By: JDK
- 29th July 2011 at 01:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My point was only that there's no news in Daks flying with both doors removed; but an earlier discussion was whether it was common - and on what basis - it was normal to fly with both doors removed for paratrooping in W.W.II.
It's an interesting picture, certainly! (Just of a more than slightly worrying practice...)
By: Creaking Door
- 29th July 2011 at 01:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I rechecked the account in ‘Band of Brothers’ and:
The pilot gave the paratroopers a choice; they could ride with the door off, giving them fresh air and a chance to get out if the plane was hit, or ride with the door in place, which would allow them to smoke. They chose to take the door off...
I’m not sure which door, or doors, were removed but on another aircraft (whilst in flight):
The crew chief removed the door...
It seems improbable that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door especially when wearing the British-designed ‘leg-bags’ containing much of their equipment (and weapons) but it seems from this account that it happened on D-Day.
By: pagen01
- 29th July 2011 at 08:36Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It seems improbable that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door especially when wearing the British-designed ‘leg-bags’ containing much of their equipment (and weapons) but it seems from this account that it happened on D-Day.
CD please re-read the thread again, I went at pains to differentiate and point out that the only door that is removeable in flight is the small inset one in the fwd cargo door, it is completely removeable, and stowed out of the way, and not inward opening so as not to foul the path of the exiting paratroopers.
In photographs this does seem to be the most common approach to para dropping.
I can't really concur with JDK that both doors (am assuming fwd & aft cargo doors?) being removed was that common, certainly from all the pictures that I have seen.
CD & J.Boyle, either I'm missing your humour or that would be highly effective camoflage as the ailerons match exactly the detail in the backgorund! Why would you just camoflage the ailerons anyway?
By: aeronut 2008
- 29th July 2011 at 08:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[HTML]It seems improbable that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door especially when wearing the British-designed ‘leg-bags’ containing much of their equipment (and weapons) but it seems from this account that it happened on D-Day.
[/HTML]
Considering that the leg bag was designed so that a paratrooper could use it jumping from a Halifax and Whitley floor exit the doorway of a Dakota would not be a hinderence. The despatch cadance of paratroops is important, too slow and the troops are thin on the ground, too fast and the paratroops could collide and become entangled, which considering the UK didn't use reserve parachutes until 1956, could prove fatal.
I've checked my AFEE reports and for paratrooping it was only ever the removable panel in the door that was approved to be used as an exit. Supply dropping may be another matter but even here when the roller floor was used it was again just the removable panel that was used as a despatch exit.
By: JDK
- 29th July 2011 at 09:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I can't really concur with JDK that both doors (am assuming fwd & aft cargo doors?) being removed was that common,
I'm not suggesting it was common - quite the opposite. But it appears not unknown.
CD & J.Boyle, either I'm missing your humour or that would be highly effective camoflage as the ailerons match exactly the detail in the backgorund! Why would you just camouflage the ailerons anyway?
Camouflage was a joke, the ailerons are there, it's just an artefact of the low quality newsprint.
By: pagen01
- 29th July 2011 at 09:44Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You do say that it was 'normal for paratrooping' to have both doors removed, I personally don't agree with that. It is of course possible, and in some cases desirable (ie large load dropping) to have both cargo doors removed for flight, but I have seen very few images of C-47s/Dakotas in that condition during normal service flight.
In fact many of the images I can find of the main doors being removed was for other reasons ie gun mounting (Spookys') and Speaker mounting (phsych warfare) etc.
Aeronut raises an issue that I was going to mention and that is the control of paratroop drops. Although paratroops needed to deploy fairly rapidly it had also had to be conducted in an orderly fashion from a safety point of view, just the normal para door being removed ensures good control of this, aswel as being a reasonable distance from the tail, ie it ensured nicely controlled para exiting from the aircraft with the maximum safety margins.
I would also think (but don't know) that having either of or especially both of the larger door sections removed would cause buffeting inside the aft fuselage, uncomfortable on longer flights, but more importantly not condusive to clean drops and allowing the risk of people/items falling nearer the tail than desirable.
If it was as straight forward as just leaving off the fwd cargo door for normal para drops then I would think that the the inset door would have been deleted, or even not devised in the first place.
I'm not entirely devoid of humor, I'm sorry but unless there is something wrong with my computor that image isn't what it purports to be to my mind no matter how bad the printing reproduction is, even what appear to be ghost impressions of the aileron trailing edges are wrong as they are parallel with the aileron leading edges, which of course the Dak dosen't feature.
By: oscar duck
- 29th July 2011 at 10:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Quite normal to remove the para door in flight. Also you can take whole door off [on the ground] and fly. Depends on what was being dropped. The AC-47 doors are not "open" but rather removed says I who operated three Daks in a past life. When doing fodder drops during flood work we removed the front door completely and aft door on occasions to facilitate dropping and quick turnarounds on loading.
