Landing Heavy Bombers at Night - Any Pilots?

Discussion in 'The War In The Air' started by jamesinnewcastle, Jun 1, 2011.

  1. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi All

    My first post!

    I'm investigating the crash of a Stirling Bomber which was landing at Oakington in May 1941. There seems no obvious reason why it crashed as the AM1180 for the incident reports that the pilot had spoken to the tower on the R/T and had nothing special to report.

    At that time in the war there were no landing aids at Oakington and the lights were just Gooseneck Flares. The aircraft had its undercarriage down and was trimmed for landing. It just got too low, too soon, apparently.

    Cambridge is very flat but the place where the aircraft crashed is an unusual 150 feet above the level of Oakington field. He was 3 miles from the runway.

    My questions are:

    1. How would he have known how high/low he needed to fly on his approach? I assume it was virtually pitch black so visual sighting seems unlikely. Did he need to know the level of the land on the approach? Where would he have learned this?

    2. Could he have seen the runway flares from 3 miles away, given that they were just flickering parafin lights?

    3. I understand that he would have been 'stacked' before making a final circuit to land, but what would the radius of that circuit have been? Would it have been greater than three miles?

    4. When stacked would the pilot have made the circuits just by watching the runway lights and flying round them or would he have needed dead reckoning to circle?

    He was on a 'bee-line' for the runway, a very accurate heading for landing so it seems that whatever he was using to get home it was a good method. So many questions about landing, not much on the web about it - was it such a dull part of the whole tour?

    Anyway appreciate any help!

    Cheers
    James
     
  2. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Interesting post James and welcome to the forum! 1940's Technologyy wasnt great in terms of landing guides at night or in bad weather. It was still a hazardous affair. I'm sure you'll get the answers you are looking for though, once some of our resident "fly boys" get their teeth into your query.
     
  3. Tab

    Tab Senior Member

    There was also long range German fighters that lingered around bomber bases in Britain at night hoping to pick of a few as they came into land. As far as landings went in the four engine bombers, well they more or less flew them on to the runway then dropped the tail wheel onto the ground as they cut the speed back.
     
  4. Smudger Jnr

    Smudger Jnr Our Man in Berlin

    Hello and welcome to the forum.

    From what I have read many Pilots flew with the Height calibrated incorrectly due to one reason or another.

    For this reason alone many crews paid the ultimate price when trying to land in adverse conditions of visibility or landing in the pitch black.

    It could be one of quite a few reasons, but I am sure that one of our resident experts will be able to check the crash details and reply with a full explaination.

    Regards
    Tom
     
  5. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi Guys

    Yes, there could well have been fighters (in fact he was bombed by a fighter while landing just a month before the fatal crash!), there are rumours that the runway lights were put out and that there were lights on in Civilian houses that misled him.

    I'm investigating all of these things, but seperately - Can I guide everyone gently back on topic? It's the landing at night I need to know about in this thread.

    Even if he had incorrectly calibrated his altimiter, how would he have known not to go below 150 feet while 3 miles out? This must be a question that faced anyone landing in the dark at that early stage in the war (without radio aids).

    There was a quarter moon by the way - but I don't know what the weather was like.

    Cheers

    James
     
  6. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    View attachment b17f_flight_log.pdf


    Taken from the above B17 Navigators log (9/29/43 US Style)( UK - 29/9/43) - A B17 came in to land at 1230 (0030hrs) and was attacked while in the pattern - getting bold again!



    untitled.png
     
  7. RCG

    RCG Senior Member, Deceased

    Hi James, Weather for London in May 41 that was just a quick google with a bit more searching you might just find what the weather was like around Oakington at the time. Looks as if it was pretty cold at times.

    London Weather - 1941 Cold, Dull and Wet,


    May - Very cool and dull with rainfall slightly above average.

    Mean Temperature 9.6°C Monthly Highest 18.9°C Total Rain 47 mm Monthly Lowest 0.3°C Total Sun 149 hrs

    The first 3 weeks of May were mostly cool or very cool with plenty of cloud but with some sunny, then clear, periods to allow ground frost to form at times overnight. On the 16th the air temperature dropped to 0.3 Celsius after a high the previous day of only 9.3°C. Rainfall was generally light with many dry days, but the last week, although a little warmer, was also wetter. On the 26th, over 12mm of rain fell, and the maximum temperature on the 28th almost reached 19°C.

    11th May - Minimum temperature of minus 9°C. Celsius at Lynford (Norfolk). A similar reading was thought to have occurred at the same place a week earlier.
     
  8. Nicola_G

    Nicola_G Senior Member

    Hi James I bought a DVD recently called Night Bombers, which shows a Lancaster landing at night at an airfield where they had used a technique where they lit streams of fuel to burn away fog at night (can't for the life of me remember the name of the technique at the moment). It also detailed some other stuff. Might be useful for you.

    BTW welcome to the forum
    Nicola
     
  9. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    untitled.png FIDO Outlets for petrol valves.

    Fog Intensive and Dispersal Operation.
     
  10. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi All

    Thanks for the input, some interesting stuff there, but still need to know how you lower 28 Tons of Bomber at 100 mph into darkness looking for a long strip of grass without smashing into something!!

    I guess I need a Pilot to come up with this sort of detail

    Cheers
    James
     
  11. Harry Ree

    Harry Ree Very Senior Member

    I think that you might find the Stirling Pilot Notes helpful.These may have been reproduced.

    OTU training would have given the pilot experience in handling the aircraft by day and night and time on squadron operations should have given progressive experience.However despite this,the common features of a loss of aircraft was from fundamental errors,either pilot or navigator or error introduced by other factors such as being attacked by intruders when a final descent was in progress in a landing airfield.A run into high ground in poor weather might be as simple as not setting the altimeter correctly.It was a common occurrence on night cross country training when aircraft ran off course and ran into high ground.

    Pilots posted to an airfield would be required to assimilate to the airfield layout,its associated nearby high structures and the airfield's operational procedures,ie,left hand circuits or right hand circuits,the norm.(It appears that Oakington airfield highest structure was the local church spire)

    When aircraft were returning in numbers,then there was a requirement for the control tower to control landing according to priority.If intruders were about then,airfield runway lighting would be left off and aircraft would be told of the situation and given a diversion airfield.

    3 to 4 miles radius might be the the normal circuit.Nearby operational stations could pose a problem and lead to aircraft getting into other people's circuit with the risk of collision.(Flying congestion was so intense and congested between Scampton and Dunholme Lodge that aircraft were often found to be in the wrong circuit.By November 1944,it was rectified when it was decided to place Dunholme on C&M when Scampton returned to operations with concrete runways.

    Visual landing aids of runways were arranged to give minmum assistance to those landing without giving too much away regarding the position of the airfield.It was not uncommon for aircraft to land on decoy airfields (Q sites) at night thinking that they were genuine airfields.So a pilot approaching would require to have an understanding of an airfield to be used.(Know of a Boston which landed at night at a RAF decoy airfield,thinking it was his intended airfield,which was about 5 miles away.The pilot left the aircraft and was accomodated overnight at his intended airfield after being transported to the station by the decoy staff.Left the Boston to another pilot to fly it off the decoy airfied)

    Not sure about the civilian lights.The discipline during the war was very severe regarding the exposure of light from a dwelling.Air Raid Wardens were very zealous and the smallest chink of light would attract their action.

    This aircraft,I think, would be a No 7 Squadron aircraft (F/L R Cruikshank) which was lost on returning from Hamburg.Thought to have been attacked by an intruder and on fire, was brought in too low and crashed at Dry Drayton on the present A14, a few miles east of Oakington.
     
  12. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi Harry

    Some very useful information there. The aircraft is indeed that of Raymond Cruickshank who, just incidentally, did crash land on a Q-Site at Stambourne a month before his fatal crash and was bombed at the same time. I have the Stirling Pilot notes, I have AP 129, AP 2095 and AP 1234, they do not contain the nitty gritty I am after.

