# Could a Lancaster bomber perform a barrel loop?



## MickMcM (Jul 9, 2009)

As this is my first post, it may be that this question is posted on the wrong subject forum – apologies, if so, in advance.

I am very interested to know if a Lancaster bomber could perform a barrel or similar loop? I think that I've read elsewhere that it was perfectly capable of doing so. If anyone could throw light on this I'd be most grateful.

Michael


----------



## fibus (Jul 9, 2009)

Yes.
I believe the name of the book is " Sigh for a Merlin". can't remember the authors name but he was a pre ww2 racer of small aircraft. Became a production test pilot and was one of the great aerobatic demonstrators.
Aside from Spits he tested, among other aircraft, the Lancaster and did rolls and loops for fun.
Remember Tex Johnson rolled the prototype Boeing 707 and nearly caused heart failure in his boss.
That is on tape try utube.


----------



## trackend (Jul 9, 2009)

no


----------



## Crunch (Jul 9, 2009)

Technical response trackie?


----------



## Tzaw1 (Jul 9, 2009)

Yes. First and last barrel.


----------



## trackend (Jul 9, 2009)

Crunch said:


> Technical response trackie?



no personal introduction so it recieved a short answer


----------



## Geedee (Jul 9, 2009)

One of my books on the Lanc, quotes an incident where a Lanc was blown on its back by flack, and by dint of who knows what, the pilot managed to recover by pulling through as though completeing a loop and made it back to his base safely.

Only problem was there was by now soo much dyhedral (spelling ?) on the wings that this poor old Lanc resembled a rubber powered balsa model !!!


----------



## Glider (Jul 9, 2009)

I don't see why a Lancaster could not be barrel rolled but a loop is a different kettle of fish. In the former the G forces can be controlled and an ideal one should be a continious 1 G.


----------



## beaupower32 (Jul 9, 2009)

Im pretty sure that most if not all aircraft is/was capable of performing a roll. In most of the manuals I see for heavy bombers (though im still looking for a Lancaster manual) Barrel Rolls are restricted and not allowed. Although, From what I have read, Alex Henshaw is the only pilot known to have barrel rolled a Lancaster, a feat considered almost impossible.


----------



## trackend (Jul 9, 2009)

Seen a B25 get very close to a barrell roll but I would be suprised if a Lanc had a roll rate sufficient to complete the manouver


----------



## lingo (Jul 9, 2009)

The Pilots Notes for the Lancaster I gives the VNE as 360 mph and states 'The aeroplane must not be subjected to violent manoeuvres and care must be taken not to impose heavy loads by use of the elevator. Under Handling it states 'The ailerons are light and effective but become heavy at speeds over 260 mph'.
The PNs for the later marks point out that 'Spins are to be avoided'!


----------



## Colin1 (Jul 9, 2009)

fibus said:


> Yes.
> I believe the name of the book is " Sigh for a Merlin". can't remember the authors name but he was a pre ww2 racer of small aircraft. Became a production test pilot and was one of the great aerobatic demonstrators.
> Aside from Spits he tested, among other aircraft, the Lancaster and did rolls and loops for fun


You read Sigh for a Merlin
and can't remember the author's name? 

Alex Henshaw

He didn't roll Lancasters for fun, if I recall, he did it once across the 300-odd that he tested.


----------



## Glider (Jul 9, 2009)

A change of pace but Concorde was barrel rolled a number of times which must have been fun to watch.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 9, 2009)

A barrell roll isn't that big of a deal. Well, maybe more of an ailerion roll. Barrel rolls are a tad more advanced but even those don't put much stress on the bird. Was told by a Navy pilot once that they were taught to roll a T-34 in such a way that a glass of water on top of the instrument panel would not spill a drop. It is a pretty mild manuver, just somewhat disconcerting if you haven't done it before. Nose down, pick up speed to x, pull the nose up to about 15 degrees above the horizon and push the stick over to the side of your leg, holding it there until you come right side up (jockeying the rudders) then neutralize the controls and you should be slightly nose down. 

Loop is a little more involved. Nose down, to speed of x (x is whatever you need to do the full manuver- oh and full power on both manuvers), stick back in your stomach (don't let up going over the top when you start floating a bit), go over the top and throttle back a bit coming down the back side or you'll really be moving at the bottom. The problem is the stress really builds up at the bottom of the loop. At least it can. Also, you could get negative g going over the top if you lose it a bit. 

I think you can roll a Lanc relatively easily. Loop it? Not if you didn't have to. I read that story in the book mentioned by Geedee and think that crew was very, very lucky. Others probably did it and didn't live to tell about it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 9, 2009)

Kind of off topic (sorry ), but I did see a C-130 do a barrel roll at the Royal Air Tattoo.


