"QUIT STALLING OR SPIN IN!" WWII U.S. NAVY PILOT TRAINING FILM STALLS, SPINS PLANE CRASH 45894
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 02. 2022
- Love our channel? Help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: / periscopefilm Even a really tiny contribution can make a difference.
Consider becoming a channel member • Help us preserve more ...
This 1945 U.S. Navy training film, Quit Stalling-Or Spin In! (MN-4353a), teaches pilots the dangers of stalling, or spinning, and how to avoid crashing. A stall is what happens when an aerofoil cannot make enough lift to keep the aircraft in level flight. The film features a Navy instructor who presents a series of case studies from the Navy’s office of Flight Safety Flight Statistics (00:52). The film begins with footage of a plane stalling and crashing into the ground (00:14); the remains of the pilot are recovered by the military. The Navy instructor reviews some of the key rules to avoid stalling: the steeper the bank or the sharper the pull-up-the higher the “G” (02:14); the higher the “G” and the heavier the load, the higher the stalling speed (03:10); and keep flying speed (03:31). Since more than half of all spin accidents occur during landing approaches, the Navy instructor reviews several cases involving landing approaches, including lacking speed during a turn (03:58) and slow gliding on aircraft carrier (05:20). Next, the film shows footage of a PV-1 as the narrator recounts a fatal spin accident involving the same plane, which killed the entire six-member crew. The instructor then discusses cases of crashes involving spin that occurred during takeoffs. This is followed by spin accidents that happened during simulated emergency training (07:32); in one case, an instructor and student on a b-stage flight in what appears to be a Navy N2S Stearman (08:09) entered a simulated spin but crashed due to insufficient altitude, with fault assigned to the instructor. The fourth key to avoiding crashes during spins is to never make steep turns at low altitudes (09:00). The instructor reviews graphs for necessary speeds based on the angle of bank to avoid spins for planes such as the N2S (09:24) and the F6F Hellcat (09:59). Another cause of crashes is pulling out of a spin too quickly, which results in falling into another spin, as is the case with an F6F cruising at 2000 feet (10:25). The Navy instructor then recaps the four other major classifications of spin accidents (12:00): those taking place due to emergency landings caused by engine failure; those traceable to unauthorized low flying or flathatting; those occurring at night or during reduced visibility; and those during dives or pull-outs. The training film concludes with footage of wrecks from several stalling accidents (13:04) and a reminder to be smart and avoid stalling or spinning.
We encourage viewers to add comments and, especially, to provide additional information about our videos by adding a comment! See something interesting? Tell people what it is and what they can see by writing something for example: "01:00:12:00 -- President Roosevelt is seen meeting with Winston Churchill at the Quebec Conference."
This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD, 2k and 4k. For more information visit www.PeriscopeFilm.com
"quit stalling and do what you're supposed to" the story of my life here
Airspeed is life.
Altitude is life insurance.
That guy's eyes & delivery was perfect for this. Creepy but memorable i think sums it up!
From December 1941-August 1945, the US Army Air Forces lost 14,903 pilots, aircrew and assorted personnel plus 13,873 airplanes inside the continental United States. They were the result of 52,651 aircraft accidents (6,039 involving fatalities) in 45 months. That was nearly 40 a day (although less than one accident in four resulted in total loss of the aircraft).
It's mind-boggling to think how many planes and pilots we were turning out in WWII if we could lose 14,000 pilots and 13,000 planes and still send as many as we did to fight the war.
@@survivalhealthandhealingtv5651 Yes.
@@jobu88 Just think, they all had at least a four year college education as well.
this is extremely well explained and narrated.
Yes,precisely.
Every wahoo yahoo should watch this. Some are rather arrogant.
"..quit stalling and stay out of our files".....Sound advice. I am still a believer in unusual attitude training for pilots. I wouldn't be typing this now if I had not had that when I learned to fly in '90. I don't know if it ever "went through" but there was a push by some in GA to not teach spin recoveries on the idea that if the pilot never gets into a spin, they don't need to know how to recover from one.
In the 90's, I was taught how to recover from stalls and spins.....in a Flex-Wing microlight. (UK) Good training by a great instructor.
One of the worse things for any pilot is to find himself in an attitude he's never experienced before. I'd agree with the no spin recovery crowd if there was a guarantee that spins would never occur.
