Author Topic: Norvegian tragedie (Read 623 times)

straffo · « **on:** April 07, 2005, 04:04:23 PM »

See

http://andersh.privat.ldp.no/ventus_medium2.wmv

Maverick · « **Reply #1 on:** April 07, 2005, 04:30:34 PM »

Aw nuts, I thought it was a real tragedy like gscholoz reproducing or something really bad.

Shame about the plane it looked pretty nice but the wings flexed a lot there. Must have been a heavy load on them.

Nilsen · « **Reply #2 on:** April 07, 2005, 04:48:47 PM »

LOL

G-forces = 1 point

RC nerd = 0 points

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #3 on:** April 08, 2005, 01:37:24 AM »

It was obvious from the wing flex that there was a design error to begin with.

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #4 on:** April 08, 2005, 02:26:01 AM »

Those wings scared me from the start, I guess they were supposed to be imbreakable. Poor guy.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #5 on:** April 08, 2005, 03:42:55 AM »

If you install a jet engine to a glider which leads to overstress it's a design flaw.

Wolfala · « **Reply #6 on:** April 08, 2005, 04:07:41 AM »

No where near as bad as the RC B52 taking the plunge.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #7 on:** April 08, 2005, 05:21:38 AM »

Cry me a river Gsholz.

Attitude like yours lead directly to the accident. The added weight of the jet and unnaturally high speeds lead to the catastrofic failure.

You just can't admit it for some reason.

Swoop · « **Reply #8 on:** April 08, 2005, 05:25:12 AM »

Jeez just get a room you two, you're not fooling anybody.

bob149 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 08, 2005, 06:01:33 AM »

oooh ..not good ...
I watched a vid of one of mate's jet r/c model crash ......first flight , it only lasted a bout 10 seconds in the air before spiraling into the tarmac...Then some joker from air traffic asked if he needed crash n rescue to come out

Got to say it though the wing flex was quite considerable , with the wings flexing upwards and downwards .....
Still makes me feel slightly better as i only bent the u/c and snapped the prop on my Cub the other day

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 08, 2005, 08:29:30 AM »

Too bad, was a nice looking airplane.
I think at that level of size and expense these guys should just get a real airplane.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #11 on:** April 08, 2005, 08:46:11 AM »

Quote

The plane was flying perfectly fine until the RC pilot made it pull too many G's.

With almost 45 degrees of wing flex and a construction that was most likely meant for powerless flight or a very light engine.

There's no excuse for stupidity, they wasted 3000 hours of work building an RC that couldn't handle even the very basic movements without breaking apart. It's not like he was attempting aerobatics or something, just a regular turn broke it apart.

The takeoff revealed that the design was made for extremely low airspeeds. From the wingflex you can assume that they exceeded the design weight for the airframe considerably.

It was just a matter of time when a gush of wind or a control movement would break it apart.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #12 on:** April 08, 2005, 09:32:43 AM »

He did try to loop it. However a regular RC can easily take a loop like that. His one would too unless it had a completely flawed design.

As far as cars go, it's a design fault to put an overpowered engine to a chassis that's built to handle less than half of the power and top speed.

That's why it's illegal in most countries.

A Beetle like that would be dangerous to drive and prone to damage. Just like the overpowered glider was.

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #13 on:** April 08, 2005, 09:49:55 AM »

So youre saying every lawmaker is stupid for having regulations on car designs for example?

Riiight...

What kind of a moron builds an RC plane which can't be flown for fun? The whole concept was flawed for an RC plane to begin with if it was so fragile it had to be flown like a commercial airliner to stay intact.

Habu · « **Reply #14 on:** April 08, 2005, 09:53:44 AM »

LOL

I need you to translate some documents for me Siaf. Seems when I read something I am totally missing the actual message.

Quote

What kind of a moron builds an RC plane which can't be flown for fun? The whole concept was flawed for an RC plane to begin with if it was so fragile it had to be flown like a commercial airliner to stay intact.

Ok let me try this reading between the lines thing out.

So are you saying Siaf that all commercial airliners are designed like crap and are dangerous to fly because if you tried to loop them they would fall apart?