jay hammond
Airman
- 26
- Sep 11, 2021
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Thank you very much for your insight. Now I just need to find out how a burning engine made a plane unmanageable to the point the bomber couldn't fly. Have you any ideas?Or moving back into the fuel tanks in the wing.
There are seven tanks in each wing and any one catching fire would burn through primary structure (spars and/or skins) causing structural failure. There are tanks behind and both sides of the outboard engines shown here in yellow - two tanks are not shown.
View attachment 658931
View attachment 658933
Well you can lose an engine in many ways. If it is shut down and the prop feathered it isnt so much of an issue. If the engine seizes and the prop cant be feathered that is a huge issue. It causes massive drag, and if it is the outside engine, that makes things worse.Thank you very much for your insight. Now I just need to find out how a burning engine made a plane unmanageable to the point the bomber couldn't fly. Have you any ideas?
The airplane wants to "pivot" around the dead engine?Well you can lose an engine in many ways. If it is shut down and the prop feathered it isnt so much of an issue. If the engine seizes and the prop cant be feathered that is a huge issue. It causes massive drag, and if it is the outside engine, that makes things worse.
I think the early Halifax's with rudders as per Mitasol's post #3 already had "control authority" issues with the rudders.Yes. You may get so much drag on the port side that full right rudder can not prevent a yaw to the left. If aileron controls are also affected there could be a resulting irrecoverable spiral down to the left.
Yes, almost as efficient as an air brake as a means of propulsion, I dont think it does the engine mounts any good either as the loads are in the opposite direction. However if the prop can be feathered things are different, I read of a Lancaster losing its outer engine and with it the power for the rear turret after take off, they just went on with the mission with no further problems after feathering it.The airplane wants to "pivot" around the dead engine?
Keep calm and carry on.Yes, almost as efficient as an air brake as a means of propulsion, I dont think it does the engine mounts any good either as the loads are in the opposite direction. However if the prop can be feathered things are different, I read of a Lancaster losing its outer engine and with it the power for the rear turret after take off, they just went on with the mission with no further problems after feathering it.
Thank you very much for your insight. Now I just need to find out how a burning engine made a plane unmanageable to the point the bomber couldn't fly. Have you any ideas?
Keep calm and carry on.
Does anyone know whether the ailerons on a Halifax Mk III were metal or fabric?I don't know many specifics about the incident or the Halifax's design, but I can see the fire either damaging flight-controls directly (impinging on control-cabling or the fabric-covered ailerons), or the heat therefrom weakening the wing-spar causing a partial but still fatal failure.
Does anyone know whether the ailerons on a Halifax Mk III were metal or fabric?
Is this about the Halifax I saw at the RAF Hendon Museum?Hello
I am trying to find out how a port outer engine fire on a Halifax bomber could cause the bomber to crash.
Was that particular Halibag Don Bennet'sIs this about the Halifax I saw at the RAF Hendon Museum?
Handley Page Halifax Mk.II (W1048) – On 27th April 1943 this aircraft, also known as 'S for Sugar' departed RAF Kinloss as part of a planned attack on the infamous German battleship Tirpitz and, after being damaged by defensive fire, crash landed on the frozen Lake Hoklingen. Recovered in 1973 the airframe is displayed in the condition it was found and is one of the most evocative pieces in the museum.