P38 Vmc Roll No Drill

[@jerrypolverino6025]

Former airline pilot here. I owned a piper twin Comanche, which as it is widely known, is not the safest twin engine airplane. I practiced VMC every few months so if I lost an engine, I would be ready. I did have one fail right on takeoff, and that practice was worth every inch I cleared over the trees at the end of the runway on a hot summer day fully loaded. Yes sir, speed is life.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Great story Jerry!

[@Gundog55]

I taught in the twin Comanche and it took several demonstrations for students to detect the beginning of the roll. Sporty maneuver to say the least

[@cjswa6473]

Also have twin c. Also swallowed a value, left engine right after gear came up. Just me, half gas. Hot, sea level. Really, it was so uneventful I didn't even feather the prop. Flew around the pattern about 700 ft , landed, $1200 later, new cylinder. All was good..no metal in the oil( checked). Also had the right engine quit on takeoff roll,,bad fuel injector controller.aborted. that was scarier..the amount of rudder I had to put in on takeoff was abnormal..so I aborted.then noticed the right engine quit😮

[@jerrypolverino6025]

@@cjswa6473 I had the prop feathered before the gear finished retracting. I barely made it.

[@timg9448]

Incredible stories, all three!!!

[@leonardoglesby1730]

My father flying a P-38 on a mission with the 49th FG 9th FS to Fac-Fac New Guinea in 1944 while strafing the harbor had Japanese supplies explode in front of him. He had no option but to fly through the explosion and debris cloud. This resulted in Japanese ammo boxes being jammed in the left radiator. He went through the P-38 single engine procedures, feathering the prop, and was able fly 260 miles to return safely to his base on the right engine. Sadly Dad passed away at 100 after a long life well lived in December. He always said that Jeff Ethell didn't seem to have a clue with regard to P-38 fuel management.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks for sharing your Dad’s story!

[@hughesr.6656]

My Grandad was an armorer with the 9th fighter squadron on New Guinea during WW2. His job was to maintain and load the guns on the P38s.

[@leonardoglesby1730]

@@hughesr.6656 Your Grandad was as essential to the war effort as any of the pilots. I would hope that their paths crossed sometime during their service with the 9th FS. Dad was with the squadron from Dobodura, Nazab, Biak Island, to Leyte, Lingayun, and Okinawa.

[@terrancestodolka4829]

At least the good luck was he was not hit with a big enough piece of shrapnel to bring him down, along with that he had airspeed over the control surfaces to manage an engine out and time to feather the prop. The best in life is to have luck and good training, for these are the two we hope to have to pull us through the disaster and panic, of the ' Oh Shit...! ' parts of our lives...

[@leonardoglesby1730]

@@terrancestodolka4829 I just checked the 9th FS History for July 1944, and I got the side wrong. It was the right side which took the damage. Dad always referred to it as the day he got blown up. Here is the extract for the incident: Until the 8th, the missions flown by the squadron were very prosaic patrols, but on this date our planes escorted B-25's to Fac Fac. Upon completion of the bombing all the flights strafed the target with fine results. Lt. H. Oglesby strafed a warehouse which turned out to be an ammunition depot. The resultant explosion threw debris to a very respectable height. Passing thru all the flying boxes and miscellaneous matter fouled up the coolant system of his plane, and Lt. Oglesby came home on one engine with his right prop feathered, a distance of 290 miles, landing safely. Pieces of ammunition boxes lodged in his intercoolers bore mute testimony to the fate of the warehouse. This was an example of good minimum altitude strafing.

[@jackoneil3933]

Thanks again Scott for the excellent insights. A friend here in Oregon was involved with the video relating to Jeff's final flight and I saw Jeff's final departure. later I also saw the crash site and what was left of the P-38, and seeing such a large and imposing aircraft as the P-38 reduced to a small crumpled bit of derbies left an indelible impression as to our responsibilities as pilots and the harsh reality of the consequences of complacency that changed my perception and practice of flying. It was obvious the joy Jeff experienced flying Warbirds, especially P-38, a joy we all experience from flying, and Jeff's needless loss while tragic, today is a reminder to us all, and one we can in our own way honor him and his loss by being the best and safest we can be.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Well said!

[@sjbeaver]

I flew with Jeff on a number of occasions. Your analysis of his attitude is spot on.

[@easttexan2933]

Never been PIC on a twin of any kind. I'm almost 78 now and back in the 60s when I was learning to fly I always heard from old timers around the field that "twins ain't as safe as you been told". Nothing has changed my mind about that as more and more twins are crashing and being reported. I haven't flown PIC in a single since 1988 and I really don't miss it. Just too complicated now and that's the reason I quit long ago. Just no enjoyment to be had from the experience now. Thanks for sharing Scott. Really enjoy your take on these crashes.

[@tombowers3681]

I remember well when this happened. We were right in the middle of the WWII weekend in Reading PA when the word came in. To say Jeff was well known and well liked among the East coast Warbird community would be an ultimate understatement. I sometimes wonder if his desire to always be flying different types of warbirds contributed to the accident, with his not really gaining an understanding of many of them and just hanging them on the wall like trophies. The crash happened in the P38 but really it could have been any one of many.

[@deanhoman1958]

Really excellent presentation. I remember that crash well. Couldn’t believe that such a talented person would get himself in such a mess. You covered it extremely well.

[@Milkmans_Son]

If Dale Snodgrass can forget to remove a gust lock...

[@briansilcox5720]

Good analysis, Scott. Of interest, many people claimed at the time, that Jeff had written in detail about the complexity of the the Lightning’s fuel system, which would indicate to some extent that he was familiar with it’s operating procedures and limitations. I had met Jeff several times and talked with him over the decade of the 90’s, and came to the conclusion that he was highly motivated to publish warbird related flying content, but was not a particularly experienced, nor a professional aviator. I have known several close friends of his who echoed this interpretation. Simple engine out recovery experience (immediate action responses) should have led him nowhere near a departure from controlled flight, even if encountered at approach speed. Basic checklist adherence (even if relying on memory) should have carried him through fuel management to preclude the starvation event to begin with. The pattern was established long before he accepted the invitation to fly someone else’s irreplaceable P-38. A more professional attitude and conduct would have resulted in refusing that opportunity until all the boxes had been checked affirmatively.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Great input Brian!!

