I worked at Rockwell International in Downey, CA 40 years ago and met an old trimer who asked me "Have you ever landed a Corsair on a floating match-stick in the middle of the ocean at NIGHT?.....Well, I did !!!" I met several other WWI pilots there who worked as engineers and their stories were amazing. Those days are long gone.
I worked at Rockwell for 28 years, met a lot WW-2 guys there and a fair amount of German rocket scientists that were still there in the late 70s. Interesting people, all had wild tales and I learned quite a bit from all that knowledge.
My Dad used to fly A-4s off HMAS Melbourne, a WW2 era carrier. It was funny cross decking with the USN because he loved how spacious the US flight decks were yet the USN Tracker pilots hated having to land on Melbourne at night (AKA The Can Opener) and the A-4 guys flat out refused. Hats off to those in the Corsairs though, less aids, tail dragger and a higher attitude making visibility nearly nil.
@@renatosureal He was probably knocked unconscious and drowned. That film was pretty slowed down. The impact may have broken his neck,too- that was like a 100+ foot fall with a flat landing… something like a 10-story building or more. That plane wasn’t flying anymore- it stalled,torque-rolled and he probably cut power when it did. Regardless, you can see how hard it hit by how that water flew. That paper at the end said that there was perceptible blood in the canopy and that the last they saw was that he was slumped against his straps… it sank almost immediately.
Hoooly Jesus! I was wondering where did you pull this name out, and after few days of trying various approaches to google this, found the record on bataanproject. Yup, lt. Groves indeed. 12 march 1919 - 12 may 1945.
As someone else noted, the biggest contributing factor here was the stall that came first. Torque roll is more likely and harder to prevent if it comes with a stall first.
Stick was full aft as he left the deck, nose started coming up immediately, the elevator didn't start to deflect downward till the rotation to the left had begun. Once the wing had stalled and the rotation to the left begun, it was over. This was stall/spin on takeoff.
That's what it seems to me. According to instructor at the start 6 deg R aileron, 6 deg R rudder. From the camera angle he didn't seem to have either of those. Just cruel that mistakes like that can cost you so dearly.
How could this dreadful death have been prevented? Corsairs by then already had stall strips to even out the stall on both wings. A stick pusher to prevent the stall? Or a contra rotating propeller?
@@williamzk9083a 65hp Piper Cub would suffer the same fate if the pilot held full aft stick on takeoff. It could have been prevented with neutral elevator and some right rudder before he left the deck.
Notable too, is that he died three years to the exact day since he had enlisted, in 1942. Fate in the blink of an eye. And yet because the cameras were rolling his fate is captured forever.
@@LincolnLagger I don't know about this guy but a lot of officers in WW2 started off as enlisted and got accepted into OCS soon after. A lot of them already had college degrees when they enlisted. Major Winters of Band of Brothers was one of those officers.
Rudder and stick into the expected torque roll pre takeoff, nose down if it gets out of hand... it happens so fast. Wow. Zero chance of recovery. RIP, sir.
@@capnhardway No crash protection at all in the cockpit. Slammed into the water going over 50mph, if not closer to 100mph. Even in a car with the safety features of today it would hurt, let alone a plane with nothing but metal panels.
That's what it looks like to me, extreme pitch up as soon as airborne with a little yaw to the left stalling and then rolling from the torque. Not sure if the wind isn't a little off the right. Wonder if there was an issue with elevator trim?
This was my Dad's carrier (they called her the "Three Aces") and squadron (VMF-513) when he was in WWII, flying Corsairs. He mentioned how many pilots were killed in training. It was not an easy plane to fly, for many reasons, including its lack of visibility as well as torque derived from a lot of horsepower driving a huge propeller. Sad to see this, but I hope it helps the family in some way.
I served with VMA-513 from 75 to 77, both at MCAS Iwakuni Japan, and MCAS Yuma, AZ. I was in the Avionics shop, then Sqdn Training NCO. Flying Nightmares flew AV8As in my day. Also a hard bird to master. Best squadron in the Marine Corps. Semper Fi.
JohnDB, Thank you for your story and for your dad. My father was also on the Vella Gulf on the very day this video was taken, 12 May 19. In the 'remarks' column of his Aviators Flight Log Book, he noted 'Carrier Requalification', machine type FG-1D, machine # 88086 and again on 14 May, FG1D machine# 88041. I have several 8x10" B&W prints of DD-60 hanging over the port edge of the flight deck and finally being pushed over the edge by many crew members. The pilots name was Pat White. I believe this is where the four cockpit instruments I've inherited originated from. The story was, "we were given 15 minutes to salvage anything we could. "... I still can't get over seeing dad's ship and knowing he may be somewhere in the video... my dad, John F Tenvold, was born in 1915, and I was born in '53. He passed in 2007 at 91 years old and also had a beautiful wife of 57 years, Patricia Lew (Palmer) and three lovely daughters. God bless all of these men...
Pilots who flew it into combat considered it one of the best fighters of the war. Unfortunately it was a lot like driving an 800HP Dodge Challenger Hellcat... give the keys to someone with little experience handling that kind of power and they'll kill themselves before rounding the first bend.
The F4U was designed as an air superiority carrier fighter. But, the Navy pilots had great difficulty doing simulated carrier landings...so, the F4U was dumped on the Marines. The Marines were totally delighted to have the top fighter in the Pacific War, and they had no problems operating off of airfields. The F4U had a 2,000 hp engine, while the Japanese Zero only had a 1,000 hp engine.
@@DK-gy7ll Same analogy but different time, different airplane: The Sopwith Camel. If you could manage the airplane it was a great fighter, if you couldn't, it would quickly kill you.
Torque Roll is a very real 'thing' in these big=engined aircraft. I experienced it, to my surprise, pulling away from touch-and-go practive at Pensecola in a T-28 trainer [1,450 HP Pratt & Whitnet radial] when I gunned the engined in response to blowing my carrier landing, resulting in a wave-off. It was all I could do to keep the trainer under control. In the case of the F4U Corsair shown here, the prime issue, as I see it, is the stall upon take-off which resulted in loss of lift and effective airelon control that normally countered torque, allowing the normal torque to roll the F4U.
Flew the T-28B in Primary and torque roll was a thing. Approach turn stall training-if you didn't stick your right foot in it during recovery she'd roll right over. My uncle flew Mustangs and he said it'd torque roll at idle. Sure the Corsair was like that too.
Yes it's the gyroscopic effects from the large and heavy propeller. You can see the yaw to the left creates a nose high attitude leading to the stall, you could actually argue it's a wing stall that flips the airplane over and not torque. Or you can say having stalled as you mention allows Torque to flip it over. Torque is very mild in the Corsair and Mustang. Torque roll is a myth.
I would call that a snap roll caused by over rotation on the cat shot more than a pure torque roll. History of Marine ops from CVEs (and a least one CVL} during late War 2 and Korean War deserve more attention. Thank you for doing this video.
2nd Lt. Ed Groves didn't have right rudder or aileron and he seemed to have stalled from the sudden pitch-up off the end of the catapult. One he stalled there were no adequate aerodynamic forces to stop the torque roll. Rest in peace and thank you for your service.
So he had flaps correct, but ailerons, rudder, and elevator wrong. I'm guessing he would have flown this bird on land at least a little. I wonder if maybe this was a catapult shot, and he just wasn't ready? Otherwise how might he have messed up so many things. I don't know what the catapult system was on that ship at that time. Does anyone know?
Another comment. I've taken snow skiing lessons, and one thing that takes some practice is, you've got to face downhill and lean downhill to be able to control yourself, though the natural instinct is to lean back away from the downhill direction. I think that must be a lot like stalling a plane on takeoff.
Yep from what I see right as the catapult started he had Full Flaps, At least 6º of up elevator if not more, Rudder was neutral, and Ailerons were neutral. Wrong settings for takeoff or he wasn't ready when they launched him. They should have had a secondary observer outside the aircraft verifying the aircraft was properly configured for takeoff before initiating the catapult.
Holy moley….even just looking at these planes, the amount of right rudder necessary to keep those things coordinated at high angles of attack must’ve been extraordinary…
I knew someone who was at an airbase where RVN pilots were being trained to fly them, and he said it was common to be walking down the ramp and see them flying inverted down the runway.
