Big Crash at Reno
While I appreciate that it is more exciting to see the aircraft banking 60 or 70 degrees and it is quite difficult to get an idea of the scale from the diagram I would have thought it was crazy to fly aircraft at coming up on 500MPH in an arc that requires them to have control to keep them from going off the arc into the crowd.
In my mind, from hearing rules and guidelines, I would have thought that the only possible way to lay out a course would be with the long straight parallel to the crowd line and the last turn perhaps a mile or so before. That way the aircraft should be straightened out before entering the vicinity of the spectator zone.
An alternative, perhaps, would for the spectators to be within the race circuit, with usual distance clearance, then any fast aircraft going astray is far more likely to crash outside the perimeter. Some of the best views and pictures I have taken have been of aircraft flying an arc concave to the crowd line seen in almost plan view but some shows I have been to have been constrained by traditional air show mindset and a total lack of imagination on the part of the organisers. One in particular uses the longest runway as a dispersal and static show and sits the crowd on the North side of the runway in use. It is nearly impossible to get a good picture and on a clear day even to watch the aircraft comfortably because they are against the sun. Doesn't anyone think of these things?
In my mind, from hearing rules and guidelines, I would have thought that the only possible way to lay out a course would be with the long straight parallel to the crowd line and the last turn perhaps a mile or so before. That way the aircraft should be straightened out before entering the vicinity of the spectator zone.
An alternative, perhaps, would for the spectators to be within the race circuit, with usual distance clearance, then any fast aircraft going astray is far more likely to crash outside the perimeter. Some of the best views and pictures I have taken have been of aircraft flying an arc concave to the crowd line seen in almost plan view but some shows I have been to have been constrained by traditional air show mindset and a total lack of imagination on the part of the organisers. One in particular uses the longest runway as a dispersal and static show and sits the crowd on the North side of the runway in use. It is nearly impossible to get a good picture and on a clear day even to watch the aircraft comfortably because they are against the sun. Doesn't anyone think of these things?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: MIA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where we have been sitting in the stands for the last 12 years is perfect for watching the race. Moving the home stretch back much would take a lot of the effect away and putting the stands inside would obscure over 80% of the track so nobody would go. Yes, for a second, friday, we thought we were done but we won't go back if they try to make it 100% crowd safe and make the race boring. They might as well just close down the last air race in the world if that is the only solution.
If closing down the Reno air races is their solution then we had better close down Nascar too because people in the crowd get killed there too. Didn't somebody get killed with a baseball and a golf ball in the last 10 years too? We could make this world really safe if we outlawed all of these sports. Soccer will have to go. Remember the stands that collapsed. The list goes on.
If closing down the Reno air races is their solution then we had better close down Nascar too because people in the crowd get killed there too. Didn't somebody get killed with a baseball and a golf ball in the last 10 years too? We could make this world really safe if we outlawed all of these sports. Soccer will have to go. Remember the stands that collapsed. The list goes on.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nouvion
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just some observations of the picture posted above by FoundationMetro (post 162) and particularly the trim tab and elevator position. The aircraft is in a left turn not disimilar to its last turn before the abrupt pitch up. The elevator appears to be in the slightly nose up position as would be expected to keep the nose up during the turn. But the trim tab looks to be in a nose down trim position suggesting that in high speed level flight (racing) nose down trim is required to maintain level flight and give the pilot a rest as he is always pulling in the turns. This means the tab is always in the high speed airflow and with the loss of the tab, an immediate pitch up could be the result due to the loss of nose down trim force.....not to mention a large change is static and dynamic balance of the elevators.
The other telling thing about this pic is the HORIZONTAL reflection of the ground in the spinner ! As mentioned previously, the reflections in the picture of the aircraft supposedly in a dive do not match up. The same photo was shown in one of the links to a news website but the photo was shown with the aircraft horizontal and it looked correct there. I think that pic might be genuine but turned through 90 degrees to make it more 'dramatic' !
The other telling thing about this pic is the HORIZONTAL reflection of the ground in the spinner ! As mentioned previously, the reflections in the picture of the aircraft supposedly in a dive do not match up. The same photo was shown in one of the links to a news website but the photo was shown with the aircraft horizontal and it looked correct there. I think that pic might be genuine but turned through 90 degrees to make it more 'dramatic' !
Last edited by Von Klinkerhoffen; 22nd Sep 2011 at 16:14. Reason: bad english !
The other telling thing about this pic is the HORIZONTAL reflection of the ground in the spinner ! As mentioned previously, the reflections in the picture of the aircraft supposedly in a dive do not match up.
They do actually, the spinner is dark because its reflecting a dark surface, more commonly known as the ground.
If you think the image has been rotated 90 degrees the sky on your planet must be a very peculiar color. At what point in the accident sequence was the aircraft straight and level at the same plane as the photographer to get a perfect side on shot?, and where was the photgrapher standing in relation to the aircraft at the time to get this perfect side on straight and level shot? You know, angles, distances etc etc. In your own time.
Funny that none of the photoshop keyboard warriors has come up with a plausible explanation as to why a photographer with a world wide syndicated image of such a widely covered accident would risk his career in manipulating such an image. The only way a photographer or agency would 'manipulate' such an image is close cropping, you don't need to see blank sky, the close vertical crop works for this image and emphasises the 'story' being told by the image. i.e. the aeroplane is pointing at the ground ...