----------



## trackend (Jul 9, 2009)

Blimey Chris bet that was spectacular


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 9, 2009)

Many thanks for all of your responses. As a novice screenwriter, I now realise that I'm going to have to seriously revise my opening scene.

It would have helped if my Lancaster, to escape an FW-190, could have somehow turned the tables on it's adversary by attempting some theoretically possible but highly unorthodox manoeuvre demonstrating the outstanding skill of my pilot, the hero. He's already tried to shake off the fighter with a "corkscrew". Maybe I'll stick with that.

Thanks everyone,
Michael


----------



## gumbyk (Jul 9, 2009)

From what I understand, most, if not all aircraft could perform a barrell roll. Aren't they meant to be only positive g's and max out at around 3g? Aerobatics Figures

I wouldn't want to be pulling an aileron roll on somethig like a lanc (with the negative g's), but a barrell roll IMO would be a definite possibility.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 9, 2009)

Ah. I'm not using the correct terminology. I mean a loop – the "barrel" part was the problem. 

The aircraft climbs, looping over and backwards until it becomes inverted, then descends out of it on the other side back to level flight but ending up in the original direction of travel? Sorry if this isn't very clear but my knowledge of aviation is quite limited – just pointing out the obvious there. 

Would a Lanc. have been capable of performing that manoeuvre?

Thanks for your patience, guys. This is really important and my sanity may depend on it!


----------



## gumbyk (Jul 9, 2009)

If it did, it would probably never fly again. My guess is that it wouldn't have the power to get over the top, without having too much airspeed from a dive, and over-stressing the airframe.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 9, 2009)

I would think with enough speed and altitude it could be done, now if the wings would stay on or not...eh


----------



## Matt308 (Jul 9, 2009)

I always love the reference to Tex's barrel roll of the Boeing 367 (707). He did that at a Seafair celebration (hydro-races) in the Seattle area. And now for the part of the story you don't hear.

He also bent the $hit out of the wings. Permanently. And was lucky he didn't lose the airplane.

All planes can barrel roll. Once.


----------



## Airframes (Jul 9, 2009)

There used to be an old gentleman who frequented my local pub, very well respected, and I believe reached the rank of Squadron Leader. Unfortunately, he passed away 18 months ago, so I'm unable to ask him to re-tell the account of him looping a Lancaster.
This event was totally unintententional, and happened as result of evasive action during an operation over Germany, as far as I remember, in early 1944. He had been attacked by a night fighter and, begining the evasive manouvre known as a 'corkscrew', had started to pull up and to starboard, when cannon shells hit the rear of the aircraft, according to the tail gunner's warning, along the port elevator and tailplane. 'Jock', the pilot, then tried to reverse his turn and climb, to enter the second part of the twisting 'corkscrew', only to find that the Lancaster (which had already dropped its bombs, incidentally), continued to climb, eventually 'falling off' the top of the loop, and going into a rather steep dive, which took quite a few thousand feet before recovery was effected.
When they eventually landed, and inspected the damaged Lanc, it was found that the port elevator controls had been severly damaged, along with the rudder, leaving partial control movement to the starboard elevator and rudder only.
The main wings had received extensive stress damage, and were rippled across their entire span, with the dihedral increased, at the centre section to main plane joints, by a consdireble degree.
'Jock' never flew this particular Lanc again, and as far as he knew, it was written of due to this action.
In his own words he was, as far as he was able to ascertain, the only person to loop a Lancaster and survive.


----------



## fibus (Jul 10, 2009)

Thank you.
Alex Henshaw.
Sigh for a Merlin.
Read the book.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 10, 2009)

Appreciate the many useful contributions – looks like my hero won't be looping then!

MickMcM


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> I always love the reference to Tex's barrel roll of the Boeing 367 (707). He did that at a Seafair celebration (hydro-races) in the Seattle area. And now for the part of the story you don't hear.
> 
> He also bent the $hit out of the wings. Permanently. And was lucky he didn't lose the airplane.
> 
> All planes can barrel roll. Once.



Here is video of that one:


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IV9PZW1N9U_


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2009)

Airframes said:


> There used to be an old gentleman who frequented my local pub, very well respected, and I believe reached the rank of Squadron Leader. Unfortunately, he passed away 18 months ago, so I'm unable to ask him to re-tell the account of him looping a Lancaster.
> This event was totally unintententional, and happened as result of evasive action during an operation over Germany, as far as I remember, in early 1944. He had been attacked by a night fighter and, begining the evasive manouvre known as a 'corkscrew', had started to pull up and to starboard, when cannon shells hit the rear of the aircraft, according to the tail gunner's warning, along the port elevator and tailplane. 'Jock', the pilot, then tried to reverse his turn and climb, to enter the second part of the twisting 'corkscrew', only to find that the Lancaster (which had already dropped its bombs, incidentally), continued to climb, eventually 'falling off' the top of the loop, and going into a rather steep dive, which took quite a few thousand feet before recovery was effected.
> When they eventually landed, and inspected the damaged Lanc, it was found that the port elevator controls had been severly damaged, along with the rudder, leaving partial control movement to the starboard elevator and rudder only.
> The main wings had received extensive stress damage, and were rippled across their entire span, with the dihedral increased, at the centre section to main plane joints, by a consdireble degree.
> ...




