Onthe27th ofJulyIwashonouredtospendanhour or two at the Korean Memorial in Moore Park in Sydney, to commemorate the 71st Anniversary of the Armistice which ended that ‘forgotten’ war. I hadn’t visited the Memorial before and was moved by it. It’s a circular wall encompassing two central stone slabs representing the north and south of that land. Between them is a path that fractures their unity, wending its way through a small forest of bronze chrysanthemums, each one representing an Australian life lost. In Korea that flower honours loved ones and expresses sorrow at their passing.
At the end of the ceremony I was honoured to lay a small wreath to remember Keith Clarkson, Richard Sinclair and Ron Coleman, who went there aboard HMAS Sydney in 1951 and who never came home.
Our appeal to get volunteers to assist with the running of the FAAAAdid bear fruit - thank you to those souls who held up their hands - but we have so far failed to secure a National Secretary or Slipstream Editor. These are key positions: one central to the functioning of the Association and the other to bring a key product to our members.
If we can’t find replacements soon some very hard decisions will be necessary on how the organisation will continue into the future. Options might include closing the shop, or perhaps breaking into smaller components. Neither is palatable and we would much prefer to hold the status quo.
So, can you help? Why not contact me here ato find out more?
In mid July members of the FAAAA met with the Director of the Navy’s Sea Power Centre, (CAPT Alastair Cooper) to discuss the status of the Fleet Air Arm Museum. Topics included staffing, extending opening hours, broadening visitor experience and the potential acquisition of an MRH90 airframe. All in all we felt it was a productive meeting, although we will see what transpires: listening is one thing, doing is another.
On the matter of the MRH-90, the Museum had previously ruled out asking for a dedicated airframe but CAPT Cooper has now agreed to a Curatorial Board to re-examine the validity of adding one to the collection if available.
We think its a no-brainer as the MRH-90 was an important part of our history, having delivered over 15 years of utility, SAR and logistic support to the Fleet. It’s acquisition would fulfil a long-standing principle that the museum should house the best possible example of every major airframe that operated in the FAA since its inception back in 1947. Why would you not want one?
We will be preparing a detailed submission for the review Board and will keep you informed.
Finally, at the end of this month Graeme Lunn’s extraordinary book on the life of Admiral Sir Victor Smith will be officially launched at the FAA Museum. The current attendance list is approaching 100, comprising many serving and veteran personnel who remembered Sir Victor, or wish to remember him. Graeme has kindly agreed to sign any author’s royalties to the FAAAA for the specific purpose of supporting the Museum.
If you would like to attend the book launch, please click on the link on page 4.
REST
PEACE
A few words and thoughts from the Editor of this magazine.
Rest In Peace
This month’s crop of correspondence from our Readers.
The V22 Osprey is a marvel of engineering, but its safety record is poor. 32
We remember those who are no longer with us. 18
Last month’s Mystery answered, and a new one presented for your puzzlement (p35).
Riding The Dog
Although it was old and cantankerous, the UH34D was a tough bird in combat in Vietnam.
Badger Down! A Cold War event that could have led to disaster. 36
Notes on the A4
Fred Lane remembers some things about our Skyhawk jets.
Since the last edition of FlyBy we have been advised the following have Crossed the Bar:
Eccleston, Kevin French You can find further details by clicking on the image of the candle. ✈
The status of orders for Wall of Service Plaques.
Bits and Pieces of Odd and Not-so-odd news and gossip.
The Wright Brothers would never have flown but for Charlie Taylor.
In the early days, surveying had to make do with the tools of the time.
Yes, I’d like to buy the book ❛ Have just received your book and the word "excellent" is totally inadequate to describe the finished product. I am delighted that I have a slight association with the work. Bravo Zulu.❜ Toz Dadswell.
Click Here
Yes, I’d like to attend the book launch
Click Here
❛I would like to say what a great read it is. I’m impressed with the attention to detail and background (historical scene setting) information … including excellent footnotes, which has added so much value to the text … This is gold standard material and sets a high benchmark for a biography.❜ Kim Dunstan.
❛The text, photos, art work and layout are superb.❜ Mark Smith (VAT’s son). AllAuthor’s
By Editor. The piece in last month’s magazine on Peter Lancaster, who wears an aircrew flying jacket and a large number of miscellaneous patches he’s not entitled to, rang a few bells as the letters below show. He’s obviously a sad case so I won’t feature him againbut if you do see him wondering around, call him out!
Dear Editor,
Your bit on Peter Lancaster stirred up a memory of me doing some research into his bogus FAA “uniform” a few years ago. Looks like he is still at it.
I have a mate who is a member of the Southport Aero Club who asked me if I knew him. The club is based at Mason Field in the Gold Coast and is probably the most expensive and best equipped in Oz. Lancaster had been parading around the bar in his flight gear pretending to be a retired FAA pilot (probably still does).
My “googling” then came up with the same result as you have, an ex RAN chalkie. His Linkedin profile claims all sorts of achievements, not the least of which is that he is a PGA championship golfer. Regards, Arthur Johnson.
Dear Editor,
The Deep Fake Update in the latest issue brought to mind a couple of stories, though I wouldn’t know Peter Lancaster if I fell over him.
I don’t know if you know an ex Navy chum, Marty Ward. He had someone impersonating him by name and bigging himself up as an ex member of
the RANHFV, which Marty was of course. Contact was made with http://www.anzmi.net, which was a group dedicated to outing such personages.
Many years ago there was an item in the Sale paper, “Gippsland Times” mentioning an individual living up the coast claiming to have been a member of RANHFV, only issue was no one by the name given ever served.
With respect to WO1 Clive Collins that I wrote about previously, the US Army has no record of him being awarded the DFC, Bronze Star or Purple Heart as he claimed. Colour me not surprised.
Cheers, Brian Abraham.
Dear Editor,
Re July 2024 Flyby Magazine and the Dzeus tool used by aircrew on Trackers - part of the top of aircraft pre-flight we had to open the flap covering the Constant Speed Drive (CSD) fluid tank to check it had the correct fluid level and filler cap secure. The flap was secured with two Dzeus fasteners.
The same for the engine oil filler. I recall there were some other areas where fasteners needed to be checked too, but things are getting hazy without seeing an aircraft.
Hence all if not most aircrew had such a Dzeus tool.
Thanks for yet another fantastic magazine.
Cheers, Alan Earle.
By Ed. Thanks for the clarification, Alan. Your response triggered me to consider a short ‘interest’ article on why they are called Dzeus Fasteners, but it turns out they are fasteners invented by a bloke called William Dzeus. Not much of a story there!
Dear Editor,
Having flown over 3000 hours in S2E/S2G I can assure you that I carried and used my Dzeus Key quite often e.g. when detached or overnighted away from our maintainers.
For example during ESTES Patrols in and out of
East Sale when removing the covers to check engine oil levels or any panel that needed checking for leaks etc.
Hence #3 & #4 seat Aircrewmen and Observers always carried one. I hope this helps.
Bob (Timber) Mills.
Ex CPOA VS816 & VC851.
Dear Editor,
Those of us who did our flight training with the USN were issued with these "Dzeus Keys" tools along with our flying clothing. We didn't actually use them to undo/do up Dzeus fasteners but used them to lever up the locking latches of the fuel caps and unscrew the oil dipstick on the R1820 of the T28 and TS2A/S2E if it was a little more than "finger tight".
I'm not aware that they were issued back in 816/851 but I do remember that they had to be handed in when tool control was established. The cover for access to the oil filler/dipstick had spring loaded latches (I think!)
Picture of me (below) returning the Dzeus key tool to my flying suit pocket following preflight of a T28 in May 1967 (compliments of John (Bomber) Brown)
Cheers, Peter (GT) James.
Dear Editor,
I enjoyed Bomber Brown’s tale of the AS350 procurement. Absolutely agree it was the best choice, and proved a useful interim operational aircraft until the Seahawks arrived.
One feature that enhanced its deck landing capabilities was the undercarriage anti-rebound dampers. This arrangement was similar to the Scout, and both allowed for positive touchdowns on a moving deck.
As to engine management, during check out with
Jim Llewellyn in mid-1984, I asked who was responsible for this abortion. Jim advised it was because the Crabs wanted it to be just like the UH-1. As quickly became apparent it was not!
Can imagine the heated conversation between the company reps at the meeting, but it was probably nothing like when the design office was asked to engineer the modification; the merde would then really have hit the fan.
Probably best the crusty old Crab remain anonymous.
Some years later (late 1990s), when I was working for CASA, a Supplemental Type Certificate for the throttle modification was approved for civil AS350s.
It came with a comprehensive Flight Manual Supplement on how to manage the system.
Not sure if there were civil operators wanting this expensive option , highly unlikely, or if the manufacturer was anticipating ex-RAN AS550s appearing on the civil register.
Yours aye, Keith Engelsman.
DearEditor,
I write in response to your recent Letter to the Editor from RonMarsh re the QldAir Museum’s Gannet 859 (XA331).
As QAM President sinceAugust 2023, I am writing to agree and affirm that this airframe does indeed represent a very important part of Australia’s aviation history and that it’s current condition is a cause of great concern to all volunteers at QAM. I was dismayed to read your correspondent’s claim that “it is obvious that no one in authority takes any interest, as I emailed my concerns over a year ago and am still awaiting the reply which will never eventuate.” I can find no record of this email in any correspondence that has been passed on to me as president, but invite your correspondent to please re-send it and I shall assuredly reply promptly.
It is especially disappointing to read the accusation that “the stronger influence of a different Service prevails at [QAM]”. I cannot speak for the personal preferences of our volunteers and members; but I can say that our volunteers are drawn from all services and indeed from the world of civil and commercial aviation also. QAM is not, and never has claimed to be, a military aviation museum. We enjoy the energetic and generous contributions of volunteers from all walks of life and are united by a desire to help this organisation fulfil its mission, as it striven to do since 1974.
Our 96 airframes (80+ on display) are cared for by our restoration volunteers two days a week on a very tight budget. Add to this the fact that around half of our aircraft are regrettably unable to be housed under cover, including 859. The scale of the task of conserving these
airframes can perhaps be appreciated. I might add that two of our RAN aircraft - our Westland Wessex and DH Sea Venom - do enjoy the cover of Hangar 2, but, alas, so many others do not.
I am proud of the passion, dedication and skill our volunteers bring and they do a mighty job with the limited resources available to us and the conditions we work in. It is true that aviation history was well-served by the exemplary contribution of ex-FAAvolunteers all those years ago who assisted QAM in bringing 859 to a very respectable display condition.
I can say that there is not one single volunteer to my knowledge who does not wish the Gannet to be in a more presentable condition. This is not wilful neglect. It may however be an indication that the QAM collection has grown beyond our capacity to adequately care for it, hence we are making every effort to recruit new restoration volunteers and to rationalise our collection.
