Damage of P47D "Dixie Hall", Capt. Paul Hall, 57 FG, 64 FS

[seesul]

Good morning to all,

yesterday I found a picture of damaged P-47D "Dixie Gal" from 57FG, 64 FS, 15 USAAF. The text at the FB page says " Captain Paul Hall's P-47D Thunderbolt fighter 'Dixie Gal' of 57th Fighter Group, US 64th Fighter Squadron at rest at Grosseto, Italy. Captain Paul M. Hall struck the ground during a strafing attack while on a mission near Milan, Italy. He successfully flew the vibrating aircraft 150 miles back to his airfield at Grosseto, Italy."

View: https://www.facebook.com/groups/812798735458957/permalink/1937509376321215/


Although Jug was a very tough airplane I don´t belive that it could fly with such a propeller damage. Not only because of the vibrations but would the propeller be able to produce enough thrust in such a condition to bring this heavy bird to its home A/B?

Looking at the pic of the damaged belly I´d say that the pic shows P-47D that belly landed and then the ground crew got the gear down. Also the prop seems to be damaged while turning on a very low RPM. Just my opinion.

What do you think?

Edit: I´m sorry if this case was already discussed in another thread but I haven´t found anything here so far.

 

[Airframes]

Hmm.
I tend to agree Roman. It's possible, or probable, that the aircraft did strike the ground whilst strafing, and then got back to base, damaged, and had a belly landing.
I would have expected the prop blades to have been bent forwards, if the prop had struck the ground under power, whereas they look as if the prop was perhaps 'windmilling', after cutting the power during or immediately preceding a belly landing, with the underside damage being more in line with such a landing.

 

[Milosh]

Stephen King That's a LT. Jim Hare photo from the 57th FG, 65th FS. To quote his caption "Back on his feet, but will require engine change. 64th FS P-47 hit ground while attacking on a mission, flew all the way back to Grosseto. Black A-26 invaders of the 47th BG in the background." I'm not going to argue if it's true or not, but those are the comments of the guy that took the pic.

from comments on Facebook.
my bolded text would seem to imply a belly landing.

 

[Crimea_River]

I don't see how they could bend forward Terry if the aircraft is traveling forward at 300mph.

I've heard this story before and my doubts have not changed.

 

[seesul]

Stephen King That's a LT. Jim Hare photo from the 57th FG, 65th FS. To quote his caption "Back on his feet, but will require engine change. 64th FS P-47 hit ground while attacking on a mission, flew all the way back to Grosseto. Black A-26 invaders of the 47th BG in the background." I'm not going to argue if it's true or not, but those are the comments of the guy that took the pic.

from comments on Facebook.
my bolded text would seem to imply a belly landing.

Exactly my opinion.

 

[seesul]

Hmm.
I tend to agree Roman. It's possible, or probable, that the aircraft did strike the ground whilst strafing, and then got back to base, damaged, and had a belly landing.
I would have expected the prop blades to have been bent forwards, if the prop had struck the ground under power, whereas they look as if the prop was perhaps 'windmilling', after cutting the power during or immediately preceding a belly landing, with the underside damage being more in line with such a landing.

Hi Terry, my guess is that should the prop hit the ground under high RPM, it would immediately be destroyed. As it happenned to Gabreski.

 

[seesul]

I don't see how they could bend forward Terry if the aircraft is traveling forward at 300mph.

I've heard this story before and my doubts have not changed.

I also didn´t know that the prop blades can bent forward untill I found this:
"Propeller blades are meant to flex, quite a bit actually, and can paint a nice picture for crash scene investigators. When the NTSB investigates a crash, particularly aircraft with a propeller, one of the things they look for is the shape of the propeller in the wreckage. Propellers bow forward quite a bit under load, but they also twist in their hubs as well. If the propeller were to strike something and stop instantly while under that load, they will freeze in that shape.
A crash scene with a propeller bowed forward substantially tells the investigators that the propeller was under high loads at moment of impact, (pilot was at a high power setting). This would indicate the pilot was trying to climb out if trouble by having full power and "hanging" the aircraft on the propeller at the moment of impact (eg the pilot was in a stall/spin when he crashed).
A crash scene propeller that is bowed forward a little tells the investigators the pilot was at a cruise power setting when he crashed (eg controlled flight into terrain).
A crash scene where the propeller is bent backwards at the tips indicate the propeller was windmilling or the pilot was at a low power setting when he crashed (out of fuel, etc)"

Interesting, taken from here:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/494p6v/p47_thunderbolt_propellor_damage_what_would_this/

 

[fubar57]

Very interesting Roman, thanks

 

[buffnut453]

I suspect the use of different words "bow" vs "bent" suggest a rather different appearance. Under power, the propeller is generating thrust which will force the area of the blade that generating most "lift", typically the middle third of the blade, to bow forwards relative to the hub.

