If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LiveLeak) Followup Remember the Argentinian pilot who made a pass so low he left a swath of headless ants in his wake? Here's the view from the cockpit   (liveleak.com) divider line 27
More: Followup  
•       •       •

7442 clicks; posted to Video » on 07 Jun 2011 at 4:15 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



27 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-06-07 04:29:51 PM
Didn't see any kinda altimeter on the HUD. Wonder if it would even work a couple feet off the ground.
 
2011-06-07 04:30:31 PM
300 knots at 3 feet...

Thank god for the velocity vector.
 
2011-06-07 04:35:44 PM
IAMONE: Didn't see any kinda altimeter on the HUD. Wonder if it would even work a couple feet off the ground.

Huh? Altimeter is the box on the right side. Even better is the radar altimeter, which is a smaller box just above the data block on the lower right side, which measure altitude above ground. The little flashing "R" next to it is flashing because it's not getting reliable radar alt data when it's going over the trees or when the airplane rolls (and the radar alt is pointed at the sky).
 
2011-06-07 04:49:50 PM
Charlie Freak: IAMONE: Didn't see any kinda altimeter on the HUD. Wonder if it would even work a couple feet off the ground.

Huh? Altimeter is the box on the right side. Even better is the radar altimeter, which is a smaller box just above the data block on the lower right side, which measure altitude above ground. The little flashing "R" next to it is flashing because it's not getting reliable radar alt data when it's going over the trees or when the airplane rolls (and the radar alt is pointed at the sky).


So basically, its saying "Pull up! Pull up!"
 
2011-06-07 04:54:12 PM
Charlie Freak:

Huh? Altimeter is the box on the right side. Even better is the radar altimeter, which is a smaller box just above the data block on the lower right side, which measure altitude above ground. The little flashing "R" next to it is flashing because it's not getting reliable radar alt data when it's going over the trees or when the airplane rolls (and the radar alt is pointed at the sky).

I didn't see it. Thanks for the info.
 
2011-06-07 04:54:45 PM
ALT ALT ALT ALT

The funny part was that the altitude flashing on the hud went away when he leveled out inches above the ground.

The amazing part is that it looks like he went in BETWEEN people... and they were running opposite directions....
 
2011-06-07 05:26:30 PM
Can someone tell me why this is so impressive? Just fly the plane low and dont hit the ground. Why is this a difficult thing?
 
2011-06-07 05:38:31 PM
Are you serious?spacemanjones: Can someone tell me why this is so impressive? Just fly the plane low and dont hit the ground. Why is this a difficult thing?
 
2011-06-07 05:50:57 PM
Kind of. Im not saying I dont think its impressive, I'm just not sure why. Does it get harder to fly a plane at lower altitudes? Do plane not want to fly in a straight line?
Actual curiosity on physically what happens.
 
2011-06-07 06:09:28 PM
spacemanjones: Kind of. Im not saying I dont think its impressive, I'm just not sure why. Does it get harder to fly a plane at lower altitudes? Do plane not want to fly in a straight line?
Actual curiosity on physically what happens.


the ground can get in the way of certain maneuvers... which is something you do not have to deal with at altitude...
 
2011-06-07 06:20:14 PM
spacemanjones: Kind of. Im not saying I dont think its impressive, I'm just not sure why. Does it get harder to fly a plane at lower altitudes? Do plane not want to fly in a straight line?
Actual curiosity on physically what happens.


There's a huge chance of highly increased air pressure right under the wings at super-low altitudes. The slightest bump in that could cause the jet to rotate, and it takes very little of that for a wing to hit the ground. Also, in general, it's dangerous and impressive because there is ZERO adjustment time in the case of any other disturbance (in air all kinds of shiat can happen, but you have lots of time to correct).
 
2011-06-07 06:25:08 PM
Charlie Freak: 300 knots at 3 feet...

Thank god for the velocity vector.


Roger, Roger.
 
2011-06-07 06:34:52 PM
spacemanjones: Kind of. Im not saying I dont think its impressive, I'm just not sure why. Does it get harder to fly a plane at lower altitudes? Do plane not want to fly in a straight line?
Actual curiosity on physically what happens.


It's not necessarily harder, there's just less room for error.

Air behaves like a fluid in three dimensions - at 3 feet off the ground, it doesn't take but a slight displacement to ruin your day. The good news is that in a fighter or trainer, the wing loading is very high, so turbulence and smaller amounts of displacement don't affect you as much.

