And especially grateful for getting the (French) idea of a rotating engine around a fixed crankshaft - i.e. a front-mounted flywheel - out of the way early on in the development of aviation.
The way the pilot controls the engine speed is with a blip switch located on top of the control stick. By holding the switch down with his thumb, the magneto is grounded, which shuts electricity off to the spark plugs. This effectively, kills the engine. When the blip switch is released by taking the thumb off the switch, the spark plugs begin to fire again and the engine roars to life. By blipping the switch on (thumb up) and off (thumb down), the pilot can control the speed of the engine for operation on the ground and to slow down for landing. If you watch any old World War I films, you can hear the sound of the engine going . . . Brrrappp! . . . Brrrappp! . . . Brrrappp!. . . when the aircraft comes in to land.
@@allanroser1070 Yes it's true of WW1-era rotary engines like this. In these engines the whole crankcase spins around a crankshaft that's bolted to the bulkhead. As far as I know it simply wasn't possible to make a reliable throttling system for these engines so the spark cut "blipper" was the answer.
@@chrisburn7178 Air cooled acft engines even modern ones are intentionally run rich for ground ops, takeoff, full power, and during climb to cool them. In most cases there is a manual control (always red) on the panel that controls the mixture. Once you reach cruise altitude and air speed you lean the mixture for economy. Yes fouled spark plugs is a recurring issue, and 100 hour inspection requirements includes removing, cleaning, and ops checking the plugs. Fouled plugs is also the most common cause of a failed magneto before takeoff check. The shut down procedure is designed with this very rich mixture in mind. To clear the cylinders of fuel you shut down using the 3 Ms in the correct order. Mixture (to idle cutoff) and wait for the engine to die then, Master (off), Mags (off). They still foul plugs like big dogs.
The Camel had a rotary engine which means the crankshaft is mounted to the airframe and the rest of the engine spins around it. If you ever had a string pull gyro from the museum of science as a kid, you probably remember How it resists turning by applying a force 90 degrees opposite the applied force. Same thing in this plane with its heavy engine spinning would require anticipating what it would do for any attempted change in attitude.
Sorry, Rotary engine. The Wankel rotary engine is a different beast. The original rotary engine had the complete engine spinning around a stationary crankshaft, with the propeller bolted not to the crankshaft but to the spinning engine.
Attended a couple of events at Rhinebeck back in the 80's. Fabulous event! The runway is tiny and surrounded by rather dense forest. The pilots are the best!
I flew in to the airport right next door during the 70's. Didn't trust myself with my C-172 to land at Rhinebeck. The show and displays were wonderful but watching the braver public taking off afterwards from Rhinebeck was breathtaking!
As a GA pilot, I love seeing these old aircraft perform! I was privileged to fly in a Stearman once, the old yellow and blue radial engine, tandem seating aircraft, quite a thrill!
Yes, you were privileged. Know of those thru Dad.. Army Air Corps markings. Prob. had the Continental radial,or the Pratt & Whitney R985 Wasp Jr radial!!
All these rocket scientists know absolutely nothing about a WW1 rotary engine, never mind even less knowledge what it takes to fly one of these planes!
I was there back in the nineties when Gene DeMarco lost power and stalled it into the trees. We heard the muffled crunch of tree branches, then saw him running out of the woods waving to the crowd. As far as I know, he was alright.
@@rolandweinberg That was before he swindled Peter Jackson for 100s of thousands and was convicted and jailed.. On release declared bankrupt in NZ and shot through to New York. A rotten bounder old boy.
Obvious that you don't know about the engine. The smoke is from caster oil. It's a total loss oil system so you always have a fine spray of oil blowing back at you
Yep, but not in the same league as fighter. Tom Sopwith referred to the Pup as having no vices. Great interview with Tom Sopwith on UA-cam when he was 96
I remember going there back in the early 1970s, with my parents. Was in my 20s then. Still have many film slides of many plans. Back then they actually flew most of them, only a few were in repair and they had a great show with the Black Baron and a blond youg lady dressed in blue. Her Saveur and the Baron would have a pretend dog fight. The Black Baron flew a Fokker and would drop bombs. There was also a mail biplane and others. It was all a great show.
this thing is fucking tricky to pilot: I could not have done better than him, for sure: no brakes on landing gear, no steering tailwheel, no gas throttle just a pool of switches! [edit] not mentioning the torque of rotary engine, obviously.