Sounds right. Also very hairy. Gotta be young to do that.

Lucky Jock.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2009)

MickMcM said:


> Appreciate the many useful contributions – looks like my hero won't be looping then!
> 
> MickMcM



Suggest you keep the Lanc in a corkscrew to the ground. At low level, the Lanc is covering his vulnerable belly from the fighter and forcing him into attacking from behind or above. Can't dive past on his attacks, which really limits what the 190 can do. Further, if the pilot is listening to his gunners, he can break into the attack, giving the fighter a constantly changing gunnery solution (granted, on a very big target) that is going to make life tougher. He can make life difficult for the fighter, but not impossible if the fighter knows his business. 

The only way I can think of turning the tables on the fighter is if the 190 gets going on a overhead and above pass from astern. The tailgunner calls it out and the pilot chops the throttle, pops the flaps (might even drop the gear) and litterally stops the Lanc in midair. For the 190, which had horrible vis looking straight ahead, it would appear that the Lanc just dropped out of sight below his cowling. Only way to find it would be to roll up on the side and look down through the side windows/canopy. But if the break is done at the right time (and the fighter gets sloppy), there is a possibility that the fighter will end up in front of the lanc in a pullout. But he'll be going very fast and the bomber will be going very slow.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 10, 2009)

Timshatz
This is very interesting.

Because in one of the earlier scenarios I had the Lanc. going right down to sea-level because 1/2 of his engines had been shot up by the FW-190. Unbeknownst to my fighter pilot, who the audience might naturally assume is new to this type of fighter, the FW-190 had a fault whereby if the powerful, variable incidence tailplane trim mechanism is left in the "nose heavy" position the aircraft could not recover from the dive in time (Source: Wikipedia – I think).

The only problem with it was that it didn't necessarily establish my Lancaster pilot's brilliant flying credentials right from scene 1.

Greatly appreciate you offering your thoughts on a solution to my problem, though.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2009)

Mick, was thinking about it and losing two engines on any four engined bomber makes it a sitting duck. Lose the manuvering envelope as well as speed. A Lanc, at full power, on the deck might make 240mph. Figure the 190 has a 125mph advantage on it. He can swing around in front, but by using speed (which translates into manuvering abilitiy), the Lanc can turn to give him a tougher shot and his gunners a better shot too. Plus, it takes more time and fuel to do it. Only so many passes you will get on a fast moving bomber on the deck. 

Once you lose those two engines, you lose the that ability and you are fighting to stay in the air. Might be making 140mph or so. 190 is still up at 375 on the top end so he can pick where he wants to make his shot (which will probably be where the fewest guns are on him and gave him the best chance of hit). A beam attack, most likely, with a headon attack being another viable option (going for the flight crew in the cockpit).

In short, lose those two engines and this thing is a waddling target. If the 190 can't pop it in a short and violent pass, he's just not ready for prime time.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 10, 2009)

Okay. So keep all four engines to give him at least some hope in this very uneven, one-sided duel. 

I desperately want to give my pilot-hero flying skills that do not defy belief and are ones that a veteran watching this movie, as much as the average layman movie-goer, will accept as credible (supposing it ever got made – hope springs eternal, though).

Better keep that Mid-Upper turret, which gets shot away early on, then!

thanks, Tim.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2009)

I once read a story about a guy named Cunningham. He was the top Brit night fighter pilot in WW2. He got in a daytime duel with an He111 from a German pathfinder squadron (think it was KG100). It was a crappy day, weather right down to the deck and the Germans were running aircraft over in singles for various reasons. Anyway, he gets in a long, drawn out dogfight with this German in the He111, in and out of the clouds, blowing by him as his gunners hosed rounds in his direction, losing him and then being tracked back on it's tail by ground radar. A really wild fight. The story was told from the viewpoint of his radar operator (who could provide no help as it was all about flying and not technical skills). I think his name was Jimmy Rawnsley.

it was a long fight that went on until the He111 hit the ground. Both pilots were exceptional and, short of colliding with the ground, neither one layed a glove on the other. 

It might be the basis for a good start for your story. Turn the 190 into a 110 or a Ju88


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 11, 2009)

Tim
My bomber is returning from a night sortie over Berlin and is crossing the Channel in an early summer dawn. These times don't need to be too precise for the purposes of the film. The important part is to reinforce the impression – to the audience – early on, that this pilot has a really natural gift for flying and is extremely cool under stressful combat conditions (like the majority of these pilots were of course).