[@jimanderson1355]

John Deahl was killed in his P-38 at SLC in the early eighties in a similar fashion, following loss of power on the right engine after takeoff. Nearly 50 years ago an MEL student in a new Cessna T310R spun me during stall training by aggressively using aileron in an attempt to pickup the low wing. We were 6000’ agl and I recovered with lots of room, but the rate of descent was phenomenal. I’m surprised the hands didn’t fly off the altimeter. Any MEL training or evaluation I did after that was at 10000 agl.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

The P-38 he crashed had none of the original fuel tanks. The selectors were pinned to block certain selections. Warren Bodie said he thought it was possible Jeff got distracted and stopped flying for a brief moment, trying to find fuel, in fear that he'd lose the other engine in just seconds

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@AlanRoehrich9651 And it could have been aliens. Aluminum tanks had been installed instead of bladders. The fuel selectors worked the same way, it has been common to block the external tank position-- all you'd get is air. None of that changes the amount of fuel available by any appreciable amount.

[@jpcii]

The one thing drilled in my head while I still had my twin comanche was “speed is life”. One time when I was still somewhat new to the plane I got a little slow trying to hold altitude while changing from a dry tank (new leak in flight) because I did not realize how long it would take for the boost pump to get the fuel to the dead engine. I kept the prop spinning because I thought it would only take a few seconds. It took more like 30. I had to descend to keep my speed as my speed was slowing it was obvious I needed more speed. So many things I did wrong, but keeping my speed up was the one thing that helped.

[@blancolirio]

Thanks for covering this! Air Classics- “For the Wreckord”

[@BillHuete]

Hi Scott, just watched your P-38 video, enjoy your videos and presentations. I had a close friend who flew P-38’s , P-39’s, and P-40’s during WWII. He had some very interesting stories about all of these airplanes. I never thought to ask him why Lockeed never changed the rotation of the propellers opposite of what they were, that is right prop clockwise rotation, and left prop counterclockwise rotation when viewed from the front. He said he was always mindful of having to bailout in flight for whatever reason because of the horizontal stabilizer which required rolling upside down in that situation. He did lose and engine after takeoff but was able to land straight ahead with gear up. He said he was able to exit the airplane and had never ran so fast then or after that . Sadly he passed several years ago but he was the best flight instructor I ever had. He loved to teach the “Military” way. Keep up the great videos, take care.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Great story!

[@FlyingDoctor60]

Two thoughts: 1) although the death of any pilot is tragic, calling things what they are, respectfully but honestly (in this case, cavalier complacency) is the only way we learn, so kudos for that; and 2) after watching this and BSWorks 5, I am amazed I survived my multi-engine training back in the day. Wow! I had NO idea of the physics involved in a spin of a twin. Yikes!

[@cfinstr]

Thank you for instructing and trying to keep all of us alive.

[@greenthing99100]

Thanks - clear and incisive as always. I used to watch in awe as Michael 'Hoof' Proudfoot practised aerobatics in the Duxford UK P38. He was an artist but died rolling the plane into the ground in July 1996. The previous day he did one neat aileron roll, but the day of the crash he went straight into a second, passed through wings level at the end of that, pointing at the ground and cartwheeled into oblivion when the wingtip hit the ground. No shortage of speed in that case, and most people concluded pilot error but I have always suspected that something jammed the ailerons from the way it just kept on rolling until the inevitable collision with the big hard thing at the bottom of the sky ... RIP both pilots and both P38s

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

There is speculation that he had caught the yoke on something. Another tragic loss of a beloved pilot and rare, priceless aircraft. It wore the livery of two really cool P-38's, it started as Jack Ilfrey's "Happy Jack's Go Buggy", and was Richard Loenhert's "California Cutie" when it crashed.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@AlanRoehrich9651 I've seen the video. It doesn't look like that to me. The thing is about an aileron roll... the nose always drops. The first roll was initiated about level, ended with the nose about 10-15 degrees in a dive. It used up quite a bit of energy and the second roll was a bit slower with the nose still dropping. Throughout it had developed a considerable descent rate. Recovery from the first roll I think could have been made. The second no. The roll out showed the pilot still had roll control just prior to impact. I wouldn't put much credence in the Yoke theory. I was stationed at RAF Lakenheath 92-95 and saw that airplane fly at Duxford... at least I think I did.

[@captaincrash9286]

It was a shocking accident. I'm sure I read that a snapped control cable was at fault, but that may have been speculation. He was a popular and experienced warbird display pilot.

[@localbod]

He performed that first roll at a ridiculously low altitude. Very sad.

[@locustvalleystring]

Thanks for a nice synopsis. When I was flying from New Garden Airport in PA back in the 70's there was a sad looking P-38 with flat tires under a shed for many years. One day I returned and the plane was gone. I was told they flew it out and subsequently crashed. I think it was Serial #44-53193 that I found at the Warbird Registry.....not certain though. I thought it had a clear dome on the front when I saw it. What a handfull it must have been with all that power on each wing.

[@DaddyRecon1]

Scott, thank you for your continued reviews. Sad this accident even happened, tragic loss of life and an incredible aircraft. Know your aircraft systems!

[@billylain7456]

I love your videos, Scott. Thank you so much for posting this one.

[@leedaero]

If I remember correctly I read that Bob Hoover developed his Aero Commander routine based on the training demo he did at the Santa Rosa Army Airfield P-38 training base during WW2. The pilots were loosing confidence in the P-38 due to many accidents. He was sent down to demo and train and build their confidence.

[@boommasterkc-135____8]

I’m extremely thankful for this content. All of my multi training has been in centerline thrust jets although I’m legal to fly multi-engine pistons. I refuse to allow myself to get killed in an airplane by remaining ignorant to the dangers of single-engine operations. As far as I can tell, the two biggest things you need are for them to be flown respectfully and with a plan.

[@TheBullethead]

I recently read a book called "Race of the Aces" by John R. Bruning. It's about the contest to win the case of whiskey offered by Eddie Rickenbacker to the 1st WW2 AAC pilot to exceed his own WW1 total of kills and the impact this had on pilot behaviors. It's a great book on its own merits and I recommend it but it also had a fair amount to say about P-38 VMC rolls as this very new, very high-tech, and very complex plane entered service under the extremely trying conditions of the PTO. Anyway, the gist of what this book says about the P-38's single-engine performance is that there had never been a US twin with the power of the P-38 so at that time, all the engine-out training was based on multi-seat twins with much lower power. So all the pilots were trained that, if an engine failed on takeoff, to firewall everything and worry about feathering the dead engine as a later step. Problem was, while the P-38, like all twins, definitely had a blue line for minimum single-engine speed, it also had an unknown higher speed where the sheer power of the good engine would overcome control authority to correct for the drag of the dead engine. Thus, firewalling everything quickly got over this upper limit and killed a LOT of pilots who were strictly following their training, especially because the plane was new in service, nobody had much time on it, and the operational conditions were very primitive so engine failures were common. Eventually, front line pilots figured out that firewalling the good engine overcame your control authority just as much as being too slow and insisted that training be changed away from firewalling everything. It took a while and a LOT of crashes but eventually this was accepted and resulted in the pilot's manual you quoted for late-model P-38s. So as you say, with 1 engine, the P-38 can still fly quite well, but it has to be kept between conventional VMC and that higher limit, hence the special term "safe single engine speed" used in the manual.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Good point, I described trying that in the air myself.