The problem world war 1 Planes did not have any braking systems on them. This makes taxing, takeoff and landing way harder. World war 2 plane had differential braking systems that help steer. Taildraggers are a pain in the ass.
Looks to me to be a genuine ground loop accident, not a stunt or humorous. I'm amazed at how ready almost EVERYONE is to opine about technical issues with no authority whatsoever. Modern culture: ptooey.
These biplanes had rotary engines. For those of you that are unaware, I’m not talking about Mazda engines. These rotaries were horrible engines. The crank shaft was stationary and the engine would spin. So the propeller was attached to the engine crank case. They were also lubricated during WWI with cod liver oil due to shortages of oil. Basically a death trap for pilots. But they flew them !
D.R., very exactly!! Used castor oil from what I've read/was told..Not exactly multi-vis oil, synthetic or reg, as we have today, over a century later. Very right on. Think the Camel used the Clerget rotary. Any rotary like that induced high gyroscopic tendencies at high (sic) rpm, that the pilot must plan for/stay ahead of.
@@theprinceofliberia6793 I believe that you might be confusing rotary engines with radial engines. Rotary engines were basically used during WW 1. If not then I not familiar with the rotary that you are talking about.
@@BsUJeTs you're right. I actually did make that mistake. Now i can imagine problems associated with such huge mass rotating around stationary crankshaft especially at LOW AIRSPEED and high RPM. Thanks for correcting and educating me
That’s the reason why most airfield of those times were round fields with no specific runway directions. Always the wind on the nose and plenty of space for „break out‘s“ Unfortunately they had no breaks either… It‘s always easy to criticize pilots from a wing chair! Yes, I am a pilot, a taildragger pilot, a CRM assessor, an instructor and well experienced in training instructors.
Yikes! Didn't they put wheel brakes on those old planes? Looks like nasty to control once the tail wheel lifts up off the ground but before you have enough airspeed to get the rudder to act...
Because of the rotating engine torque, the Camel always wanted to turn right. It ha been said; "the easiest way to make a left hand turn in a Camel is to make 3 right hand turns."
I heard a jet fly over last night that sounded just like the sound of this plane as it was taxiing to take off. Never heard a jet sputter and "backfire" like that before. It was pretty unusual. Like 10 or 12 pop sounds in quick succession.
For all of you who don't know... Pilot was never intending to rake off, rather roll by the audience with the tail up. Engine was working as designed and not misfiring. This type of rotary engine has no real throttle, just a switch controlling ignition. Usually switches between off, firing one or 3 cylinders, and all cylinders. Because cylinders rotate with propeller around a stationary crank shaft torque is a big issue. No brakes means that at low speeds the biggest force often means that torque. In this case pilot lowered the tail as power was being reduced. No brakes, no rudder control, and that engine torquing the airframe cause this incident ( not accident).
308winsniper sorry but I disagree. There is no indication of this happening. After the pilot lifts the tail he goes back to blipping the ignition. The popping noise is normal for this engine. Suggest you watch this m.ua-cam.com/video/FvHrbkYEn0k/v-deo.html for more info
It's not quite that simple. The answer is yes, but really Error was because of limitations of control inherent in this design. This accident is common with these types of engines. I'm hesitant to say the cause is pilot error
Yes, I've never felt comfortable with the harsh term "pilot error" being slapped on most accidents because it implies a degree of negligence, whereas I think the softer term "pilot misjudgement" would be more applicable in many cases such as this one.
Yes. Well, doesn't this one?? Prob. stroboscopic aberrations in the video. Yeah, supposed to be 2-bladed laminated wood, with shot-peened partial leading edge!! You don't see the prop at static, so hard to tell..
IF YOU FREEZE the video at the 1:57 mark, the 2 bladed prop is visible. Prop rpm and video frame rate are not synchronous, so it looks like a 4 blade at times.
Those old planes have no wheel brakes so you have to do all the on ground steering with the rudder. In order for enough prop wash to go over the rudder to steer more power must be added.
Interesting. I have the same issue docking my old sailboat. Need 4-5 Kts in reverse (2-3 kts in forward), for the rudder to have an effect. That may not sound a lot but max speed is only 6-7 kts so it takes some time to have any control.
Dear stanfolo44, would it be possible to contact you regarding this fantastic video? I would love to discuss a permission to use this video in a production if this is possible. Greetings!
