# Mustang crashes into crowd at Reno



## phas3e (Sep 16, 2011)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCNePeKn3Tg_

At least 30 serious injuries involved in Reno Air Races crash | Reno Gazette-Journal | rgj.com


----------



## Rocketeer (Sep 16, 2011)

So sorry to hear of the accident at Reno....my thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected and caught up in this sad event.


----------



## mudpuppy (Sep 16, 2011)

Just horrible. My thoughts go out to the families and friends of those injured. "..multiple fatalities" quoted in the paper you linked above.


----------



## pinsog (Sep 16, 2011)

Looks like the P51 Galloping Ghost crashed near the stands into some spectators not very long ago. Early reports are saying 12 dead and many injured.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 16, 2011)

It was a horrific crash. Most of my fellow photographers have checked in. Joe, were you out there? PLEASE check in


----------



## evangilder (Sep 16, 2011)

Live news feed from Reno
Watch Live Newscasts - My News 4 - KRNV, Reno, NV


----------



## Njaco (Sep 16, 2011)

[email protected]!!!


----------



## Njaco (Sep 16, 2011)

Guys, I just merged several threads into here.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Sep 16, 2011)

Dammit!


----------



## Coors9 (Sep 16, 2011)

Awful, just awful. Condolences to all the families.


----------



## herman1rg (Sep 16, 2011)

A terrible tragedy


----------



## TheMustangRider (Sep 16, 2011)

This is terrible, what a tragedy.


----------



## wuzak (Sep 16, 2011)

Such sad news.

Condolences to the familes and friends.


----------



## Vassili Zaitzev (Sep 16, 2011)

Damn. Condolences to the families of those lost.


----------



## Crimea_River (Sep 16, 2011)

I echo these thoughts.


----------



## wheelsup_cavu (Sep 16, 2011)

Condolence to all the families of those involved.


Wheels


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

I'm here folks - thanks for the call Eric, did not partake this year. I'll give a call tomorrow...


----------



## The Basket (Sep 17, 2011)

This is shocking news. Absolute awful.


----------



## Snautzer01 (Sep 17, 2011)

horrible, absolutely horrible


----------



## lindsay (Sep 17, 2011)

Very sad news and a terrible tragedy. My thoughts go out to the familys and friends of all those involved.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

Glad you are okay, Joe.


----------



## Pisis (Sep 17, 2011)

I just saw it on news, I'm shocked.... Sad about the victims.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Sep 17, 2011)

Sad day in aviation. Prayers for the victims and their families.

TO


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

I hope for the best for recoveries and hope all affected by injury loss or trauma suffer the less than expected.

Tis' a great shame and tradgedy, but also a miracle that the whole stand wasn't taken out. Heartfelt hopes and wishes of swift recovery to all survivors, families, Reno effected communties.

P-51 Galloping Ghost crashes into crowd at Reno from SAS1946


----------



## A4K (Sep 17, 2011)

Very sad news, my condolences to the victims and their families.

I wonder if they will ban further events - they banned the Red Bull Air races here after a crash. Official reason: 'it is too loud and too dangerous'. Ok, why don't they ban Formula 1 aswell then???


----------



## stona (Sep 17, 2011)

A4K said:


> why don't they ban Formula 1 aswell then???



Because F1 has done everything it can to make itself safer,a movement instigated by Jackie Stewart back in the 1960s. The tracks,cars,medical facilities etc would be unrecognisable to a driver from the 50s and 60s.
The last driver to die was Ayrton Senna in 1994. An Australian marshall was tragically killed in 2001 and an Italian marshall a year earlier. Both men were killed by a flying wheel when the tether (introduced in 1998 ) failed. The cars now have a double tether to try to prevent this. I can't even remember when the last death in the crowd was.

I hope the air races continue despite the awful events of Friday but I have my doubts.

Steve


----------



## Thorlifter (Sep 17, 2011)

Damn, another pilot and plane lost.


----------



## cactus42 (Sep 17, 2011)

So the question arises in the wake of the crash: are these old warplanes too old to be trusted to perform safely anymore....especially at spectator events? It depresses me to think about it, but I'm equally saddened by the needless loss of an historic aircraft. Is it simply the cost of keeping the older planes alive that we have to lose one from time to time, so millionaires (the ones who can afford it) can get their jollies flying a half-century plus old warbird at the edge of its performance envelope?


----------



## Tangopilot89 (Sep 17, 2011)

Just caught this on Sky News this morning and all I can say is what everyone else has said. Condolences to the families and friends of who were lost, and rest in peace those who were lost. A sad loss as well of such a great warbird.

Andy


----------



## Airframes (Sep 17, 2011)

Shocking and sad news, I'm stunned! My thoughts are with all those affected.