[@briansilcox5720]

I read that book not long ago, recommend it highly to those wanting to learn more of the details about the P-38’s history.

[@grafhilgenhurst9717]

And then there was the high speed flutter problem!

[@TheBullethead]

@@grafhilgenhurst9717 Not to mention hitting the horizontal stab when bailing out. I knew a guy (he's been dead a while now) that happened to in the North African campaign. He remembered bailing out and then waking up in a German field hospital some days later with a broken back. Apparently, the impact opened his chute. When the Germans retreated, they left the hospital there for the Allies to deal with. And he was in a US hospital for a year after VJ Day but eventually he could walk again and did so until the day he died in the mid-2010s I knew another P-38 pilot for a while, who claimed to have won his share of the war because he had 4 kills and had only been shot down 3 times. His service was later, once lessons had been learned. So I asked him how he'd bailed out without hitting the tail. He said that the technique depended on speed. If you were 300-400kn, you just unbuckled, popped the top, and got sucked out and up. If you were between 200-300kn, you unbuckled,, popped the top, and kicked the yoke forward so you got thrown out above as the plane dove. If you were 200kn or below, you unbuckled, popped the top, rolled inverted, and just fell out. As he had personal experience with all these techniques, I take his word for it.

[@ErikssonTord_2]

The De Havilland Mosquito have similar behavior, and needed an expert pilot (not just a pro) to fly home on one engine!

[@peterruiz6117]

I read the magazine article where Ethyl flew the "green P38". He practiced the engine failure procedure, and described it all. Mystery why he did not feather prop , ect. He DID know.

[@williambest9507]

Hi Scott. Trying not to be haywire here, I thought you might be interested in this. Great video on the P-38. I was an RCAF Starfighter pilot, in the latter 60s, 81ish now, so not much rudder use in those single engine jet years. 75 hours of the F-86, transitioning to the the 104. A young guy's dream for sure. Joining CP-Air later with zero twin time, I found it an interesting learning curve. Mostly it meant to me, to get the rudder on ASAP as long as it was the correct rudder. I felt that opposing the perceived Yaw was the key to getting the correct rudder input and stopping the Yaw. Dead foot, dead engine anybody? The slower the rudder came on the worse it got. Over the years from the 737-200, in 1972, the 727 200/330 in the late '70s, to the DC-10 and the 747-400 in 1984, and later the 767-330, I became a disciple of the Yaw symbol at the top of the electronic Primary Flight Display (PFD). When, on a low visibility take-off (in a Sim, say 600 RVR {runway visual range}) an outboard engine was cut/failed at V1 or later, the Yaw symbol immediately slid left or right, (actually it did this regardless of V1) as required by the occurrence, and it was easy to see it if I happened to see it in a glance downward, which was almost equally up outside and down inside at the instrument panel during the take-off roll. The thrust of these giant engines is eyewatering. But they are simply airplanes like the P-38, I think that is why Boeing put such a big vertical fin on their iconic bird. Flying out of Check Lap Kok in Hong Kong in say 1999, the wind shears were awesome and not really appreciated by other than the pilots flying there. They had LIDAR technology which was really interesting to Air Traffic Control but never was of much interest to the operating airline pilots. What do you do with a LIDAR Alert? Get tensed up and carry on I guess. There were so many take-offs and landings there that we generally listened to the last guy's comments. No comments meant no news. It has been said that when "They" changed from Kai Tak to Check Lap Kok they couldn't have chosen a worse place. The confluence of the Pearl River atmospheric outflow for half of the year with the reverse flow over the Island in the other half year. You could have a 10 knot tailwind at the start of the take-off roll and a 10 knot headwind at the other end of the runway. Very strong wind flow patterns. Nobody asked the pilots. On take-off, an unreported five-knot crosswind gust would hit that big rudder fin, and at 50 - 70 knots indicated on the roll, the jet would charge off to one side, right now. It got one's attention big time as the gust would evaporate and re-occur in the opposite direction about the time the time the correction was applied. Maybe you went 10 feet left or right of centerline but it seemed huge at the time, especially in low visibility with 427 passengers right behind us. This is a rudder blab, forgive me. Somewhere in there, nose wheel steering gives over to the rudder for directional control. On a First Officer or co-pilot take-off, the Captain has the tiller (steering wheel) to keep it straight initially. At 788,000 max gross weight, one would think 70 knots is not a big deal. It is, at 90 degrees in your intended direction. At slow speed, the thing is a weather vane. On the 747-400, some pervert came up with the scenario of an engine failure on a rejected landing/go-around with one engine inoperative and a second engine failure on the go-around. Obviously on the same side as the failed engine. The only way to survive this scenario (and it is extremely challenging and not intuitive) is to normally get the gear and flaps selected up to 25 (from 30) quickly. Fly the jet! Deal with the engine asymmetry problem but let the jet accelerate as much as possible before shutting down the second engine. You don't have to rotate as fast as possible to the go-around attitude. There is after all a runway in front of you. The Fire Drill gives you an immediate loss of thrust when the Fire Switch is pulled and the start lever is cut off. Thrust is degraded before that regardless, thus Yaw. This is where the Yaw icon or symbol is critical in my estimation. This is inertially derived, right now info, about the same time you feel it changing in your butt but not really understanding which way. The Yaw symbol is out to one side, step on the rudder which will push it back into the center, and problem solved! You then need to struggle up to whatever speed is needed and select flaps 20. Now comes the directional control problem of the P-38 and all twin engine or indeed all multi engine airplanes. Too much asymmetrical thrust at low indicated airspeed is equally a bad thing. A powered direct flight to the crash. And the really non-intuitive thing to do is pull back the outboard engine a little bit as required to regain directional control to go straight but keep going up. There are places where you really need to go straight and up. When I got to try it, it got to be very quiet for a couple of minutes as to how low we would go before accelerating out of the boones/smutz. For your folks' possible interest. A head up display makes this sort of thing much easier. Cheers, Billy Best

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Awesome story Billy! Thanks!

[@fazole]

I lived in Hong Kong in the time of Kai Tak and later Chek Lap Kok airports. Standing in Kowloon City and hearing first the power increase then watching a huge 747 in a steep turn at low altitude, lining up for the landing at Kai Tak was amazing and thrilling. Later, I remember some terrible accidents shortly after Chek Lap Kok opened up. The runways are right next to steep mountains so I can imagine the windshear. In 1995, the whole area was just some small fishing villages built on wetlands; by 1997 it was a huge airport, but it was rushed to meet the handover to China. In the first weeks, the baggage system failed resulting in 100,000s of dollars food spoilage, there was no water, restaurants or functioning ATMs. The news told of a family stuck in the airport for days. Which was worse in a typhoon, the approach to KT or CLK? Thanks.