Pilot error only in the sense that he should not have agreed to a fast taxi/no take off demonstration in the 1st place. This plane/engine combination can't do it.
Thanks, Charles. I thought it was an early rotary belching out that smoke and cutting on and off. I never saw one before operational. Just read about them.
Nothing wrong with the engine, it is a Gnome rotary. The method of speed control is to shut off the ignition from time to time, hence the sounds of missfiring. The whole thing was staged.
As a pilot I can appreciate the frightening gyroscopic forces on these things at takeoff and in left hand turns. The advantage of the rotary engine must have been substantial considering the conventional in-line engines available at the time. Crashes with these rotaries was pretty common.
He was ready to take off and kept waiting and waiting and waiting. Fearful not confident at all. This pilot have no idea what is this machine. After he took off decided to stop. BIG mistake. There's no tail gear control! After taking off just go! Destroyed a perfectly flying Sopwith Camel. What a shame! No, this aircraft is not hard to fly. It is hard for those that do not understand squad about it. The escuse to say this aircraft killed many in the past is no escuse at all. At the time the pilots did not and were not trained for the gyroscopic effect of the rotary engine that it has. All in all. Don't let inexperienced pilots like this put to shame aircraft in front of the public like this. SHAME SHAME SHAME.
Not sure the pilot could have done much more than he did to try and avoid it. Original engined WW1 aircraft were notoriously difficult and unreliable and he'd probably only have saved it if he'd shut down and aborted at the very first stutter. He probably expected and hoped for it to clear through as just an oil/fuel clog very quickly. Thereafter with no proper propwash the rudder authority was gone completely.
If my old wheelhorse tractor ran like that I’d turn around and head back to the shop. This pilot should have lost his license until he learned basic high school engine repair skills. What a waste, and what’s up with that ridiculous scarf? Too many parts for that costume to entangle itself with. Then again it’s Rheinebeck, NY.
For all the criticism people must know that the Camel was one of the most difficult planes to master. Accidents were frequent.
Yeah i've heard that more sopwith camel pilots died in crashes than in actual fights
Just the very reason NOT to fly it. Anybody that tries is brain dead.
the gee bee R2 was harder
Yessir, correct..short-coupled, along with gyroscopic tendencies 'cause of the rotary engine!!
@@jaimesarabia9830 Heard about/know about that "Flying Barrel" too!
Hats off to the brave aviators and engineers of yesteryear that paved the way to the incredible technology we are accustomed to today.
My!! Now there's a great, heartfelt, honest critique there!!..Thanks!!
And especially grateful for getting the (French) idea of a rotating engine around a fixed crankshaft - i.e. a front-mounted flywheel - out of the way early on in the development of aviation.
And we still crash em
I honestly never fully appreciated how unstable these things were. Especially on takeoff and landing.
Yessir, very correct!! Especially with that rotary engine!
They are generally made of very small pieces of wood, covered in organic cloth.
Reminds Joe when he flew Sopwith Camels during the Canadian Bacon War delivering medical supplies to cure hams.
Got a good belly laugh from that one! Thanks!!!
😂😂
I was there and I saw him, no really I did. I got his autograph. will live forever in my toilet.
so , pigs did fly.
The way the pilot controls the engine speed is with a blip switch located on top of the control stick. By holding the switch down with his thumb, the magneto is grounded, which shuts electricity off to the spark plugs. This effectively, kills the engine. When the blip switch is released by taking the thumb off the switch, the spark plugs begin to fire again and the engine roars to life. By blipping the switch on (thumb up) and off (thumb down), the pilot can control the speed of the engine for operation on the ground and to slow down for landing. If you watch any old World War I films, you can hear the sound of the engine going . . . Brrrappp! . . . Brrrappp! . . . Brrrappp!. . . when the aircraft comes in to land.
True story? ... great info if it is cheers
Idle adjustment!
@@allanroser1070 Yes it's true of WW1-era rotary engines like this. In these engines the whole crankcase spins around a crankshaft that's bolted to the bulkhead. As far as I know it simply wasn't possible to make a reliable throttling system for these engines so the spark cut "blipper" was the answer.
@@Cheva-Pate The engine doesn't have an "idle" but his mixture is definitely rich!