Absolutely. She was a sweet-flying Old Girl right up until you stalled at low altitude and cobbed the tremendous Duplex Cyclone trying to regain flying speed. USA could never seem to normalize coaxial counter-rotating props - but the Corsair and the Skyraider would have surely been safer if they could have had them installed.
I'd suggest the main issue is coming off the end of the catapult with the stick in his crotch. The roll doesn't start until after the sharp pitch-up which will have stalled the aircraft. It actually looks like he has a bit of left rudder on coming off the catapult too which will have helped convince the aircraft which way to snap after stalling, just incase torque, spiral slipstream, P-factor and gyroscopic precession weren't enough. Poor guy. You don't get a lot of time to think - that's clear!
he had the reccomended full flaps and looks like the elevator was slightly nose up as suggested. It seems the instructions were for 6 degrees of right rudder and 6 degrees of right aileron - I wonder if he missed on those or if the stall set him up for disaster.
Not sure what you could read into it but the pilot looks stiff as a board which makes him seem really scared or hesitant right before launch. It could be a head back against the rest stance because of the catapult but he doesn't give any indication that makes the viewer think he's really ready. R.I.P. brave aviator.
Could have been a number of things. Could have not had trim set properly, could have put in too much power, could have been a problem with the controls or the control surfaces. Really is a shame regardless of the cause.
The instruction pertains to the rudder trim. On takeoff you can see the rudder trim tab deflected to the left, which is correct for right rudder trim. How much trim he had in I can't say.
The left wing stalled to begin the rotation, once the left wing stalls, no amount of aileron is going to help, Look instead at the position of the elevators as he's leaving the deck.
Yeah, and the stick was in his lap. You see the elevators? He does try to fix it and I bet he firewalled the throttle. My Dad flew these in Korea and almost killed himself when he got slow in the pattern and gunned it, causing the thing to start to roll on him. He was one of the lucky ones who made a mistake in the plane and lived to apply the lesson.
@gort8203 Yes, as you are referring to, when the plane rolls left at low speed the natural instinct would be to push the stick to the right to correct. This lowers the left aileron which acts as a brake, slows airflow over the wing even more, and increases the stall and roll to the left. The correct maneuver is to lower the nose and use right rudder only, not aileron. Unfortunately this plane was unrecoverable from that speed and low altitude no matter how the pilot responded.
I was about to write the same! Also, it looks like he had zero aileron deflection until the plane was already rolling to the left but then it was too late to counteract the massive forces :(
He had his elevators way up for climb before and during his take-off roll, put himself into an instant stall; with that slight left turn the left wing totally stalled, torque roll was a secondary consequence.
The rudder appears to be trimmed left not right. Also the plane yaw to the left immediately after the cat stroke. It appears that the roll starts after the plane yaws left which you would see in a yaw induced roll.
I live in Cape May NJ. NAS Wildwood is just a few miles from my house. NAS WWD trained navy dive bomber and torpedo bomber pilots. There is a monument there for the dozens of young men who were killed in training.
Practicing for carrier qualification, so possibly first flight off carrier. Such fine margins between success and death where land-based training can only go so far. RIP.
The "Torque Roll" is a MYTH!. This event has nothing to do with the torque of the engine, it has to due with the dynamic motion of YAW!. Three things in sequence are actually what causes this event. Any airplane can experience this. I have a video of a SR22 in England doing the same thing, on or about March 26, 2024. The P factor of the prop in a climb causes left yaw, this is of course stronger forces as the pitch gets higher. This yaw, (not sideslip, with the ball out of the middle) causes the left wing to pivot aft loosing lift while the right wing is pivoting forward increasing lift, (yaw - roll coupling) this causes asymmetric lift and the airplane will start to roll left. The pilot will always feed in right stick causing the left aileron to deflect down, adding in more drag, adding more yaw force to the left (adverse yaw), additionally the change in the camber of the wing (by the lowered aileron) causes its critical angle of attack to be reduced, stalling the left outboard wing panel. Notice no additional right rudder was applied, had he done that, all the above would have been cancelled out! Pilots need to be taught, YAW and PITCH are the things to pay attention to while flying a machine in a 3 dimensional environment. The airspeed, and ball in the middle is a flawed method!
Why is ball centered a "flawed method?" There is no yaw if the ball is centered. Yaw is uncoordinated flight and ball centered means the aircraft is in coordinated flight assuming the instrument has been mounted properly.
People forget that tens of thousands of Allied aircrew were killed during training during WWII. And that was the winning side which had the best flight schools, resources, and technology.
If the Allies had the best flight schools, why did Germany have so many fighter aces? If the Allies had the best technology, why did Russia and the US "recruit" all the best German aerospace scientists after the war? The Allies had the "best resources"...and that's it.
@codymoe4986 because in the US and UK if a pilot had skills they were rotated out of combat so they could train new pilots. Germans just had to fly for the duration. Also lower ranking pilots in German squadrons were always tasked with assisting other higher ranking pilots in getting kills and not getting kills of their own. If only like half or a third of the pilots in a squadron are allowed to shoot down planes of course they're going to have higher scores. Germany focused on rocket technology much more than any other country by 1945, of course they would have the most rocket experts. The united stated had the best atomic scientists in 1945. German pilot quality got worse and worse and worse as the war continued. Exoeriencd pilots expected to fly in combat until they day, reduced flight hours for cadets, accelerated lesson schedules. It's ridiculous to say the luftwaffe was better. Good air forces don't lose air superiority and never regain it for the final year of a war.
@@codymoe4986 Not really. While I take nothing away from the German technology nor the training, the simple fact is Germany never had to overcome the inherent challenges of operating in a carrier environment. The U.S went from 7 fleet carriers and 1 escort carrier in 1941 to 28 fleet carriers and 71 escort carriers in 1945, a technological feat unmatched by any country and a lead that the U.S. hasn't lost since WW2. Due to the demands of the war, much technology was (The Corsair a prime example) was subject to little long term testing with the faults often fixed in the field, often at a tragic cost. Additionally, the nature of the war favored Europe in terms of pilots becoming aces, with pilots on both sides being able to fly hundreds of missions due to the close proximity of the conflict. This was particularly noteworthy on the Eastern front with Russia being able to produce large numbers of planes often with poorly trained pilots that were easier picking for the better trained German pilots. In terms of overall counts the European pilots had a 2 year head start of American pilots as the U.S. entered the war in 1942 vs. 1942.
There was a considerable yaw to the left soon after leaving the deck, together with a sharp pitch up at low airspeed. Insufficient right rudder to counteract the prop wash at high power causing the yaw, then a stall or semi-stall due the pitch up leading to a barrel roll entry, all aided by engine torque?
Looked like stick aft and left rudder leaving the deck. Elevator maybe neutral after the pitch up. Stick probably full forward and right as the roll started. I couldn’t tell if right rudder was applied, but it looked like stall-spin at that point. The full right stick probably helped the spin to the left.
No rudder applied - probably freaked out when the torque roll happened, leading quickly into the torque induced stall spin. Matter of seconds, not a lot of reaction time. Bad way to go.
He had wrong rudder input from the start and maybe the catapult officer should have aborted the launch until the pilot saw his mistake, that's if the officer even had such piloting knowledge up his sleeve. POV pilot prop turns clockwise therefore any high angle of attack attitude will cause the blades to bite harder into the air between 2 and 8 O'clock position of rotation and cause exactly the out of control nose wander seen here, then its on into a port wing stall and game over. Right rudder ( lots of it, to also counteract the spiralling prop wash striking the vertical stab) and slight nose down after launch is what you see in most other footage of F4U launches.
I would have thought he would have survived that, but "percetable amounts of blood in and in the vicinity of the cockpit" tells me his mellon was split. When you look at the impact it was almost an immediate stop, however, he hit at approximately 60 Kgs, which makes me wonder if he had his shoulder straps on correctly.
Looked like the plane stalled, just before rolling. A stall after take-off would definitely cause instability in any aircraft, but the F-4U was known for its torque issues. Interesting to note the briefing chalkboard accentuating the need for certain adjustments to flight surfaces (ailerons, rudder, etc.) upon take-off, just before the incident. Would give a gonad to be able to fly a F-4U and/or a P-51.