The other thing they dont teach which is actually highlighted in this video, which is if you spent a moment to realise your attitude, a simple rollout can save you 100's of feet instead of just parrot fashioning a split S pull out.
Great stuff. The infamous B-52 crash at an airshow was due to excessive bank.
That crash was from an idiot over flying and show off
That was czar-52 at McCord AFB in 1994
@@anthonylux4606 Right airplane, but wrong side of the state.
I realized that as I scanned down the replies!
@@davidhudson5452 wasnt it some hot shot pilot who claimed to know the aircraft better than anyone? I think he was like Crazy cColonel……
I’m a glider pilot, and it might be different in power flight, but I believe that the instruction to “not bank too steeply” is in itself not sufficient, especially on final turns. A pilot under high workload will apply extra rudder to bring the glider round in a shallow final turn, and if speed is too low, that will trigger a spin. I remember being taught shallow final turns, but it was eventually realised that eye witnesses usually saw the glider in a steep-turn attitude prior to hitting the ground because the glider had already started to spin from a shallow, slow turn with too much rudder. Having sufficient speed is the key message, rather than the angle of bank.
GA aircraft tend to have high cord wing. Anything with a narrow chord tends to stall quickly and rapidly. I would image a narrow glider wing would do the same. Seen video of kit plane Pulsar pulling high turn after take off, flipped and crashed.
Lots of problems start with trying to correct a heading with the rudder alone. Aircraft turn because of the angle of bank, not the rudder input. Gliders may be different from powered aircraft in response time, but the principle remains the same. If you are already banked pushing the a/c into a skid, (rudder into the direction of turn), you will be a higher risk for a low and slow stall/spin. This is the reason to develop regular habits for approaches or pattern work, and knowing how your particular a/c behaves at slow speeds. Train for how you will fly, and fly how you've been trained. I was a CFI for several years and that's my two bits.
@@riconui5227 The rudder thing is a bit over blown. I get a few ppl's on check outs using too much rudder. Mainly because previous instructors over emphasized keeping in balance. Modern aircraft not much out of balance on turns. Unlike days of old like Sopwith Camel, would barely turn without rudder, but miss handled would bite.
#822👍This is very interesting to watch as a retired CFIA&I!! Exactly what we don't want our students to die from.
Kinda goes to show what limited training and experience these WW2 boys were sent up with ( and expected to perform at a nearly impossibly high level) this series of military flight training videos would be invaluable for fas
many saw combat having less total hours than a civilian pilot needs to get a commercial license, and in higher performance aircraft.
I can't imagine going into combat with limited flight training. You probably learned fast if you managed to survive.
@@texaswunderkind My first time in combat, we were deployed, without knowing what the vehicles we'd be using looked like, and with no formalized nor successful tactics yet devised for the job we were tasked with doing. We had to figure it out on the fly and make it up as we went. Units we replaced were suffering up to 30% casualties. My company deployed 20 men short at only 100 men, and we lost only 1 in combat, and 3 others injured enough to be sent home. We figured it out and became top experts at what we did. But we had a rather unique unit and group of guys. It was a perfect storm of the right people in the right place with the right leadership to figure it out.
The military signed huge contracts for the vehicles we used after that deployment, and many modifications we made to them are still being used, and many of the tactics we came up with became common practice across the military.
Success in war is about adaptability, adapting on-the-fly, and knowing how you equipment works to find ways to use it to defeat the enemy's tactics and equipment (gotta seek to understand the enemy's equipment too). We did regular After Action Reviews after Every single mission while it was fresh in our minds, and devised changes to our own tactics daily to adapt to anything we saw or encountered, often times anticipating what the enemy would do next, or how they would change their tactics in response to us.
This is a great point. Mastery of anything takes years.
No, it doesn’t. American pilots would be best trained of the entire war. They went to combat knowing their aircraft in tactics very well. All pilots, regardless of experience level, have stalled and spun in. It is an easy coffin corner to get into when flying. As a pilot you have to be ever vigilant, and a moments lapse of focus can get you killed. The exact same mistakes described in this video still occur today. This is a great presentation of the stall spin problem and would be great for every CFI to show their students.
This was GREAT. Think how little training people had in WWII ... they treated it more like learning to drive a car or a tank .... vs being the mastery of complex and unintuitive physics and fluid dynamics.
