The Bugatti 100P Flies!

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

You know, I always thought the main gear looked to be a bit far aft, and here we see the first actual flight reault in a nose over. Hopefully damage was minor, but it looks like it does need a VERY light touch on the brakes.

I'm told the Griffon Spitfires also require a very light touch on the brakes ... but maybe not quite as "on the edge" as the Bugatti.
 
You know, I always thought the main gear looked to be a bit far aft, and here we see the first actual flight reault in a nose over. Hopefully damage was minor, but it looks like it does need a VERY light touch on the brakes.

I'm told the Griffon Spitfires also require a very light touch on the brakes ... but maybe not quite as "on the edge" as the Bugatti.
Well, he lost the right break and when trying to stop, it turned a little and ran to the side of the runway where the gear got stuck in the mud. Any tailwheel design would have tipped over in those circumstances, so it doesn't say much for now.
 
Agreed mostly. Again, hopefully the damage was light and we will see a swift return to the air, perhaps with some flights away from the airport.

I have to salute their perseverence and desire to get this puppy in the air and hope we will see it flying for many years to come. Anybody up for a new "kitplane?" ... though it probably will take a certerline thrust rating for a twin engine aircraft, like a Cessna Skymaster.
 
They might want to do something about tailwheel shimmy on take-off though, it's moving all over the show once unloaded; perhaps a lock?
 
Don't think that's a shimmy.

It looks more like the tailwheel swung back and forth a bit after it left the ground. That isn't much of an issue since it will straighten out once the airflow hits it at speed. It looks MUCH too slow to be a shimmy, which usually happens at a higher frequency and more violently.

I could be mistaken ...
 
What a shame!

People may say the design was faulty but, absenting a primary cause, all it really means is, "We don't know." Hopefully it was on film and on recorded radio, so maybe they will be able to determine what happened. Not having heard anymore, I will not speculate further, but I certainly hope the investigation comes up with a primary cause.
 
I saw the news clip yesterday. And it showed the aircraft takeoff but not the actual crash. The climb out looked slow and it seemed like the aircraft was in a nose high attitude during initial climb as if it wasn't making power. Witnesses say he banked left and it went straight in. Very sad.

It looks like there were several cameras on board so I hope it helps in the investigation process. So tragic to see such an experienced pilot lost let alone such an historically significant aircraft, regardless if it was a replica or not.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back