P-38 for me. Wouldn't touch the P-51. It's got a very temperamental stall-spin tendency in every sim I've ever flown it in, and wartime documentation seems to bear that out. I consider it more dangerous than aircraft that had worse reputations. The P-39 had a reputation, and will certainly kill you if you let a spin develop fully, but you have plenty of time to stop it. The P-51 will surprise you with a spin (the stall is very sudden), and the spin will develop fully unless you're really on-the ball stopping it. The aircraft's one saving grace is that recovery is automatic in a fairly short timeframe unless you actually hold it in the spin, so you're unlikely to be instantly screwed at altitude, but the spin is violent while it lasts and tends to leave you significantly nose-low, and it's *very* easy to re-spin it during the recovery from the nose-low attitude, after which your chances of digging a new hole in the ground are significant.
@@JonBrase The P-38 had its own issues. Managing the fuel for 2 engines for one, it could get tricky. If you flew in the ETO the lack of hydraulically-controlled ailerons for two, until the L variant. P-38's were meat on the table for the really good Luftwaffe pilots until the L variant. Also, if you were to fly it in the ETO you would freeze your azz off, even with electrically-heated suits because you had no engine heat in front of you, just ice cold air. It affected combat efficiency, and many pilots got frost bite. But over all, in the PTO, it was amazingly successful, and in many ways turned the tide of the air war in the South West part of the PTO. Charles Lindbergh had a big hand in solving the range issue by coaching pilots to throttle back below factory recommended settings to increase range. It was a beautiful plane and pilots liked flying it. The really good ones used the throttle control on the inboard engine to dramatically increase turning radius. Bong did that...
The chalkboard had elevators 6° nose up which seems unnecessary. He had full power, full flaps down, a head wind and a catapult assist. Level elevators or perhaps 2° nose down might have been the order of the day.
Those trim settings are in the Pilots Operating Manual for the Corsair due to its tendency to roll to the left at high power, low airspeed, full flaps conditions like this.
It’s looks like the rudder trim wasn’t set properly for takeoff ? It’s also looks like a possible “trim stall”. With the pitch up and high angle of attack the rudder because more predominant for roll control. It’s possible that aileron control was put in and acerbated the stall. These guys had very little experience and these were high performance beast! Thanks for you service guys!
The Hawker Tempest''s engine "Napier Sabre" 3500 hp which was maybe the most powerful chase plane engine of WW2 caused the plane to do that same torque roll too.The torque roll is similar to helicopters spinning when they lose the tail rotor.
I think he wasn't lined up properly and tried to correct with left rudder. But that is opposite of what he was suppose to do. So when takes off, he already has some left momentum from the left rudder initially. Basically, his configuration should have been to counter left movement but he started with left movement in order to correct the misalignment. Watch in .25 speed.
The pilot maintained back pressure throughout the launch, that's what caused this accident. The outcome would most likely be the same in a F6F, though he would have had a better chance of correcting his mistake. Back pressure to prevent tail rise, take off power, launch, ease off back pressure, take off... the other video shows the proper way. Almost looked as if this was an example of what not to do, use a beat up airframe and stick a mannequin in the cockpit.
*Torque roll is a myth.* The Corsair and Mustang have very large and heavy propellers. These are not really propellers, but massive gyroscopes. (13 foot 2 inch, 475 lb gyroscope for the Corsair). It is those gyroscopic effects that lead to this outcome. Watch in .25x you'll see the nose yaw to the left _with the resultant force pitching the Corsair nose up_ , exceeding the critical angle of attack and stalling the left wing, snap-rolling it on its back. It is critical for operators to understand this and be prepared to handle the gyros at play. When inputs are applied appropriately the Mustang and Corsair are more than manageable. The reality is torque is very mild in these airplanes. Sadly too many pilots were lost to this misunderstanding and for it the Corsair and P-51 got a bad rap.
Of course spinning a 450lb gyroscope is going to have effects...but in this case it's more 'P-factor' at work combining with engine torque and way too much elevator and angle of attack with no aileron resistance leading to the stall. Once stalled the engine trying to turn the propeller against air drag and the angle of attack increasing the 'P-factor' is more than the wings can counter so it rolls over on its' back. Torque rolls ARE a thing and many video's exist of 'wave-offs' where the pilot jams the throttle and without any change in angle of attack the plane instantly starts to roll over as several thousand ft/lbs of torque are applied to the prop. Any change in aircraft attitude then allows the gyroscopic influence of the prop to get in on the fun flipping the plane over. RIP to the pilot.
@@Milkmans_Sonno gyro has precession. A chain saw, leaf blower or even a hair dryer will twist, turn and gyrate in your hand when you wave them around. What you are feeling is gyroscopic precession.
I keep thinking about the power of these engines. It just doesn't sink in properly without physical, present experience. But... this video... it takes one closer, most definitely. Absolutely monstrous machines.
I'm surprised they even tried flying Corsairs on or off of escort carriers. Too big, too heavy. They were even considered unsuitable for fleet carrier operations at first. That's why escort carriers flew F4F and FM-2 Wildcats up to the end of the war. I've read about experimental attempts to fly Hellcats on CVEs, too, that did not work out, either, and for the same reason. I remember seeing a photo of a Hellcat pilot in his cockpit, missing a landing on a CVE, last photo of him taken while he was alive. The F8F Bearcat was supposed to be the escort carrier fighter to replace the Wildcat, but it did not deploy until the war ended.
Were these guys taught to fly these from an airport initially? Seem like this pilot didn't do any of the things except possibly the elevator when launched. Interesting that the instructions being written on the blackboard didn't include power setting which I would have thought would be important as a way to help reduce torque to a level that the control surfaces could handle
Under normal WWII circumstances YES. They were taught to fly Stearman Bi-Planes first then T-6 Texans, then they would get stick time in the same types of birds they would fly into combat. Typical Carrier operations called for full power on takeoff, as these early catapult assisted launch systems were barely adequate for big heavy birds like the Corsair and Hellcats, especially on these short decked Commencement Bay-class "Jeep" carriers. This carrier was literally BRAND SPANKING NEW, having been commissioned only a month before this accident.
Yes, I have other videos showing the training at El Centro, CA where they practiced on land as if at sea. The videos have "LSO Training..." and "bounce landing..." in their title.
There is the possibility that the aircraft did not respond to the avaitor's inputs, you know? Maybe he tried to correct properly, but the aircraft was damaged or had one or more faulty systems. It is possible that it wasn't actually pilot error. Also, does anyone have an idea what that black blob bobbing in the sea is? I guess that is not the pilot at 0:58 and for several seconds afterward in the churn of the splash down.
Looked like the plane also got caught in a combination of acceleration from the catapault, plus lift from an unexpected updraft and / or strong wind coming over the front of the moving ship. I once stood at the tip of the bow of a cruise ship, and the wind at the tip of the bow was like a hurricane.
He had the stick in his lap, that is why it had such a steep angle on take off. It seems that maybe he wasn't ready for the cat, his body language in the cockpit was really tense.
Blimey, look at the DIAMETER of that propeller! Equal to the height of 2 grown men, plus a bit more! Anyone know what the rotating MASS of that prop is?
I wonder if the correct action on leaving the deck is to leave the stick neutral but don’t let the nose balloon up, and be ready with the rudder to keep it straight and level. Something like that? Then when under control, raise the gear…and with sufficient speed, then the flaps?
I'd call that a spin stall. The pull of the catapult changes the angles from vertical to somewhat more horizontal, but that hard pitch up right off the bow killed his lift. From there he was just a leaf in the wind.
Except it didn't spin. It was a torque roll due to inefficient airflow over the wing and flight control surfaces resulting in the torque of the propeller to roll the aircraft. Hence why it is called a torque roll. This is the same thing that happens to a helicopter if the anti-torque rotor fails. Spins occur due to asymmetric lift occurs of the wings and causes the aircraft to rotate or spin around the vertical axis. In a torque roll the aircraft rotates around the longitudinal axis which is what happened here. The pitch up and stall made it look like a barrel roll.
@@ImpendingJoker Sorry but that was most definitely a snap spin entry! It snapped left specifically because of the torque of the high power setting, but it didn't start rotating until after the aircraft had stalled and the torque, p-factor, slipstream, etc, caused the left wing to stall first and deepest.
I had not realized before seeing this video, that there was some sort of assistance mechanism helping develop the forward momentum of this type of aircraft when taking off the ships deck.
He obviously commanded a lot more the six degrees nose up. That was probably about thirty degrees. He may not have been ready for snap backwards of the cat, and if he had his hand too tightly on the stick - that would do it
The Corsair was known as "The Ensign Eliminator". Remember this when you hear people claim it was better than the F6F Hellcat, known as "The Ace Maker" and had a higher kill ratio than the Corsair.