 

[vikingBerserker]

It does not look like it belly landing. The only damage I see besides the prop is to the bottom front of the cowl and from the wings that can be seen look to be ok. I think if it had nosed over the blades would be damaged more close to the hub.

The bend in the blades look like a high sped hit to me. Could the prop have hit the ground bending all 4 blades back, then hit the bottom of the cowl pushing the bent blade tips forward?

 

[Crimea_River]

Thanks for posting that Roman, but what they are describing is the deflection of the prop under aerodynamic load, not from a ground strike.

 

[seesul]

Thanks for posting that Roman, but what they are describing is the deflection of the prop under aerodynamic load, not from a ground strike.

My English is limited so I can be wrong but if I got it right the leaf stays bent forward when the prop is under the aerodynamic load and hits something (also ground) at the same time. And the last sentence, on my opinion, exactly describes the situation that I can see on the picture of that Jug : A crash scene where the propeller is bent backwards at the tips indicate the propeller was windmilling or the pilot was at a low power setting when he crashed (out of fuel, etc)"

 

[Crimea_River]

Aerodynamic load bends it forward yes. But what they are saying is that if the aircraft hits something, the prop can remain permanently deformed with a forward set. There is no way that the blades would bend forward when they strike the ground under power with the plane going at speed.

 

[Airframes]

On my airfield crash / rescue/ fire fighting course, it was mentioned about prop tip angles, as we needed to know the circumstances of a belly landing or crashed aircraft (if we hadn't actually seen the incident happen), so that we might have some idea of the state of the master switch, or magnetos, battery isolator etc.
I remember being told that, if the props, or prop tips were bent forward, the engine was under power when the aircraft struck the ground, and if bent backwards, then the power was more than likely at idle, or off, and the prop either static or windmilling.
Since then, I've attended, or seen, a number of incidents where (with metal props of course) this was precisely the case.
Those aircraft I've seen where the engine was 'cut' before impact all had the prop blades bent backwards, whilst those under even moderate power, had at least the first two or three blades to make contact bent forwards
With wooden props, the largest areas of splitting and splintering were on the front of the blades where power was 'on', and at the rear of the blades when 'off', static or windmilling. That is, the wooden prop would break forwards, leaving more exposed wood at the front, if the engine was under power when the prop blade made contact.
The pic below shows a Stampe that had a heavy landing, on a surfaced runway, where the undercart collapsed just as the pilot tried to increase power to 'go around', after 'floating' across the runway. I was around 50 yards from the runway as this happened, at approximately '10 o clock' to the nose of the aircraft, and saw the splintered prop remains fly forwards. The pic was taken after a group of us man-handled the aircraft back onto the grass parking area.

 

[seesul]

Here few pics of belly landed Jugs I just found on Internet. Propeller leaves seem to bent the same way as the ones on the Jug in question.

 

[Airframes]

Yep, typical of a belly landing with power cut. The original pics you posted Roman, show under-side damage extending quite some way down the fuselage, very much in line with a belly landing.
I don't doubt that the aircraft, or prop, struck the ground during strafing, but the end result certainly looks like damage following a belly landing.

 

[seesul]

Yep, typical of a belly landing with power cut. The original pics you posted Roman, show under-side damage extending quite some way down the fuselage, very much in line with a belly landing.
I don't doubt that the aircraft, or prop, struck the ground during strafing, but the end result certainly looks like damage following a belly landing.

Agree Terry. I can´t say what happened during straffing, but looking at the prop and the belly damage it seems like clear belly landing damage to me. And on my opinion, an airplane with such a prop damage that is on the pic could never fly.

 

[Crimea_River]

Terry, thanks for explaining, however I remain unconvinced that prop tips could ever bend forward due to a prop strike with the ground whilst in flight.

Anyway, this is going OT a bit so apologies for the digression Roman.

 

[seesul]

Terry, thanks for explaining, however I remain unconvinced that prop tips could ever bend forward due to a prop strike with the ground whilst in flight.
Anyway, this is going OT a bit so apologies for the digression Roman.

No need to apologize, I find this discussion very interesting in many aspects. What do you mean by OT?

 

[Crimea_River]

"Off Topic". I didn't want an extended discussion to escalate on the physics of prop bending.