"Flat Spin" Experts

[Ahnab]

From McCudden's report of 56 Squadron's encounter with Werner Voss, it's apparent that it was the first time they encountered the "flat spin" maneuver which Voss repeatedly pulled in his nimble Dr. I. Of course, to pull such maneuvers one had to be quite a natural flyer and know his machine very well. I was wondering were there any other reports of "flat spins" during encounters (German or Allied)? I'm asking this in order to get a sense of how many pilots, in general (and on both sides of the front), were genuine innovators of air combat? Boelke, for example, was one for codifying the rules of combat. I'm not asking in terms of kills, but in terms of innovation in tactics and evolution of combat maneuvers.

[xjouve]

Well, I know René Fonck and Georges Guynemer used to 'rudder' a lot. Fonck for instance was known for always trying to fly flat, so I assume he wasn't bad at flat spinning (in the limitation of his plane; a SPAD wasn't a DrI). If I correctly understand his tactic, he used flat spins after a first attack in order to glue on his enemy (that's the way I'm interpreting some of his own reports of fights against 2-seaters).

By the way, from what I've read, René Dorme who was a natural born flier -the best Stork according to his CO- loved playing with his rudder mostly to avoid enemy fire but also to shot at his opponent. For instance, on December 20, 1916, in the south of Péronne, too much confident (what could happen sometimes for someone really gifted ), he made the mistake of attacking head-on a Halberstadt D by simply climbing in front of him. He later admitted his imprudence.

Seeing this, the second German scout made a turn and came to attack the French ace from behind. Despite of his noobish attack, Dorme wasn't the last one so realizing his enemies won't let him coming to them safely , he immediately made a flat spin with his Nieuport to face the one coming from his tail, and then both opponents fired at each other. As evidence suggests, both were hit and headed for home. Dorme was wounded with incendiary bullets, engine shot as well; he eventually turned back to the Halberstadt a second time but then disengaged and so did the German (possibly ace Ltn Kurt Haber, KIA in the south of Péronne? Who knows?). He didn't fly the front again until January 28, 1917.

The only difference I see between Voss' flat spin against 56 RFC and Dorme's flat spin against the Halberstadt, is that Voss did it ending nose up (right?), and Dorme did it ending nose down (that's the way he described it a letter). But well, the difference isn't really related to the maneuver itself but to the location of the opponent(s).

[Barrett]

A definition is required:

In aviation a spin is a descending 360-degree maneuver, repeated until corrected or until the aeroplane interfaces with Mother Earth. Most spins are somewhat nose-low, corrected by opposite controls and forward stick. Recovery often is accomplished in less than a full turn.

A flat spin is distinguished by the nose on the horizon, which means the aeroplane is essentially in a stalled condition. It may be difficult to get the nose down to regain flying speed, which tends to make aviators rawther nervous.

The "flat spin" that Voss employed was not a spin. It was basically like whirling (spinning) a plate on a table--conducted in 2 dimenstions rawther than 3. It was made possible by the tripe's handling characteristics combined with the rotary engine. Undoubtedly WV was cross-controlling in order to point his nose (read: Spandaus) where he wanted at a particular moment. Once he was pointed in the desired direction, he centered the controls and got on with the fight.

Apparently the only difference between Voss & Dorme's "flat spins" was what they did with the pitch (up-down) axis upon completion of the evolution.

I thank you.

[mustang]

Originally Posted by Barrett

A definition is required:

In aviation a spin is a descending 360-degree maneuver, repeated until corrected or until the aeroplane interfaces with Mother Earth. Most spins are somewhat nose-low, corrected by opposite controls and forward stick. Recovery often is accomplished in less than a full turn.

A flat spin is distinguished by the nose on the horizon, which means the aeroplane is essentially in a stalled condition. It may be difficult to get the nose down to regain flying speed, which tends to make aviators rawther nervous.

The "flat spin" that Voss employed was not a spin. It was basically like whirling (spinning) a plate on a table--conducted in 2 dimenstions rawther than 3. It was made possible by the tripe's handling characteristics combined with the rotary engine. Undoubtedly WV was cross-controlling in order to point his nose (read: Spandaus) where he wanted at a particular moment. Once he was pointed in the desired direction, he centered the controls and got on with the fight.

Apparently the only difference between Voss & Dorme's "flat spins" was what they did with the pitch (up-down) axis upon completion of the evolution.

I thank you.

In both a nose down spin or a flat spin the wings are stalled and auto- rotating. If the wings are not stalled its a spiral dive. The recovery techniques are different. Depending on the aircraft a recovery from a flat spin may require emergency recovery techniques as specified in the aircraft flight manual.

Mustang

[xjouve]

I think we are using almost the same words then.

What Dorme's did was like whirling a plate on a table too.