By: Creaking Door
- 29th July 2011 at 11:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
CD please re-read the thread again, I went at pains to differentiate and point out that the only door that is removeable in flight is the small inset one in the fwd cargo door, it is completely removeable, and stowed out of the way, and not inward opening so as not to foul the path of the exiting paratroopers.
I’m not sure where you think my post contradicts your earlier post? At no point have I mentioned an inwardly opening door. :confused:
I was joking about the camouflage. It seems to me that replacement ailerons were fitted to this aircraft at some time that do not match the aircraft but coincidentally match the background very well in this photograph. The overall appearance of this aircraft doesn’t seem to be that important to the user since the US national markings can be seen crudely painted-out. Just my guess.
By: Creaking Door
- 29th July 2011 at 12:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Considering that the leg bag was designed so that a paratrooper could use it jumping from a Halifax and Whitley floor exit the doorway of a Dakota would not be a hinderence.
I didn’t know that the leg-bag was designed for use with Whitley and Halifax floor-exits but that makes it sound less cumbersome than it sounds from the accounts in ‘Band of Brothers’. In that account the American paratroops think that the leg-bag is a very good idea but then were extremely critical of it (see below).
Although paratroops needed to deploy fairly rapidly it had also had to be conducted in an orderly fashion from a safety point of view, just the normal para door being removed ensures good control of this, aswel as being a reasonable distance from the tail, ie it ensured nicely controlled para exiting from the aircraft with the maximum safety margins. I would also think (but don't know) that having either of or especially both of the larger door sections removed would cause buffeting inside the aft fuselage, uncomfortable on longer flights, but more importantly not condusive to clean drops and allowing the risk of people/items falling nearer the tail than desirable.
One thing is apparent that the actual parachute drops on D-Day, although being probably the most planned during WW2, didn’t go at all according to plan. Certainly the accounts from the above book describe aircraft dropping troops from a wide range of altitudes and at far greater speeds than were planned. Many paratroops had the leg-bags torn from them and as a consequence lost much of their kit, including their weapons! The overall experience seems to be of aircraft manoeuvring at all sorts of attitudes under intense ground-fire and the paratroops being eager to exit the aircraft as soon and as quickly as possible. The C-47 crews were completely without combat experience but even that being the case the pilot of one C-47 at least was astute enough to appreciate that the paratroops may wish to have the option of a quick exit so offered to remove the door(s).
I am not disputing what you say when it comes to the design of the doors or how they were planned to be used in ideal circumstances but in actual combat situations troops nearly always use equipment outside the parameters for which it was designed.
By: pagen01
- 29th July 2011 at 12:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I perhaps picked on your points in an over zealous way CD, but your post as it reads to me suggests that the door opens (like a normal door) and gets in the way of normal paratroop exit (which you actualy say you think is improbable!) - it doesn't and that is why it is an inset removable in flight for purpose paradrop door.
By: Creaking Door
- 29th July 2011 at 13:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just to clear up what I thought:
It seems improbable (to me) that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door but it seems from this account (‘Band of Brothers’) that some aircraft operated that way on D-Day.
By: aeronut 2008
- 29th July 2011 at 13:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[HTML]case the pilot of one C-47 at least was astute enough to appreciate that the paratroops may wish to have the option of a quick exit so offered to remove the door(s).[/HTML]
Having spent several years as a 'Boffin' testing parachute systems people like that were the bane of my life. I'd spend months working on a system making sure it was safe for the aircraft and all persons involved only for the aircrew or army despatchers to revert to type and try and use the procedures from the old systems (usually dating back to WW2). The real joke was that these 'procedures' had been put in place to stop them from screwing up the drop in the first place.
By: pagen01
- 29th July 2011 at 13:20Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
CD it may seem improbable to you, but it was the most common (& recommended) way that it was operated for para dropping and was suitable for task, the door maybe smaller than the orifice left when the cargo door is removed but it was still big enough for the job. The exit wouldn't have existed if it was deemed as unsuitable.
Many images even show the main cargo doors and their hinges heavily covered in tape etc to help avoid snagging when leaving the dedicated para exit.
This image shows the norm for paratroop and smaller para supply drops
By: Resmoroh
- 29th July 2011 at 14:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Aeronut 2008 (re post #59),
Looks like you and I were at opposite ends of the same problem at (roughly?) the same time? You had to get the Grunts/Stores out of the a/c in a safe fashion. Having done that (and assuming the Drivers, Airframe, got the a/c into the right place (in 3 dimensions) and the Nav put the "Green On" quickly, and the PJI 'Bouncer' got the Grunts out quickly) then my lot took over to get the blokes/loads from the a/c to the right place on the ground! Many interesting drops in that period!!