Finally, I am delighted that our Displays Manager and a small team are currently making great progress with an exciting new display featuring a 3 metre-long model of HMAS Melbourne, complete with 1/72 scale aircraft, to be located in a prominent place in Hangar 1. This very exciting addition will include audio stories from retired personnel as well as a variety of artefacts and information boards.Any memorabilia that might be donated to be added to this major new display are most welcome. Please contact our Displays Manager (displays@qldair.museum)
GarryHills.
QAM President president@qldair.museum
Editor’s Note. The Letter to the Editor to which Garry refers was published on page 8 of last month’s FlyBy.
Farewell To Lynne
We don’t often feature obituaries for non-birdies, but occasionally make an exception for those who had a marked impact on the Fleet Air Arm and/or who will be remembered by many of usboth sailor and officer.
Lynne Dickson entered the WRANS as a General Duties Writer 23May 1960 at age of 18 with a stenographer qualification and rose quickly to Acting Petty Officer WRANS. Selected for WRANS Officer training in late 1961, she was promoted to 3rdOfficer WRANS on 9October 1962 and posted to Lonsdale as Unit Officer WRANS. For a period in 1963, Lynne was Quarters Officer at Cerberus before being posted to Melville (Darwin) from November 1963 through to March 1966. She was promoted to 2ndOfficer WRANS while at Melville on 31 December 1965.
2nd Officer Dickson’s association with the Fleet Air Arm began in 1966 when she was posted as the Unit Officer WRANS at Albatross succeeding 2nd Officers Marjorie Reid and Judy Guy, who had led the WRANS into the previously male-dominated world of the Birdies. Others around this time were 2ndOfficer Jacqui Mullins and 3rdOfficer Marjorie Reid and many more followed. Approximately 80 women were carrying out a range of admin, comms, driving, and stewarding duties across most of the base. Lynne remained at Albatross until September 1966 when she was posted as Unit Officer WRANS atPenguin while also working as Assistant to Chief Staff Officer (Admin) in Flag Officer East Australia’s Potts Point office overlooking Garden Island. Lynne remained in Sydney until her short service commission ended 8 October 1968.
While Lynne’s term atAlbatross was not a long one, she made an indelible impact on all. She will be remembered by many, but sadly a number of those have left us as well. John Brandl, John Drinkwater, Rob Partington, David Ferry, Norman Phipps, Douwes Prass come to mind quickly, but there will be many other members of the Wardroom Nissen huts of those days. When hanging by one's legs from the rafters and drinking a half-pint of beer was a rite of passage in the Albatross Wardroom, I recall much discussion between Lynne and Judy Guy, then also a 2ndOfficer, as to how to tuck in one’s Mess Undress Dress (Ladies) into suspenders and proceed with dignity and aplomb.
Lynne left Australia for the UK and wider pastures in October 1968. After working in London for a period, Lynne worked as a carer in Spain and later in Germany in a BMW dealership while still travelling Europe extensively. By around 1973 she obtained a long-term position in the American PXs in (then) West Germany where she met Walter Maier and they eventually married. With Stuttgart as a base, Lynne and Walter visited friends a number of times in USA especially in Las Vegas and Atlanta. They also returned for sometimes lengthy periods to Australia visiting her father and mother, younger brothers Wayne and Colin, plus their families, as well as maintaining close contact with Max and Judy Speedy. They had no children and when Walter died, Lynne elected to stay in Germany.
Lynnehadaverylongbattlewithcancerandpassedawaypeacefullyon23June.On19July2024there is to be a private cremation in Kornwestheim, the town where Walter's sister Rose plus Lynne lived for over 50 years.
One of the first of the (honorary) lady Birdies at Albatross, rest in peace, Lynne.
Lynne Cecelia DICKSON. Born 31 October 1941 in Sydney. Died 23 June 2024, Stuttgart, Germany. Forwarded by
Jeff Dalgleish and Murray Smythe with material supplied by Max Speedy and Lynne’s family.✈
“Real” Aircraft Carrier Joins Pitch Black
The Italian Navy committed to Exercise Pitch Black in a big way with the aircraft carrier Cavour and frigate Alpino joining 17 other nations in what is the biggest exercise of its type in recent years.
The CAG is understood to comprise six AV-8B “Harrier” jets, a single TAV8B and six F35B STOVLs, together with two SH-90 helicopters for Pedro or SAR duties.
The CAG mostly disembarked to RAAF Darwin, where they will participate alongside aircraft of the Italian Air Force including Eurofighter Typhoons, F35A and F-35B Lightnings and AEW and Tanker aircraft. All in all it is a very significant force commitment.
This is the first time an aircraft carrier has been dedicated to Pitch Black. (Defence images). ✈
Memories
This picture appeared on a Facebook page recently, featuring a Sea Fury “Gate Guard”, by the look of it, with Commander Shaw, CPO Heindorff and an unknown LEUT draped around it. Anyone care to give any more information about the people, the occasion or the aircraft? ✈
Nothing Changes
Baggage problems when travelling? Looks like it started from the very beginning.✈
The Italian aircraft carrier Cavor enters Darwin harbour in preparation for exercise Pitch Black 2024. The majority of her Air Group deployed to RAAF Darwin where they operated with naval and/or air forces of 17 other nations including Britain, Japan, Spain, Germany, Singapore and the US. (Left. AV-8B “Harriers” from Cavor’s CAG.
A Different Tilt Rotor
A string of fatal accidents to the V-22 Osprey has been in the news recently (see page 14 in this edition), but, perhaps not known to many, there is another player in town.
Being developed by Leonardo Aerospace, the AW609 Tilt Rotor program set another milestone recently with its first successful trial aboard the ITS Cavour, the Italian Navy’s flagship carrier. Clearly, these trials are aimed at the possible introduction of the aircraft into a military role.
A Home By Another Name
On the face of it, this photo on the right is of a quaint old cottage, perhaps of the medieval period.
But there’s something odd about it. Any ideas? See page 13 for the answer. ✈
H Rules, OK!
But the AW609 is primarily, at least for the moment, pitched at the civil/ private/EMS market - and it offers some interesting performance parameters with a fully pressurised cabin, full icing clearance, a ceiling of 25,000 feet, a cruising speed of 270 knots and extended range of 1000 nm. Powered by two Pratt and Whitney PT6 engines, it has single engine flight capability a fully digital fly-by-wire flight control system, and triple redundant hydraulic and electrical systems. Like the Osprey, it is unlikely the AW609 can hover on one engine, however, and its autorotative properties are probably poor due to low rotor inertia.
The AW609 has logged over 1,900 flight hours in Italy and the USA and is on track to become the world’s first tilt rotor to achieve civil certification. ✈
We’ve reported from time to time on the progress of Electric Vertical Take Off and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, of which Joby appears to be leading the pack.
Most of those still in the race have taken the approach where they develop purely electric vehicles for short-haul work (mostly centered around urban transport), but will fit them with Hydrogen propulsion systems once the technology catches up.
Joby has now flown its eVTOL with a hydrogenelectric propulsion system developed by its German subsidiary, appropriately named H2Fly. The demonstrator flew 523 miles, which is more than five times the range of the same aircraft powered by its standard battery electric powertrain. The hydrogen powered version of the aircraft retains 90% of the systems on the pure eVTOL model, so conversion is relatively easy. The aircraft landed with 10% of its hydrogen fuel
The demonstrator carried 40kg of liquid hydrogen, with a smaller number of batteries than the standard model. The hydrogen is converted to electricity, with water and heat being its only emissions, and the batteries provide additional power mainly for hovering and low speed flight.
For our more technical readers, the following commentary on the system may be of interest:
“A double-walled, vacuum-insulated LH2 dewar tank is installed in the cockpit area of the right-hand fuselage in the four-seat HY4. An internal heater pressurizes the LH2 in the tank, and a heat exchanger using waste heat from the fuel cell drives
an evaporator that vaporises the hydrogen for delivery to the fuel-cell cathode at 6.5 bar (94 psi) absolute pressure.
Evaporator control is identified as one of the technical achievements. The storage system needs an evaporator because the hydrogen in a liquid state has to go into the gaseous state.
That is done by evaporating enough hydrogen, which then is directly used. To achieve a steady flow of hydrogen the ,pressure in the fuel cell must be stable, which requires precise controlling. The simplicity of the controller was described as “astonishingly good.”
Control of the evaporator, pressure and fuel-cell power output was sufficiently fast and precise to eliminate the need to use a buffer battery to handle power transients. This was expected, and demonstrated that during the cruise phase of the three hour flight, no battery power at all was required.”
The demonstration marks a huge step forward in the quest to achieve long range emission free flight. The quantity of hydrogen carried (40kg) is relatively small compared to the fossil fuel equivalent required for a similar flight. ✈
Posh Digs
The USS Abraham Lincoln will have some recreational creature comforts when she leaves on her next deployment.
In line with four other carriers, the Lincoln will have a fully renovated lounge and library featuring cushy club chairs, a stadium seating movie theatre and a personal communications centre with phone booths to reach home. Each space is softened by wooden bulkheads, laminated flooring, artificial plants and contemporary artwork. Four more similar carrier conversions are planned this year.
“What the Abraham Lincoln USO Center offers is a peaceful and modern respite for our sailors and Marines to rest and recharge and to reach their families while using wifi while at sea, to watch movies in legitimate movie theatre seating, and play video games in a purposefully designed video game room,” Capt. Pete Riebe, Lincoln’s commander, said during a Monday ceremony on the carrier’s flight deck.
“We ask a lot of our sailors and Marines. We ask them to uphold the values of our nation. We ask them to sacrifice time away from their families, loved ones and friends,” Riebe said. “For their sacrifices, it’s absolutely fitting that we provide our Abraham Lincoln sailors and Marines a suitable space to truly unwind.”✈
Top: Updated Library aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. Middle. Sailors play video games aboard the Lincoln. Lower. The recreational space includes an area where sailors can phone home using one of the custom booths, or get reliable wifi. (USNI News Photos). ✈
Home By Another Name (from p.11)
Well, its not a home - rather, an extraordinarily detailed model of one.
When the creator’s hand and a couple of pencils are reinserted, it brings back the missing perspective.
The model was created from polystyrene and has been carefully painted to give both the required detail and a ‘weathered’ appearance.
Extraordinary what you can do with enough time, skill and patience. ✈
Local Honour Board
Stickers for Sale
Click here for details and Order Form.
A little known local War Memorial which was dedicated by RADM Neil Ralph and Chaplain Wheeldon in the early 1900's is the Wall of Remembrance at the Jervis Bay Maritime Museum.