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nouvion
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm lots of thoughts of a photographic nature on an aviation forum but not much opinion of an aviating nature...sure you belong here Jumpseater ?
Who said anything about photoshopping ? I said the photo looks like it has been turned through 90 for dramatic effect.....not neccessarily by the photographer.......plenty of unscrupulous news papers/stations to do that sort of thing.
Look again at all the photos on page 6, especially posts 104,111,& 120.
In my world the horizon runs from left to right or vica versa.....since when has it gone vertically ?
In post 111 with the 2 pics side by side , with the aircraft rolling on its back the reflection is along the a/c longitudinal axis as expected, with the a/c in a dive pointed at the ground.....the reflection of the horizon is still along the longitudinal axis....what Lost in Saigon says about the reflections is hard to dispute !
PS at what point did the a/c roll left because thats what the ailerons are demanding in that photo ( unless it is aileron upfloat that we are seeing ) !
Who said anything about photoshopping ? I said the photo looks like it has been turned through 90 for dramatic effect.....not neccessarily by the photographer.......plenty of unscrupulous news papers/stations to do that sort of thing.
Look again at all the photos on page 6, especially posts 104,111,& 120.
In my world the horizon runs from left to right or vica versa.....since when has it gone vertically ?
In post 111 with the 2 pics side by side , with the aircraft rolling on its back the reflection is along the a/c longitudinal axis as expected, with the a/c in a dive pointed at the ground.....the reflection of the horizon is still along the longitudinal axis....what Lost in Saigon says about the reflections is hard to dispute !
PS at what point did the a/c roll left because thats what the ailerons are demanding in that photo ( unless it is aileron upfloat that we are seeing ) !
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 55
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
reflection may be hangers, not planes
I'm sure the photograph is real: reputable photojournalist, underside of wing is well lit, top of tailwheel door is shadowed, etc.
As far as the reflection goes and Saigon's claim: bright spots in the spinner are probably hangar roofs at the airport. If you look at the google aerial view of the airport you'll see that right near where the plane came down there rectilinear hangers with bright white roofs against a black tarmac.
Google Maps
Can we please drop the conspiracy theories now? please!
-Rob
As far as the reflection goes and Saigon's claim: bright spots in the spinner are probably hangar roofs at the airport. If you look at the google aerial view of the airport you'll see that right near where the plane came down there rectilinear hangers with bright white roofs against a black tarmac.
Google Maps
Can we please drop the conspiracy theories now? please!
-Rob
Hmmm lots of thoughts of a photographic nature on an aviation forum but not much opinion of an aviating nature...sure you belong here Jumpseater ?
More knowledge than thought, well from some quarters that is...
Whether I belong here isn't for you to question, we'll leave that for the mods to decide, but if the board ever becomes professional aviation licence holder only to be a member, I'll still be here, will you?
PS at what point did the a/c roll left
Just before it hit the ground actually, didn't you know?
Sorry, I don't think you mentioned it, just remind me where was the photographer standing in relation to the aircraft? Angles, distances you know that sort of stuff ...
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somwhere between 6 and 15 feet below ground level
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was rather surprised to find that nobody had posted a link to the preliminary report from the NTSB, posted yesterday.
Nothing there that hasn't been discussed here already, but if it saves you the time of searching for it:
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...2011120000.pdf
Nothing there that hasn't been discussed here already, but if it saves you the time of searching for it:
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/Acciden...2011120000.pdf
Moderator
This unhappy event is fresh in our minds now, but in decades, someone is going to pour over reports, and read:
Aircraft: NORTH AMERICAN/AERO CLASSICS P-51D, registration: N79111
Injuries: 11 Fatal,66 Serious.
and ask "What the heck?"
And perhaps:
"the airplane sustained substantial damage"
Is a bit of an understatement...
Aircraft: NORTH AMERICAN/AERO CLASSICS P-51D, registration: N79111
Injuries: 11 Fatal,66 Serious.
and ask "What the heck?"
And perhaps:
"the airplane sustained substantial damage"
Is a bit of an understatement...
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Liverpool
Age: 32
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
forgive me if this comes across as insensitive bearing in mind the tragic events, but a friend who saw the pictures asked me (as an aero eng. undergrad... like i'd know) why there was no explosion or fire in the crash. the more i thought about it, the more it puzzled me, as surely it would have been carrying enough fuel for the rest of the race plus the usual safety reserves. the only other time i have heard of such an explosion-less crash was ken wallis' wellington during the war, and that was because it had been run completely dry.
rip mr leeward and the spectators. may the awesome spectacle of the races continue to run in future years
rip mr leeward and the spectators. may the awesome spectacle of the races continue to run in future years
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nevada
Age: 57
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello, obviously very new here. This forum has been an amazing source of intelligent info regarding the Reno accident. Although I wasnt there, I like countless others have been affected by this. I spent 20 years racing cars, so I love competition, speed and the idea of doing those things to their limits. I also was a helicopter mechanic in the Air Force so also have a love for aviation. Thanks for all the insight and experienced input. I too have wondered about the absence of fire, but some of the theories out there make a bit of sense. And after watching the above video would love to know if any of you have a different opinion than what you originally thought. I understand about speculation and the damage it can do. Just curious, and hope you folks dont mind this as my first post here. Thanks again, and prayers to ALL those affected by this tragedy.