@@chrisburn7178 Air cooled acft engines even modern ones are intentionally run rich for ground ops, takeoff, full power, and during climb to cool them. In most cases there is a manual control (always red) on the panel that controls the mixture. Once you reach cruise altitude and air speed you lean the mixture for economy. Yes fouled spark plugs is a recurring issue, and 100 hour inspection requirements includes removing, cleaning, and ops checking the plugs. Fouled plugs is also the most common cause of a failed magneto before takeoff check. The shut down procedure is designed with this very rich mixture in mind. To clear the cylinders of fuel you shut down using the 3 Ms in the correct order. Mixture (to idle cutoff) and wait for the engine to die then, Master (off), Mags (off). They still foul plugs like big dogs.
That's the same as me flying model planes, in a big open space always find the smallest thing to crash into
takes a lot of skill and practice.
Snoopy would never have done that!
to be fair I believe he flew a later variant ,the Sopwith Kennel.
You cannot fly a Sopwith, without a scarf flowing in the wind....
R
*You can't fly any ww1 aircraft without a scarf flowing in the wind
Never planned to take off.. They state it was to be a high speed taxi.
Click bait.
+
The ridiculousness of a.) Not being able to see where you are going and b.) Needing to keep the power on to be able to steer!
Note to self: Never, EVER try to fly a Popping Johnny.
I shall never understand the human mentality, laughing at someone else's mishap.
🤮
Because its funny?
@@SJF15, how was that funny? I didn’t even think about laughing.
@@huntspoint3442 maybe try getting a sense of humour then!
@@SJF15, maybe you stop being a sadistic jerk.
I have been to the Rhinebeck air show. Well worth the time and money.
Crash? more like a bad parking accident.
Pa
Parking Accident!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Im rolling on the floor here!!! HAHAHAHAHA
Obviously no plan for an aborted take-off.
Parking accident! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
did the pilot survive....the embarrassment?
The Camel had a rotary engine which means the crankshaft is mounted to the airframe and the rest of the engine spins around it. If you ever had a string pull gyro from the museum of science as a kid, you probably remember How it resists turning by applying a force 90 degrees opposite the applied force. Same thing in this plane with its heavy engine spinning would require anticipating what it would do for any attempted change in attitude.
Radial engine, not a rotary engine. The rotary engine was designed by wankle, 50 years later.
Sorry, Rotary engine. The Wankel rotary engine is a different beast. The original rotary engine had the complete engine spinning around a stationary crankshaft, with the propeller bolted not to the crankshaft but to the spinning engine.
"Hurry! We need more people to run over to the plane to help out. We only have 25 so far!"
Attended a couple of events at Rhinebeck back in the 80's. Fabulous event! The runway is tiny and surrounded by rather dense forest. The pilots are the best!
I flew in to the airport right next door during the 70's. Didn't trust myself with my C-172 to land at Rhinebeck. The show and displays were wonderful but watching the braver public taking off afterwards from Rhinebeck was breathtaking!
I did fly-in there with my sister and brother in law back in the summer of 1972. Enjoyed it .
As a GA pilot, I love seeing these old aircraft perform! I was privileged to fly in a Stearman once, the old yellow and blue radial engine, tandem seating aircraft, quite a thrill!
And perform it did, I think...
Ah yes, the good old days when you didn't know when, at what altitude and how you would fall out of the sky. Quite thrilling indeed.
Yes, you were privileged. Know of those thru Dad.. Army Air Corps markings. Prob. had the Continental radial,or the Pratt & Whitney R985 Wasp Jr radial!!
Sounds like the Cannibal Queen ❤️
Wow this takes me back, great memories from long before I was born.
No shit he hit the building, WWI aircraft and their replicas dont have brakes
I had a Testors model of one of these and IT crashed too. Took off like a banshee and nose dived right onto the cement.
Sorry about that!!
"ah, put it on...you're going to get hundreds of hits.."
781,187 hits later
Priorities......need those social media hits 🤔
“Oh, I know!”
@@hipser 1.2 million now!
@@rivernet62 aliens guy: "content"
That's what I call barnstorming !
Pilot related to Wrong Brothers.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
All these rocket scientists know absolutely nothing about a WW1 rotary engine, never mind even less knowledge what it takes to fly one of these planes!
No one in the comments anyway.
I've been going to Rhinebeck since the late 1970's. People commenting on here just don't know, but you and I do. :)
@@rolandweinberg Me too. Even flew my model Eindecker at the jamboree one year!
@@mikeyd6957 Ok Mikey D, you're one of "us" too. :)
Most exactly right there!!