I can't see any rudder at all, either rudder trim or rudder input. You need almost full right rudder on that thing. Go to this posters normal ops video and watch the F4U launch. Almost full right rudder being used.
It appears he exceeded pitch up angle of attack and his left wing stalled, the torque appeared to carry him through the roll. It appears he also applied incorrect rudder after pitch up.
My RC model Corsair would likely do a similar thing. I put in a lot of right rudder on takeoff as the throttle is advanced to control the left swing. 2.8m span, 250cc engine, 32 inch propellor, 25kg
Pitched up exceeding AOA, left wing stalled, combined with mil power setting caused a snap roll. Not a torque roll. In a torque roll, the airframe will rorate 360° around the prop shaft while not deviating from its relative course.
As a non pilot I’m trying to understand. It seems he stalled, and in that state there was not enough airflow over control services to counteract torque. Full right boot would not stop it nor full right stick. In a situation like this could you reduce throttle? As a layman that seems to make sense but I understand a real pilot died here and I’m sure I don’t get the reality of this situation.
1:49 what is that flash of red? Looks like a tiny fireball. But it hadn't contacted the water yet, else you'd see a splash of white. It watched it over and over again from 1:48, is it a reflection? An explosion? Weird. I guess it was from the impact in some way, but it doesnt look like that at all under closer inspection
It’s amazing they didn’t have a system set up where there was a motorized small boat or at least swimmers ready to go in case of something like this. The accounts say that men on deck saw the pilot slumped forward as the ship passed by. Someone could have gotten to him and pulled him out, even if he was dead.
They have an escort carrier somewhat nearby that helps recover in some situations as you will see in future videos. Unfortunately, this plane sank rapidly...before all of the carrier passed by.
Can you please change the title of this video and remove the "torque roll". This crash is a result of pilot error, he had full up elevator which caused a stall resulting in the roll. Many people are sharing this video stating it is proof of the Corsairs terrible handling and torque response which is incorrect and unfair.
Not at this time. It is well documented that the Corsair had some flight characteristics that were worked on to make the plane safer to fly in the carrier environment. One characteristic in particular was the tendency to roll due to the torque of the engine/prop at or near stall speed. I will do additional research to see how this can be conveyed by multiple sources who know directly. I understand that there are a lot of opinions about this. I posted this video in an effort to respond to others comments/opinions, and to let the conversation flow. Thank you.
Japanese pilots didn't like it. They called it an aerobatic plane. No armor, no self-sealing fuel tanks, lightly armed and under powered compared to the F6F and F4U. Like most early war Japanese planes it would catch on fire after a few rounds to critical areas. They much preferred the later Japanese fighters, which were quite good.
The VMF squadrons assigned to these ships were a mix of 8 Hellcat and 8 Corsair, I believe. There were usually 2 photo recon F6F within the Hellcat contingent.
It looked like he didn't do enough to prevent a stall after launch.....he pulled up too steep...... and also did nothing to counter the roll to the left. No right aileron input. Were the controls locked at launch? Did he black out at launch? It didn't look like he was flying the plane at all.
You can clearly see the right aileron input trying to counteract the roll to the left. Problem is that this was the wrong input at that time and only aggravated the stall of the left wing, ensuring the crash.
At first it looks like a barrel roll that ran out of altitude. The high AOA and the swing of the nose to the left says snap roll. Maybe a snap roll initiated at near stall speed looks like a barrel roll in a F4U? The carriers initially used springs and hydraulics and it appears that's what this carrier had. Steam catapults came later. They were trying to make soda jerks and busboys etc into officers, pilots and bombardiers. Sometimes they didn't get it right. Sitting on the fantail are two Avengers.
@@VMTB143Mike Could it be variations within different states perhaps? My friend is in Tucson, Arizona. Me personally i am viewing from Norway...but i have VPN so no big deal for me regardless.
I worked at Rockwell International in Downey, CA 40 years ago and met an old trimer who asked me "Have you ever landed a Corsair on a floating match-stick in the middle of the ocean at NIGHT?.....Well, I did !!!" I met several other WWI pilots there who worked as engineers and their stories were amazing. Those days are long gone.
I met a paratrooper that fought in
D-day very humbling, just a normal guy that did some crazy things that I’m not sure I could have done.
You do mean WWII don't you?
I worked at Rockwell for 28 years, met a lot WW-2 guys there and a fair amount of German rocket scientists that were still there in the late 70s.
Interesting people, all had wild tales and I learned quite a bit from all that knowledge.
My Dad used to fly A-4s off HMAS Melbourne, a WW2 era carrier. It was funny cross decking with the USN because he loved how spacious the US flight decks were yet the USN Tracker pilots hated having to land on Melbourne at night (AKA The Can Opener) and the A-4 guys flat out refused. Hats off to those in the Corsairs though, less aids, tail dragger and a higher attitude making visibility nearly nil.
@@mikefelshaw9276 ww2 ! Lol typo
RIP Lt. Groves. These young men were in dangerous situations a long time before they entered the active theater.
Looking at the accident .. it is hard to believe the pilot would be dead from the impact.
@@renatosureal
He was probably knocked unconscious and drowned.
That film was pretty slowed down.
The impact may have broken his neck,too-
that was like a
100+ foot fall with a
flat landing…
something like a 10-story building or more.
That plane wasn’t flying anymore-
it stalled,torque-rolled and he probably cut power when it did.
Regardless,
you can see how hard it hit by how that water flew.
That paper at the end said that there was perceptible blood in the canopy and that the last they saw was that he was slumped against his straps…
it sank almost immediately.
Hoooly Jesus! I was wondering where did you pull this name out, and after few days of trying various approaches to google this, found the record on bataanproject. Yup, lt. Groves indeed. 12 march 1919 - 12 may 1945.
As someone else noted, the biggest contributing factor here was the stall that came first. Torque roll is more likely and harder to prevent if it comes with a stall first.
Stick was full aft as he left the deck, nose started coming up immediately, the elevator didn't start to deflect downward till the rotation to the left had begun. Once the wing had stalled and the rotation to the left begun, it was over. This was stall/spin on takeoff.
That's what it seems to me. According to instructor at the start 6 deg R aileron, 6 deg R rudder. From the camera angle he didn't seem to have either of those. Just cruel that mistakes like that can cost you so dearly.
once the plane stalls (or even slows down enough) the surfaces have no effect so main unstopable force acting over the airframe is the engine torque..
How could this dreadful death have been prevented? Corsairs by then already had stall strips to even out the stall on both wings. A stick pusher to prevent the stall? Or a contra rotating propeller?
@@williamzk9083a 65hp Piper Cub would suffer the same fate if the pilot held full aft stick on takeoff. It could have been prevented with neutral elevator and some right rudder before he left the deck.
This is the clearest video of the infamous Corsair torque roll
Did the pilot climb too steeply and lose air flow over the ailerons reducing his ability to counteract torque ?
How does this happen?
Mustangs have a similar response to immediate full throttle on take-off.
One of the nicknames for this plane was “The Ensign Eliminator.”
@@jimsilvey5432 looks like he didn't apply adequate counter-rudder to neutralise the torque of the engine
Notable too, is that he died three years to the exact day since he had enlisted, in 1942. Fate in the blink of an eye. And yet because the cameras were rolling his fate is captured forever.
@@HTN3 if true, just so bizarrely sad. God bless the greatest generation 🙏
Officers enlist?
@@LincolnLagger my dad did
@@LincolnLagger I don't know about this guy but a lot of officers in WW2 started off as enlisted and got accepted into OCS soon after. A lot of them already had college degrees when they enlisted. Major Winters of Band of Brothers was one of those officers.
@@LincolnLagger if you went to college you were an officer
Rudder and stick into the expected torque roll pre takeoff, nose down if it gets out of hand... it happens so fast. Wow. Zero chance of recovery. RIP, sir.
He landed right side up I imagine he was knocked unconscious tragic, unfortunate RIP.
Into the expected torque roll? Wouldn't it be against
@@capnhardway Two witnesses on the deck said they saw blood in the cockpit and the pilot was hanging from the seat restraints when they last saw them.