This commemorates the 50 RAAF, RN and Army personnel killed in the local area during WW2. Most but not all were aircrew conducting training with Beaufort aircraft in the torpedo strike role. Several including two Army were fatalities resulting from ground accidents. The remainder were RN Fleet Air Arm people conducting continuation and conversion training while disembarked from their aircraft carriers of the British Pacific Fleet at our two local airfields.
The memorial had been looking a little neglected since it's centrepiece Beaufort propellor was removed to better manage it's corrosion resulting from many years on the seabed before it was recovered by a local fisherman (and now inside the museum).
JB Maritime Museum recently announced that staff had conducted a most welcome refurbishment of the memorial and some associated landscaping including a small but elegant pool of reflection.
An Unenviable Safety Record?
The V22 Osprey is a remarkable feat of engineering, but there are growing concerns about its safety record. Here’s a list of crashes and hull-loss accidents to date.
11 June 1991 Amis-wired flight control system led to two minor injuries when the left nacelle struck the ground while the aircraft was hovering, causing it to bounce and catch fire. The pilot suspected that he may have accidentally set the throttle lever the opposite direction to that intended, exacerbating the crash if not causing it.
20 July 1992 Apre-production V-22's right engine failed and caused the aircraft to drop into the Potomac River with an audience of Department of Defense and industry officials.Flammable liquids collected in the right nacelle and led to an engine fire and subsequent failure.All seven on board were killed.
08 April 2000 AV-22 loaded with Marines attempted to land at an airport inArizona. It descended faster than normal from an unusually high altitude with a forward speed of under 40 knots when it suddenly rolled over, crashed, and exploded, killing all 19 on board. The cause was determined to be vortex ring state (VRS). The V-22's envelope restricted the Osprey to a descent rate of 800 fpm at airspeeds below 40 knots. Subsequent testing showed that the V-22 is generally less susceptible to VRS than helicopters.
11 December 2000 AV-22 had a flight control error and crashed near Jacksonville, North Carolina, killing all four aboard.Avibration-induced chafing from an adjacent wiring bundle caused a leak in the hydraulic line, which fed the primary side of the swash plate actuators to the right side rotor blade controls. The uncontrollable aircraft fell 1,600 feet and crashed in a forest.
training exercise in Hawaii sustained a hard landing which killed two Marines and injured 20. The aircraft sustained fuselage damage and a fire onboard. The aircraft was determined to have suffered dust intake to the right engine.
December 2016 an MV-22B crashed while landing onto a reef in shallow water off the Okinawa coastline of where the aircraft broke apart.All five crew members aboard with MarineAircraft Group 36, 1st MarineAircraft Wing were rescued. Two crew members were injured. Preliminary reports indicated that, during in-flight refuelling with a HC-130, the refuelling hose was struck by the Osprey's rotor blades.
August 2017An MV-22B Osprey crashed in Shoalwater Bay,Australia on 5August 2017, killing three Marines. The tilt-rotor struck the USS Green Bay and crashed into the sea shortly after taking off from amphibious assault ship USSBonhomme Richard. 23 personnel were recovered from the stricken aircraft, with three confirmed dead.
error due to low altitude steep bank angle manoeuvres exceeding the aircraft's normal operating envelope.A personal GoPro video camera was found at the crash site and was in use at the time of the crash. This was prohibited as “they can incentivise risk taking and serve as a distraction”.
June 2022 An MV-22B Osprey crashed in California, killing all five Marines onboard. The accident investigation determined that the crash was caused by a dual hard clutch engagement causing catastrophic malfunction of the aircraft's gearbox that lead to drive system failures. From 2010 to the time of the crash, there had been 16 similar clutch issues on Marine Ospreys.
August 2023 An MV-22B Osprey crashed on Melville Island,Australia on 27August 2023, killing three Marines while another five were flown to a hospital in critical condition.
March 2006. AMV-22B experienced an uncommanded engine acceleration while turning on the ground. Since the aircraft regulates power turbine speed with blade pitch, the reaction caused the aircraft to go airborne with the Torque Control Lever at idle. The aircraft rose 6-7 feet into the air and then fell to the ground, causing damage to its starboard wing. It was later found that a mis-wired cannon plug to one of the engine's two FullAuthority Digital Engine Controls was the cause. The aircraft was found to be damaged beyond repair.
April 2010.ACV-22 crashed in Zabul Province, Afghanistan. Three US service members and one civilian were killed and 16 injured in the crash. The loaded CV-22B was at its hovering capability limit, landing at night at approx. 5,000 feet, in turbulence due to the location in a gully. The USAF investigation ruled out brownout conditions, enemy fire, and vortex ring state as causes. The investigation found several factors that significantly contributed to the crash: these included low visibility, a poorly-executed approach, loss of situational awareness, and a high descent rate.
April 2012An MV-22B was participating in Exercise African Lion when it crashed in Morocco, killing two Marines. Two others were seriously injured, and the aircraft was lost. U.S. investigators found no mechanical flaw with the aircraft and human error was determined to be the cause.
June 2012AUSAF CV-22B crashed at anAir Force Base in Florida during training.All five aboard were injured. The aircraft came to rest upside-down and received major damage.The cause of the crash was determined to be pilot error, with the CV-22 flying through the prop-rotor wash of another aircraft. May 2015.An MV-22B Osprey participating in a
September 2017 An MV-22B Osprey operating in Syria as part of Operation Inherent Resolve was damaged beyond repair in a hard landing on 28 September 2017. Two people on board the aircraft were injured. The non–salvageable Osprey burned shortly after the crash.
March 2022 An MV-22B Osprey crashed in Norway, killing all four Marines onboard. Investigators concluded that the causal factor of the crash was pilot
November 2023 ACV-22B Osprey crashed into the East China Sea, killing all eight airmen aboard. Witnesses reported seeing the aircraft inverted with flames engulfing the aircraft's left nacelle before an explosion occurred and the aircraft subsequently crashed.An investigation is ongoing. In early March 2024 the US and Japan resumed flights of the V-22 with revised maintenance and pilot training focuses but no changes to the aircraft. The V-22 was returned to flight with no changes, but part that failed and how it failed was identified, although the accident was still under scrutiny.
Source: Wikipedia. Abridged.✈
Its Crunch Time!
THE FAAAArelies on volunteers to keep going and the lack of them will bring the organisation to its knees. We are now urgently in need of [1] a National Secretary and [2] an Editor to produce Slipstream magazine.
In particular, the Secretary’s job is crucial. If nobody steps up, the Association will soon have no alternative but to carefully consider whether it can continue. Either job would suit a meticulous person who has the heart to give something back. You can be located anywhere in Australia, and training can be provided.
Contact Marcus Peake here for more details.
“Volunteers do not necessarily have the time; they have the heart’ Elizabeth Andrew.✈
Riding The Dog
When I mention that I flew helicopters in Vietnam," an American Marine pilot said to me, "the first thing people say is, 'Oh, you flew the Huey' You've got to explain to them that no, this was a different helicopter."
Boy, was it. Turns out the guy flew the Sikorsky H34 Seahorse, known in its U.S. Marine Corps guise as the UH-34D. D for deafening, different, draughty, dervish-slash-whirling and just about everything but diminutive or debonair.
The Marines called it the Dog, and its pilots often referred to themselves as Dog drivers. Not because it was one, but because no American warrior would dream of calling a weapon by its Government-approved name.
Somewhat more irreverently, they also called it the Shuddering Shithouse. To understand the latter, you have to at least ride aboard one, preferably fly it. I've done a little of each, although l've also been told by experienced ex-Marine pilot Mike Leahy that the scatology was originally prompted by the Sikorsky CH-37, an enormous early heavy-lift helo that was powered by two Pratt & Whitney R-2800 radials. "That thing literally shook like a big dog after its bath when you approached for a landing and slowed it to a crawl."
The UH-34D - and the CH-37 - represented the end of an era. It was the era of piston-engine, clanking-parts, fling-wing, Rube Goldberg
helicopter design sometimes described as ‘a collection of rotating and reciprocating parts all trying furiously to become random in motion’. One example of the 34's archaic complexity: the single main rotor head, about the size of a cowboy's Stetson hatbox, has what U.S. Army H-34 pilot William Walton recalls was 84 grease nipples. "And they had to be greased after every flight." It was an era that was about to be coffin-nailed shut by humming turbines, sophisticated rotor systems and unimaginably light materials and devices. Today, a turbine helicopter engine equivalent to the piston-engine H-34's 1,525 hp weighs about 25 per cent of what the ironmongered UH-34D engine did.
Indeed, the H-34 soldiered on for another decade as the Westland Wessex, once it was fitted with a turboshaft engine.
The H-34 was basically a bulked up Sikorsky H-19, a late 1940s design that pioneered a unique power plant configuration. In pre-turboshaft-engine days, a good place to find reliable, compact, high horsepower was in air-cooled radial engines. The obvious place to put such an engine would have been in the very centre of a helicopter, directly under the rotor hub, low in the airframe for stability, with a vertical driveshaft. But that would have pretty much filled the cabin, making the machine pointless as a people-hauler.
Sikorsky's solution, in the H-19 and then the H-34, was to stick the radial out in the big Rottweiler nose, with a driveshaft angled up and aft, passing between the flight-crew seats to the transmission and rotor hub at about a 45° angle. This left a boxy, unobstructed area for a cabin. Mounting the heavy engine in the nose also counterbalanced the long tail boom.
With the potential of light, compact turbine engines apparent by the time the H-34 first flew, in 1954, the helo was already obsolescent and about to be obsolete. A war, however, delayed the H-34’s retirement ceremonies.
When Vietnam began to heat up, in the early 1960s, it was still a place for professionals - lifers and volunteers - many of them United States Marines. The Marine Corps has typically been at the bottom of our military equipment food chain, making do with what the favoured armed services have either cast off or haven't been able to figure out how to use. A classic albeit anomalous example was the FU Corsair.
When U.S. Navy pilots decided the Corsair's bouncy main-gear oleos made them too difficult to
land on aircraft carriers, they were seconded to the Marines - who inadvertently ended up operating one of the great fighters of WWIl.
So their two dozen old UH-34Ds were all that Marine Squadron HMM-362 (HMM equals Helicopters, Marine, Medium) had to work with when on 15 April 1962 they landed on an abandoned WWII Japanese fighter strip at Soc Trang, on the Mekong River Delta. The Ugly Angels, as they soon came to be known for their medevac missions, were eventually followed by nine more UH-34D squadrons.
South Vietnam's own air force operated a squadron of UH-34Ds handed over by the Marines; Air America, the CIA's covert 'airline' operating in Laos, also relied on the Dog.
In fact, though 34s were eventually operated in combat by everybody from the Argentines to the Israelis, Air America's 34s were in combat areas longer than those of any armed forces in the world, including the USMC. "1 didn't even know we were owned by the CIA," admits Air America 34 pilot Charles O Davis "I flew it more than 3,000 hours and never had an engine failure. By today's
standards it was archaic, but as far as I'm concerned, the H-34 is the DC-3 of helicopters. When I climbed into that aircraft, it was like putting on a good, comfortable pair of shoes."
