Simviation Forum - Is this for real?

	Search the archive:

Simviation Main Site | Site Search | Upload Images

Simviation Forum › Real World › Real Aviation › Is this for real?

(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2

Send Topic

Print

Is this for real? (Read 853 times)

Nov 4^th, 2008 at 2:15pm

jimclarke Offline
Colonel
So many add-ons....so
little time.....
Arizona

Gender:
Posts: 636

I just saw a video that was emailed to me showing an aerobatic plane similar to an extra 300 that loses a wing during a performance and still manages to land safely. Hopefully one of you has seen it also. Is this real or is it a very elaborate hoax?

Happy flying,

Jim

No God? Know God!

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 2:28pm

Mictheslik Offline
Colonel
Me in G-LFSM :D
Bristol, England

Gender:
Posts: 6011

The video is almost certainly a fake, but it has happened (well....the wing hasn't been completely lost.....but it's come loose)

Here's an account of a Zlin's wing partially falling off and having to fly an inverted circuit to keep it on before rolling out on final.....

IT all really depends on the amount of thrust availabel to maintain the knifedge....and not many aircraft (even high performance aerobatic aircraft) have enough to do so for the time in the video (assuming we're talking about the same thing). It can however happen in RC aircraft which generally have a very high thrust to weight ratio. Here's a nice video of a very skilful landing following the sme kind of incident....just this time it's RC Wink

Wink

.mic

.mic

[center]

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 3:15pm

pepper_airborne Offline
Colonel
Voorhout - The Netherlands

Posts: 2390

A DC-3 has once lost a part of the wing and managed to safely land back. I also remember reports of an F-15 loosing part of a wing and still being able to land, above normal landing speed that is.

http://white-line.org/&&;

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 4:23pm

Isak922 Offline
Colonel
Consider yourself badgered!!!
Connecticut

Gender:
Posts: 1528

pepper_airborne wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 3:15pm:

A DC-3 has once lost a part of the wing and managed to safely land back. I also remember reports of an F-15 loosing part of a wing and still being able to land, above normal landing speed that is.

You mean WAY above normal speed...

Normal is about 130kts... This F-15E was going over 220kts I believe! Shocked

Shocked

Shocked

Shocked

Shocked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmgKMW2eW80

4GB DDR2 PC5300; 3.2GHz Pentium D 940, Nvidia 9800GT 1024MB DDR3, Windows XP Pro SP3

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 4:28pm

specter177 Offline
Colonel
Check out the Maverick
Flying Car!
I-TEC - X35

Gender:
Posts: 1406

Yea, the F-15 lost almost it's entire wing.

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 4:59pm

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

The video is fake- the aiborne stuff is a RC plane, taking full advantage of the much better power-to-weight ratio. They did go to great lengths, though- it perfectly matches the real one seen after the landing.

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 5:02pm

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

Mictheslik wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 2:28pm:

Here's an account of a Zlin's wing partially falling off and having to fly an inverted circuit to keep it on before rolling out on final.....

An amazing bit of flying, but I would have been out of that sucker as soon as I knew what was wrong...maybe sooner!! Grin

Grin

That's why you wear a chute for that kind of flying. Wink

Wink

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 5:28pm

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

beaky wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 5:02pm:

Mictheslik wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 2:28pm:

Here's an account of a Zlin's wing partially falling off and having to fly an inverted circuit to keep it on before rolling out on final.....

An amazing bit of flying, but I would have been out of that sucker as soon as I knew what was wrong...maybe sooner!! Grin

Grin

That's why you wear a chute for that kind of flying. Wink

Wink

That was in 1970. I'm not sure he was wearing a parachute. No mention of baling out as an option in his report.

PS. "Had a parachute been carried I would have climbed as high as possible and used it."

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:37pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

beaky wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 5:02pm:

Mictheslik wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 2:28pm:

Here's an account of a Zlin's wing partially falling off and having to fly an inverted circuit to keep it on before rolling out on final.....

An amazing bit of flying, but I would have been out of that sucker as soon as I knew what was wrong...maybe sooner!! Grin

Grin

That's why you wear a chute for that kind of flying. Wink

Wink

I think you'll find he was a bit on the low side. Neil Williams' own account says he was pulling out a 1000ft. For an aircraft where a manual bailout is required, this isn't much. As a guide, the RAF's Tutors have a min abandonment height (IIRC) of 1500ft.

He just happened to be one of the technically most skillful pilots who ever lived.

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:45pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm:

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Exactly my point. Other than an inflight fire, there'd be little point to wearing/using one. Conincidence would have it, on this occasion enough control (albeit inverted) may have allowed its use

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:48pm

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

C wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:45pm:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm:

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Exactly my point. Other than an inflight fire, there'd be little point to wearing/using one. Conincidence would have it, on this occasion enough control (albeit inverted) may have allowed its use

This was in 1970 when the regulations were different. Had it been today he would have worn one.

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Nov 5^th, 2008 at 4:24am

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:48pm:

C wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:45pm:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm:

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Exactly my point. Other than an inflight fire, there'd be little point to wearing/using one. Conincidence would have it, on this occasion enough control (albeit inverted) may have allowed its use

This was in 1970 when the regulations were different. Had it been today he would have worn one.

I suspect sport parachutes would be a fair amount smaller and lighter now too compared to 1970 technology.

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Nov 5^th, 2008 at 6:21am

expat Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender:
Posts: 8499

C wrote on Nov 5^th, 2008 at 4:24am:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:48pm:

C wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:45pm:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm:

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Exactly my point. Other than an inflight fire, there'd be little point to wearing/using one. Conincidence would have it, on this occasion enough control (albeit inverted) may have allowed its use

This was in 1970 when the regulations were different. Had it been today he would have worn one.

I suspect sport parachutes would be a fair amount smaller and lighter now too compared to 1970 technology.

During my days of beening single and fancy free, I went gliding every weekend that I could. The chutes we wore and still do today where said to be able to save your life if they where opened at the latest passing through 300 feet. I was always skeptical about this until one day a friend of mine was sat in his car with his feet out the door and his back to the inside of the car. His youngest child came up, grabed the "D" ring and ran. The chute deployed..............smashing the the passenger window. There is a rather large and powerful spring to throw the chute out to catch the airflow and save ones life.

Matt

PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Nov 5^th, 2008 at 9:50am

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

expat wrote on Nov 5^th, 2008 at 6:21am:

C wrote on Nov 5^th, 2008 at 4:24am:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:48pm:

C wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:45pm:

Hagar wrote on Nov 4^th, 2008 at 6:40pm:

He wasn't wearing a chute. Check his report.

Exactly my point. Other than an inflight fire, there'd be little point to wearing/using one. Conincidence would have it, on this occasion enough control (albeit inverted) may have allowed its use

This was in 1970 when the regulations were different. Had it been today he would have worn one.

I suspect sport parachutes would be a fair amount smaller and lighter now too compared to 1970 technology.

During my days of beening single and fancy free, I went gliding every weekend that I could. The chutes we wore and still do today where said to be able to save your life if they where opened at the latest passing through 300 feet. I was always skeptical about this until one day a friend of mine was sat in his car with his feet out the door and his back to the inside of the car. His youngest child came up, grabed the "D" ring and ran. The chute deployed..............smashing the the passenger window. There is a rather large and powerful spring to throw the chute out to catch the airflow and save ones life.

Matt

All depends on relative velocities.

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2

Send Topic

Print

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge