More useless stuff

[Britbrat]

1) What was the date of the first manned ejection-seat test & who was the "volunteer"?

2) What aircraft was the first specifically designed turbojet fighter & what was the date of its first flight?

3) What was the highest speed achieved by the Me 163 & on what date?

4) What was the first aircraft to successfully fly & demonstrate a variable incidence wing, & on what date?

5) In what year & country occurred the first reported hijacking of a commercial aircraft.

6) Who was the first man to exceed Mach 1 in a turbine powered a/c, what plane & on what date?

7) What was the first a/c to fly non-stop around the world?

[jetmex]

1. The first use of an ejection seat was made by a German test pilot named Schenk, on January 13, 1942. He had to punch out when the He 280, which was powered by two Argus pulse-jets that required a high forward speed to start up, refused to release from the tow aircraft due to the cable release failure. Although Schenk’s was the first known use of an ejection seat for an emergency bailout, the Heinkel compressed air seat he used was reportedly tested in an experimental ejection from a test aircraft by a Heinkel employee named Busch, prior to the 1942 ejection

2. I think it was the He-280, which first flew on April 5, 1941.

3. 623 mph in October 1941

5. The first recorded aircraft hijack was on February 21, 1931, in Arequipa, Peru. Byron Rickards flying a Ford Tri-motor was approached on the ground by armed revolutionaries. He refused to fly them anywhere and after a ten day stand-off Rickards was informed that the revolution was successful and he could go in return for giving one of their number a lift to Lima.

7. Boeing B-50 "Lucky Lady", from 26 February to 2 March 1949.

[Britbrat]

Very good Jaime. You didn't leave much for Galvin.

#1 correct
#2 correct
#3 essentially correct -- missed it by 1 mph -- 624mph Oct /41 is also correct -- what day?
#5 correct
#7 close enough -- however, my records indicate that Lucky Lady was a B29, not a B50.

Only two to go

[jetmex]

"Lucky Lady" was a B-50A:

www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b50.html

I saw her fuselage many years ago in the Planes Of Fame Museum in Chino, CA. Maybe Galvin (or anyone else) can let us know if it's still there.

[Britbrat]

OK -- it's all yours.

What about #4 & #6?

I'll add a bonus question as well -- What was the first straight-winged production (not experimental) a/c to exceed Mach 1 -- and when -- and who? I guess that's 3 bonuses in 1.

[Galvin]

4.) Glenn Curtiss successfully flew a "hydroplane" with a variable incidence wing as early as 1910. The wing was one of many experiments tried in an attempt increase the lift required to get the arircraft off the water. Nearly three times the power to lift off land was required in order to overcome the suction of the canoe type float he was using. Fokker also had a varible incidence wing on his V.1, and V.2 experimental fighters. The V.3 was the prototype of the DR.1 triplane and only its upper wing had variable incidence. The feature was dropped as too hard for the average service pilot to handle.

The Republic XF-91 Thunderceptor, in addition to having mixed rocket and turbojet power, had a variable incidence wing of inverse taper planform, i.e., narrower at the root than at the tip. The XF-8U Crusader may have been the first PRODUCTION aircraft with a variable incidence wing but I doubt it.

6.) This goes back to the discussion we had with the XP-86 and whether or not it exceeded the speed of sound a couple of weeks prior to Chuck Yeager's official record. That the aircraft was capable of exceeding Mach one even in its original form has been proved and so that would make the first man to exceed Mach one in a turbine powered aircraft George "Wheaties" Welch, the North American test pilot of the XP-86. An unnamed British exchange pilot flying the same aircraft did so also a month or so later and broadcast the feat over the radio.

Jaime: The fuselage of the "Lucky Lady" was still at the "Planes of Fame" museum in Chino when I last saw it back in 1997 and likely still is.

[Britbrat]

Galvin -- #4 is an interesting case. I intended that the question refer to "in-flight" variable incidence -- but I didn't specifically say so. The early examples that you gave were indeed variable incidence configurations -- but not in flight. I happily accept you examples, but I am really looking for the first successful in-flight variable incidence aircraft.

#6 We went through the XP-86 thing previously -- not reported & not confirmed, plus no sonic boom -- ergo it didn't happen -- keep looking

[Galvin]

It is my understanding that both the Curtiss and Fokker examples I cited were capable of inflight change of wing incidence. The Fokker examples were not proceeded with because of the difficulty an average service pilot would have in flying them.