By the time the world's media had swarmed the war, in the late 1960s, the chuttering rumble of the 34's radial engine had largely been replaced by the waspy whine of the Bell UH-1 Huey. The TV nightly news and eventually movie theatres as well, thanks in large part to Apocalypse Now and its Ride-of-the-Valkyries scene - resonated with the whap-whap-whap of the Huey's wide twin rotor blades, and most of us grew to assume that Vietnam was the Huey's war.
But in the seven years that U.S. Marine UH-34Ds were in-country, they flew as everything but gunships. They carried troops, recon teams, cargo, crates of ammunition that their crew chiefs literally kicked out the door during low passes over beleaguered landing zones, often-pointless packages and paperwork on what were called admin runs' - the Vietnam helo equivalent of WWII's milk runs - chaplains ("holy helo” trips), bodies and, perhaps most memorably, the wounded. Without the UH-34D's endless medevac
shuttles, far more Americans and South Vietnamese would have died.
The Dogs were powered by the same Wright Cyclone R-1820 radial engine used in 1930s American biplane fighters, the B-17 and indeed some DC-3s, and the aircraft had never been intended to do battle against ground troops. H-34s had no guns, no cannons, no rockets - no problemthe Marines welded up mounts for light M-60 machine-guns, one on each side of the aircraft, and installed them in the field... but that was all the recoil that the airframe could take.
The H-34 had been designed to be a carrier-borne U.S. Navy antisubmarine-warfare bird, fighting a relatively neat search-and-detect sonar war at sea. Unfortunately, the aircraft's skin was made of super-light magnesium. Sikorsky had to do something to compensate for that enormous lump of engine in the nose, but the magnesium skin did its best to become powder in the presence of salt water.
World's Largest Fashbulb
That magnesium was also to become a liability in battle. "On my second day of flying in Vietnam,*
Vietnamese soldiers unload supplies from a US Marine Corps Sikorsky UH-34D, 1964.
UH-34D lifts vehicle from USS Valley Forge, c1965.
Few if any UH-34s are still flying, but you can find them in museums.
recalls ex-34D pilot Seppo Hurme, "one of our 34s was shot down, and you could see it from miles away, the magnesium burned so bright. But you never had to worry about ending up a cripple. Between the avgas and the magnesium, you either walked away from a crash or you died." (As exHMM-363 pilot Joseph Scholle puts it, "We used to call it the world's largest flashbulb. Get a fire anywhere and drop it in the water is about all you can do.")
Nonetheless, Hurme loved the old Dog. *That big engine up front was the equivalent of a lot of armour plate and gave you more protection than there was in other helicopters. I heard of one guy who took a hit from a 57 mm recoilless rifle that knocked one of the cylinders completely off. The engine kept running - rough, but they still got away. When I transitioned to Hueys, I felt naked.* Hurme had been trained to fly the Dog's replacement - the big turbine-engine, twin rotor Boeing-Vertol CH-46- for by 1967, when Hurme arrived in Vietnam with HMM361, the UH-34D was well on its way to an honourable retirement for the second time.
But the 46s soon experienced a series of in-flight failures: they would shed their entire tail and rearrotor pylon. As Joseph Scholle describes it, "The H-46s would break apart right in front. of the stub wings, and become a section of two H-23s." Such gallows humour is typical of helo pilots. American newsman Harry Reasoner once wrote, "Airplane pilots are open, clear-eyed, buoyant extroverts, and helicopter pilots are brooding, introspective anticipators of trouble. They know if something bad
long as you're doing 45 knots, it swings around into about a 45 degree crab and stays there. It's weird, but you can fly it."
For all their size, 34s were surprisingly nimble. "It was an extremely manoeuvrable aircraft,” says one ex-Marine pilot who flew it for almost a year. “You could get into and out of landing zones where no other helos could go, but that bad news is that once there, we pilots were sitting thirteen feet up in the air, and the bad guys were in a prone position laying on the ground flat as they could or hiding behind a tree, firing back at you.
You were a sitting duck in a hot LZ.”
Sabin manoeuvred to put the strobe between the helicopter and the waiting Marines, but the light kept moving: the Marine carrying it had mounted it on his helmet, figuring that would make it a better beacon, and now he realised Sabin might try to land on top of him. "Ron landed with his side toward the shooting, so the exhaust stacks wouldn't be a target, and we picked up our guy. I remember as we headed back toward Marble Mountain, Sabin got on the intercom and asked the corpsman down in the cabin, “How’s he doing?” The medic said “I’ve got my hand inside his chest, but he’ll make it.”
grounding, and the Marines turned back to the faithful UH-34D. Says Scholle, "Everybody wanted to go into Hueys and gunships, and when I got assigned to 34s, I thought, 'Aw, jeez, 34s, the Shuddering Shithouse. But the part I grew to like was its reliability. We'd get more time out of our engines than the Hueys were getting. All that redclay sand used to get sucked into their intakes and eat the turbine blades alive. We had an air cleaner, basically, like something you have on a Pontiac. Take it out, bang it on the ground, rinse it in avgas and you're back in business."
Scholle also knew of a 34's nine-cylinder Wright suddenly transitioning to an eight. "A friend of mine was doing a recon insert (dropping off a squad of Marines) way up by the Laotian border. It turned bad and he had to go back in and pick the guys right up again, and he took a lot of fire. He said the aircraft felt a little sluggish and when they landed to let the recon team off, there was no oil on the dipstick. So the crew chief emptied the spare fivegallon can into the tank, put the cap back on and said let's go. They flew back to Da Nang and the crew chief opened the clamshell (nose) doors and said, 'Cap, you gotta see this.’ One entire cylinder was missing, the rod was missing, it was just a hole in the side of the block. They came all the way back from the Laotian border with it that way. Nor were engine parts the only thing the Dog could do without. "It was one of the few helicopters that would fly with an inoperative tail rotor," says Scholle. "A 34 has an awful lot of side area, and as
Rod Carlson remembers that. He was another re-routed CH-46 pilot, sent to HMM361 to instead fly Dogs. Carlson drew his first night time medevac mission soon after arriving at Marble Mountain, the helicopter strip at Da Nang, flying with aircraft command Captain Ron Sabin. Marines who were expected to die in the field before daybreak were flown out, but it was a fearsomely dangerous undertaking. Carlson and Sabin waited for a summons in the squadron ready room, Carlson recalls. “With the red lights on to preserve our night vision, everything was the colour of clotted blood.”
When the phone rang, Sabin and Carlson sprinted to their 34 and fired it up. “A constant blue-white flame from the exhaust stacks extended past my window like a huge blowtorch. Once we were airborne, Sabin flipped off the light switches overhead, and except for the flame, everything vanished in total darkness. I felt as though I were in free fall. Everything I needed to fly was goneairspeed, altimeter, rotor and engine rpms, manifold pressure, horizon.”
Below them, Carlson says, "Lights blinked like the small farms we flew over during night training hops from Pensacola. But each was the muzzle flash of a gun being fired at us."
The landing zone was hot-under fire. Sabin told the grunts on the ground to mark its centre with a small strobe.
“The standard procedure was to spiral down directly over the LZ, in order to present the smallest target for the shortest time. In daylight, this approach was dangerous. At night, I was sure it was impossible."
Carlson remembers that,"Sabin bottomed the collective, screwed back on the throttle, dropped the nose and spiralled down like a duck with a shot wing. After five complete revolutions he straightened out, and the strobe was dead ahead. I could feel him raising the nose to slow our forward movement and twisting on full power to stop the descent.
Before his first night aloft was out, Carlon and Sabin would do it seven more times, a typical shift for a ready-when-you-are Dog.
Ron Ferrell was also a corpsman on UH- 34Ds, and what he-and many a pilot-particularly appreciated about the Dog was that it had big, fat wheels and tyres on long-stroke oleo struts. "We were lifting off under fire one day," Ferrell says, "and the pilot took a hit in the head just as we took off. We were nose down, tail-up, and he had the rotors cranked up to full rpm. And then boom, we set right back down. We probably dropped a good ten feet. I watched those struts go damn near to the ground and then spring back up. Hueys just had skids, and if that'd happened in a Huey in anything but an absolutely level attitude, you'd have pitched over.
"The co-pilot got control and we took off again but it was frustrating. There's a bulkhead at the forward end of the cabin and above that is where the pilots sit, and you can't get up there from the cabin. All I could see of the pilot was his feet, his hand hanging down, and there was blood running down the bulkhead. And I couldn't do a thing about it."
John Downing, an HMM-361 UH-34D pilot incountry, remembers that the big landing gear made it easier to get into a tight LZ. “You could stand it up and put the tailwheel on the ground, haul back on the cyclic and get it about 40º nose high, just put the tailwheel on the ground and it’d stop on a dime. That got me into trouble when I transitioned to the Huey, because you definitely don’t want to do that in a UH-1. The first thing that hits the ground is the tail stinger, next is the tail rotor.”
Joe Scholle also loved that landing gear. “If you look at where the main struts attach to the fuselage, they’re basically holding up the transmission deck, because you don’t want that thing coming down through the cabin. So if you land real hard and bounce, you’re bouncing off the point of main structural strength in the aircraft. You try tail bouncing a Huey, hit tail-first and you're probably going to nose over. But with the 34, if you
had to do a night medevac, it was the best way to find the ground, with the tailwheel. It was like a hen in a nest, putting her butt down on the eggs."
Extremely Sensitive
H-34s were the first helicopters to get a true stability-augmentation system - a kind of primitive autopilot that did its best to counter a helo's innate desire to do anything but fly straight-and-level. "It was called the ASE system, automatic stabilisation equipment, and it gave the aircraft a little more of a stabilised feel,” one pilot remembers. "But there were many occasions when it wasn't operating, so you flew without it."
With the ASE off, the aircraft was extremely sensitive to the touch. "All you had to do is think about doing something, and you've already done it," one pilot remembers. It took a fair amount of coordination to manually adjust the rpm and pitch simultaneously with a motorcycle-grip throttle on the collective while working the cyclic stick and rudder pedals at the same time. "You could overspeed it quite easily if, say, you were going into a hot LZ, taking fire. “You had to listen to the rpm, the sound of the engine and the rotor blades, without looking at the gauges. When I went back and flew a UH-34D again a year ago, after having flown a lot of fixed wing military and commercial aircraft in the intervening 33 years, I knew how the barnstormers felt in the 1920, listening to the sound of the wind in the wires and feeling the slipstream on their cheeks.
watching pilots and aircrew and announced that he was going for a ride and if anyone wanted to join him, he wouldn’t stop them. The entire Squadron fired up and headed for A Shau.
