

Bounce. Bounce. CRACK! I wonder if there should perhaps be more stringent requirements on operating overpowered, HISTORICALLY VALUABLE taildraggers. Just being able to afford one obviously isn't enough.

[SPman]

Aah shit!
Not again!
He's not having much luck with that plane, is he.
I wonder if there should perhaps be more stringent requirements on operating overpowered, HISTORICALLY VALUABLE taildraggers.
There are quite stringent requirements, and no one realises this more than the operators. Just think of a Spit, as the GSXR1000 of the skies.....
more photos here http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=civil&action=display&thread=10366&page=2

[Pussy]

It does pay to land them at runway height.
Not 15 ft above

[kwaka_crasher]

Just think of a Spit, as the GSXR1000 of the skies.....

You mean generally operated only by image conscious squids with little cash and even less taste? :scratch:

[nudemetalz]

It does pay to land them at runway height.
Not 15 ft above

And they tried to land these on aircraft carriers during WW2...
Hats off to those dudes !!!

Oh hang on,...didn't always go to plan either...

<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=seafire_crash.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/seafire_crash.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=seafire-17-ja.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/seafire-17-ja.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=seafire3.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/seafire3.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=seafire2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/seafire2.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/?action=view&current=seafire8.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/turbo_NZ/seafire8.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

[nudemetalz]

More damaged Spit pics from Ardmore...

Doesn't looks so bad from these pics but they can be deceiving. Plus parts wouldn't be cheap... :eek:

[Pussy]

Gonna be an expensive exercise.....

[Mikkel]

That suggestion is right on the money!
There will be a big "please explain" from the insurance company, I'll bet!

Insurance, for a Spitfire... I am not even sure if anyone would go near that. Maybe if it was stored in a hangar and not taken into the air.


That double-seat canopy is incredibly fugly.

Not to mention pointless - with that track record no one would be willing to get into that cockpit.


Aah shit!
Not again!
He's not having much luck with that plane, is he.
There are quite stringent requirements, and no one realises this more than the operators. Just think of a Spit, as the GSXR1000 of the skies.....
more photos here http://rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=civil&action=display&thread=10366&page=2

More like the Vicent Black Lightning of the skies...

The F-35 is more like the Gixxer of the skies.


More damaged Spit pics from Ardmore...

Doesn't looks so bad from these pics but they can be deceiving. Plus parts wouldn't be cheap... :eek:

And I doubt Vickers-Armstrong Ltd. has got a stockpile of spares just waiting to be ordered in. ...even if the company still existed today.

[Pussy]

Insurance, for a Spitfire... I am not even sure if anyone would go near that. Maybe if it was stored in a hangar and not taken into the air.




Believe it or not, they are actually insured! Not cheap, though!

[Mikkel]

Believe it or not, they are actually insured! Not cheap, though!

I'd imagine. Third party only or comprehensive? :laugh:

What are the ACC levies on airplanes btw?

[Pussy]

I'd imagine. Third party only or comprehensive? :laugh:

What are the ACC levies on airplanes btw?

It's "aeroplanes"!
I'm not sure of the exact percentage, but funnily enough, the aerial topdressing company I fly for has recently had a REDUCTION in levies!

[Forest]

Believe it or not, they are actually insured! Not cheap, though!

Most private planes are only insured for total loss & third party liability.

[Swoop]

Not to mention pointless - with that track record no one would be willing to get into that cockpit.
Not so. I have been trying to track down the owner and enquire about a flight. Will continue to do so, even after this.

[nudemetalz]

A flight in a Spitfire (or P-51, or P-40, or...) would be a lifetime dream come true for me !!!!

[Bass]

Not so. I have been trying to track down the owner and enquire about a flight. Will continue to do so, even after this.

It's not difficult to meet him. He flies his contest aerobatic aircraft pretty much every fine day. I can show you where to stand and wait.

[Bass]

A flight in a Spitfire (or P-51, or P-40, or...) would be a lifetime dream come true for me !!!!