    I have a very large amount of information about the whole incident, I'm not after any more at the moment, what I am after is some idea of what was going on in the aircraft as he was losing height, how did he get there? What could he see? What was he doing to ensure he wouldn't crash? Even if he was watching his altimeter (calibrated correctly or not) it would be no use if he didn't know what height the ground was below him at any point. Even if he knew that Dry Drayton is at 150 feet and Oakington was at ten feet - that is no use unless he knew what part of the countryside he was flying over. Would a pilot have avoided high land by using 'dead reckoning'? i.e. I flew for 3 minutes at 100 knots SW from the field at 400 feet, turned 180, now I need to fly at 400 feet for at least 2 minutes at 100 knots to clear the high land at Dry Drayton? Would the navigator have been 'singing out' the minimum height perhaps? Would the pilot simply have been able to see the runway lights and know not to fly less than a certain height until they were very close? All guesses so far, can anyone put me right?

    I know that there would have been a light flashing the morse code letters of Oakington so he knew he was at the right airfield. This pilot had done 900 hours of flying and 200 at night so he was no novice.

    Landing in moonlight the countryside would probably have looked like a mass of deep black shadows, anonymous fields and amorphous shapes, the cockpit would not even have had a good view of the ground below, it would be instantly fatal if there wasn't a good way of doing it. No matter how much you know about somewhere in the day, night-time is a completely different matter. I'm trying to find out how these brave pilots got down in one piece. For that exercise we can assume that there were no enemy planes, no nearby airfields, the runway lights were on, no useful ground features like lakes, etc, the weather was clement, the moon was half full, it was 2:30 in the morning, he had fuel and this is just another standard landing. Anyone know what training or techniques he would have used/needed to avoid crashing into any of the land contours and to get him safely to the runway after being given permission to land?

    I know that this is a very specific question with quite a specific and complex answer, you can probably see why I think that only a pilot could answer it. It's a long shot to assume that one might be reading my post but no harm in trying. This doesn't seem to be a very well documented procedure given the danger involved and that Bomber Command were bombing at night.

    Cheers
    James
     
  13. Stormbird

    Stormbird Restless

    .....
    From what I have read many Pilots flew with the Height calibrated incorrectly due to one reason or another.

    For this reason alone many crews paid the ultimate price when trying to land in adverse conditions of visibility or landing in the pitch black.

    ......



    The most common cause for incorrect altimeter setting would be the failure to adjust the altimeter (which is a simple pressure device) for local barometric pressure when descending from altitude.

    On the other hand, the altimeter is not nearly accurate enough to rely on for landings. It would only guide you to the point where you start your final descent, after which you depend on visual cues outside the cockpit. The runway flares would be essential as you need some sort of runway lighting, at least to verify a correct glide slope. A fully moonlit concrete surface will often do fine even without runway lighting, but a grassy surface with poor contrast would be much more tricky.

    Today one would typically rely on own aircraft landing lights for judging those last few feet, or, if lights for tactical reasons must be out, NVGs come in handy.

    The fact that the runway was on a 150 ft rise would be a potential killer as it makes it extremely hard to assess and maintain a correct altitude.

    Flickering parafin lights on 3 miles is not as bad as it seems, given that the crew was fully darkness adapted and the countryside all blacked out.

    There is also a classical spatial (in this case visual illusion) disorientation trap in darkness which will typically lead to landing short of the runway.
     
  14. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Not my subject James, but an interesting post nonetheless. Stay patient regarding obtaining answers to your question, there are a lot of very knowledgable people on this forum and I feel sure someone will be along with the answers. This may take a while, so you may want to 'bump' this thread every now and then to make sure it stays visible/current!

    Welcome to the forum - enjoy!

    Best,

    Steve.
     
  15. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    Night Bombers -RAF Hemswell 1943 (On YouTube) Parts 1 to 9 - Part 9 shows a Lancaster pilot (in cockpit) landing on a night FIDO Flare path.

    An Air Ministry film made in 1943 -long. in 9 parts.