Unfortunately, the skipper and three other 34s in the first wave were immediately blown out of the sky. Since it was too late in the day to do any more, the surviving 34s returned to Phu Bai to regroup. First thing the next morning, the Angry Eyes returned to the LZ like angry hornets and began pulling out soldiers. Twardzik took a .50 calibre ricochet squarely on his flak jacket during lift-off, and the impact blew him out of the door and into space. "My gunner's safety belt was hooked to a D-ring on the deck, and when it reached the end of
its travel, it snapped me right back into the cabin.” He recalled.
Another round ignited the ever-present five-gallon can of spare engine oil. The pilot autorotated into a clearing where they pitched the flaming can out and extinguished the remains of the fire. With the engine restarted and the rotors re-engaged, they took off, dragging the main gear through the trees as they headed back to Phu Bai. Twardzik got out of the 34 to view the damage, and the aircraft was literally sieved with bullet holes - but The Angry Eyes nonetheless managed to save every one of the HMM-163 aircrew who'd gone down the day before, as well as 190 of the 220 soldiers.
Slipstream 80/20 Dilemma
Mike Leahy served as a gunner even though he was a major and a rated helicopter pilot. As a watercolorist and the executive officer of the U. S. Marines' combat-art programme, he decided that the best vantage point from which to view scenes he could later paint was from the door of a Dogbut that meant he had to work, not just ride. "As a fully functioning crew member of a UH-34D, I also sometimes had to load KIAs into our chopper for the doleful trip back to Da Nang," Leahy recalls.
"We once were so full that I had to hold the upper part of a body bag in my lap, as I manned my M-60 on take-off, and I could feel the trooper's still-warm torso It was one of the most moving situations I ever went through."
George Twardzik was an HMM-163 'Angry Eyes' door gunner, a squadron so named for the glaring samurai eyeballs painted on their UH-34D's clamshell nose doors. Twardzik remembers the day in March of 1966 when "we received a frantic call from an Army Special Forces unit of about 220 who were under siege in the A Shau Valley from an enemy force estimated at 3,000 men. An Army helo sped in to assist them and was promptly shot down. It was decided the risks were too great and that all units should stay away from the A Shau outpost. For three days, we could hear the troopers begging over the radio for medevacs, ammo and water.
Finally, Twardzik’s squadron skipper could take no more. He strode to his 34, turned to the anxiously
In past months we’ve asked those with email addresses to consider receiving their Slipstream magazines electronically, rather than through Australia Post. We’ve had a trickle of people doing that, who we thank for their consideration.
At the time of this “FlyBy” going to print, however, 314 members still receive their Slipstream by ‘snail mail’. Of these, 254 (80%) have valid email addresses, so could receive the magazine electronically. This would not only save us big $$ in postage, but also in production costs. It also helps volunteers.
Current Hard Copy recipients who could elect to receive electronically. 80% 20% Current members
The bloke who prints Slipstream has indicated he’s retiring soon, and the next best quote to replace him is almost TWICE as much. This will certainly push up the costs for everyone unless we make an effort to change.
TOTAL NUMBER OF HARDCOPY MEMBERS = 314
So, there’s a solution! If you elect to receive your next Slipstream electronically, it saves on both postage and printing costs, and with sufficient numbers we can still make it work without a price hike.
here
Please click here to switch to electronic. If softcopy works for you with this “FlyBy” magazine, I’m sure it will work for you for Slipstream too!
Number without email addresses who really need hardcopy = 61 (20%).
Number with email addresses who could receive it electronically = 254 (80%).
How do I know which Slipstream Format I am? If you received your last ‘Slipstream’ through the post, you are a HARD COPY member. If you can’t remember, you can click here and look in the ‘format’ column: “H” = Hardcopy, “S” = softcopy. You’ll need to log into the website to access. OR, you can just elect to go softcopy by clicking on the red link above, and we’ll sort it out either way. ✈
Fitted with a gas-turbine engine, the H34D served for another couple of decades as the Westland Wessex. ✈
May 24th 2024 slipped away quietly for most of us, but it marked a day seldom celebrated in aviation: AMT, or Aviation Maintenance Technician day.
AMT day remembers the life of the ‘The Engine Man’, Charlie Taylor, sometimes called the father of aviation maintenance. It is a rare and valued acknowledgement in an industry that tends to laud pilots, rather than those who put them in the air in the first place.
Charles Taylor was born in 1868 in a log cabin in Illinois and had his first job aged 12, working as a binder at the Nabraska State Journal. It wasn’t work that inspired him, and he was able to secure a job as an apprentice toolmaker. At 24 he met and married Henrietta Webbert and they moved to Dayton where prospects were better.
By then a new craze was sweeping America: cycling. This was primarily due to the development of the safety bicycle, which was deemed safe for women and children to ride. Taylor was hired by the Stoddard Manufacturing company to fix them.
But when the Wright brothers entered business,
Taylor went to work for them. Initially he was hired to fix their bicycles (they owned a factory) but increasingly took over the running of the shop as the brothers spent more and more time on their aeronautical pursuits in Kitty Hawk in North Carolina, where they flew gliders.
The two brothers believed that it was necessary to master the art of controlling a glider before attempting motor-driven flight, and they saw the practice of lateral control by shifting the pilot’s body weight from side to side as inadequate. They were determined to find something better.
By 1899 they believed they had the answer‘wing warping’, and they built a five foot biplane kite whose lateral control could be altered by four lines manipulated by the operator.
Over the next three years the Wright brothers developed the basic principles of flight control, testing them in a self-made wind ‘tunnel’ powered by a bicycle they took turns to pedal. Their discoveries included the use of an adjustable rudder for balanced flight, understanding the mysteries of aspect ratios, and developing the correct formulas for the coefficient of lift and drag. Their 1902 glider made over a thousand flights to demonstrate lifting capacity, control
The Engine Man
Charlie Taylor was one of those men who could turn his hand to anything mechanical, and although he never qualified as an engineer he was to achieve lasting fame as the man who powered the first successful flight in history.
and stability. By the end of that year they were ready to add power to the equation.
The brothers had designed and carved their own spruce propellers, using theories they themselves developed. Remarkably, later research showed they had a peak efficiency of 82% - but the engines available to power them were just too heavy, and could not deliver sufficient power.
And so they turned to Charlie Taylor, who built a new design from scratch in just six weeks. Later, he was to report:
“The only metal-working machines we had were a lathe and a drill press, run by belts from the stationary gas engine.
The crankshaft was made out of a block of machine steel 6 by 31 inches and 1-5/8 inch thick. I traced the outline on the slab, then drilled through with the drill press until I could knock out the surplus pieces with a hammer and chisel. Then I put it in the lathe and turned it down to size and smoothness.
The body of the first engine was of cast aluminium and was bored out on the lathe for
independent cylinders. The pistons were cast iron, and these were turned down and grooved for piston rings.
The completed engine weighed 180 pounds and developed 12 horsepower at 1,025 revolutions per minute. [It actually produced nearly 16 hp when it was first started, by this dropped to 12 hp as the engine heated up.]
The fuel system was simple. A one-gallon fuel tank [it actually held just 22 ounces] was suspended from a wing strut, and the gasoline fed by gravity down a tube to the engine. The fuel valve was an ordinary gaslight pet cock. There was no carburettor as we know it today. The fuel was fed into a shallow chamber in the manifold. Raw gas blended with air in this chamber, which was next to the cylinders and heated up rather quickly, this helping to vaporise the mixture. The engine was started by priming each cylinder with a few drops of raw gas.
The ignition was the make-and-break type. No spark plugs. The spark was made by the opening and closing of two contact points inside the combustion chamber. These were
To the uninitiated, its hard to tell which was the nose and which was the tail of the Wright Flyer, but this image might help. The engine was installed roughly in the centre of the aircraft, forward of the ‘pusher’ propeller. The pilot lay prone next to the engine block facing to the left in this photo. ✈
operated by shafts and cams geared to the main camshaft. The ignition switch was an ordinary single-throw knife switch we bought at the hardware store. Dry batteries were used for starting the engine, and then we switched onto a magneto bought from the Dayton Electric Company. There was no battery on the plane.
Several lengths of speaking tube, such as you find in apartment houses, were used in the radiator.”
Other features included a bicycle chain turned camshaft which operating the spark breaker arms and exhaust valves, but the "automatic" intake valves were opened by suction. Having no throttle, the motor only ran at full speed, tuned with a lever that adjusted the camshaft timing. A splash system lubricated the bearings and other moving parts in the crankcase, while a small gear-driven oil pump supplied oil to a tube that that dripped into the cylinders and onto the pistons.
The engine was first run on 12 February 1903. The very next day it overheated and seized up on the bench during a test run. New castings arrived from the foundry on 20 April 1903 and Charlie had the engine rebuilt and ready to go by early June.
When Calbraith Perry Rodgers made his trip from Long Island to California in 1911 in his newly bought Wright aircraft, he paid Taylor $70 a week (a large sum at the time) to be his mechanic. Taylor followed the flight schedule by train, frequently arriving at the next rendezvous before Rodgers, to make any required repairs and prepare the aircraft for the next day's flight.
Taylor worked for the Wright-Martin Company in Dayton until 1920. He later moved to California and invested his life savings in several hundred acres of real estate near the Salton Sea, but the venture failed. He returned to Dayton in 1936, and he and Orville helped Henry Ford in the planning, moving and restoration of the Wright family home and one of the Wright brothers' bicycle shops to Ford's Dearborn, Michigan, heritage village about great Americans. Orville also gave Taylor an annuity of $800 a year.
In 1941 Taylor returned to California, finding work
in a defence factory, but suffered a heart attack in 1945 and was no longer able to work. By 1955 his annuity and Social Security income were inadequate and due to his health problems he ended up in the charity ward of the Los Angeles County Hospital. When his destitute plight was publicised by a reporter who found him, the aviation industry raised funds to move him into a private facility.
Taylor died from complications of asthma in San Fernando on January 30, 1956 - eight years to the day after the death of Orville, his friend and employer. Taylor is buried at the Portal of Folded Wings Shrine to Aviation in Burbank, California, a shrine to aviation history.
As a lasting legacy to Taylor, mechanic certificates in the US now feature his image rather than the images of the Wright brothers they previously carried.
Middle: A working replica of the Wright 1902 engine, built by Terry Hesler. Bottom: The engine with the crankcase cover removed. It had no carburettor: the fuel was dripped through the spigot mounted on top of the cylinder block (the small can in the image). The heat of the engine vaporised it, whereupon it was sucked into the combustion chambers. ✈
After powering the Flyer on four flights at Kitty Hawk on 17 December 1903, the engine was seriously damaged when wind overturned the Flyer.