@@capnhardway No crash protection at all in the cockpit. Slammed into the water going over 50mph, if not closer to 100mph. Even in a car with the safety features of today it would hurt, let alone a plane with nothing but metal panels.
@@Darion350 no seat belts, restraints then
would suck to get through all that training and then die in a crash on takeoff on a carrier
Yep, he pitched up, stalled and torque took over. Tragic
That's what it looks like to me, extreme pitch up as soon as airborne with a little yaw to the left stalling and then rolling from the torque.
Not sure if the wind isn't a little off the right. Wonder if there was an issue with elevator trim?
This was my Dad's carrier (they called her the "Three Aces") and squadron (VMF-513) when he was in WWII, flying Corsairs.
He mentioned how many pilots were killed in training. It was not an easy plane to fly, for many reasons, including its lack of visibility as well as torque derived from a lot of horsepower driving a huge propeller. Sad to see this, but I hope it helps the family in some way.
I served with VMA-513 from 75 to 77, both at MCAS Iwakuni Japan, and MCAS Yuma, AZ. I was in the Avionics shop, then Sqdn Training NCO. Flying Nightmares flew AV8As in my day. Also a hard bird to master. Best squadron in the Marine Corps. Semper Fi.
JohnDB, Thank you for your story and for your dad. My father was also on the Vella Gulf on the very day this video was taken, 12 May 19. In the 'remarks' column of his Aviators Flight Log Book, he noted 'Carrier Requalification', machine type FG-1D, machine # 88086 and again on 14 May, FG1D machine# 88041. I have several 8x10" B&W prints of DD-60 hanging over the port edge of the flight deck and finally being pushed over the edge by many crew members. The pilots name was Pat White. I believe this is where the four cockpit instruments I've inherited originated from. The story was, "we were given 15 minutes to salvage anything we could. "... I still can't get over seeing dad's ship and knowing he may be somewhere in the video... my dad, John F Tenvold, was born in 1915, and I was born in '53. He passed in 2007 at 91 years old and also had a beautiful wife of 57 years, Patricia Lew (Palmer) and three lovely daughters. God bless all of these men...
Dobrý den. Zdravím Vás z Czech Republic. Jak jse oficiálně jmenovala letadlová loď co na ní Váš otec sloužil jako pilot Corsairu ? Děkuji za odpověď.
I have quite a few Vella Gulf films coming!!
Many were killed in training. And while repositioning to new base etc etc.
Ah yeah, the Ensign Eliminator (nickname for the F4U)...
Must have been scary to be assigned to that monster of a plane.
Pilots who flew it into combat considered it one of the best fighters of the war. Unfortunately it was a lot like driving an 800HP Dodge Challenger Hellcat... give the keys to someone with little experience handling that kind of power and they'll kill themselves before rounding the first bend.
@@DK-gy7llgood analogy. I love the Corsair but I’d probably have preferrred to move into a Wildcat or Hellcat.
The F4U was designed as an air superiority carrier fighter. But, the Navy pilots had great difficulty doing simulated carrier landings...so, the F4U was dumped on the Marines. The Marines were totally delighted to have the top fighter in the Pacific War, and they had no problems operating off of airfields. The F4U had a 2,000 hp engine, while the Japanese Zero only had a 1,000 hp engine.
@@DK-gy7ll Same analogy but different time, different airplane: The Sopwith Camel. If you could manage the airplane it was a great fighter, if you couldn't, it would quickly kill you.
@@archerpiperii2690 It is the inherent instability that makes the Camel and Corsair great fighters, if you can handle it..
Torque Roll is a very real 'thing' in these big=engined aircraft. I experienced it, to my surprise, pulling away from touch-and-go practive at Pensecola in a T-28 trainer [1,450 HP Pratt & Whitnet radial] when I gunned the engined in response to blowing my carrier landing, resulting in a wave-off. It was all I could do to keep the trainer under control. In the case of the F4U Corsair shown here, the prime issue, as I see it, is the stall upon take-off which resulted in loss of lift and effective airelon control that normally countered torque, allowing the normal torque to roll the F4U.
Flew the T-28B in Primary and torque roll was a thing. Approach turn stall training-if you didn't stick your right foot in it during recovery she'd roll right over. My uncle flew Mustangs and he said it'd torque roll at idle. Sure the Corsair was like that too.
Yes it's the gyroscopic effects from the large and heavy propeller. You can see the yaw to the left creates a nose high attitude leading to the stall, you could actually argue it's a wing stall that flips the airplane over and not torque. Or you can say having stalled as you mention allows Torque to flip it over. Torque is very mild in the Corsair and Mustang. Torque roll is a myth.
The Corsair also had a PW powerplant, specifically a R-2800 twin row radial, producing 2000HP, definitely no joke indeed.
Thanks for the explanatoin.
A stark reminder that freedom isn't free. RIP.
"notification of his parents ,,,,,," Tear jerker right there, brave young men/Officers
I would call that a snap roll caused by over rotation on the cat shot more than a pure torque roll. History of Marine ops from CVEs (and a least one CVL} during late War 2 and Korean War deserve more attention. Thank you for doing this video.
Plus left rudder.
Look at the position of the elevators as he leaves the deck, he's holding the stick full aft.
Nope. Snap roll is one stalled wing.
This is not a stall.
It's only a cat shot if a catapult is actually used.
And you'd be wrong.
2nd Lt. Ed Groves didn't have right rudder or aileron and he seemed to have stalled from the sudden pitch-up off the end of the catapult. One he stalled there were no adequate aerodynamic forces to stop the torque roll. Rest in peace and thank you for your service.
So he had flaps correct, but ailerons, rudder, and elevator wrong. I'm guessing he would have flown this bird on land at least a little. I wonder if maybe this was a catapult shot, and he just wasn't ready? Otherwise how might he have messed up so many things. I don't know what the catapult system was on that ship at that time. Does anyone know?
Another comment. I've taken snow skiing lessons, and one thing that takes some practice is, you've got to face downhill and lean downhill to be able to control yourself, though the natural instinct is to lean back away from the downhill direction. I think that must be a lot like stalling a plane on takeoff.
Yep from what I see right as the catapult started he had Full Flaps, At least 6º of up elevator if not more, Rudder was neutral, and Ailerons were neutral. Wrong settings for takeoff or he wasn't ready when they launched him. They should have had a secondary observer outside the aircraft verifying the aircraft was properly configured for takeoff before initiating the catapult.
Aileron input doesn't prevent a stall it accelerates it.
@@Cpt_Adama Look again, that was a left rudder he had on leaving the deck.
Holy cow, I'd never seen this before. A much belated thank you for your service - Working on that flight deck back then was so freaking dangerous.
Still is
Holy moley….even just looking at these planes, the amount of right rudder necessary to keep those things coordinated at high angles of attack must’ve been extraordinary…
13,000 pilots died in training accident during WW2
i like how a cake was important enough to document in the report
The AD-1 through 6 Skyraider - with the R-3350, in carrier service - would overwhelm you just as easily.
I knew someone who was at an airbase where RVN pilots were being trained to fly them, and he said it was common to be walking down the ramp and see them flying inverted down the runway.
Absolutely. She was a sweet-flying Old Girl right up until you stalled at low altitude and cobbed the tremendous Duplex Cyclone trying to regain flying speed. USA could never seem to normalize coaxial counter-rotating props - but the Corsair and the Skyraider would have surely been safer if they could have had them installed.
@@patrickshaw8595 The Brits had to resort the them to keep the late, high-powered Griffon-engined Spitfires from killing their pilots on take off.
I'd suggest the main issue is coming off the end of the catapult with the stick in his crotch. The roll doesn't start until after the sharp pitch-up which will have stalled the aircraft. It actually looks like he has a bit of left rudder on coming off the catapult too which will have helped convince the aircraft which way to snap after stalling, just incase torque, spiral slipstream, P-factor and gyroscopic precession weren't enough. Poor guy. You don't get a lot of time to think - that's clear!
he had the reccomended full flaps and looks like the elevator was slightly nose up as suggested. It seems the instructions were for 6 degrees of right rudder and 6 degrees of right aileron - I wonder if he missed on those or if the stall set him up for disaster.
@@djmips I believe the cat shot messed up his hands and feet on the stick and rudder for just 1 second.
Not sure what you could read into it but the pilot looks stiff as a board which makes him seem really scared or hesitant right before launch. It could be a head back against the rest stance because of the catapult but he doesn't give any indication that makes the viewer think he's really ready. R.I.P. brave aviator.
