-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
F-15 Lands with one wing
- Thread starter Pepere
- Start date
krazycolin
Banned
Old OLD story....
So ?
AckAck
Charter Member 2015
The upside down "F-15" that was really an F-100 was supposed to be an A-4. 
There also seems to be some A-7s in the footage too? Plus, you can also see where they digitally erased the wing during landing footage, digitally added "fuel spray" to cover the wing, etc. So yes, there wasn't any actual footage of the aircraft flying, only stillls from after it landed. They probably patch together stuff like this to get footage, figuring that most people won't know any better (a correct assumption).
It's hardly uncommon, even in big budget films. I know I can annoy my wife when watching aviation- or automotive-themed films because I often complain about how they "fix things in post" or take shortcuts in footage - dub incorrect sounds, use the wrong aircraft, switch aircraft in flight, crash the wrong car - stuff that most people aren't paying attention to. (Just yesterday, while watching the sad 1997 remake of Vanishing Point, I ticked her off by pointing out that 1) they crashed/blew up a Camaro, not a Challenger, and 2) no stock or mildly modified Challenger could even approach 185 mph, especially in less than 1/4 mile.)
Brian
There also seems to be some A-7s in the footage too? Plus, you can also see where they digitally erased the wing during landing footage, digitally added "fuel spray" to cover the wing, etc. So yes, there wasn't any actual footage of the aircraft flying, only stillls from after it landed. They probably patch together stuff like this to get footage, figuring that most people won't know any better (a correct assumption).It's hardly uncommon, even in big budget films. I know I can annoy my wife when watching aviation- or automotive-themed films because I often complain about how they "fix things in post" or take shortcuts in footage - dub incorrect sounds, use the wrong aircraft, switch aircraft in flight, crash the wrong car - stuff that most people aren't paying attention to. (Just yesterday, while watching the sad 1997 remake of Vanishing Point, I ticked her off by pointing out that 1) they crashed/blew up a Camaro, not a Challenger, and 2) no stock or mildly modified Challenger could even approach 185 mph, especially in less than 1/4 mile.)
Brian
flaminghotsauce
Charter Member
I remember having a big argument online with a guy that claimed to be an airline pilot, and this was absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, according to him. We got into all kinds of minutia, lifting surface, speeds, stability, and stuff. But if you look at it, there's plenty of bottom on the aircraft to act as a lifting surface should you fly it fast enough, and apparently that is exactly what this pilot did.
I never did convince this supposed airline pilot that it could indeed happen, even though it did indeed happen. He's probably still convinced he's right.
I never did convince this supposed airline pilot that it could indeed happen, even though it did indeed happen. He's probably still convinced he's right.
