Real or Photoshop?

I thought there was a limit to how fast planes can go when buzzing an airshow?

And just going out on a limb here...wouldn't there be some sorta motion blur if that Flanker was really going that fast? Can a camera really keep focus on everything (stationary and moving) at once like that? Like Bublik's photos have motion blur...but not this one?

And those trees are further away than any object in the lower photo, and they're not in focus....so if it really was going that fast...?

"on a fixed-wing monoplane, about half the distance from a wingtip to the fuselage."

 

If he's low enough to touch the ground with wheels extended, he's below the ground effect.

 

-SK

Was the Flanker in the original photo that low? It didn't look like it to me. ;)

I thought there was a limit to how fast planes can go when buzzing an airshow?

 

And just going out on a limb here...wouldn't there be some sorta motion blur if that Flanker was really going that fast? Can a camera really keep focus on everything (stationary and moving) at once like that? Like Bublik's photos have motion blur...but not this one?

Being a professional photographer I can field this one with absolute certainty. Yes, if the shutter speed is fast enough.

As to the speed limit at airshows, the only restriction is that they can't break the sound barrier, in the US.

I thought there was a limit to how fast planes can go when buzzing an airshow?

 

And just going out on a limb here...wouldn't there be some sorta motion blur if that Flanker was really going that fast? Can a camera really keep focus on everything (stationary and moving) at once like that? Like Bublik's photos have motion blur...but not this one?

Depends on the camera, but it also depends on where the camera is. If its on a chase-plane...its all relative. ;)

Being a professional photographer I can field this one with absolute certainty. Yes, if the shutter speed is fast enough.

Ok, thanks.

Daayyyymmmnnnn. If Maverick's flybys can make his skipper spill himself, I hate to be at one of those airshows during one of those flybys then.

Rgr. Cheers.

If he's low enough to touch the ground with wheels extended, he's below the ground effect.

 

-SK

Do you mean "in the ground effect"?

Since the closer you get to the ground the bigger the GE.

Bah...400 knots is nothing for a fly-by. The almost-instantaneous arrival of sound from the engines will scare the hell out of ya if you don't see it coming...but that's about it. I guess it depends on the aircraft though...if you see a G Phantom on the deck with no smoke behind him, flying toward you...plug your ears or you're gonna get hurt.

That's even more crazy :biggrin:

http://www.flightzone.co.za/media/harvards.wmv

Do you mean "in the ground effect"?

Since the closer you get to the ground the bigger the GE.

Well, for a given speed, there is a distinct altitude threshold when the lift generated by the wing ceases to be less than the weight, and begins to be greater than the weight. This is a very stable level - any increase in aircraft altitude will cause the lift to decrease, and the aircraft should fall back; any decrease in the altitude and the lift should increase, causing the aircraft to rise. It likes to "sit" on a cushion of a specific height. Physically, you are correct, but from the piloting point of view, we "feel" it as a discrete altitude when flying. You have to push the nose down to fight it, if you want to descend.

Since you seem to understand, maybe you can help me remember my training - what happens when the plane flies very fast? Is the ground effect reduced, and the plane can approach nearer the ground? I thought that ekranoplans continued to accelerate even after they rise out of the water, but since the airplane I fly is always slow, I'm not 100% sure that it affects faster aircraft in the same way.

-SK

That lead T-6 pilot sure looks familiar.

That's even more crazy :biggrin:

http://www.flightzone.co.za/media/harvards.wmv

Ok, that does look like something I don't want to try myself, but:

- it's a slow aircraft,

- it's a low-wing aircraft,

- they aren't doing it on top of the spectators, and

- they are all doing it together, and obviously on purpose from training, using the ground effect instead of fighting it

I think the Su-27UB photo is more frightening, but maybe because I just can't understand how it was done. Maybe he was only at that altitude for an instant, and the ground effect was already "bouncing" him back up?

The f-14 was also scary, but less so because you could watch him accelerate to safety. I wonder if he scraped the lower fins doing that, but didn't mind, because the F-14s are being removed from service anyway.

-SK

Well, for a given speed, there is a distinct altitude threshold when the lift generated by the wing ceases to be less than the weight, and begins to be greater than the weight. This is a very stable level - any increase in aircraft altitude will cause the lift to decrease, and the aircraft should fall back; any decrease in the altitude and the lift should increase, causing the aircraft to rise. It likes to "sit" on a cushion of a specific height. Physically, you are correct, but from the piloting point of view, we "feel" it as a discrete altitude when flying. You have to push the nose down to fight it, if you want to descend.