No, I want to use the FW-190 (he's bounced by another one later on in the story) but thanks for the suggestions – appreciate the helpful sentiment behind them.

At the moment I'm just trying to familiarise myself with flight dynamics – control surfaces and such. Conversing with people like you, it strikes me how deeply ignorant I am even about the basics. Meanwhile, a friend of mine was (hopefully, still is) going out with an RAF pilot who flies Hercules into Kandahar so I'm going to run some ideas past him if I can.

A family friend of mine who was a navigator on a Lancaster (amazing guy) emailed me yesterday to say that if a loop or barrel roll had been feasible his pilot, who he describes as a bit of a "madcap", would certainly have tried it!

Mick


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 11, 2009)

I don't see why it couldn't be rolled or looped but the havoc created inside by all the loose items like ammo, the navs maps dividers and anything else that wasn't fastened down would make life onboard very interesting. It would IMHO not be healthy thing to do on the outbound leg with an overloaded aircraft as was the norm for most missions


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 11, 2009)

Pbfoot
That's really my point. Is it theoretically possible? Would the airframe be able to handle the huge stresses and strains. Would there be enough engine power to carry out the manoeuvre? And, as you point out, it's on the return journey leg, so no bomb load. 

It's a film, not real life, so a little creative licence, as long as it's based on something feasible, albeit highly controversial, should be acceptable.

I like the idea of things, like ammo, falling about the place – very visual.

Mick


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 11, 2009)

MickMcM said:


> Pbfoot
> That's really my point. Is it theoretically possible? Would the airframe be able to handle the huge stresses and strains. Would there be enough engine power to carry out the manoeuvre? And, as you point out, it's on the return journey leg, so no bomb load.
> 
> It's a film, not real life, so a little creative licence, as long as it's based on something feasible, albeit highly controversial, should be acceptable.
> ...


IMHO it would be able to handle it , I've read about it taking place but cannot recall the reference


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 11, 2009)

Thanks. You see I want his flight engineer to tell him it can't be done – then the pilot goes and proves him wrong. My intention is to make the character appear inclined toward recklessness. He's just a risk-taker.
Should you recall that reference...

Mick


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 11, 2009)

Just found this.


----------



## Airframes (Jul 11, 2009)

Mick, that sounds very like the story related to me by Jock, as mentioned in my previous post. As I remember it, as it was a number of years ago when he told me, it was a nightfighter which caused the problem, but, of course, either me, the newspaper, or even Jock could be slightly confused here!
I notice you are using a FW190. Although this type was used , in the 'Wilde Sau' role, on night-fighting duties, they tended to be ground, and / or air controlled by vector to target. Erich would be the better source of info, but I would assume that the FW190 would get one pass at the target, and wouldn't be in a running fight. Also, I doubt if an FW190 would be over the Channel on a night op, although, of course it's not impossible. The attacker would more likely be a Bf110 or Ju88 nightfighter, with a radar operator to guide his pilot to a visual contact. If or when this visual contact was lost, it would often be very difficult, sometimes impossible, to re-establish the contact, unless, of course, it was avery bright night or, as you are portraying it, breaking dawn.
The preferred tactic of the Luftwaffe nightfighters was an attack from astern and below, especially when armed with 'Schrage Musik'; let rip with the cannon, then dive away.Most often, the unfortunate bomber crew never knew what hit them!
I know a Flight Engineer on Lancs, who was shot down by Bf110 over Stuttgart in July 1944. The first they knew was when the cannon shells hammered home, the engines erupted into flames, and the rear gunner called that a '110 was below them!
Next thing, they'd abandoned the aircraft and were under canopy! Certainly no running dogfight, loops, barrel rolls , or even time for a corkscrew.
Tim's account of John 'Cat's Eyes' Cunningham, and his Nav, Sgt (Later commisioned) Jimmy Rawnsley, is accurate, and recounted in Cunningham's book, the bl**dy title of which eludes me! Cunningham was the leading exponent, and a pioneer in the use of the early A.I. (radar) fitted in the Bristol Beaufighter, although he later gained further success with the more advanced A.I. Mk VII in the Mosquito. The nickname, 'Cat's Eyes', which he loathed, was partially a cover-up for the existance of 'radar', with the Press (via HMG) attributing his extraordinary success at night to eating plenty of carrots! This also, apparently, spurred on the populace, and the 'Land Army', to plant and harvest more root vegetables!
The technicalities here (such as they are!) might be at odds with your intended story line, but I hope they have been of some little help.
Terry.