There was also a prototype of a variable incidence light observation aircraft produced during WWII, the Bf-163 V1 (Not the Me-163, that was the rocket fighter). It was flown and reportedly performed quite well but was not put into production because of its complexity. One George W. Cornelius built and successfully flew a variable incidence wing aircraft in 1930. His designs were always a bit weird, forward sweep was another of his trademarks and he designed a fuel carrying flying wing glider during WWII that had that feature,

Other more recent examples of variable incidence wing aircraft were the aforementioned XF-91, the Martin XB-51 bomber, and the XF-8U Crusader, the first mass produced aircraft having a variable incidence wing.

The "Crimson Test Tube", the Douglas "Skystreak" D-558-1 #1, exceeded Mach 1 on September 29, 1948, while piloted by Eugene F. May and flown in a 35-degree dive. It was a straight-winged aircraft and, by all accounts, fairly hairy to fly at transsonic speeds. The "Skystreaks" were powered by the J-35 turbojet engine, a U.S. built version of the British Sapphire turbojet.

BTW: The "Lucky Lady II" was indeed a B-50A. It differed from the B-29 mainly in that it was powered by the P&W R-4360 "Corncob" 28 cylinder radials rather than the Wright R-3350s that powered the B-29.

[Britbrat]

OK -- I give up on #4 -- the a/c I was looking for was the Supermarine Type 322, flown on Feb 06, 1943 by Geoffrey Quill. There are too many different sources & I guess mine are not complete, or are trying to revise history.

The Skystreak wasn't it -- there is another.

What about the bonus? -- the Skystreak, being an experimental, ain't it either.

[Galvin]

I believe that the Skystreak was the first straight-winged turbine powered aircraft to exceed the speed of sound but if we want the first production aircraft it was probably the Canadian CF-100 "Canuck", powered by two Rolls Royce Avons and the first all-weather interceptor available to NATO. It had a long career with the Royal Canadian Air Force but was plagued with fuel leaks and resultant inflight problems throughout that time. It first flew in 1950, around the time the F-94C went into production for the USAF. The F-94C was a development of the original F-80/T-33 design and also went supersonic in a dive at some time soon after its first flight. As a young boy I lived across the street from the Van Nuys airport in the early 1950s and probably saw most, if not all, of the production F-94s flight tested from the A through the D version.

I once talked to an Australian Vampire pilot who had flown against CF-100s in exercises conducted under the old SEATO alliance. He told me that the standard challenge given by a Canuck pilot after intercepting a bogey was "Identify yourself or I'll blow myself up".

[Britbrat]

The CF-100 is correct -- but it was powered by Canadian Orenda engines, not Avons (the 2 prototypes were Avon powered). Jan Zurakowski exceeded Mach 1 in the first CF-100 Mk4 in 1950.

The CF-100 fuel leakage (& a host of other problems) was largely confined to the prototypes, plus the Mk-2 & Mk-3 versions. Most of the long-term in-flight problems were related to the Hughes MG-2 fire control system & APG-4 targeting radar (vacuum tubes in those days). Throughout its long life the CF-100 was not so much unreliable, but rather, a maintenance nightmare because it used parts from a variety of suppliers, even within a specific model -- the parts inventory was enormous.

The Mk4s & Mk5s were very good fighters in all respects. Very high altitude combat capability, Mach .93 speed at altitude (but only M.85 at sea level), transatlantic range (it could fly an intercept at 1,500 miles!!), massive armament, & despite its huge size & weight, it was a formidable dogfighter (easily wax a Vampire at all altitudes). Except for the Sabre, the Mk4A & B could out-fight any NATO fighter of the period, including the Hunter & F100. The Mk4B was a close match for a Sabre above 35,000 ft, but a dead duck against a Sabre at low altitude. Mk4A & B could exceed Mach 1 in a dive from 40,000 ft, with recovery to level flight at 20,000 ft. The Mk-5 was a genuine high altitude fighter/interceptor with a combat ceiling of 54,000 ft, but without supersonic dive capability. The Mk5 had, on occasion, been flown above 60,000 ft.


Still waiting for #6 -- the first turbine a/c to exceed Mach 1.

[Galvin]

I guess the first turbine powered airplane to exceed Mach one in a dive was the third prototype of the DeHavilland DH-108 "Swallow". This occurred on September 9, 1947 and the pilot in this case was DH test pilot John Derry. For some reason I was fixated on the first straight-winged turbine powered aircraft or I'd have gotten this sooner.

