Recently Matt Jackson (Vice President of the Unlimited Racing Class and director of the Reno Air Racing Safety Committee) gave the following information to a fellow competitor, at the Reno National Air Race Association. The FAA/NTSB investigation has shown that the cause of the crash of the Galloping Ghost unlimited air racing P-51 may have been caused by something other than the failure of Jimmy Leeward's port side elevator trim-tab, as suggested in the preliminary report. "Original note removed by author" Following a conversation I had with someone associated with Matt Jackson, they stated that Matt Jackson never said what was in that report I was given or least in that verbatum. Even if the report was true, it was in fact part of a conversation speculating on possible causes and is not a definitive answer to the root cause of the accident. I've opt'd to remove the note until such time as Matt Jackson tells me personally it is or is not true. The final report from the FAA should be out in February or March of next year. Steve (Bear) CartwrightReno, NV

Thanks for the update. Good to hear the NTSB and Insurance Companies are working together on keeping this race going in the future.

Wow. That's very, very interesting.

Let's wait for the official NTSB's report.

Isn't there going to be an awful lot of unstable & turbulent air around the circuit if several planes are flying it at the same time at fantastic speeds? Wouldn't it be safer for all concerned if they flew timed circuits individually?

Thanks Bear for the update. Very interesting findings...

Isn't there going to be an awful lot of unstable & turbulent air around the circuit if several planes are flying it at the same time at fantastic speeds? Wouldn't it be safer for all concerned if they flew timed circuits individually?

It would undoubtedly be safer, but it would affect the outcome and the spectacle too, not to mention the skill required to compete, since it is when people push things and do passing moves that require skill and judgement that you really get a race. If you compare footage of a Formula 1 car race with something like a WRC car race, where the one has cars on the track at the same time and the other has them on timed stages, you can see which one is the more visually exciting, and has the driving styles and moves affected by other competitors. Same thing with an aeroplane race, a horse race or a 100 metres hurdles race. It's just not the same without people doing it alongside one another. Interesting notion that Jimmy may have pushed the CoG too far back with fuel tankage to get some extra speed. Of course when speed is all, it makes sense to do that and get a lot less drag with a rearward CoG, but of course it also affects the required amount of tail down force from the horizontal stabiliser when that is done, and puts stability closer to the ragged edge, else we'd all be doing it on every flight we made, so maybe it was indeed 'a tweak too far'? There are certainly plenty of fighter planes out there on which the lower limits of fuel tankage are almost unusable because it ends up making the things damn near unflyable owing to the rearward CoG shift, the MiG 21 is one such example, where the last quarter of its fuel tankage is pretty much unusable because of that phenomenon. So as a theory, it does make a lot more sense than the trim tab alone being the cause, and the nature of taking a bit of a gamble to try and get some more speed is of course well in keeping with the mentality really competitive racers tend to favour. Al

Somebody remind me what maneuvering speed is for the P-51?And above maneuvering speed, aren't full control deflections forbidden?

Since the Ghost was racing at 480 mph

Note the P-51D's Vno (max structural cruising) is 437 mph, but that's at FL250 !!!How much lower is Vno at 2,000 ft MSL?What's the GG doing flying way over Vno? (Nevermind the shortened wings.)

when Jimmy picked up the Ghost for the Reno races at the last minute, a complete flight test program had not been done based on available information.

Why do the race orgs allow a highly-modified aircraft to race (i.e. fly at the edge of the envelope, by definition) without evidence of pre-race testing? And why does a pilot race an aircraft without testing it after the latest mods? - jahman.

Somebody remind me what maneuvering speed is for the P-51?And above maneuvering speed, aren't full control deflections forbidden? Note the P-51D's Vno (max structural cruising) is 437 mph, but that's at FL250 !!!How much lower is Vno at 2,000 ft MSL?What's the GG doing flying way over Vno? (Nevermind the shortened wings.) Why do the race orgs allow a highly-modified aircraft to race (i.e. fly at the edge of the envelope, by definition) without evidence of pre-race testing? And why does a pilot race an aircraft without testing it after the latest mods? - jahman.

That's Vno doesn't matter I fly over Vno all the time. Vne is what matters. Funny thing is to many aircraft don't have written Vno's because part 121 and 135 operators can't operate the aircraft above that speed if there is one listed. Those speeds that are listed anyways are a moot point now that it is so heavily modified.

