General discussion for aviators

Flying wingless

Interesting story here

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005380500,00.html

and more Photos of the damage here

http://uk.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/cmfalloon/album?.dir=b755&.src=ph&st…

Luck of the Irish I call it.

Comments (8)




8 Responses to “Flying wingless”

  1. admin says:

    Sounds like a Wrong Way Corrigan hoax.

    "Flyingmonk" <chais…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

    news:1124562990.573192.232710@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com…

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

    > See also this thread:

    > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.homebuilt/browse_frm/thre...

  2. admin says:

    Seth Masia wrote:
    > Sounds like a Wrong Way Corrigan hoax.

    Hard to tell. He lost an aileron. Unless there were problems with the controls
    of that one, a single aileron would give about the same control feel in normal
    flight. He lost some lift on that side. But he also lost an auxiliary tank. That
    tank may be assumed to have contained a fair amount of fuel, since he said he
    only noticed a problem when he saw the gauge for that tank showing empty. So,
    the loss of lift was probably countered by the loss of weight on that side.
    There’s also a radar pod under the other wing.

    The plane might actually have flown a bit better this way.

    On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine hitting something hard enough to remove
    part of the wing and have nobody on board notice.

    George Patterson
          Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
          use the Internet and he won’t bother you for weeks.

  3. admin says:

    On 2005-08-21, George Patterson <grpph…@verizon.net> wrote:

    > On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine hitting something hard enough to remove
    > part of the wing and have nobody on board notice.

    Knowing how well the press are fooled on aviation matters, I’m taking
    this one with a gigantic pinch of salt.

    This should be a reportable incident to the NTSB since it’s an
    N-registered aircraft. The first two digits of the N-number are visible,
    therefore it should be findable in the NTSB within the next week or two.

    It certainly should appear in Britain’s AAIB database if this thing’s
    real and it really landed in Jersey, since the CAA adminsiter that
    airspace.


    Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
    Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
    Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
    "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

  4. admin says:

    Let’s not forget that the Boomerang by Rutan was Asymetrical and it
    flew fine.

    Bryan

  5. admin says:

    > Let’s not forget that the Boomerang by Rutan was Asymetrical and it
    >flew fine.

       So why don’t Cessna and Beech and Piper and the rest just saw off
    some wing, decrease drag and go faster? Asymmetric airplanes look
    asymmetric but are designed to be balanced. The Germans had a similar
    setup during WWII but it wasn’t terribly successful.
            Removing anything–wings sections, control surfaces, or
    anything else–from an airplane will render it dangerous and certainly
    less than cooperative. Ask any WWII bomber pilot who had to limp home
    (or couldn’t even do that) with such things shot away.

              Dan

  6. admin says:

    <Dan_Thomas_nos…@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1124735343.024770.311190@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com…
    >> Let’s not forget that the Boomerang by Rutan was Asymetrical and it
    >>flew fine.

    >   So why don’t Cessna and Beech and Piper and the rest just saw off
    > some wing, decrease drag and go faster?

    http://www.avweb.com/newswire/11_34a/briefs/190422-1.html

Place your comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.