----------



## Colin1 (Jul 11, 2009)

If the Lancaster was 'tossed' onto its back by a shell, it could have provided just the momentum the pilot needed to keep going through the roll until he was right-way up again. I can't see a bombed-up Lancaster pulling off a roll in the normal aerobatic manner.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 11, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> If the Lancaster was 'tossed' onto its back by a shell, it could have provided just the momentum the pilot needed to keep going through the roll until he was right-way up again. I can't see a bombed-up Lancaster pulling off a roll in the normal aerobatic manner.



An all up weight Lanc no but a Lanc after dumping its load and beimg light on fuel why not


----------



## Colin1 (Jul 11, 2009)

pbfoot said:


> An all up weight Lanc no but a Lanc after dumping its load and beimg light on fuel why not


I'm not disagreeing with you
but in the case of this particular Lancaster, it was loaded up; it might be convenient to think that the exploding shell gave it the push-start into the manoeuvre that it needed but I can't think of anything else that might have gotten it through to the other side of the roll.

The question of 'why not' is largely irrelevant, it was done by Alex Henshaw but even with the feat confirmed we might be missing a big point here - what use was it to a 4-engined heavy? Physics tells me that a fully aerobatic Lancaster or B-17 is not going to shake a Fw190 off its tail.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 11, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you
> but in the case of this particular Lancaster, it was loaded up; it might be convenient to think that the exploding shell gave it the push-start into the manoeuvre that it needed but I can't think of anything else that might have gotten it through to the other side of the roll.
> 
> The question of 'why not' is largely irrelevant, it was done by Alex Henshaw but even with the feat confirmed we might be missing a big point here - what use was it to a 4-engined heavy? Physics tells me that a fully aerobatic Lancaster or B-17 is not going to shake a Fw190 off its tail.


I agree that the Lanc or 17 are not aerobatic birds , but I've read of one pilot flying the maritime version in the RCAF that used to roll it occasionally just to keep the crew awake


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 12, 2009)

Hope this doesn't sound too far fetched – well it probably does – but I'll run it past you anyway: My intention is to have the Lancaster dive for cover into a storm cloud (to hide) followed by the FW-190. The Lanc. immediately climbs to loop back up and over the chasing fighter, getting behind it so that when they eventually appear out of cloud cover the nose turret will shoot down the FW-190 now ahead of them. To compensate for the speed differential between the two aircraft – the fighter getting too far ahead – my reasoning is the fighter would throttle back to avoid colliding with the bomber (apparently, ahead of him). Also of course he mustn't deviate from the bearing he entered the cloud at.

May sound ridiculous to you guys who know a lot more about these things than I do, but bear in mind, that since your average film-goer won't possess anything like your knowledge, they will more than likely accept what they see. Also, it is precisely, because the pilot is an arrogant S.O.B., risk-taker, that rather than escape by using the cloud cover he wants to down the enemy fighter. Too incredible... I'm hoping not.

As an acceptable alternative, it may be to have the Lanc. simply bank in the tightest possible curving turn to enable it to get behind the fighter. Not sure what you call this manoeuvre.


----------



## Marcel (Jul 12, 2009)

MickMcM said:


> Hope this doesn't sound too far fetched – well it probably does – but I'll run it past you anyway: My intention is to have the Lancaster dive for cover into a storm cloud (to hide) followed by the FW-190. The Lanc. immediately climbs to loop back up and over the chasing fighter, getting behind it so that when they eventually appear out of cloud cover the nose turret will shoot down the FW-190 now ahead of them. To compensate for the speed differential between the two aircraft – the fighter getting too far ahead – my reasoning is the fighter would throttle back to avoid colliding with the bomber (apparently, ahead of him). Also of course he mustn't deviate from the bearing he entered the cloud at.
> 
> May sound ridiculous to you guys who know a lot more about these things than I do, but bear in mind, that since your average film-goer won't possess anything like your knowledge, they will more than likely accept what they see. Also, it is precisely, because the pilot is an arrogant S.O.B., risk-taker, that rather than escape by using the cloud cover he wants to down the enemy fighter. Too incredible... I'm hoping not.
> 
> As an acceptable alternative, it may be to have the Lanc. simply bank in the tightest possible curving turn to enable it to get behind the fighter. Not sure what you call this manoeuvre.



It's called a break and is a good option for your story.
The dive is a good one, as I believe the merlins of a Lanc wouldn't be powerful enough for it to climb to the top of the loop. The dive would give it more speed. I still believe the a/c would stall before being at the highest point and then just simply fall from the sky. Maybe try a stall-turn for your Lanc? This would mean the lanc would try to climb steeply, going vertical until airspeed would be gone (in the case of the Lanc it would be quickly). Then the pilot would kick the ruder to let the nose fall sideways, letting the a/c dive again, pick up speed doing so. Therear gunner would waste the FW190. It's still a highly un-recommended manoeuvre, though.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 12, 2009)

Marcel
I'm going to go with the "break". Could you possibly help me with the controls used? Hazarding an educated guess here, but I imagine ailerons (control stick) + increased/full throttle + rudder (foot pedals). Any other controls? Has his flight engineer got any direct involvement here?

