|
|
Post by baz62 on Jul 4, 2015 14:58:26 GMT 12
Unbelievable, obviously didn't know how to lift an aircraft correctly! Article click HERE |
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jul 4, 2015 15:11:27 GMT 12
It was pointed out on WIX earlier (by someone who had been asked for the appropriate info from the manuals) that they are only designed to be lifted when essentially empty, which may well have been a problem when it's taken on water (and has fuel etc). There had been earlier attempts to drag it onto the beach that failed when the cable broke, with who knows what structural damage. warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=56198&start=15#p557123 |
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jul 4, 2015 17:01:15 GMT 12
Yes that is true Errol. Such a shame to see an airworthy aircraft reduced to this state.
|
|
catcrew
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 72
|
Post by catcrew on Jul 4, 2015 20:12:55 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by komata on Jul 4, 2015 20:32:31 GMT 12
Can any 'cat' crew / enthusiast tell me why the undercarriage would have been extended when the aircraft was close to the beach? I would have thought that extending it would provide additional drag and perhaps compound the problem by opening-up additional access points for water, rather than leaving the gear retracted and enable the hull to be more 'boat like' and ride higher in the water (which it certainly is not doing at the 0.11 second mark on the video). Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jul 4, 2015 20:40:10 GMT 12
Perhaps the undercarriage was extended when they were trying to tow it onto the beach? They had a digger and something else tracked trying to haul it up at one point.
|
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jul 4, 2015 22:16:48 GMT 12
Which could explain why she came apart. Undercarriage digs in, trying to pull her up on the beach and some unseen ripping going onto the structure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 4, 2015 22:18:03 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jul 5, 2015 8:48:11 GMT 12
Looks like they slung at least one cable under the hull at Evans Bay, realising that they would break it if they lifted by the wing alone. |
|
|
|
Post by harrysone on Jul 6, 2015 0:09:28 GMT 12
As the pby had sprung a leak The wheels were put down to prevent the aircraft sinking or slewing up on the beach & damaging the hull or wingtip floats in the surf. The flight crew should be commended for that, note that the nose wheel is retracted, also s good procedure if you mean to winch or drag the aircraft onto the beach. Many cats (ours not included ) have an isolation valve in the hydraulics for the gear enabling the nose wheel to be raised/lowered independently of the mains. Tricycle gear is bloody terrible for beaching other than on ramps.
I doubt that failed attempts pulling the aircraft up the beach
Would result in significant damage to hull & structure...a pby will survive a landing on seal with the wheels up quite happily...they are very stoutly constructed. The structural failure was due to the weight of water inside the airframe, when they lifted it...the operation seemed to be too rushed
I know the aircraft well. It's a supercat conversion of a PBY-6a, actually the very last firefighting catalina in operation. It used to belong to the Flying Fireman, based in Washington State.
The recovery appears to have been a total botch up by in experienced salvage workers...no way should that have happened if the salvage crew had any clue what they were doing. The aircraft should have been beached, hull repairs effected & then re launched when conditions allowed. Alternatively it should have had airbags installed inside it or around it & towed go a sheltered harbour where it could be properly beached....shear hurried stupidity & waste of a good aircraft.
|
|
catcrew
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 72
|
Post by catcrew on Jul 6, 2015 9:51:45 GMT 12
Can any 'cat' crew / enthusiast tell me why the undercarriage would have been extended when the aircraft was close to the beach? I would have thought that extending it would provide additional drag and perhaps compound the problem by opening-up additional access points for water, rather than leaving the gear retracted and enable the hull to be more 'boat like' and ride higher in the water (which it certainly is not doing at the 0.11 second mark on the video). Thanks. A Catalina is easier to manoeuvre in the water with the gear down. The HARS Cat used to do this whenever in the water. It no longer does water landings. It has been decided that the risks are not worth it, especially salt water. |
|
|
|
Post by harrysone on Jul 6, 2015 10:54:45 GMT 12
yes, its easier to manouver with the wheels down, as it provides more drag/torque reaction when using differential power at low speed, but in this case I suggest it was beached on the mains to reduce the possibility of further hull/structural damage by pounding surf
|
|
|
|
Post by craig on Jul 6, 2015 11:13:37 GMT 12
They seemingly don't have alot of tide in Florida. Otherwise it would have been possible to work it up the beach with the rising tide then simply wait for the tide to recede leaving it high and dry
|
|
|
|
Post by harrysone on Jul 6, 2015 17:00:57 GMT 12
incidentally this Canso C-FSAT www.wings-aviation.ch/03-Reports/2013/NED-Catalina/C-FSAT-01.jpgmet exactly the same fate back in 1986. She hit a reef of Maui in the Hawaiian Islands & was beached in a similar fashion to N85U There are some good photos of it around, basically crumpled into a ball on the dock after marine salvage workers tried to strop the waterlogged hull rather than use the specially designed lifting points on top of the wing. The RNZAF Museum actually acquired the severed tail section of C-FSAT for their catalina restoration project. |
|
|
|
Post by harrysone on Jul 7, 2015 9:55:22 GMT 12
new evidence of salvager's stupidity... imgur.com/a/wsIDsYou'll see the strops under the nose & tail section of the fuselage, probably the two worst places you can load up a PBY airframe! there is a natural tendency in severe or catastrophic accidents with PBYs for the nose section to break away at the number 3 bulkhead (just forward of the pylon), its a known zone of weakness. When the observer heard something snap it was probably the sound of structure failing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2015 11:30:48 GMT 12
Thanks for sharing, Harry, but how awful. I've not gone into any threads or stories about the incident since just after it happened. It's too senseless for me to see!
|
|
|
|
Post by isc on Jul 24, 2015 23:34:49 GMT 12
There is a photo in the Contact Magazine (Can't find it just now) of an RNZAF Cat being hoisted by a crane on an American ship at one of the bases up in the islands in 1944. Lifting points at the front and rear of the wing root area. In the photo the aircraft actually looks quite small in comparison to the ship. Ours of course were not amphibian, so beaching gear had to be attached to get them up the ramp. isc
|
|
|
|
Post by harrysone on Jul 26, 2015 22:29:34 GMT 12
There are two lugs (on all pbys) along the centreline positioned in the vicinity of front and rear spars. I can post some shots of zk-PBY and rnzaf cats lugs if you wish. Yes the could have pulled a water logged catalina out by those, it was done in wartime a number of times by seaplane tenders after accidents or accidental sinking.
|
|