I was there back in the nineties when Gene DeMarco lost power and stalled it into the trees. We heard the muffled crunch of tree branches, then saw him running out of the woods waving to the crowd. As far as I know, he was alright.
Was that the Avro crash?
@@rolandweinberg That was before he swindled Peter Jackson for 100s of thousands and was convicted and jailed.. On release declared bankrupt in NZ and shot through to New York. A rotten bounder old boy.
I don't know anything about the motor in that plane, but between the rich exhaust and the sputtering on take off, the damage could have been worse.
Yeah, he never ran it up to speed before takeoff.
Obvious that you don't know about the engine. The smoke is from caster oil. It's a total loss oil system so you always have a fine spray of oil blowing back at you
@@kirkstinson7316 wasn’t it obvious that the motor was not reving up high enough, during warm up?
@@kirkstinson7316 Yes, knew of this..Total drag-and-a-half!!
@@huntspoint3442 Sortof noticed that, as well..
He nailed it............and the building looked good as new when he was finished.
i know Im quite off topic but do anyone know a good place to watch newly released movies online ?
Remember reading that they were difficult to fly, and this video kind of illustrates that fact. I believe this Sopwith Pup was easier to handle.
Yep, but not in the same league as fighter. Tom Sopwith referred to the Pup as having no vices. Great interview with Tom Sopwith on UA-cam when he was 96
The pilot passed out from carbon monoxide fumes?
@Alan Cogan the fuck, dude?
Hahahahahaha
If the engine in my aircraft sounded that bad, I be heading straight back to the hanger!.
Kind of looks like that pilot had the same idea.
the comment right above yours says that the pilot controls the engine torque by grounding the magneto ?
I remember going there back in the early 1970s, with my parents. Was in my 20s then. Still have many film slides of many plans. Back then they actually flew most of them, only a few were in repair and they had a great show with the Black Baron and a blond youg lady dressed in blue. Her Saveur and the Baron would have a pretend dog fight. The Black Baron flew a Fokker and would drop bombs. There was also a mail biplane and others. It was all a great show.
They used to make these planes at the same place I work in Lincoln UK during WW2.
Wow! They were still building WWI aeroplanes during WWII!!
@@kirkstinson7316 sorry I meant for WW1. We also made the first tank in Lincoln.
this thing is fucking tricky to pilot: I could not have done better than him, for sure: no brakes on landing gear, no steering tailwheel, no gas throttle just a pool of switches!
[edit] not mentioning the torque of rotary engine, obviously.
Here, Here!!
The problem world war 1 Planes did not have any braking systems on them. This makes taxing, takeoff and landing way harder. World war 2 plane had differential braking systems that help steer. Taildraggers are a pain in the ass.
Most exactly!! And as said, rotary engines don't help!!
Curse you red baron!
No throttle control and ofcourse no brakes. What could possibly go wrong?
0:24 good thing the ambulance was there
Yessir. Some folks plan for eventualities..
Fire rescue is always ready too
Damn shame, but glad the damage wasn't too bad.
What a beautiful flight .
Glorious.
Reminds me of when wrong way Feldman flew to Gilligans Island.
I`ll be catching this episode on Air Crash Investigation any day now.
Hope the guy in the cockpit was ok
Save the pieces! We have the technology! We can rebuild it!
..True there!! But things,as they are, could get expensive!
sounds like a vespa
Looks to me to be a genuine ground loop accident, not a stunt or humorous. I'm amazed at how ready almost EVERYONE is to opine about technical issues with no authority whatsoever. Modern culture: ptooey.
David Sproul UA-cam. Where all the experts live.
@@Otacatapetl Once again, exactly!! But wanted to view this one, when saw it was a Sopwith Camel having a problem on takeoff..
These biplanes had rotary engines. For those of you that are unaware, I’m not talking about Mazda engines. These rotaries were horrible engines. The crank shaft was stationary and the engine would spin. So the propeller was attached to the engine crank case. They were also lubricated during WWI with cod liver oil due to shortages of oil. Basically a death trap for pilots. But they flew them !
Caster oil, not cod liver oil.
D.R., very exactly!! Used castor oil from what I've read/was told..Not exactly multi-vis oil, synthetic or reg, as we have today, over a century later. Very right on. Think the Camel used the Clerget rotary. Any rotary like that induced high gyroscopic tendencies at high (sic) rpm, that the pilot must plan for/stay ahead of.