[@PhantomP63]

That procedure sounds like a real crusher. CRJ driver here. Even in indoc, we learn that since the max tire speed is above the rotation speed, sometimes it’s safer to keep the plane on the ground a little longer during a V1 cut to get a bit more control authority before lifting off. Of course, the sim instructor then gave me the situation in a mountainous area to show that one shouldn’t wait too long. Like you say- it’s an airplane, fly the airplane. Thanks for the food for thought.

[@dennislyons3095]

Well done, Sad to lose the rare airplane. Understanding the airplane systems are much more important than people realize. You're right: knowledge is power.

[@Magravated]

You had it right the first time. Tillamook, like book. Thanks for the info.

[@ronmoore5827]

Thanks for this video, I was the guy who posted the question. I couldn’t remember Jeffs name, very sad for everyone involved.

[@terryboehler5752]

Scatterbrain Kid out of houma Louisiana lost an engine and spun in. My Dad was the initial test pilot. He brought it to our Tulsa fly-in. Harvey young airport was 2500' grass. It was in the '70's. He also did the test work on der gabelshwanz Teufel. It had a jump seat. He also took Sam Hocket on a ride out of Harvey Young in the Scatterbrain Kid. Sam was a dedicated airplane lover who had about 40hours total in a PA12, I think. He was a very short 300 pounder. Getting him loaded was an effort. He had to undo his belt and zipper, but he didn't care!!!! He was on cloud 9.

[@Qrail]

Thanks, Scott for your research, and your time to put this video together.

[@Gundog55]

I remember this P38. If I remember correctly two of them were found in a barn and were former surveyor aircraft. The story was the Tillamook museum would restore the two of them and one would be given to the restorers.

[@thehunter3386]

if I'm not mistaken, the P-38 has counter rotating props. This means EITHER engine is the critical engine in terms of VMC. (Rt eng turns clockwise, Lt eng turns counterclockwise...as viewed from the cockpit) Thus, in a climb, the outer blade on each engine is creating more thrust than the inner blade. For those not familiar with the reasons for this, review what makes the left engine critical on modern light twins. Thanks Scott for a great presentation!

[@Thankz4sharing]

yup. Kelly Johnson decided that dangerous both-critical characteristics were worth the aerodynamic advantages. The prop tips passing so near the fuselage meant having them moving upward was best. I forget whether the benefit was more lift, less drag or both. Johnson was a genius. I’m not.

[@Triple_J.1]

The reason for the improper rotation of the props, from a safety standpoint, was for stability. The P-38 had sufficient power single engine to easily accelerate above Vmc. If it failed below that, you had to reduce power for a few moments.

[@ShadesOClarity]

Good analysis, Scott. The P-38 always looked scary to me.

[@mpetry912]

The Fork Tailed Devil ! saw your other video flying "ruff stuff". Very cool ! Tony LeVier's book "Pilot" talks a lot about the problems flying this airplane on one engine. Old book but can be found, good read. Thanks Scott.

[@andreradzichovsky7377]

Jeff did have some hours on the p 38 lighting , he did the video roaring glory videos about the ww2 planes. What happen in my opinion that didn't tell jeff about the reserve tanks were change from 44 gallons to 32 gallons each. The museum that the plane was going to requested for some reason to have them change. So I think Jeff either forgot or didn't know and he thought he had more fuel in those tanks. He was coming in to land too which didn't help him . We lost a great pilot that day and too top it off it happen in his favorite plane from ww2. I will miss reading his adventures flying those wonder planes. God rest his soul.

[@tymatt4555]

Thanks great stuff… most won’t understand how well it relates to the baron training crashes. but it really does. I Taught for 850hrs in the be76. But I wouldn’t do half of that stuff in a baron.

[@BobthePilot]

Excellent breakdown. Thanks

[@jimlove4541]

Energy is power never lose energy in any aircraft...at any time energy is flight energy is power.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Sorry, what are you talking about? Wrong about what?

[@moonmullins8227]

I remember watching Jeffery Ethell on the old WING channel on cable back in the mid 90's and I do remember thinking he was a little cavalier. I also remember the crash and his death, so it is very interesting to hear more particulars about it. Simple fuel valve switch cost him his life and a very valuable piece of history.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

Well, the videos were TV productions, he was supposed to look pretty much like a cocky fighter pilot. The fuel selectors were modified with roll pins, not all selections were available, and the original fuel tanks had been removed. You have to change you position in the seat to even see the selectors, so if you don't KNOW what is actually available, you can't really fly and "look for fuel". A fatal flaw.

[@larrybeaudoin1770]

The next time we meet Let me tell you my storry of surviving in (winter 1966-67) a single engine inverted spin while attempting to close a popped door in a 55 Barron (without landing 😮) by stalling the right hand wing with that engine placed at idle power ,, the auto landing gear extension disabled, so we could drop the gear at the lowest possible speed to stall the wing on my side to create a dead air space on the upper side of my cabin side door😊..so I could use the dead air space to close it ! It was a perfect plan 🎉 that almost got us both killed!!! 😢..It took us from 8,500 ft to 1,500 ft with ground level at 180 ft ..And we lived to tell the story . It is hard for me to understand pilots doing accelerated maneuvers in single engines below 5,000 ft preferably above 6,000 ft and in twins at or above 8,000 ft.. Altitude is our friend! ❤ I love your work Scott ❤

[@uTube486]

Thank You...Very good to hear.

[@JustaPilot1]

Jeff was a friend of mine. I still miss our conversations about everything aircraft.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

It should be noted that Jack Erickson's plane, the OD P-38 that Ethel had flown previously, had the original fuel system, and original Prestone radiators. However, Bruce Pruett's natural finish P-38, that Jeff crashed in, had a substantially modified fuel system, not the original system, and that roll pins were installed to prevent the fuel selectors from moving in the original directions for normal tank selection. The replacement radiators also altered the CG. Pruett had decided not to spend the money to install, or replace, all of the original fuel tanks, so it had different tanks, with different capacities, from Erickson's P-38. Bruce Pruett at one point sued Jack Erickson over the restoration and the crash. Of course, that doesn't absolve Jeff of fault in the crash. Oh, the insurance company actually had the wreckage intentionally crushed by a piece of heavy equipment, until none of it could be salvaged. I was friends with Captain Stan Richardson Jr., a P-38 pilot and instructor, who lived in Beaverton at the time, as well as author and Lockheed engineer Warren Bodie. We spoke at length of this tragic accident for a while, Captain Art Heiden was also a part of the conversation. Warren was of the opinion that the modified fuel system was a substantial factor in Jeff's failure to properly manage his fuel. And, once that happened, as Scott said, Jeff quickly got himself between a rock and a hard place. It was certainly a heart breaking and tragic loss of a priceless and rare aircraft, and a guy who comtributed a great deal to aviation, despite the errors that led to his death. Almost all of us at one time or another make very serious errors in judgement, at very bad times. Some of us are very fortunate to survive them.