Rest in Peace, mighty warrior.
Very sad. He didn't appear to have either right rudder or aileron when launched as per the prior instruction. 😢
Could have been a number of things. Could have not had trim set properly, could have put in too much power, could have been a problem with the controls or the control surfaces. Really is a shame regardless of the cause.
Nothing set to counteract what everyone knew. Little attention paid to the hundreds of pilots lost during training.
Pause at 1:13 left rudder can clearly be seen.
The instruction pertains to the rudder trim. On takeoff you can see the rudder trim tab deflected to the left, which is correct for right rudder trim. How much trim he had in I can't say.
Those instructions were for trim settings, not control positions.
He had neutral ailerons on takeoff. He tried to put them in at the last minute but by then it was too late.
The left wing stalled to begin the rotation, once the left wing stalls, no amount of aileron is going to help, Look instead at the position of the elevators as he's leaving the deck.
The aileron input only aggravated the stall of the left wing.
Yeah, and the stick was in his lap. You see the elevators? He does try to fix it and I bet he firewalled the throttle. My Dad flew these in Korea and almost killed himself when he got slow in the pattern and gunned it, causing the thing to start to roll on him. He was one of the lucky ones who made a mistake in the plane and lived to apply the lesson.
@gort8203 Yes, as you are referring to, when the plane rolls left at low speed the natural instinct would be to push the stick to the right to correct. This lowers the left aileron which acts as a brake, slows airflow over the wing even more, and increases the stall and roll to the left. The correct maneuver is to lower the nose and use right rudder only, not aileron. Unfortunately this plane was unrecoverable from that speed and low altitude no matter how the pilot responded.
Aileron input only accelerates the stall.
Eeesh, can see LEFT RUDDER inputted as it left the deck
Clearly seen if you pause at 1:13.
I see left rudder too
I was about to write the same! Also, it looks like he had zero aileron deflection until the plane was already rolling to the left but then it was too late to counteract the massive forces :(
He had his elevators way up for climb before and during his take-off roll, put himself into an instant stall; with that slight left turn the left wing totally stalled, torque roll was a secondary consequence.
FG is a designation for F4U Corsairs built by Goodyear as opposed to Vought the designer
The rudder appears to be trimmed left not right. Also the plane yaw to the left immediately after the cat stroke. It appears that the roll starts after the plane yaws left which you would see in a yaw induced roll.
I live in Cape May NJ. NAS Wildwood is just a few miles from my house. NAS WWD trained navy dive bomber and torpedo bomber pilots. There is a monument there for the dozens of young men who were killed in training.
Practicing for carrier qualification, so possibly first flight off carrier. Such fine margins between success and death where land-based training can only go so far. RIP.
The "Torque Roll" is a MYTH!. This event has nothing to do with the torque of the engine, it has to due with the dynamic motion of YAW!. Three things in sequence are actually what causes this event. Any airplane can experience this. I have a video of a SR22 in England doing the same thing, on or about March 26, 2024. The P factor of the prop in a climb causes left yaw, this is of course stronger forces as the pitch gets higher. This yaw, (not sideslip, with the ball out of the middle) causes the left wing to pivot aft loosing lift while the right wing is pivoting forward increasing lift, (yaw - roll coupling) this causes asymmetric lift and the airplane will start to roll left. The pilot will always feed in right stick causing the left aileron to deflect down, adding in more drag, adding more yaw force to the left (adverse yaw), additionally the change in the camber of the wing (by the lowered aileron) causes its critical angle of attack to be reduced, stalling the left outboard wing panel. Notice no additional right rudder was applied, had he done that, all the above would have been cancelled out! Pilots need to be taught, YAW and PITCH are the things to pay attention to while flying a machine in a 3 dimensional environment. The airspeed, and ball in the middle is a flawed method!
Glider training helps a pilot learn about rudder usage!
Why is ball centered a "flawed method?" There is no yaw if the ball is centered. Yaw is uncoordinated flight and ball centered means the aircraft is in coordinated flight assuming the instrument has been mounted properly.
Snap roll due wing reaching stall angle of attack. Do not apply up elevator until sufficient flying speed attained.
People forget that tens of thousands of Allied aircrew were killed during training during WWII. And that was the winning side which had the best flight schools, resources, and technology.
If the Allies had the best flight schools, why did Germany have so many fighter aces?
If the Allies had the best technology, why did Russia and the US "recruit" all the best German aerospace scientists after the war?
The Allies had the "best resources"...and that's it.
I found old color slides from a pilot in WW2 in my grand parent's attic that showed a stack of trainers balled up next to a building. Scary image.
@codymoe4986 because in the US and UK if a pilot had skills they were rotated out of combat so they could train new pilots. Germans just had to fly for the duration. Also lower ranking pilots in German squadrons were always tasked with assisting other higher ranking pilots in getting kills and not getting kills of their own. If only like half or a third of the pilots in a squadron are allowed to shoot down planes of course they're going to have higher scores.
Germany focused on rocket technology much more than any other country by 1945, of course they would have the most rocket experts. The united stated had the best atomic scientists in 1945.
German pilot quality got worse and worse and worse as the war continued. Exoeriencd pilots expected to fly in combat until they day, reduced flight hours for cadets, accelerated lesson schedules. It's ridiculous to say the luftwaffe was better. Good air forces don't lose air superiority and never regain it for the final year of a war.
@@codymoe4986 Not really. While I take nothing away from the German technology nor the training, the simple fact is Germany never had to overcome the inherent challenges of operating in a carrier environment. The U.S went from 7 fleet carriers and 1 escort carrier in 1941 to 28 fleet carriers and 71 escort carriers in 1945, a technological feat unmatched by any country and a lead that the U.S. hasn't lost since WW2. Due to the demands of the war, much technology was (The Corsair a prime example) was subject to little long term testing with the faults often fixed in the field, often at a tragic cost. Additionally, the nature of the war favored Europe in terms of pilots becoming aces, with pilots on both sides being able to fly hundreds of missions due to the close proximity of the conflict. This was particularly noteworthy on the Eastern front with Russia being able to produce large numbers of planes often with poorly trained pilots that were easier picking for the better trained German pilots. In terms of overall counts the European pilots had a 2 year head start of American pilots as the U.S. entered the war in 1942 vs. 1942.
There was a considerable yaw to the left soon after leaving the deck, together with a sharp pitch up at low airspeed. Insufficient right rudder to counteract the prop wash at high power causing the yaw, then a stall or semi-stall due the pitch up leading to a barrel roll entry, all aided by engine torque?
Damnit. The war was over three months after this.
Looked like stick aft and left rudder leaving the deck. Elevator maybe neutral after the pitch up. Stick probably full forward and right as the roll started. I couldn’t tell if right rudder was applied, but it looked like stall-spin at that point. The full right stick probably helped the spin to the left.
No rudder applied - probably freaked out when the torque roll happened, leading quickly into the torque induced stall spin. Matter of seconds, not a lot of reaction time. Bad way to go.
Pause at 1:13 left rudder can clearly be seen.
He had wrong rudder input from the start and maybe the catapult officer should have aborted the launch until the pilot saw his mistake, that's if the officer even had such piloting knowledge up his sleeve. POV pilot prop turns clockwise therefore any high angle of attack attitude will cause the blades to bite harder into the air between 2 and 8 O'clock position of rotation and cause exactly the out of control nose wander seen here, then its on into a port wing stall and game over. Right rudder ( lots of it, to also counteract the spiralling prop wash striking the vertical stab) and slight nose down after launch is what you see in most other footage of F4U launches.
Big Prop - The reason for inverted gull wing. Otherwise the landing gear would be too long.
Inherent design problems with this bird. Give me the F6F any day of the week.
I would have thought he would have survived that, but "percetable amounts of blood in and in the vicinity of the cockpit" tells me his mellon was split. When you look at the impact it was almost an immediate stop, however, he hit at approximately 60 Kgs, which makes me wonder if he had his shoulder straps on correctly.
Looked like the plane stalled, just before rolling. A stall after take-off would definitely cause instability in any aircraft, but the F-4U was known for its torque issues. Interesting to note the briefing chalkboard accentuating the need for certain adjustments to flight surfaces (ailerons, rudder, etc.) upon take-off, just before the incident. Would give a gonad to be able to fly a F-4U and/or a P-51.