However, within a wing span of the ground, you're in ground effect, which actually reduces drag. That doesn't seem like a problem until you consider the plane has been trimmed to fly at a certain attitude and speed (i.e. the control forces are in equilibrium at said speed and attitdue). When you're diving for the deck, and accelerating, those control forces are going to change drastically, then once again as you enter ground effect. One screw up in stick pressure, one change in wind could have easily killed everybody there.

Plus there are birds down close to the ground - shiat a robin could have done them all in.
 
2011-06-07 07:00:30 PM
spacemanjones: Can someone tell me why this is so impressive? Just fly the plane low and dont hit the ground. Why is this a difficult thing?

In case you are being serious, the difference between hitting the ground in an attack jet flying at 350kts and an alt of 3 feet, thereby killing yourself and all of those poor bastards in front of you, and getting away clean is about 1/10,000 of an ounce of pressure on the stick. And even if you nail it, a bad gust of wind could easily roll a wingtip into the ground. This guy is not good, he's stupid and dangerous.
 
2011-06-07 07:43:56 PM
A view from the ground here (new window).

Yee-ikes.
 
2011-06-07 09:50:31 PM
LasersHurt
Charlie Freak
vossiewulf

Thanks! Makes sense. I figured on those types of reasons, sometimes I just need to know from sources other than the voice in my head.
 
2011-06-07 09:57:08 PM
chewielouie: Charlie Freak: 300 knots at 3 feet...

Thank god for the velocity vector.

Roger, Roger.


.. And don't call me Shirley..
 
2011-06-07 10:58:26 PM
Considering this plane is a turbo-prop the low-level is even more freaky-deaky.

img141.imageshack.us

That must have been the most expensive lawn-mower ever.
 
2011-06-07 11:09:06 PM
vossiewulf: spacemanjones: Can someone tell me why this is so impressive? Just fly the plane low and dont hit the ground. Why is this a difficult thing?

In case you are being serious, the difference between hitting the ground in an attack jet flying at 350kts and an alt of 3 feet, thereby killing yourself and all of those poor bastards in front of you, and getting away clean is about 1/10,000 of an ounce of pressure on the stick. And even if you nail it, a bad gust of wind could easily roll a wingtip into the ground. This guy is not good, he's stupid and dangerous.


You've gotta let this Top Gun thing go, Iceman!! You're clearly jealous that he turned out to be the famous one, even though you won the tournament!!
 
2011-06-07 11:10:49 PM
I'm not a pilot, but I suspect this guy deserves the dumbass tag. Is there any material difference between this and a speeding car driving through a gap in a crowd of people? Other than the car might kill fewer of them? And it sounds like he didn't make any fans; the video from the ground seems to have a lot of people yelling "puta" at him.
 
2011-06-07 11:28:08 PM
Charlie Freak: Thank god for the velocity vector.

When I was back on the F/A-18 Super Hornet program, we almost had a jet come down short of the runway because of an OpenGL driver bug that caused the velocity vector to draw a little too high up on the HUD. It was intermittent, and it wasn't usually off enough to be noticeable in testing anyhow, but it sure got noticed during that landing!

That was a fun job sometimes.
 
2011-06-08 11:21:17 AM
acefox1

Considering this plane is a turbo-prop the low-level is even more freaky-deaky.

img141.imageshack.us

That must have been the most expensive lawn-mower ever.


Hmph. That picture looked familiar, so I checked my saves and found the frame after that one dated July of '09.

Still a neat shot.
 
2011-06-08 12:13:01 PM
DinsdalePiranha

A view from the ground here (new window).

Yee-ikes.


Indeed! This guy would've lost his head over that.

home.earthlink.net
 
2011-06-08 04:01:41 PM
spacemanjones: Can someone tell me why this is so impressive? Just fly the plane low and dont hit the ground. Why is this a difficult thing?

www.meh.ro
 
2011-06-08 07:11:07 PM
Charlie Freak:
Plus there are birds down close to the ground - shiat a robin could have done them all in.


Mmmmm, not likely. A small bird like a robin would go through those turbines with nary a hiccup. Larger birds like geese will take them out though. Small, soft items can generally pass through without significant damage. You would be surprised at how much water those turbines can ingest before they flame out. But hard items like wrenches do very bad things to turbine engines. FOD walks are common along flightlines. Sand and volcanic ash are also rough on those things.

On a lighter note:

onwardstate.com

Maverick approves!

/Hot like the general's daughter...
//The picture, not Maverick...
 
2011-06-08 08:36:42 PM
Screenshot

i31.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-08 09:08:26 PM
mikeoj

Screenshot

The scan distortion in that image is reminiscent of the result of slow focal-plane shutters on early Twentieth-century race cars.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »