Dornier Seastar

[wabano]

Who woulda thought a B52 could do a 90 degree turn fifty feet off the deck that slow.

If you look him up on some youtubes, it was the guy's usual routine, for which his
commanding officer was going to fire him over, the very guy you see ejecting,
and who rode onboard to make sure THIS did not happen(and who was blown back
into the fireball)...

As for the aileron down deflection aggravating a high speed stall in big wing airplanes,
like the canso and B-52, it was explained to me by some of the guys who designed the CL-215.
He stated that lot of PBYs met their demise that way...

The PBY was used in various roles for thirty years before water bombing was invented,
and then most crews where not as experimented as they where when
it was used as a water bomber...

All aircraft have their limitations and the PBY is no exception,
but I believe you are over stating the limitations of a PBY by making
the statement they are only good in sheltered waters such as lakes.

Check the Cousteau crash...just because seas touched the gear doors, they collapsed,
engulfing the cockpit with water and pushing it up in the props...

Compare with the incident in Nice(pronounced niss) in 81...

The guys TO from the runway to scoop right off in the mediterranean,
but forgot the land-sea switch in land,
so they touched down with the gear down.

The gearboxes broke off and both props fell in the sea, never to be seen again.

Otherwise, not a scratch on the plane(discounting the gear doors, of course)
Next day, a barge brought two QEC, promptly installed. Next day, two doors
where lashed to the nose and the plane was flown to Marignane by the
same crew...The Pasha(the boss over there) refusing ANY time off to the crew
for the screw up.

It would have taken longer just to bury the crew if they had been flying a Canso...

[Cat Driver]

As for the aileron down deflection aggravating a high speed stall in big wing airplanes,
like the canso and B-52, it was explained to me by some of the guys who designed the CL-215.
He stated that lot of PBYs met their demise that way...

With all due respect wabano you have been getting some very flawed information.

I have probably done more training on the PBY than any pilot alive today and have explored the flight envelope to the limits of the airplane.

Trust me aileron stall is not a control problem with the PBY, it is however quite violent as far as airframe shock goes as as the down going aileron stalls there is a sudden reversal of force that actually is felt right through the airframe, control however is regained as soon as you un-stall the aileron and there is no real loss of altitude.

Furthermore to get into a position where aileron stall is experienced requires one to really be aggressive with the ailerons at a high angle of bank and a high G load in the turn....

Of all the many different airplanes and helicopters I have flown over my career the PBY is still my favorite because it is just plain an amazing all around good airplane.

http://www.pbyflighttraining.com

[wabano]

Trust me aileron stall is not a control problem with the PBY, it is however quite violent as far as airframe shock goes
as as the down going aileron stalls there is a sudden reversal of force that actually is felt right through the airframe,
control however is regained as soon as you un-stall the aileron and there is no real loss of altitude.

It must be what he was talking about, as this was told to me twenty years ago...

Similarly, try to follow a Norseman with and Otter-or twin Otter,
better bring your flippers and shark repellent...but which would you rather fly?
(For those not in the know, Otters are fun, Norseman is...pain?)

[Liquid Charlie]

(For those not in the know, Otters are fun, Norseman is...pain?)

I for one always preferred the whoredyne over the DH products -- hands down -- especially on boards -- a beaver and an otter did not have the snap to pull a sick whore off a piss pot -- and a Noorduyn on Elliot Boards was head and shoulders above the otter or the beaver in rough conditions, slush or sticky snow -- on floats -- it was a lot easier to handle in windy conditions than the otter -- for landing and taxiing -- it was more of a challenge to fly and it took a little more skill to launch -- to me that always brought more enjoyment -- my only big complaint in the summer was it was damn hot in the pitcock -- but we worked at keeping at getting re-hydrated in the "snake pit"

A little pain is good -- bring the whip --

[Cat Driver]

A little pain is good -- bring the whip --

If you are stuck with a dead battery the Norseman with an inertial starter had a good device to bring pain...the hand crank handle, just insert it in the proper hole and start cranking.

[mag check]

Trust me aileron stall is not a control problem with the PBY,

Furthermore to get into a position where aileron stall is experienced requires one to really be aggressive with the ailerons at a high angle of bank and a high G load in the turn....

Perhaps it is not a problem for a guy like you Cat, but maybe the stories that told of PBY's being lost to aileron stall were new low time pilots during the war, in which case they would have been at low level, pulling g's, and likely not experienced enough to have explored the entire flight envelope of the pby over 50 years like you.