P-38 for me.
Wouldn't touch the P-51. It's got a very temperamental stall-spin tendency in every sim I've ever flown it in, and wartime documentation seems to bear that out. I consider it more dangerous than aircraft that had worse reputations. The P-39 had a reputation, and will certainly kill you if you let a spin develop fully, but you have plenty of time to stop it. The P-51 will surprise you with a spin (the stall is very sudden), and the spin will develop fully unless you're really on-the ball stopping it. The aircraft's one saving grace is that recovery is automatic in a fairly short timeframe unless you actually hold it in the spin, so you're unlikely to be instantly screwed at altitude, but the spin is violent while it lasts and tends to leave you significantly nose-low, and it's *very* easy to re-spin it during the recovery from the nose-low attitude, after which your chances of digging a new hole in the ground are significant.
@@JonBrase The P-38 had its own issues. Managing the fuel for 2 engines for one, it could get tricky. If you flew in the ETO the lack of hydraulically-controlled ailerons for two, until the L variant. P-38's were meat on the table for the really good Luftwaffe pilots until the L variant. Also, if you were to fly it in the ETO you would freeze your azz off, even with electrically-heated suits because you had no engine heat in front of you, just ice cold air. It affected combat efficiency, and many pilots got frost bite. But over all, in the PTO, it was amazingly successful, and in many ways turned the tide of the air war in the South West part of the PTO. Charles Lindbergh had a big hand in solving the range issue by coaching pilots to throttle back below factory recommended settings to increase range. It was a beautiful plane and pilots liked flying it. The really good ones used the throttle control on the inboard engine to dramatically increase turning radius. Bong did that...
The chalkboard had elevators 6° nose up which seems unnecessary. He had full power, full flaps down, a head wind and a catapult assist. Level elevators or perhaps 2° nose down might have been the order of the day.
Those trim settings are in the Pilots Operating Manual for the Corsair due to its tendency to roll to the left at high power, low airspeed, full flaps conditions like this.
It’s looks like the rudder trim wasn’t set properly for takeoff ? It’s also looks like a possible “trim stall”. With the pitch up and high angle of attack the rudder because more predominant for roll control. It’s possible that aileron control was put in and acerbated the stall. These guys had very little experience and these were high performance beast! Thanks for you service guys!
That was probably a very awkward cake eating ceremony later in the evening.
What made the aircraft stall like that immediately after leaving the deck? Pilot pulling the stick back too much?
I have heard that the 2000 HP double wasp engine, swinging that huge prop, required slow throttle advance at low speed to avoid a torque roll
The Hawker Tempest''s engine "Napier Sabre" 3500 hp which was maybe the most powerful chase plane engine of WW2 caused the plane to do that same torque roll too.The torque roll is similar to helicopters spinning when they lose the tail rotor.
Same with the Griffon-engined Spitfires until the controversy-rotating prop was added.
I think he wasn't lined up properly and tried to correct with left rudder. But that is opposite of what he was suppose to do. So when takes off, he already has some left momentum from the left rudder initially. Basically, his configuration should have been to counter left movement but he started with left movement in order to correct the misalignment. Watch in .25 speed.
The pilot maintained back pressure throughout the launch, that's what caused this accident. The outcome would most likely be the same in a F6F, though he would have had a better chance of correcting his mistake. Back pressure to prevent tail rise, take off power, launch, ease off back pressure, take off... the other video shows the proper way. Almost looked as if this was an example of what not to do, use a beat up airframe and stick a mannequin in the cockpit.
*Torque roll is a myth.* The Corsair and Mustang have very large and heavy propellers. These are not really propellers, but massive gyroscopes. (13 foot 2 inch, 475 lb gyroscope for the Corsair). It is those gyroscopic effects that lead to this outcome. Watch in .25x you'll see the nose yaw to the left _with the resultant force pitching the Corsair nose up_ , exceeding the critical angle of attack and stalling the left wing, snap-rolling it on its back.
It is critical for operators to understand this and be prepared to handle the gyros at play. When inputs are applied appropriately the Mustang and Corsair are more than manageable. The reality is torque is very mild in these airplanes. Sadly too many pilots were lost to this misunderstanding and for it the Corsair and P-51 got a bad rap.
doesn't a gyro rely on torque? that's how they work.
Pause at 1:13 and tell me which way the rudder is turned.
Interesting, how many hours you got in P51’s and Corsairs?
Of course spinning a 450lb gyroscope is going to have effects...but in this case it's more 'P-factor' at work combining with engine torque and way too much elevator and angle of attack with no aileron resistance leading to the stall. Once stalled the engine trying to turn the propeller against air drag and the angle of attack increasing the 'P-factor' is more than the wings can counter so it rolls over on its' back.
Torque rolls ARE a thing and many video's exist of 'wave-offs' where the pilot jams the throttle and without any change in angle of attack the plane instantly starts to roll over as several thousand ft/lbs of torque are applied to the prop. Any change in aircraft attitude then allows the gyroscopic influence of the prop to get in on the fun flipping the plane over. RIP to the pilot.
@@Milkmans_Sonno gyro has precession. A chain saw, leaf blower or even a hair dryer will twist, turn and gyrate in your hand when you wave them around. What you are feeling is gyroscopic precession.
This is really heartbreaking to see and read about the details.
I keep thinking about the power of these engines. It just doesn't sink in properly without physical, present experience. But... this video... it takes one closer, most definitely. Absolutely monstrous machines.
2000 HP
I'm surprised they even tried flying Corsairs on or off of escort carriers. Too big, too heavy. They were even considered unsuitable for fleet carrier operations at first.
That's why escort carriers flew F4F and FM-2 Wildcats up to the end of the war.
I've read about experimental attempts to fly Hellcats on CVEs, too, that did not work out, either, and for the same reason. I remember seeing a photo of a Hellcat pilot in his cockpit, missing a landing on a CVE, last photo of him taken while he was alive.
The F8F Bearcat was supposed to be the escort carrier fighter to replace the Wildcat, but it did not deploy until the war ended.
As a tail dragger pilot....rudder as soon as as the wheels turn.
Pause at 1:13 left rudder can clearly be seen.
He had left rudder applied. That’s a mistake a student with 10 minutes of flight time should not make, let alone a naval aviator.
Were these guys taught to fly these from an airport initially? Seem like this pilot didn't do any of the things except possibly the elevator when launched. Interesting that the instructions being written on the blackboard didn't include power setting which I would have thought would be important as a way to help reduce torque to a level that the control surfaces could handle
Under normal WWII circumstances YES. They were taught to fly Stearman Bi-Planes first then T-6 Texans, then they would get stick time in the same types of birds they would fly into combat. Typical Carrier operations called for full power on takeoff, as these early catapult assisted launch systems were barely adequate for big heavy birds like the Corsair and Hellcats, especially on these short decked Commencement Bay-class "Jeep" carriers. This carrier was literally BRAND SPANKING NEW, having been commissioned only a month before this accident.
Yes, I have other videos showing the training at El Centro, CA where they practiced on land as if at sea. The videos have "LSO Training..." and "bounce landing..." in their title.
Bear in mind that the instructions pertained to trim settings, not primary control surfaces.
There is the possibility that the aircraft did not respond to the avaitor's inputs, you know? Maybe he tried to correct properly, but the aircraft was damaged or had one or more faulty systems. It is possible that it wasn't actually pilot error.
Also, does anyone have an idea what that black blob bobbing in the sea is? I guess that is not the pilot at 0:58 and for several seconds afterward in the churn of the splash down.
Looked like the plane also got caught in a combination of acceleration from the catapault, plus lift from an unexpected updraft and / or strong wind coming over the front of the moving ship. I once stood at the tip of the bow of a cruise ship, and the wind at the tip of the bow was like a hurricane.
He had the stick in his lap, that is why it had such a steep angle on take off. It seems that maybe he wasn't ready for the cat, his body language in the cockpit was really tense.
Blimey, look at the DIAMETER of that propeller! Equal to the height of 2 grown men, plus a bit more! Anyone know what the rotating MASS of that prop is?
I wonder if the correct action on leaving the deck is to leave the stick neutral but don’t let the nose balloon up, and be ready with the rudder to keep it straight and level. Something like that? Then when under control, raise the gear…and with sufficient speed, then the flaps?