[Britbrat]

Ya got it ;D

Congrats, I knew you had it buried somewhere in there.

[Galvin]

I did a little more digging on the DH-108 and found that there are sources giving the date of John Derry's alleged supersonic flight as September 6, September 9, and 1947 or 1948. September 9, 1948 seems to be the correct date based on number of sources using it and the fact that if it had happened on the same date in 1947 it would have been even before Yeager's officially accepted first Mach 1 flight on October 14 of that year. This fact is not in dispute by the British, they just say that the DH-108 was their first supesonic airplane and I have no reason to doubt that it was.

I say "alleged" in reference to the DH-108's breaking of the barrier because the sole evidence of it doing so was the observation by test pilot John Derry of the machmeter's sudden jump from .09 to 1.05 and the fact that it was never confirmed as an official speed. Not that I dispute that it happened but the feat is based solely on John Derry's description of the machmeter jump and was not confirmed by any other source.

There were three prototypes of the DH-108 built, the first having a 40 degree swept wing and the other two having 45 degree swept wings. All used the fuselage pod of the DH Vampire fighter with its wooden foward half and very conveniently used the existing wing attachment points. The third prototype had a pointed nose, a 3750 Lb. thrust Goblin IV engine, and a lowered pilot seat allowing a more streamlined canopy. It was the one that unofficially hit Mach 1.05, a speed taken solely from the machmeter reading in the aircraft.

All three prototypes eventually crashed, the first taking the life of Geoffery DeHavilland, the son of the founder of the company and the other two killing their pilots also. The aircraft had a tendency to "tuck" as it approached supersonic speeds and even John Derry said that the aircraft was not in full control at the time he saw the machmeter jump from .9 to 1.05.

When DeHvilland was killed in the first prototype while practicing for an attempt on the world speed record, a loud bang was heard and it has been speculated that it may have been a sonic boom. Having heard an aircraft break up catastrophically in the air, as did the Swallow of Geoferry DeHavilland Jr., I can say that it is also likely that it may have been that same sound that was heard but we will never know for sure.

Interestingly, it was the complaint by their test pilot George Welch of just the same kind of fluctuations in airspeed readings indicating Mach 1 that caused North American to decide to investigate the actual speed of the XP-86. This was done by using a very accurate tracking radar and a theodolite as mentioned in this forum previously, and was done on October 19, within 5 days of Yeager's historic supersonic flight in the Bell XS-1 by the very same equipment that had confirmed its breaking of the sound barrier.

On that day North American's engineers found to their surprise and delight that this ground based test equipment confirmed that the XP-86 could exceed Mach 1 and had been doing so even prior to Yeager's flight. The readings that day were Mach 1.02 on the first run and 1.03 on the second. The airplane definitely could and did exceed the speed of sound.

They were immediately sworn to secrecy and ordered to keep quiet about it by Secretary of the Air Force Stuart Symington, however, and when on April 26, 1948 the Brit exchange pilot (inadvertently?) broadcast his own experience of going through the speed of sound on every tower frequency in line of sight, Symington was furious not only because it was the breach of a military secret but because it undermined Yeager's "official" record.

Based on the number of people that heard this unnamed test pilot describe doing so and the prevoiusly established fact that the XP-86 was definitely capable of the feat, our anonymous Brit was therefore likely the first of his country through the sound barrier.

(Source for much of this F-86 data, including its supersonic exploits, is the comprehensive history of the North American F-86 Sabre in Volume 10 of the quarterly "Wings of Fame" series that was published by Aerospace Publishing Co., London. The DH-108 data was gleaned from various sources on the web.)

Just to add another log to the fire, try this link.
mach1.luftarchiv.de/mach1.htm

[Britbrat]

That was tremendously interesting. I have some appreciation for what that German pilot experienced, having been through Mach 1 in early jets myself (F-86 & CF-100). My closest near miss in the air came when I very foolishly tried to push a Nene-powered T-33 past its critical Mach no. -- the attempt nearly killed me.

Where do you find this stuff?

[Galvin]

I find this stuff by typing in a few key words and then seeing where they take me. I like to solve puzzles of various sorts too and the methods used are often similar to finding needed information. However, the 262 info was one of those completely inadvertent and serendipitous discoveries that just kind of happen now and then.