Yes, the threshold is the "half-the-wing-length" altitude. I thought you claimed the effect dissapears below that threshold :D

Since you seem to understand, maybe you can help me remember my training - what happens when the plane flies very fast? Is the ground effect reduced, and the plane can approach nearer the ground? I thought that ekranoplans continued to accelerate even after they rise out of the water, but since the airplane I fly is always slow, I'm not 100% sure that it affects faster aircraft in the same way.

 

-SK

If I am not mistaken, the GE is closely related to induced drag. And, as well known, the induced drag decreases as the airspeed increases (for reasonable speeds, definitely subsonic :))

SK, you HAVE seen the various crazy French Air Force videos in Africa, right?

SK, you HAVE seen the various crazy French Air Force videos in Africa, right?

No, but I'm not so worried about aircraft that are designed to fly that low for normal combat operations. I've heard that the Jaguar for example has a great radio altimeter to help stay in control at low alt.

When I was in the MiG-29, the radio altimeter had an accuracy of 10 meters, and IIRC while we were sitting still on the runway waiting for takeoff, it said, "100 meters." (Either that or it was just dark - I might be confusing it with the airspeed display, which was similarly approximate. Neither display ever showed any quantity less than "100")

-SK

Heh, Soviet equipment... You went ahead and flew the thing, but now are afraid to attend Russian-flown airshows?! Getting old? :D

Check this out if you get the chance...

http://www.patricksaviation.com/aviation_videos/50/Fous

EDIT: oops OMG MAD its real. just saw Ices previous reply

Wow, this thread grew fast....

To clear a few things up....An airplane can land at any speed. I've done it many times from RC to 152's to King Air's to jets. Its called "Flying it onto the ground". It can also crash at any speed, any attitude. Ground effect is a cushioning effect caused by (to keep it simple) wing tip vortices. There is alot more to it such as a swirling motion along the wing itself that spreads and trails the tips (vortex) and comes together aft of the airframe forming a kind of "box" if you will. Its been a while since my college aerodynamics courses, but these are the basics. Wing Tip vortex is only present during the creation of lift. Since Induced drag is a by-product of lift, induced drag does have alot to do with it as well. But, to keep it simple, Ground effect can be penetrated at any airspeed. As far as RA, i dont know about the MiG, but the RA we had in the 328 was pretty damn accurate. It would show 5 feet during taxi, and if we hit a bump and the airplane "bobbled" up and down, it would move. Most airspeed indicators are set at 25-40 depending on aircraft. They vary... could be more, could be less. Although, we used our FMS groundspeed as a sort of "speedometer" during taxi. That was accurate to zero knots. I also use the same in LOFC (ground speed indicator) on taxi...

As for the photo, sure its possible. I just tend to lean towards the side of photoshop. But as someone else said, i wouldnt bet money on it... ;)

This same debate is going on at several pilot websites all over the net right now.... I figured you guys would get a kick out of it, so i brought it over here....

edit: As for the the forums at airliners.net.... do some searches on some real pilot websites to see how pilots feel about that community...lol... the site itself is awesome... but the forums are a bit different from what i understand... :)

If you guys are having fun with that photo, here is another one to ponder....

real or photoshop?

If you guys are having fun with that photo, here is another one to ponder....

 

real or photoshop?

:)

Judging by the flap setting,guess 30 on the pic.I would say it`s a photoshop.

Hard to tell though.

Anyone ever seen the Belgian Fouga Magister at an airshow?

Although this is a take-off run, I also made a small video clip of it at the 2004 spotters day at Kleine Brogel airbase in Belgium.

I will post that when I get home, that flyby was about as low as the Su-30 in the opening post of this thread (and lower than it is on the picture above).

This one is nice too. There is a video of it around somehwere, but I can't find it at the moment.

And of course my absolute favourite: :)

PHOTOCHOP, 100 PERCENTO, the original photo i be on bout....

Is it just me or has SK, got leet powers of mind control ?

check post 33 and 34

SW quotes the dude before he even posts...

Leet skillz :p

I think the plane in the first picture (on the first post) can go even lower.

You know this movie don't you?