----------



## A4K (Sep 17, 2011)

stona said:


> Because F1 has done everything it can to make itself safer (...) Steve



The Red Bull Air Races (and I'm sure Reno, Nascar, etc) too. I'm guessing the 'third dimension' (ie, height) is the fulcrum point in their arguments, with no safe-guard against a freak occurence, as with the recent Reno incident.

Will watch developments here with interest.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

Switzerland banned all its motorsport racing and closed all its race circuits in the late60's/early 70's after a big crash at one of its tracks, I believe it was a sidecar race and the Fath-URS was invloved.

I hope they don't ban it perce, all the aircraft undergo above accepted levels of maintainance checks and airworthness inspections. But fate isn't always so easly tricked, remember the Titanic - suposedly unsinkable.., 
And then there's the problem of aging of metal alloys devoloping crystalinity - particularly the ECD which must be a problem for Planes Of Fame and its Mitsubishi Zero-sen's continued flight worthiness.

Most of the componants are refabricated anew or remade at massive costs in limited batches, giving highly skilled persons.companies jobs, in addition to, or when not making stuff for the current military/commercial aviation, it also means that there is/can/could be new repared or replacement parts for museums and warbird aviation groups too; so we can go and see exhibits in the future as they were, not as scrap.

Coincedently, who makes real 'heavy iron'/unlimeted racing aircraft nowerdays?; except for the uber tiny stunt plane racers like Su26, Cap21, Extra 360 etc... 
It was nice to see Rare Bear back up in blue, and the Jet Unlimetd race was fun close - there was even a Vampire/Spidercrab racing in there too, which did quite well once the pylon penalties were handed out.


----------



## tomo pauk (Sep 17, 2011)

Really sad news


----------



## ccheese (Sep 17, 2011)

Heard about this late yesterday. Another sad day for the warbird community. Good thoughts to those involved.... Wonder what happened ? It looks like he just drove it straight into the ground.

Charles


----------



## GrauGeist (Sep 17, 2011)

cactus42 said:


> So the question arises in the wake of the crash: are these old warplanes too old to be trusted to perform safely anymore....especially at spectator events? It depresses me to think about it, but I'm equally saddened by the needless loss of an historic aircraft. Is it simply the cost of keeping the older planes alive that we have to lose one from time to time, so millionaires (the ones who can afford it) can get their jollies flying a half-century plus old warbird at the edge of its performance envelope?


The answer to that is yes, the "old warplanes" are meticulously rebuilt, inspected and maintained...and that's just the flying/touring warplanes that are more often owned by groups than individuals (millionaires who get thier jollies...etc).

I would rather ride in a B-17 than a city bus since they have a far better safety record and civil aviation in general is far safer than operating a motor vehicle. There have been far more deaths at soccer matches than the air races (or air shows) and to restrict or ban them for the sake of an unfortunate and tragic mishap is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction.

My thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected...Jimmy Leeward and the Galloping Ghost will be missed


----------



## Messy1 (Sep 17, 2011)

Definitely a sad event. Terribly sorry for the loss of life.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

cactus42 said:


> So the question arises in the wake of the crash: are these old warplanes too old to be trusted to perform safely anymore....especially at spectator events? It depresses me to think about it, but I'm equally saddened by the needless loss of an historic aircraft. Is it simply the cost of keeping the older planes alive that we have to lose one from time to time, so millionaires (the ones who can afford it) can get their jollies flying a half-century plus old warbird at the edge of its performance envelope?


Cactus, for the record, most of the planes racing in the Gold Unlimiteds at Reno are hardly "original" and contain few if not any original parts. This aircraft was recently totally refurbished after being in storage for 20 years and was highly modified many years ago. Please do some research about these aircraft prior to making such comments....


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

cactus42 said:


> So the question arises in the wake of the crash: are these old warplanes too old to be trusted to perform safely anymore....especially at spectator events? It depresses me to think about it, but I'm equally saddened by the needless loss of an historic aircraft. Is it simply the cost of keeping the older planes alive that we have to lose one from time to time, so millionaires (the ones who can afford it) can get their jollies flying a half-century plus old warbird at the edge of its performance envelope?



Safer than the family sedan. If you spend a little time around some of these aircraft, you will see that they are better taken acre of and maintained than when they were in military service. Racing aircraft are highly modified from their original configuration almost to the point where the only thing still original is the data plate.

Millionaires getting their jollies? Not really. Some of them are, but a lot of these old airplanes are kept flying through foundations and museums where knowledgeable volunteers keep them flying with strict safety guidelines. 

Do you want to go to a museum and see tombstones, or do you want to see, hear, smell and feel the power? Static aircraft are not much of a draw and many aviation museums would dry up and close if they were grounded.


----------



## barney (Sep 17, 2011)

There are two views of the aircraft in trouble at msnbc in the slide show on the main page. 

The first photo is of the aircraft inverted and a double notch is seen in the port elevator where a trim tab is located. It looks to me like the tab has departed the airframe. 