I don't think this was case of all rotary engines. Most rotaries had stationary cinders and crankshaft Would spin not the cylinder head assembly
@@theprinceofliberia6793 I believe that you might be confusing rotary engines with radial engines. Rotary engines were basically used during WW 1. If not then I not familiar with the rotary that you are talking about.
@@BsUJeTs you're right. I actually did make that mistake. Now i can imagine problems associated with such huge mass rotating around stationary crankshaft especially at LOW AIRSPEED and high RPM. Thanks for correcting and educating me
Great video thx for sharing.....can harsly wait for the next one
That’s the reason why most airfield of those times were round fields with no specific runway directions. Always the wind on the nose and plenty of space for „break out‘s“
Unfortunately they had no breaks either…
It‘s always easy to criticize pilots from a wing chair!
Yes, I am a pilot, a taildragger pilot, a CRM assessor, an instructor and well experienced in training instructors.
Yikes! Didn't they put wheel brakes on those old planes? Looks like nasty to control once the tail wheel lifts up off the ground but before you have enough airspeed to get the rudder to act...
Poly Hexamethyl no
Because of the rotating engine torque, the Camel always wanted to turn right. It ha been said; "the easiest way to make a left hand turn in a Camel is to make 3 right hand turns."
270 degrees right == left...
don't get too excited it looks repairable to me
Damn darth vader made this happen with his darksided force lol
...pook koof..."The Emperor does not share your optimistic appraisal of the situation"...pook koof...🤚🏻
If you look at the beginning the whole engine spins with the propeller.
Jonathan Ulfeng...Can't see that with my smartphone. But knew the Camels utilize a rotary engine, likely a Clerget..
Rhinebeck is such a magical place. Hope airplane and pilot came out of this ok.
Myself as well, being a fmr. pilot.
I heard a jet fly over last night that sounded just like the sound of this plane as it was taxiing to take off. Never heard a jet sputter and "backfire" like that before. It was pretty unusual. Like 10 or 12 pop sounds in quick succession.
Bird's, flock of geese
Might have been a compressor stall.
For all of you who don't know...
Pilot was never intending to rake off, rather roll by the audience with the tail up.
Engine was working as designed and not misfiring. This type of rotary engine has no real throttle, just a switch controlling ignition. Usually switches between off, firing one or 3 cylinders, and all cylinders.
Because cylinders rotate with propeller around a stationary crank shaft torque is a big issue. No brakes means that at low speeds the biggest force often means that torque. In this case pilot lowered the tail as power was being reduced. No brakes, no rudder control, and that engine torquing the airframe cause this incident ( not accident).
So, is that the same principle as the make-or-break engines on old tractors ?
308winsniper sorry but I disagree. There is no indication of this happening. After the pilot lifts the tail he goes back to blipping the ignition. The popping noise is normal for this engine. Suggest you watch this m.ua-cam.com/video/FvHrbkYEn0k/v-deo.html for more info
So was it pilot error or what?
It's not quite that simple. The answer is yes, but really Error was because of limitations of control inherent in this design. This accident is common with these types of engines. I'm hesitant to say the cause is pilot error
Yes, I've never felt comfortable with the harsh term "pilot error" being slapped on most accidents because it implies a degree of negligence, whereas I think the softer term "pilot misjudgement" would be more applicable in many cases such as this one.
Geez, I have a weed Wacker that runs better than that!! No surprise it wasn’t getting airborne.
I always thought the SC had a two blade prop?
Yes. Well, doesn't this one?? Prob. stroboscopic aberrations in the video. Yeah, supposed to be 2-bladed laminated wood, with shot-peened partial leading edge!!
You don't see the prop at static, so hard to tell..
IF YOU FREEZE the video at the 1:57 mark, the 2 bladed prop is visible. Prop rpm and video frame rate are not synchronous, so it looks like a 4 blade at times.
That engine sounds awful
Well, the pilot gave the audience a show, just not necessarily the one they intended...
..Correct, I think. .
you people need to learn the difference between a "crash" vs. "Incident". This is NOT a crash.
Lol! Great upload! Thx!!!
Those old planes have no wheel brakes so you have to do all the on ground steering with the rudder. In order for enough prop wash to go over the rudder to steer more power must be added.
..Right.
Interesting. I have the same issue docking my old sailboat. Need 4-5 Kts in reverse (2-3 kts in forward), for the rudder to have an effect. That may not sound a lot but max speed is only 6-7 kts so it takes some time to have any control.
