|
#102
●
07-16-2013, 11:42 PM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: PRIVATE Poster Rank:23381 Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 2 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Jane Wicker's Bi-Plane Crash Hi-Res Photos
I farted.
|
|
#103
●
07-20-2013, 10:27 PM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: PRIVATE FIRST CLASS Poster Rank:3745 Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 88 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 7 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Jane Wicker's Bi-Plane Crash Hi-Res Photos
Calling this woman stupid or an idiot is uncalled for. Yes, what she was doing was dangerous with a potential to end how it it did, but if she had chosen a different job, if no one was ever a wing walker, then no one would ever get to see what I'd think was a mind blowing act. (no pun intended) Nice pics btw. |
|
#106
●
07-23-2013, 09:07 AM
|
|
Re: Jane Wicker's Bi-Plane Crash Hi-Res Photos
I have seen Jane down here at the Avalon Airshow in Australia, to me the plane was going no slower here then in the footage shown in this forum, you have to remember this is a biplane with elliptical wings it's a 1942 Boeing A75N1 trainer, having little to no dihedral and elliptical wings makes this a very stable aircraft and also gives it an incredibly slow stall speed. My opinion is it was not stalling, I too noticed the right wing (left if inverted) dip before being righted and then violently the plane slammed to the ground, this is NOT typical of a stall, this in my opinion was either intentional or unintentional input from the pilot, I would hazard a guess that the pilot suffered a heart attack during the performance, hence the struggle for control and then as his body contorts from muscles constricting causes the pilot to pull back on the stick giving severe up elevator (down whilst inverted). Some have mentioned here that he was "in experienced" I beg to differ, however he was (I think) too old to be doing this kind of flying, on his own let alone at a show where not only your close friend and colleague are at risk but potentially hundreds of spectators, he was 63 and should not have been in control of that craft, not because of experience but rather his age. I have watched the footage over and over and am convinced this was not a stall, I believe they were going faster then when I saw them here, I have studied the stills, there is no sign of mechanical failure, the control surfaces on these old birds are cable operated, the fuselage and wings are wooden and they are covered in fabric, they are very light, but far from nimble, from memory the seven cylinder air cooled radial engine produced 220 hp, not much more needed considering what they were asking this plane to do, ie: lazy rolls and slow flyby's and remember they were built as trainers, after the war they were sold mainly as crop dusters, these were easy and forgiving planes, the violent nature in which this went down is uncharacteristic to say the least. The NTSB is still out on this one, but having flown both real and model aircraft my money is on a heart attack and no stall and no heroics from the pilot to save members of the crowd. |