In the second photo the aircraft is near vertical and the tail wheel is deployed. However, no sign of the main gear operating.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

The vertical photo is a doctored fake. The AP was totally duped on that shot. I did a photo analysis on that photo and it is an obvious fake, IMO.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

Reposting from my photo analysis from facebook



> There has been some debate about the photo provided by the AP of the Galloping Ghost "just seconds before the crash". I have to call BS. Let's take a look at the image as published.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## GrauGeist (Sep 17, 2011)

I agree Eric, and also note that the footage (and photos) of the Mustang going in were taken from the stands and photographer areas to the aircraft's starboard side...the runway/ramp area was to the aircraft's port side. Meaning that no personnel were out in that area - this "photo" we're seeing is a remarkably clear photo of the _port side_ of the aircraft. 

I call bullshit on that photo


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 17, 2011)

Here are two additional photos of the aircraft immediately before impact. Note how the prop is "stopped" and the tail wheel is down in both of these photos. I sincerely doubt that the photos in question were "doctored."

Moss


----------



## Ratsel (Sep 17, 2011)

Something happened to the pilot during the flight, no question about it.


----------



## rochie (Sep 17, 2011)

aside from the fact its the other side of the plane and they managed to take a perfect profile picture exactly 90 degrees side on and the lighting was just perfect as well, i am far from being an expert but i can see that !

and i trust Eric and Daves judgement on analysing the picture, so for me if they say its doctored then thats good enough


----------



## GrauGeist (Sep 17, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> Here is another photo of the aircraft immediately before impact. Note how the prop is "stopped" and the tail wheel is down in this photo as well. The photos in question were not "doctored."
> 
> Moss


This photo you posted may be accurate, since the angle (perspective) is correct. So is the shading and prop blur.

The photo we were discussing is not. The reflections in the spinner indicate a static aircraft with the reflections being along a horizontal line AND the angle the photograph was taken at would mean the photograph would have to have been taken DIRECTLY off the aircraft's port wing, meaning the photographer was either in an aircraft alongside or a high platform/tower...


----------



## barney (Sep 17, 2011)

evangilder said:


> The vertical photo is a doctored fake. The AP was totally duped on that shot. I did a photo analysis on that photo and it is an obvious fake, IMO.



What about the inverted photograph, also a fake?


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 17, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> The photo we were discussing is not. The reflections in the spinner indicate a static aircraft with the reflections being along a horizontal line AND the angle the photograph was taken at would mean the photograph would have to have been taken DIRECTLY off the aircraft's port wing, meaning the photographer was either in an aircraft alongside or a high platform/tower...



Just think about it for a split second. (It shouldn't even take that long.) If these photographs were indeed photoshopped, how did they know to: (1) drop the tail wheel AND (2) remove the pilot from view BEFORE any other photographs of the event were published?? _*Because the photographs in question were the very first.*_

It's no wonder how all those whacked out 9-11/UFO/Kennedy assasination conspiracy theories got going. Good grief.

Moss


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

I thought I could see a smudge just aft of missing tab with Mk1 eyeball, though that could image part of brain trying to make what it sees missing fit with a conciously known (pattern) and knowledge about aircraft... 
As for the tail wheel, if and IF the cooling sytem and/or condensor tank ruptured violently, any debris could've severed controls and the tail wheels system, then rotational G forces extended it...


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> Just think about it for a split second. (It shouldn't even take that long.) If these photographs were indeed photoshopped, how did they know to: (1) drop the tail wheel AND (2) remove the pilot from view BEFORE any other photographs of the event were published?? _*Because the photographs in question were the very first.*_
> 
> It's no wonder how all those whacked out 9-11/UFO/Kennedy assasination conspiracy theories got going. Good grief.
> 
> Bronc



Excuse me? Conspiracy theory? Are you out of your friggin mind? Did you LOOK at my analysis? Did you SEE the evidence? I am talking about one photo that was CLEARLY doctored. 

Think I don't know what I am talking about, and a paranoid conspiracy theorist? I have taken well over 100,000 photographs, film and digital. I have been published many times in national publications multiple times with both photographs and articles. I have worked on aircraft in museums and flown over 150 hours as the GIB shooting. I think I have a pretty good idea of what is and what is not doctored, bub.

I am talking about the vertical photo only here. I am not questioning the other photos, nor am I raising conjecture about what happened, nor the cause. Aviation has had it bad enough this year without some dickhead editing a photo and dubbing it "seconds before the crash" when it clearly wasn't.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> Just think about it for a split second. (It shouldn't even take that long.) If these photographs were indeed photoshopped, how did they know to: (1) drop the tail wheel AND (2) remove the pilot from view BEFORE any other photographs of the event were published?? _*Because the photographs in question were the very first.*_
> 
> It's no wonder how all those whacked out 9-11/UFO/Kennedy assasination conspiracy theories got going. Good grief.
> 
> Bronc



Dude - I think you better do some research and find out about the backgrounds on some of the folks around here before you start defecating brain matter from your facial modulation orifice.