I've never looked into the numbers, but I would suspect that many PBY's were lost out over the ocean while circling a sub at low level, high g's, and a 200 hr pilot at the controls.

[Driving Rain]

The OMNR's 7 ex-military Otters hand that hand crank thing too. I always thought it was a great idea for a bush plane until they installed a radio stack where the handle was inserted.

[Cat Driver]

Perhaps it is not a problem for a guy like you Cat, but maybe the stories that told of PBY's being lost to aileron stall were new low time pilots during the war, in which case they would have been at low level, pulling g's, and likely not experienced enough to have explored the entire flight envelope of the pby over 50 years like you.

For sure that is a possibility, aileron stall could cause a loss of control, if it is not centered to un-stall it.

What can cause a total loss of control is rudder over center lock which can be induced in that condition by excessive rudder input and crossed controls.

I have had it happen to me while practicing for the air display routines and it was one of the most heart stopping experiences I have ever had in an airplane, fortunately when I found that the two of us could not over power the rudder lock I yarded back on the elevator and snap stalled the thing and after one turn of the spin I had rudder control back and premature gray hair.


It was a Cat with the Davis tail but the standard PBY will also over center rudder lock if the wrong control inputs are used as the Navy pilots found out during the war.

It is my belief that the loss of the flying fireman's tanker 1 and the crew was due to a rudder over center lock and insufficient altitude to recover. Witnesses described the classic scenario of such an event.

I am only alive today because I was doing the edge of the envelope exploring at a high enough altitude to recover from the spin.

I've never looked into the numbers, but I would suspect that many PBY's were lost out over the ocean while circling a sub at low level, high g's, and a 200 hr pilot at the controls.

I have to agree with you.

and likely not experienced enough to have explored the entire flight envelope of the pby over 50 years like you.

Hey, easy there I only flew the PBY's from 1968 to 2005 when I retired, believe it or not I did fly a few other types as well.

_________________

[mag check]

Cat.

Wow, that doesn't sound like a fun situation.

It would seem to me that is a serious design issue with the aircraft.

Was this aerodynamic lock, or mechanial lock caused by control interferance?

If it was aerodynamic, it would seem that the original flight test pilots didn't fully test the full flight envelope.
It is, and as far as I know always has been, a test condition to ensure that control forces increase all the way to the stops, with NO reduction in force. Controls are not allowed to go "over center".

Perhaps the military doesn't have the same testing protocol that the rest of the industry does.
But you would think that when the PBY's went civilian, more testing to the current standards would have been accomplished.

Glad you are still with us after that flight

[Cat Driver]

Was this aerodynamic lock, or mechanial lock caused by control interferance?

It is an aerodynamic lock.

It only happens when the rudder is fully deflected in a slipping configuration, therefore it is seldom experienced.

I asked the TSB people who were investigating the flying fireman crash why they did not add a caution to the PBY AFM.

They refused to accept my description of what I had experienced and never did put a warning in the PBY AFM.

Please do not ask me why they ignored my suggestions during that accident investigation because I do not have the faintest idea of why they did not.

Maybe they just felt that I was relating a story that was not plausible?

Then there is the question of why the same problem was experienced by the Navy crews during WW2, maybe they also were just imagining it?

Having been involved in two high profile investigations of PBY accidents with the TSB shall we say my admiration for some of their conclusions as to cause for some accidents is rather shallow to say the least.

Then there is the position that some in aviation take that I am just a crack pot who really doesn't understand anything about flying, therefore it is easy to ignore my advice.

You probably would not believe this, but there are a few in the government side of aviation who have actually accused me of being anti authority.....

.......so therefore to be ignored.

[Liquid Charlie]

aerodynamic locking of controls also raises it's ugly head in several other types as well -- DC-3 - rudder and HS748 -- ailerons

Experience level did give a few aircraft a bad rep -- Beech 18 for one -- it was a great airplane on wheels and could take a good xwind -- like the DC-3 it could handle 40 kts. but when the beech was used as an initial twin engine trainer -- no wonder the reputation was born.

[skybaron]

WTF.

I thought this post is supposed to be for a Donier Seastar!

Why the hell is all the attention going to the cheesy PBY for - cuz its a flying boat??
Different engines, design, blah blah blah.

[Cat Driver]

Why the hell is all the attention going to the cheesy PBY for - cuz its a flying boat??
Different engines, design, blah blah blah.

Excellent question skybaron so why don't you start bringing this thread back to the Dornier Seastar by explaining to us why that design is so superior to older flying boats.