And as the pilot will need to return to the same heading, he will therefore need to have confirmed his compass heading before executing the manoeuvre?

Am I missing anything with which to make it more authentic?

Thanks, Mick


----------



## Marcel (Jul 12, 2009)

The break will only work if the fighter can't see that the Lanc is performing the manoeuvre, (the FW190 can of course turn much tighter), so the bomber should be in the cloud. In order to break, the pilot will have to pull back on the stick quite heavily (after banking first). There are some pilots here on the forum who probably have performed the manoeuvre of breaking (but not in a Lanc  )They'll probably can tell you the details.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 12, 2009)

Thanks for coming back on this, Marcel. But just to be clear, banking involves the side-to-side movement of the joystick? I would want to show this detail to the audience...


----------



## trackend (Jul 13, 2009)

Ok having been to Duxford over the weekend I spoke with Phil Gray a Lanc pilot from 44-45 he said yes you can roll a Lanc and barrel rolls were only done by test pilots in unladen aircraft the staight roll put less strain on the airframe than the classic cork screw for avoiding enemy and the crew hated doing them as it threw them about a hell of alot not knowing at what point the change of direction was going to occure. so I was wrong in saying no, I'll go with a guy who flew the Lancs.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 13, 2009)

Trackend
Thanks for this. Quite so – if anyone would know, someone who flew the thing in combat should ! I think I'll take myself off to Duxford one of these days...


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2009)

Hey Mick, back after a weekend of fun and games. 

I read your previous post and doing an Immelman (loop) to get on the tail of the fighter will make the people in the seats go "oh-ah", provided they know nothing about airplanes. Somebody who does will roll their eyes and think "Hollywood is at it again". Like the movie Flyboys. Great premiss, but they screwed it up royally. 

Let's go with the idea the Lanc can loop and stay in one piece. He dives for cover in the clouds and loops after the fighter. The fighter is going to be moving a lot faster then the bomber so even if he does loop, he's still way behind. An alternate suggestion would be a barrel roll. It is also a roll but instead of rolling on a fixed axis (like the center of a wheel) he would roll along the outside of the circle (the tread of the tire). In manuver terms, it is very good at slowing down and displacing the aircraft to the outside of the line of flight. The 190 would still blow past, but a barrell rolling Lanc (again, going wth a lot of artistic liscense) would slide in behind him for a very short time (as he is still going faster than the bomber by far). The loop puts to much time and space between the two aircraft for a slower aircraft to realistically catch the faster aircraft. 

A barrel roll would me more realistic than a loop.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 13, 2009)

Tim, hope the fun and games were good! 

Yes this is precisely what I want to avoid – that tired old Hollywood thing of exaggeration for maximum dramatic effect. Forgetting the cloud scenario for the moment I think it was you who might have commented on our Lanc. suddenly cutting speed so that the fighter overshoots and the bomber's dorsal turret gets a shot at it. What would that involve, precisely?


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 13, 2009)

Sorry 'pb' it was you who referred to this tactic...


> His favourite tactic was to drop everything from gear to flaps cut power and hope the guy overshot


.

Mick


----------



## RabidAlien (Jul 13, 2009)

> At the moment I'm just trying to familiarise myself with flight dynamics – control surfaces and such. Conversing with people like you, it strikes me how deeply ignorant I am even about the basics. Meanwhile, a friend of mine was (hopefully, still is) going out with an RAF pilot who flies Hercules into Kandahar so I'm going to run some ideas past him if I can.


Heh. Welcome to the club! Walk away from the guy who says he knows everything. He's an idiot.

If you want either maneuver to work where he slips nicely up behind the 190, the 190 will have to enter the clouds waaaaay behind the Lanc. Its kinda like a dumptruck making a loop around the block to fall in nicely behind a Porsche. 

You might also have the crew quietly conversing in hushed, awed tones the events that just took place, followed by a cockily jubilant pilot slithering out the cockpit hatch only to meet the rather pissed-off looking squadron/division CO (maybe Hap Arnold and Jimmy Doolittle, too, just for fun!) ready to chew his grits for pulling "such a dam-fool stunt you cocky SOB!". Having him grounded for a day or two in "punishment", after which the CO buys the first round at the bar, should set a good tone too.

Don't mean to write your scenario for you...its slow at work today (which is a good thing! All my PC's and servers are working!), and I'm bored.


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2009)

Rabid has it right. The Lanc is way too slow and unwieldy. 

The clouds actually could help. Depending on when you have the raid happen, clouds on a full moon night are pretty bright. There was a raid in 1944 where the Brits lost 100+ bombers because they went out on a full moon (evidently, the usually didn't do that sort of thing). Here is a link to a good book on the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nuremberg_Raid_(book)


Then, playing cat and mouse with a 190 becomes more viable. The 190 could pick him up over the target as a Wild Boar attack and stick with him. 