[@captainsalty9022]

Early in WW2, before taking his Corsair squadron, VMF 215, overseas, my father was asked to evaluate the P38 for use by the Marine Corps. Taking off out of North Island Naval Air Station, San Diego to the northwest, he retracted the gear, reduced manifold pressure and pulled back the prop controls (He thought.). Being used to flying several Grumman aircraft and unfamiliar with the P38, he was pulling back the mixture controls which were located where Grummans had prop controls. The resulting engine loss of power was embarrassing but was quickly resolved. Being carrier qualified and a Mechanical engineer, he gave a thumbs down to the P38 due to its’ spindly landing gear being unsuited to carrier operations.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Definitely not a carrier airplane.

[@94520shatto]

Spooky. After his combat tour one of my dad's jobs was test flying and I suppose certifying 'repaired' aircraft from the Alaskan theater at an Army airbase near Portland. He told me that a fighter pilot, maybe from his outfit in the Aleutian Islands, on leave who wanted to fly a P-38, so after walking him through procedures and warning him not to do any aerobatics because the plane was newly repaired and not test flown. Dad said he was putting his P-38 through it's paces, looked over to see the other plane in a flat spin, with the pilot standing on the wing he was unable to get off of, all the way to the ground.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Wow, what a story!

[@lautburns4829]

Thank you. Always great!

[@lawrencefisher5256]

Excellent video. Thanks

[@andreradzichovsky7377]

the sad part of this accident is that Jeff talk about this type of problem about the p38 lighting . About losing an engine on take off and lighting. Jeff knew the lighting pretty well his father was an instructor it is ironic the same problem that killed pilots in ww2 happen. The plane crash near this guys house the guy came out when he heard the noise and called 911. Jeff had got out of the plane and walk a few steps from the plane and then fell to the ground and that is where the guy found him. The plane didn't catch on fire so the nstb had a whole plane to look it.

[@briggsquantum]

I read the NTSB final report years ago and it mentioned that Jeff was found a short distance from the aircraft. I had no idea that he was conscious and able to move after the impact. And that makes it even more horrible.

[@raviator9443]

Great info, thank you for doing the research and presentation.

[@motorv8N]

Fantastic examination of a tragic and preventable event. Subbed sir!

[@Joe_Not_A_Fed]

You guys are making the Cessna Skymaster look like a good idea. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience, Scott.

[@ErikssonTord_2]

The lovely Cessna Skymaster is a tricky plane to handle on one engine, as the rear engine easily overheats if run at full power for too long a time. And the plane has one heavy engine in the nose and one in the rear, making it behave like a dumbbell if entering a spin unless you really know what to do. If it is just the rear engine that quits things are much easier to handle. Phil Collins wrote a lot about this lovely plane, and how it needs to be handled or it will bite you! Swedish Coast Guard had quite a few of these aircraft, and most of them were lost out over the North Sea, possibly due to flying into IMC and losing their wings, but we'll never know!

[@jcheck6]

@@ErikssonTord_2 Flew them in the military but never lost an engine. I do know that it would not maintain altitude in the hot SW on one engine and why the AF finally put them in the Boneyard.

[@northwestprof60]

Scott, just an fyi, It is pronounced Tillamook (with the "mook" sounding more like "muck"). Jeff was a great guy, a superb writer, and we shared the fact that both our dads flew the P-38 in WWII (my dad was in the South Pacific). The plane was a pilot's plane with little margin of error. In a word, complex. In numerous interviews with the surviving members of my dad's squadron, they all said they loved the plane, but also said to the effect that "If you didn't do something right, it would reach out and bite you."

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Thanks, I've been debriefed on pronunciation.

[@DanielRamirez-md8yb]

Excellent presentation!

[@bobclarie]

Thanks Scott ! !

[@Whiteyn11667]

Thanks for another great segment

[@FranksMSFlightSimulator]

Real excellent, expert analysis! Cheers.

[@duanequam7709]

Excellent video again

[@cjmoor6]

Great episode - thanks for this unique insight. Keep asking myself when we’re going to see your channel explode. I watch every episode.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

For that I need to do some clickbait;)

[@garybaldwin1061]

Thanks Scott.

[@mijyadoc5374]

Great explanation ....much appreciated.

[@JonJon-ey8ns]

Similar thing happened to the CAF P-38 Scatterbrain Kid in Lafayette LA back in the 70’s!

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

The videos you speak of regarding the two P-38's are on youtube, oddly enough last night I watched the P-38 episode of "Roaring Glory Warbirds", which leads to "The Pilots". Jeff was driven to bring the warbird experience and love ro the masses.

[@JonBrase]

The P-38 has counter-rotating propellers, but set up so that both engines are critical, and has always had a reputation for being a nasty handful on one engine. It would have been much better if the propellers were rotating the other way, with neither engine critical, and that was how the aircraft was originally designed, but there ended up being issues with turbulence over the tail that led to a redesign.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

I suggest you read what Captain Stan Richardson Jr. wrote about single engine time in the P-38. He was both an instructor and a combat pilot. With one engine in a P-38, you have up to 4000+ ft/lb of torque, as well as the rotating mass of the engine, and forces of all of that plus the prop. It's going to be affected by "torque" in one direction or another.

[@grafhilgenhurst9717]

Just what I want to fly. A twin with "both engines critical", 1400 hp a side, 60gph fuel burn a side, 32 gallon fuel tanks, and a VMC of 130 mph. Just kill me now!

[@JonBrase]

@@AlanRoehrich9651 The issue is that you also have asymmetric thrust when an engine fails, which causes the aircraft to yaw and roll toward the dead engine. Depending on the direction that the live propeller rotates, the prop torque can either roll the aircraft toward the dead engine or toward the live one. If it rolls toward the live one, the prop torque and the asymmetric thrust are fighting each other, and the aircraft is controllable down to lower speeds. If it rolls toward the dead engine, the torque and asymmetric thrust work together and the aircraft can be a handful on one engine. On the P-38, the torque on a single engine is toward the dead engine, whichever one fails.

[@Triple_J.1]

The P-38 rotations had to be reversed for stability considerations.

