Man Moment Machine MVR. Let's count the mistakes

Stephan · 25 June 2009, 01:10 AM

Mannock went down that way it is said. McCudden had engine trouble, made a goof trying to bank at low altitude. Plenty ways to die.

Ginger. · 25 June 2009, 03:04 AM

Stephen's right... you don't have to be a brayn surgeon to get yerself killed in a world war!

alex_revell · 25 June 2009, 05:32 AM

I'm amazed to read that McCudden had engine trouble and 'made a goof trying a bank at low altitude', stated as a matter of fact. Where do people get these ideas from. Worse still, why do they present them as facts, written in stone.

bristol scout · 25 June 2009, 06:20 AM

Hi Alex, Guys,

Trainee pilots were taught--or learned the hard way in the very early days NEVER to turn back after engine failure at low altitude!-Never, even if it meant flying through a brick wall in front of you! -----You would have more chance of surviving that, than attempting to turn low down--dead stick.

It is incomprehensible that anyone could imagine an 'old hand' like McCudden doing anything so silly and suicidal.
We have all read, i imagine accounts ranging from ---stunting--stunting with bombs on---being 'worse for wear' (even though he was famously a near tea-totaller)!

C1126 was a standard S.E. and McCudden was an experienced pilot---but the possibility that 'non standard incidence wires may have been fitted--to increase 'washout' may have had some adverse effect at low altitude--or not
(that from Christopher Coles book)!

Whatever it was---Goof doesn't come into it!

Dave.

alex_revell · 25 June 2009, 07:24 AM

Hello everybody,
H N Charles the old 56 Sqdn Engineering Officer, gave his reason for the crash when I interviewed him while writing

HITEB. His reason fits the eyewitness acounts of what they saw, plus what we know about McCudden as a pilot - from pilots who knew him - have told us. We will never know precisely what happened, to be able to say, this is what definitely caused the crash, but when all the accounts fit with what facts we do know, then I think we're pretty near the reason. I would stress that when I interviewed Charles he was not aware that there was any controversy over the cause of the crash. His interest in WW1 aviation ended in 1918.

Stephan · 25 June 2009, 04:53 PM

Just how its reported Alex.

leaving McCudden with two options; a forced landing or a return to the aerodrome. He chose the latter and paid for it with his life when his machine struck a tree.

James Thomas Byford McCudden VC: An Ace Who Rose From Bugler to Major in the RFC and RAF | Suite101.com

Gregvan · 25 June 2009, 08:26 PM

I suggest you all read Alex's in-depth account in High in the Empty Blue. Or, maybe in his upcoming Osprey book??

Greg

Stephan · 25 June 2009, 10:30 PM

Ok, will do. So he didn't hit a tree & didn't have engine trouble. Is that it?

Cigogne · 26 June 2009, 01:22 AM

Stephan,

I second Greg's recommendation, if you want to learn about McCudden, and No. 56 Squadron (or for that matter, British Fighter units in WWI) then you should read Alex Revell's writings. He had personal contact with many of the personalities of the RFC in WWI, pilots, mechanics, riggers, and other personnel. His research is meticulous.

alex_revell · 26 June 2009, 01:53 AM

Stephan,
I've had a look at your source for McCudden. It is full of errors. written by someone who obviously knows very little about the subject in general and is also a careless reader of the books he consults. An object lesson on why one shouldn't believe everything/anything one reads on the web.