Watch a plan crash on UK Channel 4 tonight!

[666]

Actually, I don't believe they have. There has been, to my knowledge, only one other remote control air crash, and that one didn't go so well - the plane exploded in a spectacular fireball upon impact and all of the data was lost. It was judged too hazardous of an experiment to repeat.

Some footage of that crash was shown as part of the Channel 4 show.

 

[I Ratant]

I watched it.
I wish they had spend more time analyzing the crash, and less on the reunup.

But notice all the work they had to do to rewire that aircraft for remote control. And some CTists believe the planes used on 9/11 were remote-wired, without the pilots or ground crew noticing.

.
I found that very irritating!
A decent crew from any Flight Test organization would have had a firmer grasp on the test requirements and procedures.
I wondered why -that- radio system was so short-ranged? My 2.4Ghz stuff will control my airplanes beyond visual range, a mile or so.
I have a "low power" system that fails at 175 feet, but I wouldn't use it for that test.
The "jump master" changing his jumping point from 4000 feet to 1500 feet during the test to determine exactly what would occur when he jumped!
Jeezus! He put himself in jeopardy by exiting miles from where the pick-up crew was waiting. I would have fired him on the spot!
You do not change the test plan mid-test!
The "structural" engineer opining about the change in damage had there been cargo containers in the baggage areas... why weren't there cargo containers there from the git-go? No airplane flies without them in commercial service.
It was frustrating to watch it.
Our (Lockheed) Flight Test Engineers would have never accepted the bad practices of that crew!

 

[I Ratant]

That was just the MSM's attempt to throw everyone off track. EVERYONE knows all it take is a small black box with a switch and a flashing light, it even has magnets so it's simple to stick under the dash.

.
The servo-controlled mechanisms that clamped onto the surface controlling cables in the mid-cabin floor were mentioned some years ago in some CT of a plane crash (probably one of the 9/11 planes).. escapes me right now.. the control system from a missile was modified to clamp onto the control wires...

 

[I Ratant]

Some footage of that crash was shown as part of the Channel 4 show.

.
That test failed because the procedure had the remote pilot's view of the plane switch from the cockpit to a ground mounted camera looking at the plane when the plane was close to impact.
This reverses the motion of the plane to a control input from the pilot,as seen by the pilot. He sees the left wing going down, but it appears to be turning right, so puts in more left wing down command. Happens all the time to r/c fliers learning to do head in approaches.
The wing waggle right after the transition to the ground camera is the giveaway, and it resulted in the plane landing short of the test array.

 

[DGM]

.
The servo-controlled mechanisms that clamped onto the surface controlling cables in the mid-cabin floor were mentioned some years ago in some CT of a plane crash (probably one of the 9/11 planes).. escapes me right now.. the control system from a missile was modified to clamp onto the control wires...

"Clamp on to control wires"? That's so old school. All you need is one of those boxes with the flashing lights and the "arm" switch. It's only the size of a cigarette case and has magnets that stick to everything. Don't you watch movies?

 

[I Ratant]

"Clamp on to control wires"? That's so old school. All you need is one of those boxes with the flashing lights and the "arm" switch. It's only the size of a cigarette case and has magnets that stick to everything. Don't you watch movies?

.
The 727 is old school!
The control cables move spools that direct the hydraulic pressure in the actuators in the surface servoes, it's not a digital buss controlled airplane as is common today.
It was amusing to note that when the front end got ripped off, one of the motors went to full power when its controlling cables were snapped.

 

[DGM]

.
The 727 is old school!
The control cables move spools that direct the hydraulic pressure in the actuators in the surface servoes, it's not a digital buss controlled airplane as is common today.
It was amusing to note that when the front end got ripped off, one of the motors went to full power when its controlling cables were snapped.

It doesn't matter. There is no "clamping". I believe the box uses osmosis, maybe even nano-osmosis.

 

[I Ratant]

It doesn't matter. There is no "clamping". I believe the box uses osmosis, maybe even nano-osmosis.

.
But only with nano-thermite as a catalyzer!

 

[DGM]

.
But only with nano-thermite as a catalyzer!

There were no cats involved. Wow, you really need to focus.

 

[I Ratant]

I do tend to focus on the younger cats.

 

[DGM]

I do tend to focus on the younger cats.

You have to be careful about that (coming from someone that's been around the block almost as much as you).

 

[threadworm]

Going back to the program, some parts annoyed me a little, especially the staged pieces - notably the bit where it is on the way to the crash site and the guys on the ground sit around and one of them says, in as many words:

"I have to say something important here"

Much was made of the cockpit area detaching from the main body of the aircraft, but surely this was a result of the landing gear embedding itself in the sand and introducing shearing forces that would not be there in a 'normal' crash?

Good program, and at least I know for sure that (as a 6'6" guy flying economy) that bracing won't do much for my chances!

 

[I Ratant]

Few airliners land gear up.

 

[Arisia]

...

Good program, and at least I know for sure that (as a 6'6" guy flying economy) that bracing won't do much for my chances!

Bracing will keep you from being hit by as much flying debris, though.

 

[bonzombiekitty]

Bracing will keep you from being hit by as much flying debris, though.

Yeah, that's what I got out of it. If you brace yourself, the impact alone will give you a different set of injuries than if you didn't brace yourself. One set of injuries may or may not be worse than the other depending on the situation after the crash. However, bracing yourself puts you at a smaller risk for getting hit in the head by flying debris.

Granted, one comparison is not enough to state a real difference/similarity between the two positions.

 

[George 152]

Few airliners land gear up.

Just so long as every-one does their cockpit checks

 

[Justin39640]

Few airliners land gear up.

Air-Poland?
(hehe, sorry had to)

 

[Sam.I.Am]

.
I found that very irritating!
A decent crew from any Flight Test organization would have had a firmer grasp on the test requirements and procedures.
I wondered why -that- radio system was so short-ranged? My 2.4Ghz stuff will control my airplanes beyond visual range, a mile or so.
I have a "low power" system that fails at 175 feet, but I wouldn't use it for that test.
The "jump master" changing his jumping point from 4000 feet to 1500 feet during the test to determine exactly what would occur when he jumped!
Jeezus! He put himself in jeopardy by exiting miles from where the pick-up crew was waiting. I would have fired him on the spot!
You do not change the test plan mid-test!
The "structural" engineer opining about the change in damage had there been cargo containers in the baggage areas... why weren't there cargo containers there from the git-go? No airplane flies without them in commercial service.
It was frustrating to watch it.
Our (Lockheed) Flight Test Engineers would have never accepted the bad practices of that crew!

Yeah. It seemed to be more Mythbuster-esque than anything else. It looked like a bunch of guys got drunk one Saturday afternoon and came up with an idea to crash a plane in the spirit of "Hey y'all, watch this!" more than trying to actually get some real data out of it.

They got some good footage of the crash itself (considering that it landed short of its intended target) but I thought that was about it.