[@roythird5141]

Trying to figure out how I obtained it, but I have a copy of Ethell's 24-minute P-38 demonstration video. Can't remember if I downloaded it or got it off my dad's PC after he passed away. He was a P-38 pilot in the 82nd fighter group, 97th squadron, flying out of the Foggia airfields in Italy. On almost the last day of the war in Europe he was shot down near the Po river and captured by some Germans who held him a few days and then tried to surrender to him before letting him go. He had some stories to tell. Ethell spoke a couple of times in his video about engine-out and stall characteristics of this aircraft.

[@charlesfaure1189]

Always superb content, sir.

[@DougBow96]

Thanks 👍

[@georgekemp8298]

Great video

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

Great video...👍

[@toddivey1032]

Great video Scott.

[@bullthrush]

Using aileron for directional control during a stall is asking for trouble. The dead engine side will stall first because the effective AOA is increased by the lowered aileron.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Adverse Yaw... you are correct.

[@Triple_J.1]

Adverse-yaw, and also flap-deflection tends to reduce stalling angle of attack by 1~2 degrees. Where the opposite is true of up-going aileron, it increases stall angle by the same. On many old airfoils from that era. You can end up with a 3-5 degree difference between stalling angle of attack on outboard, aileron covered wing sections.

[@flybouy11]

Newburg Oregon. Seminole several months ago. Video of the spin. Instruction flight

[@HMac411]

I was interested to hear that you had flown "Ruff Stuff/Scat III". I live about a 40 minute flight from Granite Falls and have found Fagen Fighters to (puzzlingly) be the best-kept secret in warbird aviation. Easily one of the very best Warbird museums I've ever visited. That little airport complex sits in the middle of a Minnesota cornfield and is a truly amazing collection of WWII aviation history. And every single airplane there flies. I would love to see you do a piece on that excellent museum and those wonderful people.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Maybe one day!

[@HMac411]

They've upgraded the place *substantially* since you flew Ruff Stuff. New planes, new exhibits, a new "Navy Hangar"...impressive place.@@FlyWirescottperdue

[@rangerairfield]

If pilots will watch them, your videos will save lives...and aircraft.

[@bdaileron]

in October 1974, 'Scatterbrain Kid' 50281, was destroyed in a fatal crash in Lafayette, La. Appeared to be a power addition at low speed on final. Your description of low speed characteristics seems applicable to that accident. The crash site was less than a mile from my home. I began flight training in September '74 and still fly.

[@krautyvonlederhosen]

All or most light twins are prohibited from intentional spins for good reason. Not sure, but P38 probably qualifies somewhere. “Engraved speed control in your brain.” Nice sentiment Scott.

[@igclapp]

In test flights it was shown the P-38 could be recovered from a spin if opposite rudder was put in first and the rate of spin was allowed to decay (at least half a turn) BEFORE easing the yoke forward (not moving it briskly). This was because down-elevator would blank out the bottom part of the rudders. The top part of the rudders were already blanked by the fuselage and did not contribute much to the recovery.

[@47mphill]

Excellent video. Unfortunately Cavalier attitude has been prevalent in a number of warbird communities. Your mantra of speed is life is where it’s at and that’s coming from an ex- Navy fighter pilot.

[@jeffreybaker4399]

Acknowledging that Scott knows far more about aircraft than I ever will, I am sure when he said the P-38 never was a two-seater, he is using the term in the sense of how many seats were configured so as to allow the occupant to fly the aircraft. This eliminates the P-38M from the conversation as the second seat was for an observer-radar operator.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Exactly right. There was a lay down seat put in the Recce version that Eisenhower used to view the DDay beaches. And lead a flight on a level bomb run as I remember.

[@c7042]

In WW2, the P-38 was nicknamed "The Ensign Eliminator" by Navy. This airplane was in danger of having a higher kill rate of American than Japanese pilots. However pilots like Tommy McQuire and Dick Bong were deadly flying this airplane.

[@kenthigginbotham9716]

P38 was Army Only I believe?

[@fazole]

You've got your wires crossed. Bong and McGuire flew the P-38, McGuire was killed in a P-38 while dogfighting and not dropping his external tanks for some reason, so he couldn't pull out of a dive. Bong was killed as jet test pilot after the war. The F4U Corsair of the USN and USMC was nicknamed the "Ensign Eliminator" due to it's sudden tendency to have on wing stall during the dangerous time of landing approach to the carrier, which caused it to roll over and dive. This problem was partially corrected by adding a stall strip to the other wing, so that both wings would stall simultaneously.

[@1234597114]

You’re thinking of the Corsair

[@BoomVang]

Strange to hear no mention of the Contra rotating propellers of a stock p38 which should bias the torque helpfully for either engine out. The refurbishment probably omitted this rare feature.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I doubt it was eliminated. The idea of having the props rotate counter to each other is to eliminate the critical engine. They got it wrong and both engines are critical. Why talk about it in this video? Not a factor.

[@BoomVang]

Thanks, I wasn't implying refurbishers at fault but had read that contra rotation sometimes had to be eliminated due to parts shortage in WW2 Euro theater. Similarly I hear most p47 refurbs now omit it's iconic turbo.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@BoomVang As do most P-38s. Those turbos are for high altitude operations. They don't affect the way the airplanes fly these days. Props on the other hand would be a major change and would require reengineering work to do as you suggested.

[@BoomVang]

Here I will try to correct my contrarotation misinformation. xp38 had the clever no-critical engine contrarotation but yp38 changed to scary both-critical which gave a steadier gun platform. Almost 700 export model 322s were ordered without contrarotation or turbos for France and Britain. Some weren't delivered so fell into US use as model R-322 indicating restricted. But most were converted to contra P-322 with a simple end-for-end flip of crankshaft. Instead of opining on the bad human factors of glamorous aircraft, p38 fans please take note of Admiral Ukgaki's fascinating diary. He got shot down by p38s as an adjacent aircraft to Yamamoto's but survived. It was a long drawn out drama with comical subplots including blackmarketeers on board having nervous breakdowns.

[@stevewhite3649]

Yes I seen the video you did on it it also had two other crash incidents I just wondered what your opinion was on why it happened....

[@Nivola1953]

I just fly RC planes for more than 25 years, in this hobby I quickly picked up habits to remove the risks of mistakes or forgetting something. So a “stupid” suggestion, why not have a timer alarm going off every “period” to remind switching fuel tank selection?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

There are a bunch of those. They don’t seem to close the holes.

[@fazole]

Not knowing your aircraft's systems can kill you. Yes! A 10000 hr airline pilot and ww2 bomber pilot friend owned a queen air, had total electrical failure (ntsb concluded generators were not on), crew brought it back to land with full tanks to home airport of 3000 ft, though a 10000 ft runway was available at major airport nearby. They cranked down the landing gear, but did not know the anount of cranks needed and gear down and locked light inop due to electric failure. Gear collapsed on landing and aircraft skidded off to one side and could have hit other planes on the ground.