I don't know if I believe the story or not. The Jumo 004s on that thing were capable of only about 1900 Lbs thrust each on good day. On the other hand, in a 50 degree dive with a heavy but clean airplane, the engines firewalled to the whole 3800 Lbs. thrust, moderately swept wings, and a death wish......?!

Stranger things have happened.

BTW: I believe the Me-262 on display in the Planes of Fame museum at the Chino airport was reportedly the one, originally a photo nose version, that Howard Hughes got hold of immediately after the war and converted back to the fighter version by the simple expedient of bolting a fighter nose on it.

His intent was to enter the Bendix transcontinental race for, I think, 1947. The kibosh was supposedly put on his entering it by the military. They were supposedly intending to showcase the newly operational P-80 by entering and winning the race and did not want the embarrassment of being beaten by a civilian in a refurbished war trophy. Apparently they had read that report referred to in the german article as well.

Had the XP-86 been available at the time they might have let him go for it but showing up the U.S.'s newest operational fighter with something designed several years earlier and not even in the U.S. was not going to happen.

I lived in Glendale, California when I first moved out from Massachusetts in the late forties. We lived very near the Grand Central Airport and even as a little kid I can remember that same 262 sitting there. I think the Curtiss-Wright Technical Institute, basically an A&P school, owned it by then.

(The building that the school was in and the old airport tower that was part of it are the only remaining buildings from the old airport now. Their distinctive arches were the identifying feature of Grand Central Airport as seen in countless old movies and, I seem to recall, have been designated a historical landmark. My brother retired from Disney after many years with them designing rides and equipment for Disneyland and Disney World. He used to work in a building very near to where that airplane had been parked so many years before.)

Sometimes I go up to Everett, WA and check on the progress of the Me-262 replicas. The first two-seat Me-262B has flown and should be ready to fly again after all the necessary mods have been carried out. It may have already flown again for all I know because I haven't been up there in months. After looking at them, I don't think I would attempt to do the ton in any of them, even with the 2400 Lb. thrust GE CJ-610 Lear Jet engines with which they are now equipped.

[jetmex]

Hey Patrick--I used to work on the Canadair T-Birds a while back, for an outfit called Flight Systems. We did drone support for the Patriot missile program and we used the T-33s as chase planes for QF-86 drones. The drones (or pieces thereof) probably went supersonic on the way down in the rare event that someone actually hit one, but I don't think the T-Birds were quite that fast......

I still have my T-33 preflight checklist.....

[Galvin]

Back in the 70s I had a friend named John Alden who owned a Canadian built Harvard Mk IV. It got a little pricey to keep up the maintenance and insurance, to say nothing of the thirty gallons per hour of 100LL it averaged, so he advertised for and got a partner to help him out. The arrangement was satisfactory enough that both flew the airplane out of Santa Monica for quite some time afterwards.

The partner's name was Zimmer or Zimmerman and he turned out to be a very interesting guy. He had been a Navy pilot and was one of the few to have been saddled with flying the F7U-3 Cutlass flying wing fighter. After completing the operational training course on the airplane he was flown out to the carrier, itself already underway in the beginning of a cruise. His first look at carrier ops with the airplane was observed from the island of the boat and he said that one of the first airplanes he saw recovered made a hard touchdown and rammed the nose gear leg up into the cockpit, firing the bang seat.

The pilot did about three gainers and landed on the deck still strapped in the seat. This was in the days before zero-zero seats, after all. This was hardly a confidence builder and turned out to be only the beginning of a nightmare cruise. He said that the skipper eventually put into a port in Japan after losing several pilots in rapid succession to accidents in the aircraft and left the entire complement of F7U's on the dock, apparently preferring to risk a court martial rather than sacrificing more pilots to the monster.

But I digress.

Back to what I was posting for. I remember seeing a picture of a Navy T-33 (TV-1, actually) that had received severe damage to the rear fuselage and tail feathers. It turned out that Alden's partner was the guy flying it when the damage was sustained. He was training in the airplane solo and got the T-Bird into some sort of high speed dive situation about which he now claims to remember very little save that he does recall blacking out for quite some time and finally reawakening with the airplane dead level at about twelve feet altitude, scooting along at a high rate of knots over a potato field.

I have seen that picture several times in various places but can't seem to find it on the web. If anyone has a source for it please post it here.