Amazing Footage of Dragon Air Flight landing

[DulwichFox]

This is scary.

DulwichFox

[rendelharris]

And a complete spoof - I'm no expert but pretty sure that the first thing you would get on turning a jet airliner upside down is an instant rapid plunge downward of several thousand feet, or in this case about a hundred feet before the ground intervened!

[JohnL]

but Denzel Washington did it !

Aerobatic planes have special designs I think :0

[rendelharris]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> but Denzel Washington did it !

>

> Aerobatic planes have special designs I think :0

Yes, I believe they frequently have asymmetrical aerofoils (get me!) so they fly the same level or inverted. Invert an airliner and once it's upside down, all the aerodynamics that were forcing it upwards start forcing it downwards instead.

[fishbiscuits]

It's a fake

https://www.aviation24.be/website/facebook/fake-video-beijing-capital-airlines-airbus-a320-accident-reached-6m-views-facebook/

As for whether flying upside down is POSSIBLE in an airliner... it should be in theory. After entering the roll, you'd have to press forward/down on the controls, as if you were performing a dive, in order to keep the nose up. But of course an airliner isn't designed to be flown upside down, and doing so might place unusual stresses on the structure. Modern planes have software preventing the pilot over-stressing the plane, so in practice it might not be possible.

There are some accounts of airliners performing barrel rolls... usually accidentally, but at least one intentionally, famously in a prototype Boeing 707 over Seattle.

[rendelharris]

I remember seeing a documentary about Concorde where a test pilot said he and his French counterpart had barrelrolled it both ways, so it can be done - but not a hundred feet off the ground!

[DulwichFox]

This was not a deliberate stunt performed by the pilot in stable air.

This was an aircraft hit by the storm force of a Typhoon.

Foxy

[fishbiscuits]

Sorry DulwichFox, it is a fake. Not having a go at you... a good thread... but the footage is not real.

[DulwichFox]

Well yes. The aircraft does appear to have no windows.. Give away.

The point was that it was never claimed to be a stunt.

It was mearly for intertainment value.

I bet you lot call out the punchline and heckle at a comdey night.

Foxy

[siousxiesue]

If it was MERELY for ENTERTAINMENT why not call it that?

[fishbiscuits]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well yes. The aircraft does appear to have no windows.. Give away.

>

> The point was that it was never claimed to be a stunt.

>

> It was mearly for intertainment value.

Fair enough. Yeah it freaked me out when I first saw it too.

The other giveaway was the passengers disembarking - from a completely different plane - in clear weather!

[JohnL]

LOL you turn your airline over - set the aerofoils so you are flying upside down perfectly - then realise the fuel inlets at the fuel tank are at the bottom of the plane DOH.

[Chick]

No. It depends on the angle of attack, as long as air is moving faster over the top of the wing there will be lift and the plane will keep flying.

> Yes, I believe they frequently have asymmetrical

> aerofoils (get me!) so they fly the same level or

> inverted. Invert an airliner and once it's upside

> down, all the aerodynamics that were forcing it

> upwards start forcing it downwards instead.

[rendelharris]

Chick Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No. It depends on the angle of attack, as long as

> air is moving faster over the top of the wing

> there will be lift and the plane will keep

> flying.

Isn't lift caused by air flowing faster under the wing and slower over the top? Pretty sure that's how it works. So if the wing is inverted, the air will be flowing slower under the groundward side and faster over the top, pushing it down?

Mind you I'm an English graduate who doesn't really understand why electricity doesn't fall out of empty sockets, so could well be wrong!

[Alan Medic]

I was following posts on twitter during the typhoon as my son is in Shenzhen and this was posted there and who knows where ever else. It's like a scene from the comedy movie Airplane.

[Chick]

> Isn't lift caused by air flowing faster under the

> wing and slower over the top? Pretty sure that's

> how it works. So if the wing is inverted, the air

> will be flowing slower under the groundward side

> and faster over the top, pushing it down?

>

> Mind you I'm an English graduate who doesn't

> really understand why electricity doesn't fall out

> of empty sockets, so could well be wrong!

Rendle, sorry I have been lazy and copied this:

Upside-down or right side up, flight works the same way. As you stated, the wing deflects air downward. When inverted, the pilot simply controls the the pitch of the aircraft to keep the nose up, thus giving the wings sufficient angle of attack to deflect air downwards.

It's less efficient and in a light air craft it requires full power.

It would mean pointing the nose towards the sky. Hope that makes some sense.