HTH
Resmoroh
Posts: 10,647
By: pagen01 - 28th July 2011 at 19:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Something a bit odd about that pic (besides way too many people hanging on to it!:eek:), like both of the ailerons appear to be missing!:confused:
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 28th July 2011 at 20:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, just very effective camouflage! ;)
Posts: 8,195
By: JDK - 29th July 2011 at 01:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Skydiving - especially early skydiving - is not paratrooping.
Posts: 552
By: David Layne - 29th July 2011 at 01:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think anyone suggested it was.
Posts: 8,195
By: JDK - 29th July 2011 at 01:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My point was only that there's no news in Daks flying with both doors removed; but an earlier discussion was whether it was common - and on what basis - it was normal to fly with both doors removed for paratrooping in W.W.II.
It's an interesting picture, certainly! (Just of a more than slightly worrying practice...)
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 29th July 2011 at 01:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I rechecked the account in ‘Band of Brothers’ and:
I’m not sure which door, or doors, were removed but on another aircraft (whilst in flight):
It seems improbable that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door especially when wearing the British-designed ‘leg-bags’ containing much of their equipment (and weapons) but it seems from this account that it happened on D-Day.
Posts: 9,871
By: J Boyle - 29th July 2011 at 04:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The ailerons are fabric colvered, probably painted silver, so they're duller than the bare metal structure.
Posts: 10,647
By: pagen01 - 29th July 2011 at 08:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
CD please re-read the thread again, I went at pains to differentiate and point out that the only door that is removeable in flight is the small inset one in the fwd cargo door, it is completely removeable, and stowed out of the way, and not inward opening so as not to foul the path of the exiting paratroopers.
In photographs this does seem to be the most common approach to para dropping.
I can't really concur with JDK that both doors (am assuming fwd & aft cargo doors?) being removed was that common, certainly from all the pictures that I have seen.
CD & J.Boyle, either I'm missing your humour or that would be highly effective camoflage as the ailerons match exactly the detail in the backgorund! Why would you just camoflage the ailerons anyway?
Posts: 1,528
By: aeronut 2008 - 29th July 2011 at 08:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[HTML]It seems improbable that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door especially when wearing the British-designed ‘leg-bags’ containing much of their equipment (and weapons) but it seems from this account that it happened on D-Day.
[/HTML]
Considering that the leg bag was designed so that a paratrooper could use it jumping from a Halifax and Whitley floor exit the doorway of a Dakota would not be a hinderence. The despatch cadance of paratroops is important, too slow and the troops are thin on the ground, too fast and the paratroops could collide and become entangled, which considering the UK didn't use reserve parachutes until 1956, could prove fatal.
I've checked my AFEE reports and for paratrooping it was only ever the removable panel in the door that was approved to be used as an exit. Supply dropping may be another matter but even here when the roller floor was used it was again just the removable panel that was used as a despatch exit.
Posts: 8,195
By: JDK - 29th July 2011 at 09:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm not suggesting it was common - quite the opposite. But it appears not unknown.
Camouflage was a joke, the ailerons are there, it's just an artefact of the low quality newsprint.
Posts: 10,647
By: pagen01 - 29th July 2011 at 09:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You do say that it was 'normal for paratrooping' to have both doors removed, I personally don't agree with that. It is of course possible, and in some cases desirable (ie large load dropping) to have both cargo doors removed for flight, but I have seen very few images of C-47s/Dakotas in that condition during normal service flight.
In fact many of the images I can find of the main doors being removed was for other reasons ie gun mounting (Spookys') and Speaker mounting (phsych warfare) etc.
Aeronut raises an issue that I was going to mention and that is the control of paratroop drops. Although paratroops needed to deploy fairly rapidly it had also had to be conducted in an orderly fashion from a safety point of view, just the normal para door being removed ensures good control of this, aswel as being a reasonable distance from the tail, ie it ensured nicely controlled para exiting from the aircraft with the maximum safety margins.
I would also think (but don't know) that having either of or especially both of the larger door sections removed would cause buffeting inside the aft fuselage, uncomfortable on longer flights, but more importantly not condusive to clean drops and allowing the risk of people/items falling nearer the tail than desirable.
If it was as straight forward as just leaving off the fwd cargo door for normal para drops then I would think that the the inset door would have been deleted, or even not devised in the first place.
I'm not entirely devoid of humor, I'm sorry but unless there is something wrong with my computor that image isn't what it purports to be to my mind no matter how bad the printing reproduction is, even what appear to be ghost impressions of the aileron trailing edges are wrong as they are parallel with the aileron leading edges, which of course the Dak dosen't feature.
