Which fighters did pilots feel safest in for crash landing?

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

DAVIDICUS said:
"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

That is the procedure out of the F/P-51 TO-1 Flight Manual. Aparently they felt the risk was greater if you landed straight ahead. My manual is a reprint of the '47 edition it's safe to assume they have researched the possibilities. It also noted that a P-51 sank in ~2 seconds.

wmaxt
 
It mostly depends on the pilot and situation, as you can see this Mustang of the 339th came down pretty well.
 

Attachments

  • d7-y2-339th_724.jpg
    d7-y2-339th_724.jpg
    72 KB · Views: 408
wmaxt said:
DAVIDICUS said:
"... kick the plane at the last second to land sideways" I presume thats to prevent flipping/diving the plane in the water."

That could enhance the chance of flipping. (the end portion of the wing catching)

You can't always pick and choose where you'll do a gear up belly landing. That being the case, you'd be safest in the aircraft with the fewest undesireable characteristics across the spectrum of surfaces be it soft dirt, pavement or water, etc.

That is the procedure out of the F/P-51 TO-1 Flight Manual. Aparently they felt the risk was greater if you landed straight ahead. My manual is a reprint of the '47 edition it's safe to assume they have researched the possibilities. It also noted that a P-51 sank in ~2 seconds.

wmaxt

Kicking the aircraft "sideways" puts it in a skid, which also slows it up. I am also guessing that there WAS concern about the air intake scoop, but again from what I remember seeing from it "up close" I think the thing would just turn into a "big crushed aluminum can." :rolleyes:
 
Good point, dinos. The low stall speed of the A6M would make it easy to crash land. Always though, in my opinion, the Hurricane would be the best. Low stall speed and strong structure.
 
It really isn't the stall speed, its the engine out glide speed that makes the difference. The engine out glide speed for the Zero is very low. This gives a lot of time for a pilot to make decisions in where he needs to land. This is a big is factor during emergency procedures.
 
If he's stalling at high speeds, it's not exactly ideal. It's going to smash him into the ground.
 
If you were to turn any aircraft sideways (not just a P-51) you really stand the chance of flipping the aircraft. It all depends on the speed. At low speeds I think it would work but at high speeds the wings will dip under the water and the bird will flip

I agree it depends on the terrain you are landing. On pavement such as a run way I agree with FlyboyJ that it would just crush the scoop and the bird would land just fine but in dirt or water I think it would be more of a hinderness.

Not that I want to crash land an aircraft but If I had to I would pick a P-38, P-47, or a Fw-190.
 
Imagine if someone successfuklly crash landed an Ohka and it didnt explode...just sitting there starving to death.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back