The British plane rejects the American pilot
That engine sounds like my belly after a trip to White Castle.
Aahhgghh!! That friggin' hilarious!!..Or after a "Taco Bell Feast"!!
Dear stanfolo44, would it be possible to contact you regarding this fantastic video? I would love to discuss a permission to use this video in a production if this is possible. Greetings!
It must suck to fly a plane at full throttle or ignition off! I have flown aircraft but not like that.
Hi Snoopy....well done....oh shit !
We come a long way in 100 years.
Yes, we certainly have!
That was no crash. If the dude went into the trees that would be a crash. He did'nt stack up the plane.
Foiled again....curse you Red Baron!
Rotec engine failure?
That was no real crash
Good lord! How did they ever win the war?
He's lucky it didn't get in the air.
Needs a tune up! Check the oil. And will somebody wash that windshield!
Brought to you by Hanna Barbara 😂
No engine problem I agree but its the Pilot in command who clearly has a problem
Pilot error only in the sense that he should not have agreed to a fast taxi/no take off demonstration in the 1st place. This plane/engine combination can't do it.
Not enough power.
That motor sounds like one pissed off pony!
There is not a problem with the engine...those early rotary engines controlled rpm by basically cutting the engine off and on.
Thanks, Charles. I thought it was an early rotary belching out that smoke and cutting on and off. I never saw one before operational. Just read about them.
Charles Howell aa:
The lack of brakes makes it hard too.
So if there was no problem with the engine why did it lose power and cause the ground loop? *winks* yup! you know everything! lol
Hakapik It is called Pilot error.
Why does it sound like it's powered by a 2 stroke Villiers engine ?
Because it probably was. My washing machine sounds better than that.
Probably saved his life
When he cut power, there was no way to keep the plane going straight. And no brakes didn't help either.
what power???
Aahh, forgot about that!! No brakes on those old biplanes!! Didn't realize!
@@jamesbehrje4279 Exactly my sentiments!
Thought it was machine guns, then realise the engine sounds sick.
Nothing wrong with the engine, it is a Gnome rotary. The method of speed control is to shut off the ignition from time to time, hence the sounds of missfiring. The whole thing was staged.
Ok, then the engine alone is a show turning around itself.
Here right after watching whistlindiesel destroy some airplane
As a pilot I can appreciate the frightening gyroscopic forces on these things at takeoff and in left hand turns. The advantage of the rotary engine must have been substantial considering the conventional in-line engines available at the time. Crashes with these rotaries was pretty common.
Not much of a rudder on that plane.
Was made to fly not drive
At 1:07 it looks like a ghost walks right out of the past above the plane on his preflight prayer.
What a stupid, dangerous stunt in a rambling wreck that obviously wasn't airworthy!
He was ready to take off and kept waiting and waiting and waiting. Fearful not confident at all. This pilot have no idea what is this machine. After he took off decided to stop. BIG mistake. There's no tail gear control! After taking off just go! Destroyed a perfectly flying Sopwith Camel. What a shame! No, this aircraft is not hard to fly. It is hard for those that do not understand squad about it. The escuse to say this aircraft killed many in the past is no escuse at all. At the time the pilots did not and were not trained for the gyroscopic effect of the rotary engine that it has. All in all. Don't let inexperienced pilots like this put to shame aircraft in front of the public like this. SHAME SHAME SHAME.
If it makes anyone feel better, WWII fighters like the Spitfire and Bf-109 had terrible ground handling, too!
Живут же люди, развлекаются,по разному отдыхают,чистота и порядок,люди сыты и довольны,напоминает жизнь в СССР.
"Someone's face is going to be red when they find the black box for this one!"
This accident wasn’t from it being difficult to fly but because it wouldn’t run properly.
Not sure the pilot could have done much more than he did to try and avoid it. Original engined WW1 aircraft were notoriously difficult and unreliable and he'd probably only have saved it if he'd shut down and aborted at the very first stutter. He probably expected and hoped for it to clear through as just an oil/fuel clog very quickly.
Thereafter with no proper propwash the rudder authority was gone completely.
Atleast it was still on the ground when it crashed 🤷♀️🤦♀️
If my old wheelhorse tractor ran like that I’d turn around and head back to the shop. This pilot should have lost his license until he learned basic high school engine repair skills. What a waste, and what’s up with that ridiculous scarf? Too many parts for that costume to entangle itself with. Then again it’s Rheinebeck, NY.