Frankly, when you are talking about a 65 year old aircraft with a stressed skin, unless you are prepared to spend an absolute fortune, which obviously many Reno racers do, then anything over taxying speed could be Vne, but in the case of those Reno aircraft, where they are not in original condition by any stretch of the imagination and often more or less a total rebuild using modern techniques and materials, the figures for a stock P-51 will be pretty meaningless. Nevertheless, the stock P-51 and later marks of the Spitfire were among several WW2 fighter aircraft that were used in steep dive tests when the race to break the sound barrier was on, and they got well over the 500 mph mark when doing that, so I would assume a modern souped up and well maintained P-51 is not going to be at a structural risk at 470 mph, although the stick forces would probably not be much fun. Al

Well, were not talking a full suite of flight testing at Dryden FRC, more like taking the aircraft for a few laps over the deserted desert (and at good altitude) a few days before the races and see how she haldles. That wont break the team's budget, but none of that was done. At all. From hearing the pilot's pre-race interview, it sounds like the name of the game is to go as fast as you can (it is after all a race!), but then again aircraft are not cars and can and will disintegrate if their design forces are exceeded. Cheers, - jahman.

Note the P-51D's Vno (max structural cruising) is 437 mph, but that's at FL250 !!!How much lower is Vno at 2,000 ft MSL?What's the GG doing flying way over Vno? (Nevermind the shortened wings.)- jahman.

You're confusing performance with limitations. The "437" you're quoting looks like a brochure performance number. It has nothing to do with an aircraft's limitations. Vno's are not quoted in true airspeeds, which the "437" at 25000' obviously is. As Cessnaflyer says, what matters is Vne, never exceed speed. An indicated speed. The 437 maximum cruising speed is just what you arrive at if you set max cruise power in level flight at 25000', and then ran your resulting indicated speed through your E6B to see what you are trueing out at. It is a number used by North American to sell the plane to the Army. Vno, an indicated airspeed limitation that if the P-51 even had one marked on the airspeed indicator, would be exactly the same at 2000' as it is at 25000'. These technical misunderstandings aside, I do agree that the apparent lack of any prerace testing by the racing teams and requirements thereof by their racing league, after some probably significant changes to the aircraft, pilot assignment, and procedures were made, are probably grounds for some lawsuits by the those who've been hurt by what happened that day.

Somebody remind me what maneuvering speed is for the P-51?And above maneuvering speed, aren't full control deflections forbidden? Note the P-51D's Vno (max structural cruising) is 437 mph, but that's at FL250 !!!How much lower is Vno at 2,000 ft MSL?What's the GG doing flying way over Vno? (Nevermind the shortened wings.) Why do the race orgs allow a highly-modified aircraft to race (i.e. fly at the edge of the envelope, by definition) without evidence of pre-race testing? And why does a pilot race an aircraft without testing it after the latest mods? - jahman.

The altitude at the Reno Air Race course is 5,050 feet elevation. Steve (Bear) Cartwright

You're confusing performance with limitations.

Yikes! Thats exactly what I did and then took the tangent into Vno. Thanks for the clarification!

...As Cessnaflyer says, what matters is Vne, never exceed speed.

Unless you use full deflection on your controls, then maneuvering speed is the limit.

An indicated speed. The 437 maximum cruising speed is just what you arrive at if you set max cruise power in level flight at 25000', and then ran your resulting indicated speed through your E6B to see what you are trueing out at. It is a number used by North American to sell the plane to the Army. Vno, an indicated airspeed limitation that if the P-51 even had one marked on the airspeed indicator, would be exactly the same at 2000' as it is at 25000'.

Yes, of course, now that I re-interpret the maximum speed as a performance limit

These technical misunderstandings aside, I do agree that the apparent lack of any prerace testing by the racing teams and requirements thereof by their racing league, after some probably significant changes to the aircraft, pilot assignment, and procedures were made, are probably grounds for some lawsuits by the those who've been hurt by what happened that day.

Agreed. Cheers, - jahman.

Unless you use full deflection on your controls, then maneuvering speed is the limit. - jahman.

One thing you should keep in mind was that these WWII planes were not certified the way the Cessna 172s and Piper Cherokees you are familiar with were certified. First of all, they're military, so they are built to specifications and requirements that have nothing to do with the civilian FARs that are familiar to civilians. Secondly, this was the 1930s and 1940s. Many of the terms, limitations, airspeed markings, terminologies that we think of, had not been developed yet. To really speak about what that plane's limitations were, you will have to look into the USAAF handbook for that plane from those days to find any specific notes about any specific limitation. There could be a real chance there isn't actually any sort of "Va" speed quoted. They may have some remarks about how fast you need to be to do certain things or how no faster you can be to do certain other things, but the familiar grand limitations that you are thinking of may not be in there and no such limitation may have been developed for this plane. You can search out some original manuals for WWII planes on the internet. My bet is you'd be surprised how lacking they are in specific procedures, performance and limitations back then compared to even a C172 manual today.