But still, the loop is right out. Unless you want to lose cred. In reality, the barrel roll is a long shot too. But more credible than a loop. But Rabid's Dumptruck/Porsche analogy is very good. Keep it in mind when thinking of options.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 13, 2009)

Thanks to everyone for all excellent contributions on this post
After all the comments from members like yourself, RA and Tim, I'm dumping the scenario with loops/barrel rolls and going to stick to something more tied into reality. Actually, an important element in this story is his ability in low-flying situations so I'm working this into these first scenes. Got to get something down on paper!

What would help right now is suggestions for bomber pilot memoirs/biography's – obviously from/about RAF pilot's preferably.

Mick


----------



## timshatz (Jul 14, 2009)

Mick, that's a tricky one, believe it or not. Books on Bomber Command only started comming to the US in the last couple of decades. Before that, there was some oddity about publishing rights that screwed everything up. The guys in England would have a better line on it than anything I know of.

Low level is a pretty good idea. There are a lot of stories about pilots going under wires, front gunners duking it out with AAA emplacements, even one case of a B17 flying sideways between two buildings in Germany on it's way home. Ton of stuff like that. 

Bomber Command was a very hard place to finish a tour. There were points during the war when flying in a British Heavy bomber had a lower chance of survival than a Junior Infantry officer on the Somme in 1916. Statistically, I think the worst spot in a bomber was the tail gunner.


----------



## Geedee (Jul 14, 2009)

Some good ideas here guys. I'm surprised no-ones mentioned anything along the lines of Mav / Goose in TopGun hitting the brakes. 

Ok, Ok, I know the Lanc doesn't have airbrakes....but...what about dropping the undecrart and throttling right back at the same time. Problems here are I dont know the undercart limiting speed (maybe the pilot knows his Lanc better than the designers ?) and I dont know how long it would take to cycle and start to effect forward airspeed. Would opening the bomb doors also apply drag ?

Working on the assumption that the dude in the 190 is using his superior speed to attack from behind and in a slight dive to assist, maybe he would not see the undercart starting to drop and with the engines throttled right back at th same time, his overtake speed would be considerably higher than the Lanc. In this situation the 190 driver is probably soooo p*ssed at having his intercept thrown back in his face, he would maybe not think too much about the best avoiding action to miss the Lanc, presenting the gunners with ample opportunity to pepper the 190 or at least damage it enough to cause the the 190 to break away and smoke home.

This scenario would give ample opportunity for further drama in the Lanc cockpit as the airspeed drops off too fast / dangerously low and the plane starts to waffle down in a partial stall. Cue frantic throttle shoving and lots of sweaty eyebrows interspersed with a suitable dramatic dialogue....no, I dont mean like the Carling Black jokes.... 'She's going in, I cant hold her' etc etc. All this at low level and finishing with the Lancs props tips almost in the wave tops before she sluggishly starts to respond to her frantic (read cocky!) pilots control inputs.

Something else to consider is at what angle are the 190's guns setup..ie, what angle above the fuselague datum line ?, so that the 190 has to fly slightly lower than his intended prey to bring hios guns to bear ?

Only a thought


----------



## Geedee (Jul 14, 2009)

You could also include a bit about damage to the hydraulics (unknown by the crew at this point !) so that when the undercart is cycled, it drops down faster than normal, but in the best tradition, manages to lock in place. the Lanc then has to contend with a long trip back with everything dangling, forcing the engines to run harder to stay up ...queue overheating, lots of smoke, maybe flames, shutting down at least one Merlin, fighting the assymetric drag, slowing down all the while and getting nearer to the Channel waves. Managing to find a 'dip' in the cliffs that she just manages to heave herself over...maybe even rolling the wheels on the grass and trundling up a slight incline to gain a few vital feet of altitude. All the time now the crew are chucking everything overboard to lighten the load.


Phew....I'm off for swift pint !


----------



## Pong (Jul 14, 2009)

A Lancaster doing a barrel roll? That would be amazing to see. I remember in a documentary a Lancaster crewmember notes that the pilot did a series of aerobatic maneuvers if a German night fighter was on their tail.


----------



## Geedee (Jul 14, 2009)

To add to the drama and effect, you have the Lanc pilot executing this very dangerous manouver as soon as he enters the cloud. Mr bad guy in the 190, intent on his kill and knowing its just within his reach goes barrelling into the cloud in hot pursuit.

