…last few seconds seemed like he was right on the stall over the lake (wing flutter..?) or was I imagining it ?

it was the shadow from the tree flicking over the wing as he passed through the branches. he might have been trying to take of with the wind behind as there aren`t many options for direction of take off from there by the looks of it. the tail didnt look as though it was quick to come up either so may be over weight behind the centre of gravity.

please refer to the aerodynamics spin off thread for more confusion and answers of CofG etc lol

I think the wing was designed to have a high wing loading and therefore high stability and crew comfort at low level.

big wings, ie Vulcan = bumpy ride at low level and higher aircrew fatigue

well one of them is Bill, does that help, sorry couldn`t resist

I tried to write a response Dave…..I cannot. Bless you.

with you with those few but meaningful words

I agree Tangers and Dave…I got suckered in to correct CofG not speculate….wish I hadn’t bothered as apparently I need to ‘deal with’ something.

The bottom line is that 11 died, and that is a tragedy in anyone’s book.

the question of CofG etc was genuine and still is. unfortunately its treading all over tragic accident.

some of us though do find of interest the reasons why and how an accident occours. for my part i run an aviation website detailing such events from past history. an observation of events and trying to make sense of it all. its not from some macabre rubber necking reason and do not wish to offend anyone.

like i said, perhaps a new thread ought to be started with questions of aerodynamics. the reno accident perhaps should not be used as an example of trimming faliure however as it has to go through all the “official” investigation before being used this way as nothing as yet has been proved and it will no dought be a while before that happens.

well lets “not” hope that if we`re all jetting off together somewhere on our plane spotting hols and that the air stewardess comes running back shouting “CAN ANYONE FLY A PLANE”.

we would all be rushing forward but just remember that that would move the CofG forward causing the aircraft to dive and speed up, then the CofP would move back,lifting the nose up, throwing us all safely back in our seats and letting the aircraft guide itself, all trimmed up nicely for straight and level flight whilst we argue amongst ourselves lol.

mind you i dont think the CofP would that effect with the CofG that far forward?

Thats what I said in the first case wasnt it??

i think we were both asking for confirmation from a common sense view point.
indeed i think your right also.

so was the “trim up” part in Canadairs post incorrect? or do the air race pilot actually trim the aircraft this way as he sounded quite informed.

terrible news indeed. i was only just watching some of the reno racing from a link offered up by one of the forum members last week.

in the last turn they are doing between 400-450 knots and pulling between 2 – 5 g`s. the aircraft would i expect to be trimmed nose down to counter the lift forces of the wings at high speed and ease the control loads to the pilot.

if the trim tab failed at very high speed in the run in (but not as yet come away) then this would account for the sudden high G pull up at high speed as the aircraft lost its nose down trim. the sudden force forcing the pilot over the controls (harness may have been loosened after take off for pilot comfort, to be tightend again for landing) and possibly blacking out. there were some vague movements of the aircraft when inverted at the top of the roll which may suggest the pilot may have been regaining consciousness, the trim tab appears to become detatched around this point probably due to flutter.

the roll then tightens and the g`s increase again before entering its dive at which point recovery would have been impossible.

im only writing what i can see to a certain extent. no one can really comment on the pilots health at 70- 80 or age of the aircraft design as i know some 80 year olds that put me to shame in their youthfullness and the aircraft was modified to perform what it was doing just as much as a new design would have been.

unfortunalely it seems(?) a failure of such a small part may(?) have lead to the disaster, which at normal speeds would hopefully have been intervened by the pilot safely as long as hight and time allowed.

as far as aircraft trimming goes am i wrong or right?. or have i been flying aircraft, building flying models from kits and own designs and teaching the air cadets principles of flight the wrong way for the last umpteen years??.

the air racers may have their own individual ways of trimming the aircraft but the basic principles apply dont they?