I'd call that a spin stall. The pull of the catapult changes the angles from vertical to somewhat more horizontal, but that hard pitch up right off the bow killed his lift. From there he was just a leaf in the wind.
Except it didn't spin. It was a torque roll due to inefficient airflow over the wing and flight control surfaces resulting in the torque of the propeller to roll the aircraft. Hence why it is called a torque roll. This is the same thing that happens to a helicopter if the anti-torque rotor fails. Spins occur due to asymmetric lift occurs of the wings and causes the aircraft to rotate or spin around the vertical axis. In a torque roll the aircraft rotates around the longitudinal axis which is what happened here. The pitch up and stall made it look like a barrel roll.
@@ImpendingJoker Sorry but that was most definitely a snap spin entry! It snapped left specifically because of the torque of the high power setting, but it didn't start rotating until after the aircraft had stalled and the torque, p-factor, slipstream, etc, caused the left wing to stall first and deepest.
The loss of airspeed and thus airflow over flying surfaces from pitching up, and all in a matter of seconds...so unfortunate.
I had not realized before seeing this video, that there was some sort of assistance mechanism helping develop the forward momentum of this type of aircraft when taking off the ships deck.
lt is a catapult launch system to help accelerate the aircraft to flying speed.
Late war thing tho, early part of the war they didn't use cats much yet
He obviously commanded a lot more the six degrees nose up. That was probably about thirty degrees. He may not have been ready for snap backwards of the cat, and if he had his hand too tightly on the stick - that would do it
I think that is exactly what happened.
The Corsair was known as "The Ensign Eliminator". Remember this when you hear people claim it was better than the F6F Hellcat, known as "The Ace Maker" and had a higher kill ratio than the Corsair.
I can't see any rudder at all, either rudder trim or rudder input. You need almost full right rudder on that thing.
Go to this posters normal ops video and watch the F4U launch. Almost full right rudder being used.
Crazy how the vid starts off showing before takeoff roll you're already compensating Rudder and Ailerons 6° RIGHT. Yet still she rolled.
Was taking off with full flaps standard procedure?
Yes, as these early catapult assisted launch systems were barely adequate for these big heavy birds.
Yes. You need all the lift available with such a short deck run.
On carriers, yes.
@@tomterific390 Perhaps medium flaps would have been better?
What was the flash underneath of the aircraft right before it hits the water?
It appears he exceeded pitch up angle of attack and his left wing stalled, the torque appeared to carry him through the roll. It appears he also applied incorrect rudder after pitch up.
If you haven't read the report shown at 1:53, I strongly recommend that you do.
My RC model Corsair would likely do a similar thing. I put in a lot of right rudder on takeoff as the throttle is advanced to control the left swing. 2.8m span, 250cc engine, 32 inch propellor, 25kg
Those props were so big.
Pitched up exceeding AOA, left wing stalled, combined with mil power setting caused a snap roll.
Not a torque roll.
In a torque roll, the airframe will rorate 360° around the prop shaft while not deviating from its relative course.
Control surface input after the plane is no longer flying will not help. Taking off at a 60 degree angle was not good.
What exactly happened? He nosed up right off the deck, looks almost like he wasn't expecting the wind to be as strong as it was?
Was the initial climb too steep?
Excellent demonstration
Is this the problem they fixed in the later models with the Triangle shape welded to the R/S wing?.....
This is nothing to do with torque. It's either weight and balance, trim setting or a sudden gust.
As a non pilot I’m trying to understand.
It seems he stalled, and in that state there was not enough airflow over control services to counteract torque. Full right boot would not stop it nor full right stick.
In a situation like this could you reduce throttle? As a layman that seems to make sense but I understand a real pilot died here and I’m sure I don’t get the reality of this situation.
You have to realize, the carrier is moving forward, running over the crashed aircraft.
1:49 what is that flash of red? Looks like a tiny fireball. But it hadn't contacted the water yet, else you'd see a splash of white. It watched it over and over again from 1:48, is it a reflection? An explosion? Weird. I guess it was from the impact in some way, but it doesnt look like that at all under closer inspection
I see what you are saying! Good find. Not sure, but looks like it could/should be analyzed more...
Is it because that guy wrote 6 degrees right for all the trim?
It’s amazing they didn’t have a system set up where there was a motorized small boat or at least swimmers ready to go in case of something like this. The accounts say that men on deck saw the pilot slumped forward as the ship passed by. Someone could have gotten to him and pulled him out, even if he was dead.
They have an escort carrier somewhat nearby that helps recover in some situations as you will see in future videos. Unfortunately, this plane sank rapidly...before all of the carrier passed by.
@@VMTB143Mike Yup, no way to save him, if he was even alive. That was a heck of an impact.
Can you please change the title of this video and remove the "torque roll". This crash is a result of pilot error, he had full up elevator which caused a stall resulting in the roll. Many people are sharing this video stating it is proof of the Corsairs terrible handling and torque response which is incorrect and unfair.
Not at this time. It is well documented that the Corsair had some flight characteristics that were worked on to make the plane safer to fly in the carrier environment. One characteristic in particular was the tendency to roll due to the torque of the engine/prop at or near stall speed. I will do additional research to see how this can be conveyed by multiple sources who know directly. I understand that there are a lot of opinions about this. I posted this video in an effort to respond to others comments/opinions, and to let the conversation flow. Thank you.
@VMTB143Mike Most single engined propeller driven aircraft will do the same with a full power low speed stall.
What kind of catapult was being used then?
My cousin flew these to the Black Sheep production site for filming and said they were bears to fly.
I
One of the reasons the Zero was the best naval aircraft of the war: its ease of handling and gentle stall characteristics
Japanese pilots didn't like it. They called it an aerobatic plane. No armor, no self-sealing fuel tanks, lightly armed and under powered compared to the F6F and F4U. Like most early war Japanese planes it would catch on fire after a few rounds to critical areas. They much preferred the later Japanese fighters, which were quite good.
Anyone else notice the two F6 Hellcats parked at the rear of the carrier flight deck?
The VMF squadrons assigned to these ships were a mix of 8 Hellcat and 8 Corsair, I believe. There were usually 2 photo recon F6F within the Hellcat contingent.
@@VMTB143Mike VMF-513 had 2 x F6F-5P and 16 x FG-1D during the shakedown cruise of USS Vella Gulf.
It looked like he didn't do enough to prevent a stall after launch.....he pulled up too steep...... and also did nothing to counter the roll to the left. No right aileron input. Were the controls locked at launch? Did he black out at launch? It didn't look like he was flying the plane at all.
The war diary report states that he lost grip on the control stick...not sure how they determined that.
You can clearly see the right aileron input trying to counteract the roll to the left. Problem is that this was the wrong input at that time and only aggravated the stall of the left wing, ensuring the crash.
@@VMTB143Mike Fascinating. Thanks.
No Stryker! 6 Degrees! Your Pitch is toooo high!
This demonstrates the problem with superprops, torque reaction!
It was pretty windy.
I wonder if a sudden gust contributed to the stall, lifting the plane unexpectedly ??
Windy plus he also seems to have a lot of flap down... who knows.
At first it looks like a barrel roll that ran out of altitude. The high AOA and the swing of the nose to the left says snap roll. Maybe a snap roll initiated at near stall speed looks like a barrel roll in a F4U?
The carriers initially used springs and hydraulics and it appears that's what this carrier had. Steam catapults came later.
They were trying to make soda jerks and busboys etc into officers, pilots and bombardiers.
Sometimes they didn't get it right.
Sitting on the fantail are two Avengers.
I believe on😊 later models of the Corsair they incorporated a feature to minimize torque roll.
I have read that they did add a stall strip on the right wing.
Why is this video geoblocked for USA? My friend in USA is not able to see this video.
It shouldn't be. It is not a setting that I have made...I see folks from around the world are viewing it.
@@VMTB143Mike Could it be variations within different states perhaps? My friend is in Tucson, Arizona. Me personally i am viewing from Norway...but i have VPN so no big deal for me regardless.
The only block is a "Not for Children" setting.
The F4U Corsair was an amazing, if unforgiving, aircraft.
Good Lord, imagine being the next guy to have to take off after poor Lt Groves died right in front of you
I wonder how deep is the water, and if the aircraft has ever been found.
I looked up the pilot. Ed (Edward Groves). It claims he is MIA. Him and that plane were never seen again.
Ah... Painful to watch. The breaks of Naval Aviation. R.I.P.