Change scene to inside the 190 cockpit with the pilot adjusting his gunsight lighting and looking up to suddenly find his forward visibility blocked out by a Lanc at extreme close range with the rear gun turret and mid upper,with all guns blazing at him. His natural reaction ...zoom into pilots eyes open wide in abject terror ...is to pull back on his stick as fast as he can and he zooms up and over the Lanc ...narrowly missing the tail fins of course... and gets his underside raked from 6 X .303 at point blank range. He's out of the fight at this point.

Back into the Lanc cockpit and the cocky Pilot has discovered that as the undercart dropped too quickly, its has smashed the locking mechanism so not only can he not now raise the wheels, hee's also got belly the Lanc in when he gets to his chosen field to land.


----------



## RabidAlien (Jul 14, 2009)

How's this for scenario? Lanc goes down to the deck to level the playing field (pun intended), so that the only advantage the 190 has now is its speed...no diving passes and coming up from beneath. They whip in and out of the landscape, dodging trees (at one point, the tail gunner has to contend with a huge leaf on his window), zipping under high bridges and wires (aka "Blue Max" style...LOVE that scene!)....upon finding some fog over a river, the Lanc pilot ducks in, the Nav directs him towards a mid-sized town, whereupon he does some remarkable dodging of buildings and watertowers and such....sees a cable stretched between two buildings higher up and dips under just in time, only the 190 doesn't see it and lops off a significant portion of his rudder...while 190 is fighting to keep aloft, all available guns pour enough lead into the plane to turn it into a pencil. Or better yet....knowing there's a power plant coming up (Nav again involved) he has one of the waist-gunners (or tailgunner, if he had a window of some sort....or a shell hole....that would be awesome!) poke out the side of the plane with their flare pistol and launch a flare backwards towards the 190. The only ones who's vision would be affected would be tailgunner and the guy firing, but the 190 pilot would be either blinded or have to fly with eyes shut...at which point he gets toasted by bullets and then spirals down to crash into the power plant....destroying it....and getting a SECOND target to the Lanc's credit. Then the damage scenario where they end up driving up a hill to gain some altitude back in England, coast in on two engines and come to a shuddering halt in front of the pub. Cue angry squadron CO, buy some rounds, chew hotshot pilot out, etc etc.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 14, 2009)

Tim. Just what I was thinking. Low-level and it's credible and would make for an exciting scene. My mind is made up.
Thanks.


----------



## RabidAlien (Jul 14, 2009)

Make sure to mention ww2aircraft.net in the credits!


----------



## timshatz (Jul 14, 2009)

Good luck Mick. 

As for the rest of the posts, man, you guys have some VERY active imaginations! Good reads, interesting and entertaining.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 14, 2009)

I'm stunned everybody. Some splendid ideas here. 

I'm going to study some of your offerings very closely. It's funny because you've all come up with suggestions that completely eluded me even though it occurred to me from quite early on that low-flying would be a good visual and cinematic way to avoid enemy fighters. Unfortunately I hadn't quite appreciated at the time, the vulnerability of bombers to attack from below otherwise I might have continued with this approach. But I will now. You've all given me a new lease of life!

As to credits, I will demand them from Spielberg, my mate Steven that is (yeah, right I hear you say...). 

Thanks, everyone.
Mick


----------



## timshatz (Jul 14, 2009)

Funny point, and it goes to your business and less this board. 

There is a movie called "The Dam Busters" about a Lancaster Squadron that flies a highly dangerous mission to destroy German Damns. It is something of a classic that they are rumoring to remake. Anyway, that movie (which is about low level flying in the Lancaster if you need some reference material) influenced George Lucas to the point that he used a line from it in his movie "Star Wars". 

There is a scene in "Damn Busters" when Guy Gibson has arrived at the first damn and the Germans open up on him. He asks another pilot, "How many guns are there?". The other pilot says, "I'd say twenty guns, some in the towers, some in the fields". Flash forward to "Star Wars". When the Rebel strike force is attacking the Death Star, the defenses open up on them. Then the line is used again in "Star Wars". It's a neat little sidenote. 

Anyway, watching "Damn Busters" might help.


----------



## MickMcM (Jul 14, 2009)

Actually, Gedee, the swift pint is an excellent idea! Maybe two swift pints... I find it oils the cogs of the old creative processes. 

Mick


----------



## Geedee (Jul 14, 2009)

MickMcM said:


> Actually, Gedee, the swift pint is an excellent idea! Maybe two swift pints... I find it oils the cogs of the old creative processes.
> 
> Mick



Too righty it does !!!


----------



## trackend (Jul 15, 2009)

Mine gott 2 Spitfires on the port wing


----------



## GrauGeist (Jul 15, 2009)

Why does the step those beers are sitting on say "Do Not Use"? Are those beers decoys or something? 

And a bomber's underbelly is one of it's weakspots. You get a 190A-8 in from slightly below and to the 5 or 7 of the bomber, at a range of about 650 meters, the bomber is in for some serious trouble.


----------