    2538182855_6429a00516.jpg Former RAF Helmswell.
     
  16. alieneyes

    alieneyes Senior Member

    Night Bombers -RAF Hemswell 1943 (On YouTube) Parts 1 to 9 - Part 9 shows a Lancaster pilot (in cockpit) landing on a night FIDO Flare path.

    An Air Ministry film made in 1943 -long. in 9 parts.



    View attachment 51898 Former RAF Helmswell.

    Although it claims to be RAF Hemswell in 1943, the majority of footage was shot in 1944 and 45. The footage of the Lancaster landing under FIDO was filmed at RAF Ludford Magna on 7 December 1944. The pilot of the 101 Squadron Lancaster was F/Lt Al Massheder, DFC whose tour had ended the day before. Sgt Syd Gray, his MU gunner, was placed in the rear turret so that the cameraman could take over his position to film.
     
  17. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    alieneyes - Yes I am sure you are right, made for an interesting film all the same!
     
  18. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi Wills

    A fascinating piece of history! I have had the privilege to have crawled over the spar of The City of Lincoln Lancaster and sit in the pilots seat - boy are those props big and close to you! Also they are in line with your body which must have made the pilots nervous! As I wandered about the aircraft I realised how much of my Dads electronics stuff was from the MOD! The points controller on my Dads railway set was the bomb drop panel from a WWll Bomber, fuse boxes were used for his power supplies. Any number of switches and lamp holders with a funny dark glass that you could clip down over them. At one point we bought a job lot of instruments from Lysle Street and dad made me a sit-on aircraft - cutting up a Turn and Slip instrument so it could be controlled from a wooden joystick!! I faced an array of new aircraft dials, altimeters and climb rate dials that I could appreciate but not enough to just keep!

    I have to confess that the box of surplus had brand new instruments in their boxes and greased paper wrappings that you would give your right arm for now!! One USAF radio frequency setting panel impressed me even then with its Rolls-Royce 'feel', the black 'crackle' paint, the spring tensioned anti-backlash gears, the precisely laced cabling and the 'dot' of blood red locking compound on every nut and bolt....

    Anyway back to the thread.. no deviation please!


    James
     
  19. Wills

    Wills Very Senior Member

    It may surprise some - Avro Lancaster drawings were still to be seen on some workshops into the early 1970s - some components were originally Lancaster and still in service on Shackleton's. The latter referred to as 40,000 rivets flying in close formation.
     
  20. jamesinnewcastle

    jamesinnewcastle Junior Member

    Hi Stormbird

    You are right I think, even if the Altimeter were accurate the dial isn't large enough for you to make any real decision about your height at low altitude, it's sort of a choice between 1000 feet or 500 feet or 0 feet, not really enough resolution for landing.

    Not sure if NVGs were available to air crew in 1941, but you never know!

    The Stirling did have two 'headlight' sized lights on the Port Wing which the Pilot could rotate downwards. My pilot did not have the luxury of concrete runways. Possibly the tops of trees may have looked like terra-firma, but it seems unlikely.

    As mad as it seems I have driven to the top of a bleak hill at night (and half moon) to stare over a three mile void down 150 feet or so to where my friend was waiting with a small lit paraffin lamp!! I wanted to see what the pilot may have seen for myself! Disaster! The relief map didn't show the gently rolling ground that prevented a line-of-sight between me and my friend. Worse, 10 feet from the car, even with a torch, the ground twisted and slipped away from under my feet - my car disappeared completely in the dark, At the last minute I realised I may have no mobile coverage!

    I will try again, but I could see street lights and car headlights from 4 to 5 miles away quite clearly, but they are very bright, have parabolic reflectors, and there were lots of them!

    I have read an article on the visual issues associated with landing at night but the blackout would have prevented many of the optical effects mentioned and I assume that the pilot would have had some one-to-one training on landing at Oakington, but then this is what I need to find out rather than assume!

    Cheers

    James

    (Crumbs - you don't get much typing time on here before you get logged off!)
     

Share This Page