The engine now on display in the 1903 Wright Flyer at the Smithsonian Institution was built in 1916 when Orville restored the Flyer for an exhibition at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Taylor then became a leading mechanic in the Wright Company after it was formed in 1909.
One hundred years of engineering progress. Charlie Taylor’s engine, shown in the foreground, produced 90 ft lb of thrust when coupled to a propeller. The CF34 Turbofan engine behind it generates well over 20,000 ft lb. ✈
LAST MONTH’S MYSTERY PHOTO Answer
Last month we asked what type of aircraft was shown in the fuzzy photo above, and the role for which it was fitted.
Had we provided it, the photo below might have given readers a better clue - but then it would have given the answer away right from the beginning.
In the latter stages of WW2, the Germans experimented with an increasing number of innovative (and some not so innovative) ideas to strike the Allies. One was the concept of joining two aircraft together: the upper one would be manned and piloted, and the lower filled with explosives, to be released in the vicinity of a target. The disposable drone was known as the Mistel, which is German for Mistletoe (a parasitic plant). The whole assembly, when connected, was known as the Huckepack (“Piggyback”), or sometimes
referred to as Vati und Sohn (“Daddy and Son”).
Whilst various combinations of aircraft were used, the most common Mistel was a Junkers Ju-88 bomber modified with brackets above the wings to hold the control aircraft - a Focke-Wulf 190.
The idea was originally conceived with Scapa Flow in mind, which was the British Home Fleet’s Haven, and which obstructed German maritime
pilot for Junkers, reasoned that if a bomber could be directed to the target without having to return, it would have sufficient fuel for the mission.
His concept was simple: guide a disposable explosives-packed bomber with a second, smaller fighter aircraft, which would control its engines and flight path. The fighter would share the bomber’s fuel whilst attached, thus ensuring it would have sufficient range to return to base.
Intrigued by the idea, the Reich Air Ministry authorised Junkers to begin trails in the spring of 1943. The arrangement demanded innovative technology, most notably electric flight controls (perhaps the first “fly by wire” system in the world?).
The first composite aircraft flew in July of 1943 and was promising enough to begin a project by the a Luftwaffe test unit, code named “Beethoven”. This gave rise to another nickname, Beethoven-Gerät, or “Beethoven Device”.
During the actual attack the fighter pilot initiated a 30 degree dive at 650 km/hr. Once the target was secured in his sights, he would activate the Ju 88’s autopilot using electric controls, and then sever the rearmost of the three main struts securing the two aircraft together, by an explosive bolt. This would angle the fighter slightly upward, upon which the remaining two
the sheer number of targets made the operation overly ambitious.
Whilst the attacks had some limited success, they had little impact on the Soviet advance. The last sortie took place on 26th April 1945 against the Oder. Of seven participating Mistals, only two Fw190 fighters returned. The following day KG200 was disbanded and its remaining members were assimilated into infantry roles.✈
INNOVATION
Whilst the lower aircraft could retain its normal nose assembly, some were modified to carry a shaped charge, as shown above.
The warhead was nearly two tonnes in weight fitted with a copper or aluminium liner. It was designed for penetration of armoured plate or reinforced concrete, to further improve the effectiveness of the weapon.
Some 250 Mistels of various combinations were built during the war but met with limited success. They were first used in combat against the allied invasion fleet during the Battle of Normandy, targeting the British held harbour at Courseulles sur Mer.
Mistel pilots claimed hits during this phase of the war, but none match up to Allied records. They may have been made against the old French battleship Courbet, which had been included in the harbour as a decoy by the allies.
A complete Mistel was captured by the Allies in 1945, but only the Fw190 component survives. It is preserved in RAF Museum Cosford. ✈
When a Soviet Tu-16F bomber buzzed the USS Essex on the 25th May of 1968, no one expected what happened next.
The image below, taken from the flight deck of the USS Essex became crucial evidence that probably prevented an escalation in hostility during the Cold War.
The idealogical differences of the two great superpowers meant provocation and posturing was common, and so it was that a Carrier Group led by the USS Essex began an exercise in the Norwegian Sea towards the end of May 1968, just to stir the Reds up.
The Soviet Union, of course, was not going to let that go unnoticed and dispatched the destroyer Soznatelnyy (VADM Rostislav Dymov) to observe and photograph the exercise.
Russian air assets were also mobilised. On 22 May, no less than 13 Tupolev Tu-16s flew over the Carrier Group, and the Soviet Air Command ordered that air contact with the American force was to occur at intervals of not greater than four hours during daylight hours.
Despite this activity the soviets lost contact with the Group on the 24th. The Air Commander, Chacharov, was severely
embarrassed and ordered an immediate reconnaissance mission to find it.
The CO of the Squadron, Commander Alexander Pliyev was recalled from leave to conduct the task. He was widely regarded as a hawk, who practiced ultra low reconnaissance missions to sneak under his adversaries’ radars to both detect and intimidate them.
Early on the morning of 25th May, two Tu-16s under the command of Pliyev took off from Severonorsk-1 Naval Air Station and headed for the Norwegian Sea. Their mission was to rediscover the location of the Essex and guide the destroyer Soznatelnyy towards her.
The flight was conducted at medium altitudes to avoid detection by the long range air defence radars of the Carrier Group escorts. At 1102 the carrier was found, and within three minutes the information was in the hands of the Operations Room of the Soviet Northern Fleet.
At this point Pliyev decided to demonstrate the superiority of Russian air power. He ordered the second aircraft to climb to a higher altitude to distract radar operators, whilst he descended
to deck-height as a show of contempt.
Essex’s log recorded: “At 1105 am a Russian plane, side number 94 of the Badger class, made several low passes over the Essex.”
Aboard the carrier, Pliyev’s activities attracted considerable interest. A flight deck film crew captured images of the Tupolev making a very low pass at an estimated height of about 15 metres. Groups of sailors stopped what they were doing to watch as the large bomber passed from aft to forward on the starboard size flying slowly. It then turned and was seen some distance away, manoeuvering to reapproach the carrier beam on. By then the filming had ceased.
The common perception amongst witnesses is that one wingtip struck the sea during the turn and the aircraft cartwheeled before exploding. Others suggest the aircraft stalled.
Essex’s log recorded: “On the last pass while entering into a left hand turn, the nose of the Badger dipped below the horizon and at 1152Z
Below. A Tu-16F ‘Badger’ strategic bomber of the Soviet Union passes low and close to the USS Essex on 25 May 1968. Such ‘beat ups’ were fairly common practice between units of the great superpowers of the time as a show of muscle-flexing. But pushing the boundaries could easily lead to critical mistakes, as occurred on this occasion. ✈
[it] crashed into the water, breaking up and exploding...”
A large column of black smoke marked the accident spot and the Essex and its aircraft turned towards it at speed to render assistance.
Helicopters and rescue boats were quickly dispatched, but it soon became evident that there were no survivors.
At 1601 the destroyer Soznatelnyy arrived on the scene and was met by one of the US carrier escorts, flying a flag to indicate an aircraft was down.
Body parts of three of the fallen airmen, which had been recovered from the sea by Essex’s boats, were transferred to the Russian vessel by crane, together with a detailed transcript of what had occurred.
Even in the face of tragedy, however, distrust ran high. “When the body bags were laid out on the deck of the destroyer, we opened [them] from the side of the head to see if there was really a body inside, and not something else” the Russian Commander later said. In the meantime, the Americans took the opportunity to take close-up photographs of the destroyer.
But chivalry was not completely dead. A Flight of four S2 Trackers was then launched from Essex and conducted an honour-guard flypast over the Russian vessel, which in turn fired a three-gun salute from its main armament. It then turned away and was lost from sight.
For a while, speculation ran high in Russian ranks about the cause of the crash, with theories that the Tupolev had met its fate at the hands of enemy fire, or that it had come to grief evading an American drone. “But in the end”, Dymov said, “the only people to witness what had happened were the Americans on Essex. We had to accept their word, and it was probably the truth.”✈
Right. These images are all taken from poor quality cine film from the Essex, but tell the story. [1] The scene of the crash from Essex. [2] Body bags are hauled from Essex’s seaboat into the Russian destroyer [3] Bodies laid out on the deck of the Soznatelnyy. The Russians carefully opened them to satisfy themselves that the contents were as described and not anything else. [4] The flight of four of Essex’s Trackers conducting an honour flypast over the Soviet destroyer. ✈
Order No.54. is open with the following names on the list so far:
Have you thought about getting your name put on the FAAWall of Service?
It’s a unique way to preserve the record of your Fleet Air Arm time in perpetuity, by means of a bronze plaque mounted on a custom-built wall
THIS MONTH’S
MYSTERY
PHOTO QUESTION
Here’s a bit of aviation engineering to do your head in! Any ideas what it is, and where it was used? Answers to the Editor here. ✈
just outside the FAA museum. The plaque has your name and brief details on it (see background of photo above).
There are over 1000 names on the Wall to date and, as far as we know, it is a unique facility unmatched anywhere else in theworld. Itisareallygreatway to have your service toAustralia recorded.
It is easy to apply for a plaque and the cost is far less than the retail price of a similar plaque elsewhere. And, although it is not a Memorial Wall, you can also do it for a loved one to remember both them and their time in the Navy.
Simply click here for all details, and for the application form. If you have any questions you want to ask about it before committing, email the Editor here.✈
of bombs and rockets on the enemy in Korea, no enemy bomber has ever attempted to attack any target protected by any RAN fighter, day or night.
During a 20 February 1969 armament sortie the author had the honour to fire the first RANAIM-9 Sidewinder at a Jindivik drone-towed flare off Jervis Bay. It was dead easy, a lot easier than 20mm air-to-air banner work. Simply set the switches, point the fixed gunsight at the heat source, listen for the distinctive weapon lock-on buzz in the earphones, check the range and press the fire button. The successful outcome was due, in no small measure, to the superb armourers, electricians and many others who prepared the weapon and aircraft.Also, it did no harm to carry an inert practiceAIM-9 with an active training head on all routine flights.
fighter, but never as good as the Sea Fury. Pistonengined aircraft, such as the Seafire and Sea Fury, as well as the jet-powered Sea Venom, all fell far short of both the Skyhawk and Skyraider in the strike role. Both the Sea Fury and Venom could carry a few three-inch rockets and both the Sea Fury and Firefly could even deliver a couple of 1,000 lbs bombs. Unfortunately, the Sea Fury’s bombs competed for the same under wing hardpoints as the drop tanks; therefore it was always a difficult compromise: good endurance (75 to 120 minutes) and range with just rockets, cannon and drop tanks, or limited sortie range and time (45 to 60 minutes) from the carrier with bombs and no drop tanks.
Notes on the Skyhawk
By Fred Lane
Peter Greenfield and David Prest, the two authors of the excellent book “The Skyhawk Years” were diligent in collecting as much input as they could from those who knew and loved the aircraft.. Unfortunately they couldn’t use all the material, but “FlyBy” is pleased to bring some that couldn’t be used, from time to time. Here is one such piece from Fred Lane.