Maybe you could go back and read this thread once more and you may find some interesting discussion regarding the behavior of airplanes when they are flown at their limits and something goes real wrong.

[xsbank]

Well, I'm going to take it one step past the limit and say the Grumman/Dehavilland Tracker also had a frightening rudder stall - 40+ knot x-wind and the rudder would suddenly go to the stop and it took 2 legs to centre it. Military designers danced to a different tune than boring old civilian a/c....


Nya nya nya

[skybaron]

Excellent question skybaron so why don't you start bringing this thread back to the Dornier Seastar by explaining to us why that design is so superior to older flying boats.

Maybe you could go back and read this thread once more and you may find some interesting discussion regarding the behavior of airplanes when they are flown at their limits and something goes real wrong.

A little sensitive there chap. Don't get your wiskers all twisted up.

Why the Donier or PBY or whatever, when a Van or Otter can do the job with much more versatility?

[Cat Driver]

A little sensitive there chap. Don't get your wiskers all twisted up.

Sensitive, naw far from it, it was the use of the word " cheesy " that made me wonder what you were talking about.

Why the Donier or PBY or whatever, when a Van or Otter can do the job with much more versatility?

Well I guess it all depends on what job you want to do, for instance will a Van or an Otter lift ten thousand pounds, or will either of them fly non stop for over twenty hours?

Why do you think a PBY is " cheesy "?

[xsbank]

I looked at the Dornier at CBAA and it seems way too expensive to ever be an aircraft that you can earn a living with. It also seems delicate with its composite sponsons. I asked the salesman about docking with it and he said you needed to hang boat fenders off the attached cleats! My first thought was somebody in a hurry bogging off with the fenders attached, flapping about and finally going through the rear prop....

Docking against tires will leave black streaks along the side of your shiny plastic hull - a rogue boat swell will surely fill the thing with water through its low door. I forgot to look but I don't think there is a front door for the pilots to get out of. Besides, it would be right in front of a spinning prop, perhaps. That same swell might bang the wing on the dock. Looked like a PITA to service the engines - even PT6s need care.

I nearly got checked out on a Mallard once, it was close... I would love to be checked out on a Cat. By Cat, for that matter! Both of the last-mentioned aircraft need flight engineers to climb on the wings for servicing because pilots are too clumsy for that type of work.

[Cat Driver]

Xsbank you obviously have poor ideas about waht a real airplane should be wanting to fly something that looks this cheesy.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e353/ ... wImage.jpg

[Shiny Side Up]

With all due respect wabano you have been getting some very flawed information.

Late to the game, but you're right, though I'm suprised you didn't point out one flaw to his position. Being bored today with the rain and all, I have ample time to find such things.

As for the aileron down deflection aggravating a high speed stall in big wing airplanes,
like the canso and B-52,

The B-52 doesn't have ailerons, it only has spoilers for roll control.

Anyhoo, back on topic. I personally don't have any experience with larger amphibians, flying boats and float planes. Aside from the arguement above on which might have better handling characteristics, on air or on the water, I always have to give kudos to anyone out there making the attempt to put a new craft of this type on the market. If the Germans can be reasonably sucessful in selling the thing it might pave the way for that sector of aviation to make a resurgence - One has to wonder why when a good portion of the world's waterborn airplanes are put to use in Canada, why there isn't more impetus in this direction. We're content apparently to keep using and reusing the same airfames, and not that they aren't good airframes that do an excellent job, but it seems to be a bit of a lack of foresight on our part. Someone already mentioned a factor that the expensive Seastar has in its favor - its composite construction. Is the saving in maintenance (with corosion issues) worth the higher ticket price?

Forget about the Seastar though, I'm always hoping someone with a lot of money will bring one of those Black Sea Monsters over.
Jeebus! They got more of them on there!

[xsbank]

Hi ., yeah, that's just gross! Yuk!

I think the composite thing is great until you damage one, hit a log or pound a dock with one, then the repairs are difficult yet with metal you just slap on a patch. Ramp-to-ramp only, perhaps. Where can you find a ramp nowadays?

That's why everyone on the coast went to Navajos - not only were they cheaper than a Beav, the runways didn't move, unless they were part of a road like in River's Inlet, then all bets were off.

Less than half a mil for a deluxe Beaver or 5.5 million for a Dornier? And you have to ask why we use old airframes? The pilots are already paid little enough, give 'em a new airplane and they would probably have to pay the employer to fly it.

Umm, wait, I.... never mind.