[@mcburket]

My father flew a P-38 in WW2 in the Pacific, reconnaissance. I wonder what kind of training they had for this complex aircraft, and how many P-38 pilots and planes were lost because of the issues you described.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

A lot!

[@fazole]

More US pilots died in training than in combat during WW2.

[@kenthigginbotham9716]

Scott there was a few training 2 seat P38’s down at the SoCal Lockheed Plant instigated by Jimmie Mattern the chief engineer for the P38 I believe? New pilot losses were horrific I think? Did Thomas McQuire die from this same issue? Jimmie Mattern’s Granddaughter lives in Napa🙏

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Tommy Macguire stalled the airplane at low altitude. No, I think you are mistaken. There were several airplanes that did Piggyback rides, NOT true two seaters. If you did a piggyback you sat on the spare carry through. It would have taken MAJOR engineering to make a two seater work. Look at the below the skin diagrams.

[@localbod]

A real shame about Ethell. I enjoyed his videos about the P-38.

[@flybouy11]

Newberg. Oregon. 1st week of October. Fatal Spiral

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Flat spin.

[@dyer2cycle]

I recall there were some 2-seat "piggyback" P-38's built during WW2..I don't know if the second seat had full, or any, flight controls, but I assume there aren't any of those airworthy now....

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

No flight controls. Not even a seat. You sat on the shelf behind the pilot and scrunched under the rear canopy.

[@dyer2cycle]

Thanks for the info...I should have looked it up, just made the comment when the piggyback popped into my head...been into WW2 planes since I was a small kid(58 now), but never studied the 2 seat P-38 really. Thanks for what you do! :)@@FlyWirescottperdue

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

The Confederate Air Force has a true two seat P-38 called "Scatterbrained Kid", it was crashed on takeoff about 40 years ago, and has never been repaired.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@AlanRoehrich9651 Alan, post war that airplane had an aerial survey nose and a seat in that. You could not fly it from there. There was no two seat, dual control P-38 built. It was structural impossibility. It has a regular gun nose installed when it flew as Scatterbrained Kid.

[@Andre.D550]

😎

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day Scott, Yikes ! So, he was qualified to fly Experimental Category P-38s but not GA Limited ones...; did perhaps the Experimental version feature some updated, modified, de-fanged and simplified Fuel System - requiring less knowledge & understanding of how closely it had to be monitored, and correctly operated....? You seemed to imply that not all Lightnings are quite equally complicated, and that he maybe only knew how to operate the "easy" versions...(?). But if nobody had explained the bit about burning 15 minutes of Juice out of the Reserve Tanks, while taxying & running-up - to produce an Airspace available to be refilled with whatever the Engines are not actually burning..., after switching to the Wing Tanks for Takeoff ; then apparently he made 2 X 20 minute-ish flights all done on the Reserve Tanks which are good for 40 minutes total - before the Right Engine starved & died, and after that he Stalled, and Maybe "froze" in shock & horror...(?), Because he left The Left Motor running, And came down vertically, falling Flat, while Whirling around like a Fan-powered Catherine-Wheel.... (?) ! I don't understand, considering his having been a lifetime devotee of the Lightning as a Genre, paying homage to his father's Wartime Service on the Marque..., taking it to the point of having been actually let loose in not one, but two of the very few left...; how comes it that he was not fully aware of the quaint habits, and quirky operating procedures required to manage the 6 Fueltanks on a P-38 ? That would (projecting, just here...) be the sort of thing he would've been discovering, by reading old Books, and pumping his father for explanations and stories - by about the end of Primary School..., surely (?). Sopwith Camels were my big thing, as a kid, and him being unaware of the complications of the Lightning's Fuel Management..., would be like me not knowing that the Torque of the Camel's Engine, plus the Effects of Gyroscopic Precession meant that, When turning in a Vertical Bank..., Towards the Right..., then to avoid the Nose being precessed down into a Powered Spiral Dive - Full LEFT Rudder was required to hold the Nose on the Horizon, along with 3/4 LEFT Aileron to prevent the Bank from tightening up past the vertical - with the Turn-Radius being adjusted via The Elevators.... Recovery was then later effected with that last remaining 1/4 of Left Aileron Deflection... When turning LEFT..., it required Opposite Aileron to prevent the Bank Angle from increasing - but it still needed Full LEFT Rudder...; in order to prevent the Nose from being Precessed up above the Horizon, slowing down, Stalling and Spinning... And again, Recovery from a "stable" Vertical Turn to the Left was achieved with that last 1/4 of remaining Opposite Aileron...(!). The Tail-Heaviness of Camels is another whole story which I won't open, here ; but it's a parallel example of the sort of Antique Historical Aeronautical Minutiae - which actually fanatical Students live specifically to wallow in the fun of knowing about, and explaining to all and sundry - when they first learn of all those lovely DETAILS...(!). I'd swotted up on all that, And found it totally fascinating by age 11..., Because Dad's Father's little Brother flew Sopwith Camels, with 4- Squadron Australian Flying Corps, in August 1918.... And my Biggles Fetish was boundless, as Mum's Father too Flew in the Great War of One, In the AFC, Getting his Wings and Commission from the King In Buckingham Palace in March 1919... Jennie's in Oz, the Avro 504k and BE-2c in England And Then he came home, An Officer & Gentleman, And was thus able to marry a Rich Man's Daughter, who actually came with a Dowry...(!). Dad's Uncle attacked a pair of LVG-2-Seaters, on his own, on his first trip over the Lines, shot one down, narrowly escaped the avenging 6 Albatri (Top Cover which he'd failed to notice !) which holed his Fueltank..., by "hiding in a Cloud" the official History of the AFC states (!), after which a fragment of an Anti-Aircraft Shell knocked him unconscious, recovering barely in time to Pancake slightly behind the British Lines. I knew all this stuff, in Primary School - and I thought I was Normal, too...(!). So, I truly fail to understand, or empathise with, anyone being apparently so deeply into the Aeroplanes which their father fought in - as to train themselves up and gain access to a couple of them, and start practicing to fly Formation Displays at Warbird Gatherings.....; and yet not undercomstumble how all those pesky and quirky Taps & Pipes & Tanks MUST be managed, Least the Engines run dry while aloft. He should have been trying to discuss the finer points of P-38 Fuel-system management in High School, thinking it might impress the Girls (!), kinda thing. Was he, maybe..., pretending to be rather more interested than he actually was..., perhaps affecting a deeper fascination than he really felt - possibly attempting to live up to a Perception of Unspoken (?) Expectations...? That might explain his Appearance of knowing what he was doing, whereas what he really knew, Was just(ifiably ?) enough to get Well beyond his depth (of understanding) what he was Playing around with... In real life. Thus be my PopPsychobabble Speculation, ("Nursing Diagnosis" might be too strong a term...). cross-referenced by Projection...; it's the only Hypothesis I can imagine which might even vaguely account for such "Cavalier" Behaviour... And, in SOMEBODY ELSE'S Aeroplane....! Grrrrr ! They just(ifiably ?) Don't make Aeronautical Fuel Systems Like they Used to Do, It seems... Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

[@kevspss]

Sounds A lot like Snort. Taking shortcuts.