The Douglas SkyhawkA4-G and its two-seat trainer version TA4-G were clearly the most versatile and capable of all RAN aircraft. The Skyhawk first flew in 1954 and its closest RAN rival, the Hawker Sea Fury, first flew in 1945. Both had highly responsive and featherlight controls. They were highly respected and a delight to fly. The Skyhawk, however, was streets ahead of the Sea Fury in nearly every operational respect.
Designed originally as a nuclear bomber in the early 1950s, the RAN purchased the transonic Skyhawk as a fighter, optionally modified to carry four instead of just twoAIM-9 Sidewinder heatseeking missiles. New to RAN fighter pilots, the aircraft brought an invaluable buddy store refuelling capability, an excellent computerised navigation system, ground-mappingAPG53Aradar
and an auto-pilot. Unlike the Sea Fury and Sea Venom, the Skyhawk pilot could plug in a G-suit and pull much more sustained G without blacking out. New Zealand Skyhawks (including some ex-RAN later-modified aircraft) had a better gyro gunsight and advanced bomb-aiming system, but the fixed ring sight was sufficient for the RAN Skyhawk’s brilliant anti-aircraft weapon, the Sidewinder. Intensive training produced reasonable accuracy with rockets, bombs and strafing with the two 20mm Colt cannon. The Skyhawk was also durable. Noting the extra demands of active service and new handling techniques demanded by anti-SAM manoeuvres, Skyhawks with a history of flying in Vietnam were examined in detail to ensure they remained safe to fly until their designated end-of-life, 8,000 hours. Not only was that figure safe, it could be extended to 14,000 hours.
As a fighter, the RAN Skyhawk was far superior to the RAN Sea Fury and Sea Venom. It did not have the Venom’s all-weatherAI-17 radar but if a Skyhawk could be manoeuvred into an approximate line astern position even at night or in poor visibility, once the Sidewinder locked on the enemy aircraft had much less chance of escaping. But then, although RAN aircraft dropped plenty
It is in the strike role that the Skyhawk best shows its outstanding value. The RAN has some experience in this regard, for instance with Sea Furies and Fireflies in Korea, 1950-51. While those aircraft did well enough, when comparing performance in that kind of warfare, a brief comparison with a Korean War USN contemporary, theAD-4 Skyraider (Spad) might be profitable. How did the Skyhawk and Skyraider compare with other Melbourne-capable aircraft like the Supermarine Seafire, Sea Fury and De Havilland Sea Venom?
The author was fortunate to deck land the Seafire (Mark XV and XVII) during his Operational Flying School in the UK in March 1950 and, like the Sea Fury in its day, the Seafire was an excellent
Neither Sea Fury nor Sea Venom had the strike ability and versatility of the early Skyraider (3,180 built) that first flew in 1945, just a year after the Sea Fury (864 built). ASkyraider with drop tanks might loiter 10 hours, a Sea Fury two hours at best. The Skyraider had seven hardpoints under each wing and might carry a highly varied 8,000 lbs bomb load, including even a 2,200 lbs torpedo on its centreline rack. Skyraiders, flown by USN, USAF and South Vietnamese squadrons, destroyed many valuable enemy targets in Korea and Vietnam, but the distinctive engine noise of the “Sandy” RESCAP (Rescue CombatAir Patrol) role was especially welcomed by downed aircrew. Jet RESCAPs were fine for a first few minutes but the dependable Sandies might hang around for an hour or two until a lumbering Jolly Green Giant (Sikorsky MH-53) or other helicopter made an even more welcome quick dart. Sandy duty USN
Packing A Punch
Despite being broadly similar in size (see left), each generation of aircraft brought improved capability: but the Skyhawk, only eight years younger than the Fury, outperformed the others in every aspect by a long margin - especially in its weapons load.
Figures are approximate and rounded for comparison
Photo: John Bartels
Sea Venom
Sea Fury
Skyhawk
Marcus Peake
Skyraiders even shot down two MiG 17s in Vietnam. If we are talking either Strike or RESCAP, the Sea Fury is not on the same page.
Again, to illustrate load-carrying differences, a minimum-fuelled Skyhawk might launch from HMAS Melbourne carrying the near equivalent of a maximum weight Sea Fury together with its full load of fuel, bombs, rockets and all other armament. With buddy store or other aerial refuelling, that Skyhawk could then deliver all that armament much further, much faster and with much more precision than any Sea Fury. Indeed, the RAN Skyhawk could deliver bigger bombloads faster and more accurately than most of the WWII dedicated bombers.
Then there is the reliability problem. Nearly all aircraft have an idiosyncrasy or two with a potential to ruin a whole day and they are not very useful if scattered on enemy soil or grounded for back-ofthe-hangar repairs. The Seafire, for all its fighter prowess, had a narrow-gutted and delicate little undercarriage that was definitely not suited to pitching and rolling decks. It was even less suitable than the Sea Fury in a strike or RESCAP role. With their big propeller and powerful engine, both the Sea Fury and Skyraider had a rare but nasty capability to torque stall. The Sea Fury also had anAchilles Heel oil cooler, under its port wingroot, as Tas Webster discovered when strafing a splash target towed by Sydney during our en passage 1951 Korean workup.Astray 20mm ricocheted into his oil cooler, giving him a standard 30 to 60 seconds warning before the big sleeve-valve engine either seized or burst into flames or both. Calling Mayday and turning sharply to deck land, the engine failed, forcing him to ditch, wheels and flaps down, on Sydney’s downwind leg. The Sea Venom’s biggest problem was that while it had an
missile. The Skyhawk’s worst behaviour was a very rare but potentially very lethal “flat spin”, maybe initiated by asymmetrical slat deployment, for instance at the top of a yo-yo with out-of-whack rudder.
Delivered to RANAS Nowra in 1967, ten RAN Skyhawks were a breath of short-lived but lifesaving air for our FleetAirArm.Another ten were purchased in 1969 and delivered in 1971.After parrying potentially lethal political and Other Service interference over the years, this versatile and capable aircraft in RAN colours was a dream realised. Slated to start Skyhawk exciting conversions in January 1968, the welcome anticipation of early days transformed into a bit of a quagmire. Failure to stay abreast of what seemed to us to be a “pay early and pay often” system for aircraft equipment support, meant that even when sold in the dozens of production queues an item might be arbitrarily deleted without notice because of, say, inflation or other financial fluctuation. Then we were reminded that fresh re-orders went only one way, to the back of the queue. By then, some queues were two years or more long; others “No more orders, production creasing in a couple of months, have a nice day”. We found ourselves replete with spare wings and engines not needed for a year or two, but no sign of any torso harness or even a boarding ladder that was needed to get into the aircraft and strap in. It took some time just to identify exactly what we did not have.After scrounging alternatives, like local hardware shop step ladders and considerable help from sympathetic key USN people, the RAN Skyhawk OFS 1 Course finally got under way in earlyAugust, 1968.
During the early Melbourne/Skyhawk final compatibility trials we also had some early catapult bridle strikes and one radar screen popped out
Embarking 805 Squadron on 9April 1969 for our first RAN Skyhawk cruise Melbourne headed North. One night, during an Exercise Sea Spirit, a SurfaceAttack Group (SAG) was scheduled to approach and attack the fleet. Trackers searched diligently and one made a brief sighting report before going radio silent except for an air-to-air TACAN. That TACAN was tuned to a pre-briefed frequency indicating which of the four cardinal points the Tracker might orbit at 500 feet, exactly 10 miles from the shadowed target. The Skyhawks launched, also radio silent except for one intermittent TACAN, and made a low-level transit in the pitch-black night to pass under the Tracker at best speed.At the right moment the leader pulled away, turned 10 degrees left, climbed and held speed at the flare drop limiting speed while Number Three and the other two aircraft turned 10 degrees right and climbed for a simulated rocket attack. The six-flare drop illuminated the SAG perfectly, two destroyers nestling closely to a cargo ship. The rocketeers did the rest.
Re-forming, everybody flew home to Mother, highly satisfied with a novel job well done. That was the night, when despite official and unofficial briefing after briefing and increasing the “no-go zone” from two to three miles ahead of the carrier, lighting up the darkened carrier with every possible light, automatically stopping the exercise, sounding the siren, sending warnings and even altering away from a probable whistle down our starboard side, USS Frank E Evans closed, fine on our starboard bow, then made a sudden dart to starboard, directly across our bows. Lumbering along at close to 25 knots, there is not much any aircraft carrier could do to evade the collision. Had Evans initiated that same turn just five seconds earlier she might have frightened the life out of a few Melbourne compass platform watchkeepers, but just avoid contact. Five seconds later, she would probably have rammed us amidships and sunk us both. Ten seconds later she would have maybe passed just clear astern.
The follow up formal inquiry was a farce, with little or no attention given to Evans’s captain lying abed and not on his bridge as demanded by exercise orders; neither of the two deck officers on Evans’s bridge had any formal night watchkeeping qualifi-
cation; no identification was made of who ordered nor why that fatal turn starboard order was given and, after putting their ship into a dangerous situation (inside the carrier’s three miles exclusion zone) why they failed to heed Melbourne’s both in-clear and simple code warnings.
This was yet another nail in the RAN FleetAirArm fixed wing coffin, quite beyond the ability of any naval aviator to avoid. There were other nails, self-inflicted at times, such as, in 1973: engine failure off Williamtown, soft Melbourne catapult shot near Singapore, in 1974: lethal possible flat spin off Jervis Bay, fatal mid-air-collision over Beecroft range, in 1979: engine failure near Braidwood, Melbourne arrester wire parting, loss overboard (along with Melbourne’s main radar aerial) when a rogue wave hit during a turn, in 1980: engine failure Nowra, engine failure during Melbourne catapult launch, soft Melbourne catapult shot.
The Skyhawk engine designers or the maintainers must take blame for some of the accidents, like jet engine failures, but there were instances of probable “pilot error” that do not reflect well on training. There were two examples of reflexive seat ejections, one due to arrester wire failure, the other on the catapult, but these were performed by highly experienced USN pilots.
