Oh, they wouldn't......would they?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North of Watford (Gap)
Age: 58
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DaveReidUK:
I think you need to re-read A&C's post, or possibly brush up on the Battle of Copenhagen.
I think you need to re-read A&C's post, or possibly brush up on the Battle of Copenhagen.
Err, possibly both!
Although I'll swear the Nelson comment wasn't there at the time I posted...Anyway, I duly retract my previous statement.
In other news, I am puzzled as to why the Vulcan video footage is of such questionable quality. Hardly a compelling case, is it?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It rather looks to me as though the aircraft is changing size erratically between some of the frames. That wouldn't happen in a continuous set taken from a frame burst .
But it could happen if someone had stitched together a set of shots from frame bursts of separate manoeuvres from the same display, carefully chosen to portray the attitudes displayed in a barrel roll.
That could account for the convincing and consistent lighting and specular reflections.
Just a thought.
But it could happen if someone had stitched together a set of shots from frame bursts of separate manoeuvres from the same display, carefully chosen to portray the attitudes displayed in a barrel roll.
That could account for the convincing and consistent lighting and specular reflections.
Just a thought.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lancing, Sussex
Age: 92
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vulcan manoevers
A barrel roll involves positive g on the occupants throughout, a slow roll does not. But even during a barrel roll, someone at that rear facing desk would surely notice someting, even if only the change in light level while inverted,
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After all the fuss I was expecting the Spit' to have been inverted. Regarding the rear seated crew of a Vulcan and +ve g; did they spill their coffee? Watching Bob Hoover barrel roll his own Commander while pouring a glass of water on the coaming is something to behold.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Outside in the cold distance
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The video looks as if it's been faked by stringing together separate pictures and/or bits of video footage. What purports to be the second roll looks very much as if it's shots of at least two different sequences strung together in a (poor) attempt to make it look like a continuous manoeuvre.
Far better to deem the evidence to be an act of Photoshop than the alternative, it is a wise tradition that goes back to the days of Nelson once raised his telescope to blind eye and declared " I see no ships".
It may be less than 20 years ago but 1998 seems like a different age as far as that sort of thing was concerned, Hanna and others got away with all sorts of stuff that would probably have landed them in court today, there was no need to pretend it didn't happen. I guess if he had removed Alain de Cadenet's head they may have been a little less obliging.
Me too, would have been an appropriate send off for the old girl, followed by a high speed deck level beat up of course. Unfortunately I suspect the film is not quite what it seems.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, videos don't have to be created using a video camera!
It looks to me like someone used a STILL camera to burst shoot a series of photos, and then made THAT into a video, only it appears they manually fired the shutter rather than using a program burst mode, which is why the maneuver doesn't appear consistent (or smooth) between frames.
As for the lighting - it looks correct throughout the maneuver, so IMHO it is genuine.
It looks to me like someone used a STILL camera to burst shoot a series of photos, and then made THAT into a video, only it appears they manually fired the shutter rather than using a program burst mode, which is why the maneuver doesn't appear consistent (or smooth) between frames.
As for the lighting - it looks correct throughout the maneuver, so IMHO it is genuine.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411 wrote:
I had it in my mind that the CAA would not let them carry rear crew members on display flights?
I had it in my mind that the CAA would not let them carry rear crew members on display flights?
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: North west UK
Age: 64
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have been (allegedly) very naughty boy's, and you have been accused of doing something EVERYONE want's to do, so because we are bright red with envy, we are going to punish you... LOL
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hotel this week, hotel next week, home whenever...
Posts: 1,492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pedant mode .... Signal, surely, not ships....
So many things wrong with the video....if you had 'burst' the action, why not just post the whole sequence raw, rather than crude edit? Especially with such a 'hot' topic!
And knowing the CAA, yes they would. Regardless of whether it was the types last flight or the pilot retiring the CAA are in a difficult position as they cannot now turn a 'blind eye' for fear of others following in footsteps in the future.
I could not resist and he continued thus: 'The incident occurred during the battle of Copenhagen when I was in a strong position and knew I had to continue the attack. My signals officer, Lt Foley, drew my attention to a signal from my Commander in Chief, Sir Hyde Parker, which read, 'discontinue the action.' Well, Lock, would you stop when all the advantages were with you? No, of course not. So I said to my Signal Lieutenant: 'You know, Foley, I have only one eye. I have a right to be blind sometimes'. So I put the telescope to my right eye and said, to him, 'I really do not see the signal'.
And knowing the CAA, yes they would. Regardless of whether it was the types last flight or the pilot retiring the CAA are in a difficult position as they cannot now turn a 'blind eye' for fear of others following in footsteps in the future.