[@sthomas6369]

I have a couple basic questions. I know that different versions of the P38 had counter-rotating props or CO-rotating props (both the same direction). Did any have contra-rotating props (meaning they were set up such that the torque would work against single engine controllability)? I had heard that some early twins did. I would assume that any modern restored to flight P38 would be set up with counter-rotating props for safety. Does anyone know if there are still any co-rotating P38s flying (these were mainly early US exports as I understand it)?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

You can't change the original setup. The engines rotate differently. And the props are counter rotating.

[@sthomas6369]

@@FlyWirescottperdue from what I've read, the Allison engines the original production for the USAAF P38s were able to be set up in the field for use on either side for the counter-rotating props. The difference with the export P38s (sent to Great Britain mainly) was there were different engines, they wanted to use British engines to be consistent with their other aircraft. Those engines (I don't recall what they were) had to be set up left or right in the factory and couldn't be easily converted in the field, unlike the Allison. So they were produced to be CO-rotating props (same direction). So my second question was - are there any of the CO-rotating P38s still flying? (I'm gonna guess no, but I wanted to ask). They would seem to be particularly dangerous. As for my first statement and question, I understand many of the still flying WWII aircraft have been extensively modified, some far in the past. I know some of the WWII pursuit fighters were picked up by smaller countries' air forces in the 1950s (and beyond) and modified in that time period. And I also am aware that some of the still flying aircraft are around simply because of their services away from the US, being repatriated after they were retired by those other countries. So I don't think it's crazy to suggest that a P38 that was originally CO-rotating could've later been modified to be counter-rotating at a later date.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@sthomas6369 No, one of the engines runs backwards from standard US operation. You could not set it up in the field. All the 38's flying have counter rotating props. And your supposition of 38's still flying came from outside the US is backwards. All but one never left the US during the war. I hope that satisfies your questions.

[@sthomas6369]

@@FlyWirescottperdue here is one source I found that mentions the Allison being capable of being set up for reverse operation in the field. I would imagine it’s not SIMPLE, gotta involve messing with the cams and definitely the mags. But capable of being done is different than not capable at all. As for my questioning the out of country - I’m talking about “War birds” overall. I’m aware that some P51s were repatriated (I think some were flying into the 1970s for like Central American air forces) I don’t know much about any others, I just wondered if any of the co-rotating British one were still out there.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

@@sthomas6369 The Brits had two large orders, the Lightning I was supposed to be non-counter rotating, Lightning II's were standard counter rotating models. In the end the RAF only received three Lightning I's with non-counter rotating props. They never saw service and were returned to the USAAF by July 43. The USAAF took over the rest of both orders. II's went on to be F-5 Recce versions, 19 of the I's retained the non-counter rotating props and designated RP-322-I. The rest were converted to standard and used in the states as trainers without turbochargers. Of course the engine can be converted to run backwards, it was done. I don't see your source and doubt that it was done in the field. Very few of the active warbirds of today saw service overseas. The combat veterans are rare and precious. The vast majority of the deployed airplanes were destroyed in place. Sad.

[@stevewhite3649]

I wish you would give your opinion if how the Tennessee Fly girl incident occured .

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I think I did talk about her accident. I’d have to check.

[@s2t4i6n9e]

There were 2-seat P-38's during W2, but I don't believe that any remained flying after VE day.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Not true 2 seaters.

[@AdamKeele]

When you said there were no two seat P-38s, that's not true. The P-38M was a classified two-seat version with RADAR.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

When I think of a two seat airplane it applies only to pilot seats. There were versions that had a bombardier, or photographer seat in the nose. There were NO two seat P-38's made. Sorry Dude, I'm not wrong.

[@jimallen8186]

Can you say the fuel was lack of systems knowledge when it could easily have been distraction? Similar for the speed?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

I flew P-38's and I was VERY careful with the Mains. Yes, I can say that.

[@JonathanStCloud-yo5oq]

Was this crashed P-38 rebuilt again?

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

No

[@gracelandone]

Sadly the small stuff bit back this time.

[@davejones542]

needs graphics

[@andreradzichovsky7377]

I don't think fair that you paint Jeff as this reckless pilot that flies by the seat of his pants. Jeff was a good pilot and his attitude towards flying was top notch yes he didn't have alot of time in the p38 lighting but Jeff knew that the plane inside and out it was his favorite. In my opinion what happen that day was he was just going up for a few pictures and thats all he wasn't going to be flying the plane that long so in his mind he was think i will fly on the reserve tanks like it says in the manual . But Jeff either forget or didn't know about the change to the tanks and thought he had enough fuel for his time in the air. So when he was coming in to land he lost an engine and was too low to take action and stall the plane in. Which happen to alot of ww2 pilots unfortunately

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

Read what you wrote…. Like someone else wrote it. Think what you are saying about his attitude.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

I don't know that he was necessarily reckless. I think he made one serious mistake, possibly due to the difference between the two P-38's he had flown, and once that put him behind the plane, he was in a bad position and didn't catch up in time.

[@jimallen8186]

How can you draw the conclusion of a cavalier attitude? I don’t think there is enough there to do so. I’d also suggest looking into Todd Conklin, Sidney Dekker, and Bob Edwards. Inadequate bureaucratic compliance does not equate cavalier. Nor does compliance equate safety.

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

You are always welcome to your own opinion.

[@jamesonpace726]

Yeah, maybe joy-riding hardcore 80 year old warcraft isn't a great idea. These were bleeding edge, desperate, new tech killing machines then & still are, it seems....

[@jackwilson4722]

A flat spin.well...full rudder into the spin ..full opposite aileron..pop the stick full back and hold it ..the aircraft will pop out then nuetralize the controls and recover...rudder against the turn and opposite aileron also works..a bit more g load popping out...this works if you have the altitude..if you dont it dont..just an aerobatic snap roll. Works on any type of craft ..singles jets twins doesnt matter...oh well ...now you know..

[@FlyWirescottperdue]

And you’ve actually tried that in what airplanes?

[@terencetaylor4600]

Terry is275.