Posts: 525
By: oscar duck - 29th July 2011 at 10:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Quite normal to remove the para door in flight. Also you can take whole door off [on the ground] and fly. Depends on what was being dropped. The AC-47 doors are not "open" but rather removed says I who operated three Daks in a past life. When doing fodder drops during flood work we removed the front door completely and aft door on occasions to facilitate dropping and quick turnarounds on loading.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 29th July 2011 at 11:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I’m not sure where you think my post contradicts your earlier post? At no point have I mentioned an inwardly opening door. :confused:
I was joking about the camouflage. It seems to me that replacement ailerons were fitted to this aircraft at some time that do not match the aircraft but coincidentally match the background very well in this photograph. The overall appearance of this aircraft doesn’t seem to be that important to the user since the US national markings can be seen crudely painted-out. Just my guess.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 29th July 2011 at 12:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I didn’t know that the leg-bag was designed for use with Whitley and Halifax floor-exits but that makes it sound less cumbersome than it sounds from the accounts in ‘Band of Brothers’. In that account the American paratroops think that the leg-bag is a very good idea but then were extremely critical of it (see below).
One thing is apparent that the actual parachute drops on D-Day, although being probably the most planned during WW2, didn’t go at all according to plan. Certainly the accounts from the above book describe aircraft dropping troops from a wide range of altitudes and at far greater speeds than were planned. Many paratroops had the leg-bags torn from them and as a consequence lost much of their kit, including their weapons! The overall experience seems to be of aircraft manoeuvring at all sorts of attitudes under intense ground-fire and the paratroops being eager to exit the aircraft as soon and as quickly as possible. The C-47 crews were completely without combat experience but even that being the case the pilot of one C-47 at least was astute enough to appreciate that the paratroops may wish to have the option of a quick exit so offered to remove the door(s).
I am not disputing what you say when it comes to the design of the doors or how they were planned to be used in ideal circumstances but in actual combat situations troops nearly always use equipment outside the parameters for which it was designed.
Posts: 10,647
By: pagen01 - 29th July 2011 at 12:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I perhaps picked on your points in an over zealous way CD, but your post as it reads to me suggests that the door opens (like a normal door) and gets in the way of normal paratroop exit (which you actualy say you think is improbable!) - it doesn't and that is why it is an inset removable in flight for purpose paradrop door.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 29th July 2011 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just to clear up what I thought:
It seems improbable (to me) that fully-equipped paratroops would be able to exit quickly through the smaller in-flight (inwardly) removable door but it seems from this account (‘Band of Brothers’) that some aircraft operated that way on D-Day.
Posts: 1,528
By: aeronut 2008 - 29th July 2011 at 13:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[HTML]case the pilot of one C-47 at least was astute enough to appreciate that the paratroops may wish to have the option of a quick exit so offered to remove the door(s).[/HTML]
Having spent several years as a 'Boffin' testing parachute systems people like that were the bane of my life. I'd spend months working on a system making sure it was safe for the aircraft and all persons involved only for the aircrew or army despatchers to revert to type and try and use the procedures from the old systems (usually dating back to WW2). The real joke was that these 'procedures' had been put in place to stop them from screwing up the drop in the first place.
Posts: 10,647
By: pagen01 - 29th July 2011 at 13:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
CD it may seem improbable to you, but it was the most common (& recommended) way that it was operated for para dropping and was suitable for task, the door maybe smaller than the orifice left when the cargo door is removed but it was still big enough for the job. The exit wouldn't have existed if it was deemed as unsuitable.
Many images even show the main cargo doors and their hinges heavily covered in tape etc to help avoid snagging when leaving the dedicated para exit.
This image shows the norm for paratroop and smaller para supply drops
Posts: 1,701
By: FarlamAirframes - 29th July 2011 at 13:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Dilemma over - I think this may be the missing door.....
http://cgi.ebay.de/altes-MILITARISCHES-FLUGZEUG-WRACKTEIL-MILTARIA-2-WK-/250803271438?pt=Militaria&hash=item3a650a370e#ht_7695wt_907
Posts: 941
By: Resmoroh - 29th July 2011 at 14:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Aeronut 2008 (re post #59),
Looks like you and I were at opposite ends of the same problem at (roughly?) the same time? You had to get the Grunts/Stores out of the a/c in a safe fashion. Having done that (and assuming the Drivers, Airframe, got the a/c into the right place (in 3 dimensions) and the Nav put the "Green On" quickly, and the PJI 'Bouncer' got the Grunts out quickly) then my lot took over to get the blokes/loads from the a/c to the right place on the ground! Many interesting drops in that period!!
HTH
Resmoroh