I find that most flying materials written back in WW2 approached the subject with the assumption that the pilot was coming into the lesson with zero college, zero flight time. So everything was written in a basic 12th grade level with a lot of short cut math (easy to do while in the air), easy to remember terms and phrases.
Some things never change. This was 77 years ago, and most of the points made back then still apply to GA pilots today going through their training. Planes are modernized, instruments much better - but the basics of flight have not changed.
This is good for any pilot unlike most of these military films.
Simple stalls are the cause of way too many GA accidents and deaths even today. Seems like pilots aren't being trained properly for said aircraft or they become complacent
Too many pilots don't actually know How their airplane works. I'm actually putting together a series of lectures i plan to give to local pilots regarding things related to this and more.
A ton are due to loss of spatial awareness....in other words, not paying attention to what is going on.
We're afraid to train like we should, for a variety of reasons. Looking at crashes due to engine failures- most fatalities are due to stall spin Loss of control, when the pilot fails to manage the glide and tries to stretch it to the selected spot, runs out of altitude, airspeed and options, all at once. Pilots of high performance complex aircraft do not practice power off approaches to any degree, and so when they need one, they're lousy at it. I also believe that not training pilots in actual spins early on is a bad Idea - if a pilots first spin is one entered by accident, it isn't going to his recovery any.
This is really cool
Very dangerous work. Hard to believe how air war movies make it so simple.
Think how little training people had in WWII ... they treated it more like learning to drive a car or a tank .... vs being the mastery of complex and unintuitive physics and fluid dynamics.
Will this be a new series? I'd love some pilot training videos! :D
Ten thousand airmen (and women) died during training and accidents in the United States alone during WW II. Amazing figure until you think of how many bases and personnel were active then
I read somewhere 40,000.
It's amazing that even then, they had a website. Must have been one of the first. And it's still going!
The website is just where the video was bought from, whoever uploaded it bought from that website
Interesting that they talk about the wake of another plane and having to force yourself to fly with your instruments. There'd be a lot fewer air crash investigation shows if someone had remembered to keep teaching that.
Fantastic video! Although my father became a pilot and navigator in the RCAF, he never got to fly a Lancaster in battle. Still, he told me some hair raising stories when he was in flight school, flying the twin engine Oxford-John in Texas
Glad you enjoyed it! Subscribe and consider becoming a channel member czcams.com/video/ODBW3pVahUE/video.html
Кстати, Покрышкин в своих мемуарах упоминает собственный метод выхода из штопора, похожий на тот, что в фильме / By the way, Pokryshkin in his memoirs mentions his own method of getting out of a tailspin, similar to the one in the film
I am no pilot but its to me fascinating to here about stalling and going out of control .
I guess the the bits that turn the aircraft can only catch so much air to a point then it loses grip of the air I think ?
Good guess ... those bits catching the air do so best when the air is flowing smoothly in the right direction. In stalls and spins even the air is confused. The olde adage was/is "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground rise up and smite thee!"
This is an excellent video. You a witnessing a large number of small corporate jet accidents around the world because of the neglectful and lazy views pertaining to bank angle, speed, and stall characteristics.
I bet most pilots in 2022 have never seen a more comprehensive film on stalls and spins.
The principles remain the same to this day...REDUCE Angle of Attack when indications of a approaching stall
!
One of the origins of the Naval safety Center. Today the NSC have experts in fleet type, systems, human factors etc…
Interesting perforations on those forms. Some sort of sorting aid?
Early punch card computers used for statistics analysis..
This is also handy as a dating guide
Take off is optional....landing is mandatory.
The word I’m missing here, is: “Angle of Attack”. Or rather: “Critical Angle of Attack”. Fly beyond that one, at any speed, and you’ll stall (and maybe spin).
of course, unfortunately, we only have a airspeed indicator in normal aircraft, not an angle of attack indicator.
The crash at the beginning of the video is, I believe, the airshow crash in Spokane, Wa. in 1944. Two A-25's collided and crashed resulting in the loss of 4 crewmen.
It looked more like the collision of the two Mustangs to me. The fire/explosion was identical
Correct, with 100,000 people watching.
Air properties vary and have an impact on stall and spin.
The Angle of attack isn't mentioned and today an angle of attack meter is becoming more common.
now the biggest problem is texting while flying
I wonder how many aces used stalls and spins as evasive maneuvers. Imagine not being able to out turn Me109, just pull hard and flip out.
