What conspiracy? Rob asked if the ONE picture was a p-shop, altered, or legit. I pointed out it "looks" different than other incident photo's. It's one photo of a multiple. No conspiracy. We are asking about a single photo.
This is one major reason why I love FChat - the huge knowledge base. I had no idea that these planes had fabric trim tabs. I wonder what the rational is for the use of this material. I've done quite a bit of acrobatic flying and I couldn't imagine the difficulty of a loss of a control surface; as well as the fact that at >400 kts and 500 AGL things happen literally in a blink of an eye. Such a tragic loss of an amazing pilot and plane.
No, you're asking about the news service "policy" of retouching photos. That's bordering on conspiracy theory stuff. Maybe I misread you but that's the way it comes across.
What I find perplexing about the profile picture is that it is a profile. In order to get that straight on angle of the aircraft the camera must be at 90 degrees otherwise you would get perspective on the shot while looking up at the aircraft, it looks like there is little or no perspective on the shot? Even at the end of the lens on a long lens you would get some perspective. Or possibly the photographer was shooting multiple frames with a motor drive at a fast shutter speed and captured the aircraft just as it was low enough to the ground at the photographers eye level to create a profile.? It would be interesting to know where the photographer physically was when the shot was taken, top of the grandstands, a tower, a lift?
Now I get it. I think you are reading more into it than I intended. I was asking whether cleaning up photo's was tolerable in the news media currently. For example software to remove blur... I was not trying to imply grassy knoll stuff.
The Galloping Ghost had a radiator that was completely inclosed inside the fuselage and sprayed with a water mist which turned into steam. Those not familiar with this could be startled by seeing steam coming out. This is a terrible blow to this close community that shares their love of aviation. Our thoughts and prayers are with you.
Yes. Don't know, ask AP. Yes. Maybe the photog was panning better, maybe the camera changed F stop, or exposure, or I don't know.
One thing that I find amazing as a pilot and from an aeronautical engineering standpoint is that the loss of that small trim tab (see picture) would cause such a violent pitch-up of the plane. I could see a marked increase in required control pressure, but not anything as severe as what actually occurred. I once had my trim control mechanisms fail, albeit not while pulling 5-6 G turns. Do we have any aeronautical engineers here? Is this an idiosyncrasy of the P-51 or am I way off base in my understanding of the ramifications of the trim tab loss.
I'm an EE not aero engineering but there are several things at work in this case. First, the elevator trim tab is the most critical of all trim tabs. It has a very high polar moment of inertia because it's far away from the CG and center of pressure. Next, it operates as an anti-servo acting tab. So, in explanation the trim tab acts to modify the behavior of the larger control surface(elevator) which keeps the plane in pitch trim. When you lose it, the original surface has no counteracting force. Adding to all this, the plane was being flown outside of it's original performance envelop or perhaps at the very edge of it. Also, this plane was modified in wingspan, cooling, aileron, canopy, and several other mods I can't think of. It was - in every sense of the word an 'experimental' plane from what left the factory. We have to figure from the rapid pitch up that the trim was set to achieve a significant nose down attitude. So, the trim tab was deflected some degree up, forcing the elevator some degree down(from neutral), this pushing the nose down, which is on the other end of the polar moment. During turns, the pull on the elevator control would put even greater stress on the up-deflected trim tab, and the pressures of that kind of speed must be very high. Once the tab departed the plane, the elevator no longer had the counteracting force on it, and it slammed back very fast. This resulted in a rapid nose up, which caused huge strain on the pilot. It takes a lot of pressure to push the stick forward, and I'm sure it would catch me and most other pilots by surprise.
Fantastic explanation. Thank you. I was not aware the plane had undergone those modifications. I'm sure, given those circumstances, there was absolutely nothing he could do. It was an unrecoverable event. God, what a tragic waste of a great pilot and plane.
OMG there has been another... http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/17/plane-crashes-at-air-show-in-west-virginia/
Yes, that definitely explains this picture in the context of this accident. Thanks. http://www.free-online-private-pilot-ground-school.com/Flight_controls.html Image Unavailable, Please Login
It doesn't have anything to do with the g levels in the turns, it has to do with the speed of the airplane. There is a speed at which the trim tab would be in line with the elevator (this is called the zero trim position) and at this speed the stick force is zero. This is also the speed at which the stick force is zero when the tirm tab is gone. The angle of incidence of the tailplane determines what that speed is. As you deviate above and below that speed, trim is required to remove the stick force. These aircraft are going so fast and are so far from the zero trim position, that if the trim was in the zero position (or if you lose the tab) the stick forces are huge. If you lose the trim tab at these speeds, the stick would slam aft and it is unlikely that a human could move it from that position until the airplane slowed down. It wasn't like he was just not able to hold the stick down, it is unlikely that anyone could have. Once the airplane slowed down the pilot, had he been concious, would have been able to regain control. As noted in one of the other posts, the pilot likely experienced GLOC as a result of the sudden full elevator movement, and after a few seconds wasn't flying anymore.
Not sure if people are following this elsewhere, but they have raised the death toll in Reno from 3 to 9 now. Thoughts with all involved as this was a real tragedy that will have an effect on many lives. >8^\ ER
Actually it appears that it does. Here's a new pic showing serious buckling in the fuselage. This is the area, and type of bucking common when excess elevator forces are at work. This happens in sustained high G load turns as found in the Reno air race. I don't know what lap this was, but it was before the crash, and after the take-off. The plane would not be allowed to fly if this had been discovered on the ground. It's also telling that this is on the right, or outside of the race course, indicating that some amount of rudder could be in play as well. I agree that after the trim tab comes off at that speed, the stick forces would be very high. Also, that it would lead to G-LOC for most people, especially an older person, even one in good physical shape. Image Unavailable, Please Login
No. Nothing simulated. Nothing enhanced. The plane was re-skinned. There are no exposed rivet heads or panel seams. Perfectly smooth featureless skin. There's a promo autographed pic floating around (can't find it now) of Jimmy flying over the desert. It's clear that the skin has no seams or rivets. Smooth as a baby's bottom. You can also clearly see the steam exhausting from the water-spray radiator cooling system on the bottom sides of the rear fuselege, behind the wings. (You can see the steam in the whole plane missing trim tab pic.) The camera would have stopped the prop, especially from a side view. The cockpit is also hugely modified. It's about 1/4 the size of the stock plane. You would only see the top 2/3 of the pilot's head in normal flight. When he (probably) blacked out with the abrupt pitch-up, his head would have fallen forward, chin on chest. I'm still wondering why the tailwheel was deployed there at the end.
no, view youtube or "pics" of anything aviation related and you find a percentage was just taken from very realistic simulators.
Here's an update. The NTSB focus is on the trim tab. It appears there are 9 dead now. Very sad. http://news.yahoo.com/reno-crash-killed-9-probe-focuses-wayward-part-212230699.html
I feel pretty sure that much beyond three or four seconds, the pilot was G-LOCd and a passenger. As shown below the pitching moment to tin can the fuselage is very high. And, as we age, the time of useful consciousness prior to G-LOC may decrease normally. With the rapid g onset rate, and immense stick pressures it is likely to me that no could have recovered the aircraft. A terrible waste and I am filled with sadness for the dead and injured. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Had not seen this shot anywhere yet - high res A mod can certainly delete this post if it's considered inappropriate. >8^| ER Image Unavailable, Please Login
