vikingBerserker
Lieutenant General
I would think with enough speed and altitude it could be done, now if the wings would stay on or not...eh
Could a Lancaster bomber perform a barrel loop?
- Thread starter MickMcM
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Matt308
Glock Perfection
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.
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
Benevolens Magister
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.
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.
- Thread starter
- #25
MickMcM
Airman
Appreciate the many useful contributions – looks like my hero won't be looping then!
MickMcM
MickMcM
Last edited:
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.
- Thread starter
- #29
MickMcM
Airman
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Thread starter
- #31
MickMcM
Airman
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.
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.
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
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
- Thread starter
- #33
MickMcM
Airman
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
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
1st Lieutenant
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
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #35
MickMcM
Airman
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
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
1st Lieutenant
IMHO it would be able to handle it , I've read about it taking place but cannot recall the reference
- Thread starter
- #37
MickMcM
Airman
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
Should you recall that reference...
Mick
- Thread starter
- #38
MickMcM
Airman
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
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.
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
Senior Master Sergeant
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.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