The figure is a spin on plane's belly along the transverse axis, isn't? A yaw? Just like a 180° slide, or 360° slide (Dorme's technic was to slide a lot, he was well-known for that). What I'm thinking about is like this (at 0650)YouTube - Dogfights -The First Dogfighters (2 of 5) .

Then, is the position from the horizon really important as long as the the plane is still flying 'flat'? Furthermore, does it really require 360° as Barrett said?

But then, I think the difference here isn't more 'technical' than 'practical'. I mean, Voss and Dorme did it to Immediately face the enemy, didn't they? So, the way they did it depended on their immediate needs.

About the exact position of Dorme when he started rotating isn't clear to me. He was climbing while he was attacked from behind. The German shot for a first time but missed, then Dorme did what he called 'un virage vertical' to immediately face, dive to his opponent and as they were head-on, they fired at very close range. The 'virage vertical' makes sense, he was going up to attack a scout, while the other scout attacked him, nose-up, by climbing from behind him (they were on an almost vertical straight line). The all situation could have happened horizontally, but here it was almost vertically. -Word 'vertical' might be a bit too much actually, I guess they were simply both climbing following the same line; not necessarily exactly vertical-

Anyway, what I don't know is the way Dorme started spinning? I mean, was it possible to him to rotate swiftly having his Nieuport's nose up? Or did he need energy and to quickly put his Nieuport's nose horizontally to start the maneuver?

[TJJ]

I think the torque and gyroscopic forces generated by a rotary engine – that large amount of metal spinning around at the front of the airframe – would have had a significant effect in producing these unusual manoeuvres. One only has to see the incredible tumbling (lomcovac) that aerobatic pilots do routinely nowadays to realise how gyroscopic forces can be harnessed.

The knowledge of aerodynamics during WW1 was still fairly basic, and crude control inputs in a dogfight could quite easily lead to unanticipated results. If the pilot survived the battle and didn't pull the wings off (a not unusual event), then he might have time at his leisure to try and analyse what he had done, practice it, and use it again to tactical advantage. The Sopwith Camel certainly had a fearsome reputation amongst inexperienced pilots.

The vertical manoeuvre cited may have been a stall turn or hammerhead, which would achieve the desired result provided you didn't have your tail shot off first!

[wristwister]

I remember my grandfather describing being shot down in his Breguet. He also describes the incident in detail in his letters. It was June 14 1918, he was at the tail end of a team that had just completed a successful bombing run over Soissons, and several Germans found them and attacked. It was Karl Bolle who took credit for the "kill" (his 16th).

Anyway, as Grandpa describes it his observer was killed with the first pass of bullets, then Grandpa took 3 slugs in the arm and shoulder on the second pass. His obserrver was wedged against the stick, so about all Grandpa had control over was the rudder. He said he went hard-over on the rudder and put the breguet into a flat spin, quickly decenting from ~15K feet down to near ground level. The two Germans who were in pursuit of him broke off their attack about half way down, perhaps giving him up as dead. Quite close to the ground, Grandpa was able to pull the Breguet out of the spin, establish a glide toward friendly lines, re-start his engine, and hobble what was left of his plane to safety.

I don't know the details of what constitutes a "flat spin", but Grandpa claims to have done it in his Brequet, perhaps not completely on purpose though!

[Ahnab]

I sorta agree with TJJ; the gyroscopic forces developed by the rotary engine would pull the plane to one side (the infamous "swing" in rotary aircraft). I think both Voss and Dorme took this inherent "disadvantage" and turned it into a strength. This gyroscopic effect was also present in later non-rotary (but radial-engined) WW2 aircraft. For example, the Japanese Zero could pull a tighter turn to the left than the right (and, therefore, the pilots were trained as such). I think, in general, pilots in WW1 were taught to fight and compensate for the swing (and other "unwanted" flight characteristics) instead of using it to their advantage. I'm sure certain individual pilots slowly learned to use them as a strength (like in the case of Voss and numerous Camel aces). I believe that men like Voss and Dorme (and even Immelmann), by virtue of being naturally gifted flyers, pushed their planes in ways their designers never intended, resulting in a whole slew of combat moves which have now become the staple of a modern combat pilot's armory.

The interesting outcome of such flight characteristics is that it kinda justified the Wright Brothers' stance on how aircraft should be designed; meaning that aircraft, atleast combat aircraft, should be inherently unstable on all 3 axes (rather than be stable, docile machines) in order to have superior maneuverbility. The Camel and the Dr. I are prime examples of this school of thought.

[Ron_F]

Need to figure out what you are asking Dorme did? What Voss does in the video is a flat turn, different than either a flat spin or spin. If what i read from the account is correct and he performs it going near vertical, then using rudder is a stall turn/ Hammerhead.

We would need more info in what you are asking as these are 3 different conditions in flight.

[Ahnab]

Originally Posted by Ron_F

What Voss does in the video is a flat turn, different than either a flat spin or spin.

What's the difference between a flat-turn and a flat-spin? I thought they were the same thing. Could you please clarify?