Not all your dreams come with 2 seats in NZ. Some do though and a flight can be arranged. It comes with a pretty steep price tag however. The last time one of my contacts went for a ride in the P51, it cost $2000 for half an hour and that was several years ago.
The maintenance cost are huge. The last time I asked, it cost a bit over $250,000 to overhaul the Merlin and I doubt that they would get 1000 hours between overhauls. I stand to be corrected on that one however.

[StoneY]

My grandad was a mechanic on P-51's and then on Corsairs (on Gudalcanal at that)

He told us of all the WWII aircraft out there, the ME 109 and the Spit were the two hardest to land fighters of the era

Spits 'bounced' terribly if your landing angle was out by sweet fa, and the ME's had real stiff undercariage that was too narrow and tended to collapse sideways if landing in strong side winds

Thats what Grandad said anyway, seems our man in the SI has proven him right on the Spit

[Bass]

He told us of all the WWII aircraft out there, the ME 109 and the Spit were the two hardest to land fighters of the era



I have seen the exact figures, but for the life of me I can't remember them. However, my vague recollection is that there were more 109's lost to landing accidents than to enemy action. It was certainly of that order.

[Madness]

What an investment! The Spitfire was worth $2,000,000 yesterday when it crashed. Today (according to Teh Harold) it's value has jumped to $3,000,000.

You don't see GSXR1000's appreciate like that when they get binned! :no:

[Chooky]

Not so. I have been trying to track down the owner and enquire about a flight. Will continue to do so, even after this.

I'll take you for a fly in the "Wally" for a carton of VB...:yes:

[Pussy]

I'll take you for a fly in the "Wally" for a carton of VB...:yes:

I'm cheaper, Swoop... box of Mac's Gold!

[Chooky]

I'm cheaper, Swoop... box of Mac's Gold!

Price cutter.........:laugh:

[Pussy]

Price cutter.........:laugh:

... "that's the shot"......

[BMWST?]

My grandad was a mechanic on P-51's and then on Corsairs (on Gudalcanal at that)

He told us of all the WWII aircraft out there, the ME 109 and the Spit were the two hardest to land fighters of the era

Spits 'bounced' terribly if your landing angle was out by sweet fa, and the ME's had real stiff undercariage that was too narrow and tended to collapse sideways if landing in strong side winds

Thats what Grandad said anyway, seems our man in the SI has proven him right on the Spit

and the spitfire had to be side slippped slightly as you coudnt see over the bloody great engine in front of you...prolly not peculiar to the spitfire though

[pete376403]

Buy a brand new 80% of full size replica here; http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/
$AU175k, Isuzu Bighorn V6 motor
Absolute bargain.

There is one on my Lotto list

[James Deuce]

A Diesel Spitfire.

Junkers get the last laugh.

[pete376403]

A Diesel Spitfire.

Junkers get the last laugh.

Isuzu V6 petrol, with optional supercharger. Not diesel.

Junkers was an opposed piston engine, like the Rootes TS3 Commer, right?

[nudemetalz]

The Junkers Ju-86 had the diesels,...opposed piston two-strokes.
Good for high altitude but too slow and mainly were easy pickings for the RAF fighters.

[James Deuce]

Isuzu V6 petrol, with optional supercharger. Not diesel.

Junkers was an opposed piston engine, like the Rootes TS3 Commer, right?
Yeah I know, I was using poetic license.

Yes, 6 cylinder 12 piston two stroke supercharged diesel with a service ceiling of 14,000 metres for the final version, the Ju86R. Really clever port work and an "H" configuration (something that Napier and BRM struggled to make work) gave it good scavenging performance and minimised power loss at the crank giving the Ju86 amazing high altitude performance for an engine of comparably low specific output (1000HP), especially compared to a Merlin 60 with a Two stage, Two speed supercharger like the Mk VII Spitfire had, an aircraft specifically developed to counter the high flying reconnaissance Ju86.

It took until 1942 for a Ju86P to be shot down by a specially modified Spitfire Mk V operating from Aboukir in Egypt. The Ju86R wasn't withdrawn from service until 1944. Not a bad record for an obsolescent Spanish Civil war era bomber. The Ju86 helped develop pressurised cabins for passenger aircraft, so we can fly high and fast all over the place now.