Oh my word hello and goodbye in one sentence like the Beatles song
What is "cuts his gun", reducing throttle?
Lets see if this will help in DCS and IL2 :)
It does.
I read "quit Staline, or spin in"
Bless you o great God of Hubris... bless you....
For cryin' out loud !!!
When was the audible stall-warning indicator invented ?!?
1946 by Leonard M. Greene
@@flyinwalenda Beaucoup Thanx!
Kinda explains why a WWII stall/spin training film doesn't mention any such (nowadays) essential device.
they don't always work. An older Cessna 150 from the 1960s has a stall horn, but it only works with the flaps at 40deg. At 0deg, 10deg, and 20deg of flaps, the plane will stall before the horn comes on. Since there is rarely a need to fly using 40deg flaps, the horn effectively never works. Stall horns have to be installed and adjusted for a specific configuration, and many aircraft thus face similar issues. But a competent pilot shouldn't be relying on the stall horn neither, and should learn/know their airspeed by pitch and power settings.
@@SoloRenegade SonnaMaGun !!!
I think I flew one of those.
Round tail; manual flaps lever between the seats ... worked kinda like the emergency brake in my old VW beetle.
@@charlesmadison1384 The one I have currently is a 150D, square tail, but has the rear window. Manual flap between seats (prefer manual flaps for light planes, but electric has their advantages too). Also flew the Piper Warrior with manual flap handle as well. Both work like an E-brake.
Never junk, it is always about aluminum.
Flipping on your back into at inverted slip, will get your attention. Most General Aviation aircraft with recover if you release back pressure on the yoke. It will get you out of the spin and into a steep downward spiral. Rudder is effect even at low speeds to stop the rotation.
At high altitudes man handling the controls can get you into a secondary stall.
Interesting comment, thanks for the insight. Subscribe and consider becoming a channel member czcams.com/video/ODBW3pVahUE/video.html
Unless the plane is designed for aerobatics, it may fall apart.
These are good films, even for our current aircraft and future aircraft... Physic is Physic.
Hold on.. Weren't stalls associated with angle of attack and disturbed airflow over the wings?
yes, but wing loading is part of that.
Not sure what you mean by "distributed airflow over the wings though". Never heard anyone use those terms when discussing stalls.
At a given air density, the lift provided by a wing is proportional to the speed squared, the proportionality constant being the lift coefficient. The latter is roughly proportional to the angle of attack, until a critical angle is reached (usually close to 15 degrees, unless slats and other devices are employed on the leading edge). Past that angle, the airflow over the wing separates, that is, instead of closely following the contour of the wing, it leaves the wing. In fact, in the separated region immediately over the wing the airflow is actually going towards the leading edge, as opposed to the away from it. This is what is referred to as disturbed airflow. When separation occurs, lift decreases rapidly while drag increases significantly. In most circumstances, stalls occur over one wing, while the other is still flying. The lift imbalance between the stalled and flying wing causes the plane to bank, while the drag differential introduces yaw: the result is a stall spin. Applying aileron to counteract the bank only makes things worse, because it demands more lift from a wing that is already stalled, which only increases the differential drag on that wing. Pilots are trained to recover from it, but it takes altitude. If the stall occurs during landing or taking off, the pilot may run out of air before... Airspeed figures in the equation because to provide so many G's without increasing airspeed, the pilot must increase the angle of attack (by pulling on the elevator). Once the angle of attack reaches the critical value, things get out of control pretty fast.
@@ululi1970 Thank you sir for such an educational answer.
