We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, May 5. 2011
Well, there isn't much to do at that point except get the dang thing back on the ground and glue on another wing.
No big deal.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Amen. When it comes to the expression "keeping your cool", I think we've just seen Exhibit A.
Rats. I knew some wet blanket would come along and spoil everything. I just didn't know he'd arrive by name!
What's interesting about the Snopes article is that they say, "All signs point to...", which is kind of un-Snopes-ish of them. They're usually fairly definitive. As such, putting a 'FALSE' up there seems kind of rash.
I have a much better version of the 'airplane crash' here, as well as the infamous '405' crash.
It's a miracle anyone survived.
Yeah, Snopes based their conclusion on the absence of news items. Wouldn't hold up in court.
Your site is a hoot, Doc! Thanks for pointing us there. Love the instant acid trip...
Gee, that was even worse than the Snopes piece. Nothing but conjecture and "it shouldn't be able to happen". And in those blurry three frames, I'd love to know how he could see the pilot's head not moving and the landing struts not bending. The prop didn't strike the ground because of the angle of the plane -- duh. And the side-by-side shots looked fairly convincing. In truth, I couldn't see why he was comparing them. It looked like the plane had a white stripe down it's side in the flight pic, but that could be nothing more than sunlight. Ditto the way the tail insignia was slightly different.
In the psychological world, they call this "reaching".
With respect, I thought the comparisons highlighted significant differences.
I could be wrong though.
I remember watching wing walker Lee Oman fall off the landing gear of the stunt plane in about 1991. If I remember correctly they had the pilot fly around for a while before they decided to have him land in a speeding truck for rescue. It worked almost like it was a planned goof, but it wasn't.
Pretty cool really.
Rich - I saw differences, and what could be viewed as "significant" ones, but any time sunlight enters the picture, the rules change. My mom used to have an Acura that looked pitch black in the garage, blue in the dappled shade, and green in the sunlight. So a side-by-side in those circumstances isn't very convincing.
Now here's a thought:
To pull something like this off takes some exceptionally sophisticated software. Let's just say this is no Photoshop project. Plus, scale backgrounds have to be built to accomodate the model, so the whole thing involves some serious bucks.
The airplane crash vid on the Snopes site (I linked to a better one later) looked as real as real could be. But, at the end, you find out it was produced by a company.
So, which company made this exceptional piece? A piece so sophisticated that neither Snopes nor the video can point to one single frame and say, "Here's where it cut to the model", or "You can tell by so-and-so that it's a fake." If something's that good, it's no accident.
So, if it's a fake, which company spent $20,000 to have it made? And why?
Good points, I can't answer them.
I remember seeing something about this being an ad for a certain product but I don't know if that's true.
What you point out is certainly valid.
I hope someone will help us out.
(It's stuff like this that can glue a guy to the internet searching .)
"I remember seeing something about this being an ad for a certain product-"
Acme Parachutes? :)
Hilarious, got me !
These things exist...here are two in action....or at least they purport to do so; I claim NOTHING as certain. LOL
They're definitely the real deal. Anyone into ultralights knows about them. I mention them here on the 'Design Improvements' page.
I don't believe I have seen so many laws of physics being abused in such a short time span in my life. This POS has been out there for a couple of years now.
That, sir, is flying.
I take it that the Snopes people got it in their heads that the footage was faked. I have to ask them, what was the motive, and where was the opportunity? More of the landing and the reactions would help here, but from what I saw, I'd have to call this a valid bit of video.
In short, Snopes posed an hypothesis, now they get to prove it.
fake. The 'pilot' works for KillaThrill.
There are lots of other comments on aviation sites ;-)
I checked over the web site, and everything there indicates it was for real. Not only did he talk about it in a video, but it could also be argued that if anyone could pull something like this off, it'd be a stunt pilot. How you got "fake" out of that is anyone's guess, but the site certainly didn't bolster your argument.
Plus, it still doesn't answer how some average flight jock could possess such video skills & expensive software to put together such a masterpiece that no one can point to a single frame and cry "Bunk!" Even the awesome '405' video (see my link above) has a few tiny flaws that can be pointed to. I've seen this thing about 20 times and can't find a one.
I did a Bing search on "Making-Of the Killa Thrill 'One Wing Landing' Viral Video" and came up with another video that purports to be a documentary on how they did this.
It looks to me like this "Making Of" is all fakery with CGI and use of models -- after all, the final shot with the pilot getting out of the airplane after the landing uses a two-seater aircraft that isn't even the right color!
If you freeze it at :05 sec. you can clearly see the pilot of a real plane, wearing a white helmet. When the "pilot" opens the canopy at the end, he isn't wearing ANY helmet. Case closed.
Thank goodness he didn't have time to yank his helmet off during the ordeal in order to see better.