<img src=http://vwings.net/dnl_fucida/stale_soubory/ju86/jumo207.jpg>

[Pussy]

with a service ceiling of 14,000 metres for the final version
....we refer to altitude in feet, Mr Deuce......

[James Deuce]

....we refer to altitude in feet, Mr Deuce......
You refer to them in feet because you need the lower unit measurment granularity skimming the Earth's surface the way you do.

[James Deuce]

Good for high altitude but too slow and mainly were easy pickings for the RAF fighters.
No, not at all, the RAF and USAF struggled to get anywhere near them, and they were withdrawn from service primarliy due to fuel supply issues. Diesel became much more dificult to get hold of from 1944 on for the Germans. The Jumo 207 maintained a much higher power to weight ratio thanks to the two stroke firing order and the port layout of intake in the lower cylinder and exhaust in the upper meant really good combustion efficiency, even in a low oxygen atmosphere. A Ju86 would walk away from a Spit VII at 40,000ft (happy Pussy?) an aircraft with supposedly almost double the top speed of the Ju86 at it's most efficient altitude of 32,000ft. The performance drop off in the entailing 8,000ft altitude difference meant the high flying interceptors needed a long winded vectoring process organised on the ground to line a Ju86 up and then they generally got one crack at it before it dieseled on its way.

[Pussy]

No, not at all, the RAF and USAF struggled to get anywhere near them, and they were withdrawn from service primarliy due to fuel supply issues. Diesel became much more dificult to get hold of from 1944 on for the Germans. The Jumo 207 maintained a much higher power to weight ratio thanks to the two stroke firing order and the port layout of intake in the lower cylinder and exhaust in the upper meant really good combustion efficiency, even in a low oxygen atmosphere. A Ju86 would walk away from a Spit VII at 40,000ft (happy Pussy) an aircraft with supposedly almost double the top speed of the Ju86 at it's most efficient altitude of 32,000ft. The performance drop off in the entailing 8,000ft altitude difference meant the high flying interceptors needed a long winded vectoring process organised on the ground to line a Ju86 up and then they generally got one crack at it before dieseled on its way.

Yes, thank you! (feet is the international unit of measuring altitude!)
Man, there were some clever bastards back then! I'm no authority on aircraft, but I had NO idea about the Jumo 207 engine. Interesting!!

[jrandom]

To step back from the aerogeekery for a moment, I gotta say, it'd be pretty embarrassing to be this dude.

Imagine if everyone with more money than sense had the national media sniffing around like flies every time they binned one of their toys.

Sales of Enzos and Desmosedicis would go straight through the floor.

[nudemetalz]

Speaking of which (to get off the subject a little)..there's a youtube vid of a dude riding his Desmosedici extremely poorly, proving that money does not buy skill.

However, please be aware that I by no means refer to the Spitfire accident in that frame of mind.

Now, Ju-86,..yes agree Jim,...but they were no good at low/mid altitude because the diesels did not like changes in power, preferring constant revs.
Therefore were phased into high-altitude PR work where they excelled (as you mentioned :) ).

[Swoop]

It's not difficult to meet him. He flies his contest aerobatic aircraft pretty much every fine day. I can show you where to stand and wait.
I'm listening...!

the ME's had real stiff undercariage that was too narrow
The undercarriage was fixed to the fuselage so that a wing could be removed and yet the aircraft remain on its own wheels. Bad mistake really...

You don't see GSXR1000's appreciate like that when they get binned! :no:
The problem is that the toyota corolla comparison could be made here...

I'm cheaper, Swoop... box of Mac's Gold!
Hmmm...:woohoo:

[nudemetalz]

Just got from an undisclosed source that the damage done is more severe than before and will cost around $1M to rebuild. She'll take 12 months to get back in the air. :(

[Elysium]

Now this is a better pilot. And a better plane in my opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDImSVoiJJY

[Usarka]

Just got from an undisclosed source that the damage done is more severe than before and will cost around $1M to rebuild. She'll take 12 months to get back in the air. :(

Might reconsider the trip to Wanaka next year then :crazy:

[James Deuce]

Now this is a better pilot. And a better plane in my opinion.


Apart from the flying like a mud wallowing Buffalo above 23,000 ft (It feels WRONG Pussy - The Germans used metres for goodness sake!).

[Bass]

I'm listening...!



PM sent.
Actually, if you are into aircraft Ardmore is worth a visit at anytime. There is a huge amount goes on out there behind closed doors. There is a Bleriot under construction in the hanger next to ours (which we share with a Nanchang) and a Mosquito in the hanger next to that, plus a P40 under rebuild. There is also a nearly complete V8 powered 3/4 Spitfire in our hanger that you can buy if you want. It's up for sale as part of a divorce settlement.

[pete376403]

There is also a nearly complete V8 powered 3/4 Spitfire in our hanger that you can buy if you want. It's up for sale as part of a divorce settlement.
Is this one of the Aussie Supermarines? Would you take the wife as a trade? (with cash difference of course)

[nadroj]

Is this one of the Aussie Supermarines? Would you take the wife as a trade? (with cash difference of course)

Better post a pic then!

[Pussy]

Apart from the flying like a mud wallowing Buffalo above 23,000 ft (It feels WRONG Pussy - The Germans used metres for goodness sake!).

It may well have done.... but it didn't hurt too much to use the correct unit, did it?? :p

[marty]

Ardmore is a total PITA for high performance tail draggers. It was hard enough in the Pitts doing a long straight final approach - at 95kts (similar to the SPitfire) behind 172s and Traumahawks at 60kts. I HATED the straight in approach - for 21 the easiest thing was to weave until on mid finals, drift off to the left until the threshold and tower lined up, then head just to the right of the tower, aim to turn over the threshold at about 50 feet max, roll left until the whole runway disappears, then watch the runway get big in the peripheral - cut power, crackle pop bang, set 3 point and land. power up tail up rotate, do it all again in 75 seconds :) Welcome to circuits in the Pitts.

No sweat.

[Bass]

Is this one of the Aussie Supermarines? Would you take the wife as a trade? (with cash difference of course)

Firstly, it's not mine, sadly.
Secondly, straighten me out if I'm wrong, but I thought the Aussie ones were effectively lookalike microlites with about 60 hp. This one is all-metal with what looks like a mid-sized automotive V8 in the front of it. It's not fully assembled. The wings are lying beside the fuselage, but I'll take the camera with me next time I go out.
However, all that said, post a picture of the wife and we shall see what can be worked out.

[Bass]

Ardmore is a total PITA for high performance tail draggers.
I sympathise. I've flown one approach in MAD (Richard took over as we turned finals) so I have some idea what you mean.
I recall one occasion where our Wilga was turning base for a banner pickup and he was 6th in the queue.
There have been many times that I have seen a Warbird overshoot because some student has misjudged his approach speed and nipped inside him. On one occasion I saw the T28 have 3 attempts before Unicom made space for him. This was despite the normal warnings that there was a fast one on finals.

It's not so bad now though with some of the training moving to Hamilton.

[Kickaha]

Firstly, it's not mine, sadly.
Secondly, straighten me out if I'm wrong, but I thought the Aussie ones were effectively lookalike microlites with about 60 hp.

Bit bigger than that 80%-90% size


This one is all-metal with what looks like a mid-sized automotive V8 in the front of it.

Sounds like one of the Oz built ones that pete376403 put the link up for earlier http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/

[R6_kid]

This one is all-metal with what looks like a mid-sized automotive V8 in the front of it.

Thats probably an Aussie Supermarine one then - someone posted a link earlier.

[Bass]

Sounds like one of the Oz built ones that pete376403 put the link up for earlier http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/

You are right
It might be one of those.

[pete376403]

Firstly, it's not mine, sadly.
Secondly, straighten me out if I'm wrong, but I thought the Aussie ones were effectively lookalike microlites with about 60 hp. This one is all-metal with what looks like a mid-sized automotive V8 in the front of it. It's not fully assembled. The wings are lying beside the fuselage, but I'll take the camera with me next time I go out.
However, all that said, post a picture of the wife and we shall see what can be worked out.
http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/
I asked the wife - she said no.

[R6_kid]

http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/
I asked the wife - she said no.

Time for a new wife?