Stalls aren’t merely associated with angle of attack … stalls are in fact caused by exceeding the “critical” angle of attack, in all circumstances! And a spin is caused by the aircraft entering a stall with adverse yaw. That is how stalls and spins are taught today. But as we saw in the video here, stalls and spins were not taught this way back in the 1940s. Back in the 1940s it was felt that “angle of attack” was a concept that was too difficult and abstract a concept for student pilots to understand, so they taught about stalls using ideas like “Gs” and “stall speeds” even though this analysis of a stall is technically incorrect in many commonly occurring flight conditions. The idea of a “stall speed” is a particularly dangerous and misleading way of understanding how a wing stalls. Anyway, this older way of teaching stalls and spins to new civilian and private pilots persisted until into the 1970s until it was finally replaced by the correct analysis involving “angle of attack”. As for the “disturbed airflow over the wings” you mentioned, yes; when a wing stalls (when the critical angle of attack has been exceeded), the smooth flow of air over and under the wings becomes disturbed and turbulent, and as a result the lifting force, or just “the lift” being produced by the wings becomes insufficient to counterbalance the apparent weight of the aircraft. That’s why an aircraft in a stall begins to lose altitude; gravity has taken over. If however, when the wings of the aircraft stall the aircraft is in a condition with adverse yaw (yaw is the direction the aircraft’s nose is pointing compared to the direction the aircraft is actually moving through the air) then the pilot will find s/he’s in a much worse state then a stall. In the stall lift doesn’t completely go away; there just isn’t enough to counteract the weight of the aircraft, so the aircraft in a stall cannot maintain its altitude. With adverse yaw, however, one of the two stalled wings will be producing somewhat more lift than the other. In this case therefore the one wing with less lift would tend to drop much faster than the wing that’s producing a little more lift. This is what a spin is; the aircraft in a stall with adverse yaw will flip over, perhaps quickly and violently, toward the stalled wing that is producing less lift than the other. So there you go! You’re correct, and I’ve just outlined the basics of how stalls and spins are explained to beginners today. The video we just watched was how it was taught to beginners in wartime back in the 1940s, because it was felt angle of attack was something aerodynamicists, engineers, and aircraft designers needed to know, but it was too theoretical and complicated for the kind of men first learning to fly in the military in the 1940s.
@@SoloRenegade see my reply to the original reply above … “disturbed airflow over the wings” is one of the key ideas used to describe and explain the stalled condition in ground school and the flight lessons dedicated to “slow flight”, “stalls” and “spins” when you’re first learning to fly; as a civilian this would be when you’re working on you PPL (Private Pilot License). Wing loading is just the weight of the aircraft divided by the surface area of the wings (all measured in consistent and appropriate units … pounds per square inch, or kilograms per square meter, something like that. Wing loading isn’t a concept used in teaching or explaining the basics of stalls to new and low-time student pilots like the kind of young men this video was made for.
Don't be like Col. Blake and spin in....
OK ring knocker!
Sounds like a Ronald Reagan overdub .
10,000 man hours to build a single plane? No. Not even in those times would it take that ridiculous amount of labor.
Homebuilt airplanes today, simple civilian 2-seaters typically take 2000-4000hrs. Warbirds are bigger and far more complex, even if assembled faster by more people, the total time is still a lot.
You forget that they are building the plane on an assembly line. take 10,000/100(the number of the folks on a single assembly line) and that factories at the time had 3, 4 sometimes 6 lines running at the same time with 3 shifts each 24/7.
Yeah, I'm sure YOU would know better than the people who were actually in charge of assessing that sort of information back in the time they were actually doing it. After all, you have a CZcams PhD and all they had was an actual education. Clearly you are failing to take into account all the manhours that each and every part required for manufacture before it even came to building the plane itself.
Like your films. Hate the crap that you superimpose over other people's work.
"Other people's work", that's funny. Other people may have made these films almost 80 years ago but it's a pretty safe bet they'd be nothing but degraded chemical garbage sitting in a landfill and the ones that did survive you would never have seen in your life unless you happened to stumble into the repository where nobody was tasked with preserving these films. That "crap" is how they make their money back but they decided to go through the work of producing these on CZcams so that the general population gets a chance to see them which we never would have otherwise so....the correct reply is "Thank you Periscope films!"
@@keyweststeve3509 I probably would thank them, if they weren't plastering their crap all over them.
@@SoloPilot6 well that's the beauty of it, you can see the videos completely free of all that crap, all you have to do is help defray the cost of preserving them. That's why they put the counters. All of the contents that are only available because of their efforts are available for purchase. They didn't have to give us access to all the free stuff and after watching them long enough I don't even see the counters anymore.
Oh GAWD, those early "training" films were awful! Info was right, but I doubt I'd be the only trainee to fall asleep during one.
The guy at film beginning never has had his desk spin or stall. If he did he would have recovered sucessfully and had a parade for himself in his own honor. Then he became a hero cop.
These pilots were told about speed. They forgot what it takes to fly. Today is much the same thing. Once these flight computers quit working they have forgotten how to fly.