Notably, there were also a high proportion of “carrier-error” accidents that suggest more ship-board training, equipment modification and more skilled supervision might be thought necessary before fixed wing aircraft carrier operations are ever contemplated again in the RAN. For instance, supplying relatively foolproof catapult launch controls are a great idea but if a “fail safe” catapult launch lever is fitted but not engaged then there is not much sense installing it in the first place. There might well be strong arguments made for more intensive training and more “on-the-job” operations for everyone, also aviators in more senior positions in the crew list, like the USN. However, we should protect our enviable record of carrier fire awareness and prevention.✈
The Great Barrier Reef Surveys
By Richard Kenderdine
HModern Hydrographic equipment has made aerial Surveying a lot easier, but it wasn’t always that way. In the late 20s, primitive aircraft, glass plate negatives and a steady hand were the only tools of the trade.
istories of the Fleet Air Arm invariably mention the Great Barrier Reef Survey conducted during the years 1924 – 28 as a step along the path of incorporating aviation into the naval inventory but lack detail of the techniques used and outcomes obtained. Fortunately, the National Archives of Australia hold a copy of the Report that covers the aerial component of the1928 Survey. This Report is interesting for detailing the experience gained in the effective use of aerial photography that was then in the early stages of development.
Vertical aerial photography had been used in the First World War – during 1918 alone over 10 million prints were delivered to the armies on the Western Front – and as a result the RAF gained a reputation for being able to create mosaics and, subsequently, maps and charts. For example, in the first half of the 1920s the RAF surveyed over
600 miles of the Nile River for the Egyptian Government, conducted a photographic reconnaissance of the Baluchistan and Afghan borders, photographed part of the Indus River to assist the Indian Government in building dams and created a mosaic of oil refineries in Iraq.
This gives some perspective of the knowledge base elsewhere when the Reef Survey was conducted.
Background
HMAS Geranium (above), the RAN’s first survey ship, was used for the 1924 Reef survey, in conjunction with a Fairey IIID, for aerial photography of reefs to create charts. In 1925 the RAAF formed 101 Flight (Naval Co-operation) and equipped it with Supermarine Seagull III seaplanes the following year, under the command of Flight Lieutenant A E Hempel. The Flight took
A9 – 1, - 2 and - 3 to Bowen in August 1926, now working with HMAS Moresby, and remained until the following March before returning in July. Lt F G Crowther RAN joined the Flight in October 1927 but did little flying until the new year when he was the only pilot available besides Hempel. Crowther did most of the survey flying, accumulating 160 hours in the process.
Completely independent of the Survey, the Royal Geographical Society supported the Great Barrier Reef Expedition in 1928/9 that is considered to be the birth of coral reef science. The Expedition was based on Low Isles, approximately 25 km east of Port Douglas. On 24 September 1928 Seagull A94 assisted the Expedition by using aerial photography to check ground observations.
The Report
The 1928 Survey was tasked with (i) aerial photography of the coastline between Mackay and Cape Conway and islands in the Hillsborough Channel and then prepare mosaics that could be used to create a correctly scaled plan for charts and (ii) reconnaissance of an uncharted area of the outer reef for which the Flight was based on St Bees Island.
Figure 1 (below) shows, highlighted in red, the coastline and islands photographed and the area to be reconnoitred.
Task 1 – Vertical photography of coastline and islands
The height used for photography was 8000 feet as this was the highest achievable by the Seagulls with the required load. The region has mountainous terrain close to the coast and this caused considerable distortion in the prints and hence errors in the mosaic. Control points had been placed at intervals of approximately 10 miles by Moresby’s hydrographers for their triangulation of the area. The section of the mosaic from Shoal Point to Slade Point is shown in Figure 2, the individual prints being clearly defined. A current view is shown in Figure 3.
The islands photographed were St Bees, Keswick, Carlisle, Brampton and Cockermouth after placement of prominent points by Moresby. The mosaic for Cockermouth is shown in Figure 4.
Difficulties encountered
(a) The P.7 camera with 5 x 3.875 inch plates and 6 inch focal length enabled satisfactory work to be completed but was not entirely suitable for aerial photography.
(b) No filters were able to penetrate the mangrove swamp encountered and there was difficulty trying to find a suitable filter to see reefs beyond a depth of 3 fathoms.
(c) A lack of suitable instruments in the aircraft meant that the flying was not as accurate as
desired. Height was indicated by the standard Service Aneroid in units of 200 feet with considerable lag and lateral trim could not be determined to an accuracy of 1or 2 degrees.
(d) Control points used for triangulation were unsuitable for photographic purposes for two main reasons. First, they were too far apart because the coastline distance could be up to twice the straight-line distance, resulting in difficulty in orientating the prints. Second, in order to be visible over long distances they were usually placed on local high points and therefore at a significant fraction of the photographic height. It was recommended that control points be at approximately the same height and closer together in elevated areas. Further, considerable planning in placing controls should occur before flying the photographic task.
Results
The photographic work was determined to be satisfactory given the equipment available and the poorly placed ground control. Much more detail was obtained than would have been the case using ground survey. The coastlines of the islands were well defined from the photographs.
Task 2 – Reconnaissance of unsurveyed area east of Mackay
The objectives of the reconnaissance were to locate possible passages though the Reef, delineate the inner and outer edges of the Reef and produce a map showing the grouping and relative positions of the components of the Reef. The previously unsurveyed area of approximately 5000 sq miles lay between latitudes 20° and 21° South and from 45 miles off the mainland. A small portion of the inner edge of the area had been roughly examined by Captain Matthew Flinders in 1802.
Three methods were considered: vertical photography (not used because of the lack of
control and distance between islands), oblique photography (suitable but lacked the required equipment) and navigationally controlled traverses that hadn’t been used previously and not as accurate as photography.
The Report then outlined the traverse method that is simple to explain: flights were completed at constant speed along pre-determined compass bearings allowing for deviation, variation and wind with the observer taking bearings to prominent points on reefs and plotting them by dead reckoning. In reality, there were a number of difficulties in execution, all of which are described in some detail.
Observations of submerged objects were affected by their depth (difficult beyond 3 fathoms), position of the sun, colour of the object, condition of the sea and surface indications. It was found absolutely necessary to use an observer with local knowledge of the sea conditions because discoloured water from stirred up coral sand could be mistaken for certain reef forms.
It was acknowledged that the traverse method was subject to many sources of error (compass, turning,
Figure 1. Red outline of coast to be photographed and area surveyed.
Figure 2. Mosaic from Shoal Point to Slade Point.
Figure 3. Current view of Shoal Point to Slade Point.
ground speed, wind, astronomical position), all discussed at length with suggestions for improvement. It was considered that the relative positions of the reefs would not exceed 3 miles and the absolute error of any reef, as determined by latitude and longitude, could be as much as 5 miles.
Bad visibility and strong South Easterly gales disrupted the work so that only approximately 2500 sq miles were surveyed.
The Report summarised the results of the traverse method by concluding that ‘a chart prepared by this method, under the present conditions and with the available apparatus can hardly serve any useful purpose from a surveying point of view but it may be of considerable academic interest.’
Conclusion
In their letter to the Admiralty the Australian Naval Board wrote
‘This form of hydrographic survey must be admitted to be still in the experimental stage and although the results achieved cannot at present be considered as outstanding, the Australian Naval Board is of the opinion, taking into consideration the lack of previous experience and the local difficulties in the operation of aircraft, that there is definite promise of useful development in the future.’
The Board went on the endorse the conclusions in the Report regarding the type of equipment required, the necessary changes to ground control, acceptance of the mosaics, the 3 fathoms limit of detection of shoals and rejection of vertical photography for widely spaced objects.
Further experimental work was proposed to see if air observation was reliable for depths exceeding
3 fathoms, whether low oblique photography could be used to prepare a plan of the Reef and the use of stereoscopic photography both for observing objects at depth and for topographic detail.
The impression obtained from reading the Report is that those involved did their best with the equipment they had, were aware of the limitations and what needed to be done to yield better results when undertaking similar tasks in future.
References:
(1) Report on air survey of the Great Barrier Reef, 1928, by No 101 Flight, RAAF National Archives of Aust. ID1102401.
(2) Eyes of the RAF, Roy Conyers Nesbit, Bramley Books, 1996.
(3) The Great Barrier Reef Expedition 1928-1929 - RGS.
(4) CROWTHER FRANK GEORGE. National Archives of Australia Item ID 5398919.✈
Read the story of HMAS Geranium’s survey embarkation here.
Frank Crowther joined the RAN as a Paymaster Cadet on 1 February 1921 at age 17. Five years later he had achieved Paymaster Lieutenant before being selected to join the 1926 intake to train as a pilot at Point Cook. Upon completion Frank remained at 1 Flying Training School to fly a Widgeon amphibian in July and August 1927 before joining 101 Flight at Bowen on 14 September. He continued with the Reef Survey until December 1928 and was the pilot who completed the task for the Royal Geographic Society mentioned previously. For the remainder of his attachment to the RAAF
Frank served on HMAS Albatross, 3 Squadron and 101 Flight before resuming his naval career on 26 April 1930. Frank served on a number of ships and shore establishments (including Albatross from April 1951 to June 1953). He was promoted to Paymaster Lt. Commander on 1 February 1934 and Paymaster Commander on 31 December 1942. One notable posting was as Comptroller and Military Secretary to the Governor-General as Acting Captain from May to December 1947.
Frank retired in April 1963 and died on 8 March 1979.✈
Top. Supermarine Seagull engaged on Barrier Reef survey 1926-1928 in a tropical setting. Maybe the officer on the right is Lt.. Crowther? (RAAF Museum). Below. On Low Isles, 24 Sep 1928.
Geranium
Flown by Lt F.G. Crowther (Album 2 Sir Charles Maurice Yonge Collection, James Cook University).✈
Figure 4. Cockermouth Island has an area of 170 hectares.
Bad Penny - One
This didn’t fit in the “Around the Traps” section so here it is to bring a smile/grimace to your face.
Its our wayward Commander, again (see July 24 FlyBy page 16), but this time on his wedding day, it would seem. The lady is reported as being a previous student of his. The Commander - if he indeed reached that rank - is somewat awry in his rig: winter shirt with summer trousers and hard epaulettes instead of soft ones.
He’s also sporting double qualification badges which is apparently now allowed. His appear to be PWO and SF which are unlikely to have been earned, considering his specialisation as a Schoolie. Noting the previous photos we have of him wearing an aircrew flying jacket with a multitude of badges, its surprising he isn’t sporting a set of gratuitous wings as well.
There’s an entry about him in the RANC magazine, which reports that he joined the Navy in 1967 as an aspiring Birdie (pilot) but the avenue was closed due to FAA cutbacks post ‘59. He consequently did a few hours of private flying in Chipmunks at Bankstown, which, as far as we know, was the extent of his flying experience.
Fraudsters are like bad pennies: they keep turning up. This guy is no exception. ✈
Bad Penny - Two
And finally, with the forthcoming election in the US hotting up, I was reminded of the striking cover of the Daily Telegraph of 10 November 2016.
Donald Trump, much to the surprise of many people, had just won the Presidency and the Telegraph voiced what many people were thinking: WTF!
Of course, as the paper explained, the acronym meant “Will Trump Flourish”. Yeah, right.
Hard to tell whose photo will appear this November but, depending on your views, it could be another Bad Penny moment.✈