----------



## model299 (Sep 17, 2011)

As questions about whether these aircraft should even be flying have been asked before, I must say that racing at these speeds is a very unforgiving undertaking. I mean, think about it. Remember the Pond Racer, or Tsunami? both were modern, built from scratch aircraft constructed of all new materials. Heck, Tsunami wasn't even racing when it met it's fate. John Sandburg was in the process of landing. 

I think age has very little to do with something like this.

RIP to all involved, and my condolences to family and friends.


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 17, 2011)

Three (3) different types of edge (photo-manipulation) analysis *fails to show* any, that is zero, alteration or photoshopping of the image. The Difference of Gaussians, Sobel and Prewitt compass analysis show sharp distinct edges which would not be the case with a photoshopped image. Furthermore, a digital mapping program reveals a smooth uniform image throughout. And just to be safe, Inversion analysis also *fails to detect* any alteration.

Sooo...with all due respect...unless the CIA/NSA altered this image, it's valid and unaltered.

Moss


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 17, 2011)

I would tend towards Eric's judgement on these things but I have seen a video of the incident which I highly doubt is doctored.

Let us just be thankful that the death toll was so low in this horrific incident and hope we don't see a similar one anytime soon.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

In the shot of he aircraft going straight down, what happened to the pilot???? Even if he was incapacitated or even dead, you are strapped into these aircraft in such a matter that a body or torso would ALWAYS be seen, especially from the side. I've sat and flown in many military type aircraft including a P-51 (just sat in it) and I can tell you once strapped in you cannot move much or remove your body from being viewed from the side!!! Explain that one genius!


----------



## model299 (Sep 17, 2011)

I just visited the AP site, and noticed the've pulled the photo in question from their collection on this incident. That leads me to believe they now know it was doctored as well.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

I was not questioning the inverted image, only the vertical. Secondly, trying to do that kind of analysis on the image at that size is worthless. There are *clear* pixellation differences when you run up to 200 and 300%. It's as clear as day. And exactly _where_ is the pilot? Why are all the control surfaces neutral when he would clearly be fighting the controls to get the aircraft under control again. Face it, the AP got duped, the MSM bought it hook line and sinker, and once again, the aviation community is left with even more legislation.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

Look again, at 300%, you can clearly see the pixellation, and just for the heck of it, I did a gaussian blur to eliminate the obvious pixellation. That would have helped...

Again look at the tail wheel area and the prop area. Clear evidence of tampering.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

Are AP supposed to be important or something?; its not AP Racing Ltd. 
Someone quickly made a killing out of selling those pictures to the media definately if ones of em's been pulled - send the federals in after the sick stnuC if it is true for doctoring. Before the media hide them/thier details, like as in the phone hacking scandles over here (which is just the tip of the media's 'little iceberg').

As Gnomey said earlier "...Let us just be thankful that the death toll was so low in this horrific incident and hope we don't see a similar one anytime soon."


----------



## Ratsel (Sep 17, 2011)

FLYBOYJ said:


> In the shot of he aircraft going straight down, what happened to the pilot???? Even if he was incapacitated or even dead, you are strapped into these aircraft in such a matter that a body or torso would ALWAYS be seen, especially from the side. I've sat and flown in many military type aircraft including a P-51 (just sat in it) and I can tell you once strapped in you cannot move much or remove your body from being viewed from the side!!! Explain that one genius!



Hello FLYBOYJ, 
perhaps as seen in this picture his head is only visable. 






Perhaps his head was slumped over in the other pictures. In some of the pictures I've seen you cannot see the pilot in the cockpit. maybe enough to push the stick foward a little?


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

The pilots head could be further back in the pit under the covered part of the canopy/hood, as they have a very much lowered 'roofline' and a semi reclined seat for high speed - no G-suit pressurisation on piston engined planes - he could be leaning forward for taxing take off purposes at that time before pulling his straps in once in the settled in the air prior to or during forming up behind the Pace Plane. 
Search for pics of Dayglo Red's or Vodoo's cockpit, they have the same cockpit hoods and similar upper decking alterations.


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 17, 2011)

Well, the pilot appears to be missing in multiple photos from different angles. See below. And this fact supports, rather than refutes, that the picture in question is a non-altered image. 

Just think for a moment--just a split second--about the tail wheel. 

(1) If the tail wheel was photoshopped on (added) to the photo in question *it would not appear* in multiple videos and multiple photos that are not in question. Remember, the image [in question] was the very first publicized. Thus, it is not reasonable (or rational) to believe that someone would photoshop on a very strangely extended tail wheel AND THEN have every other photographer who took a picture of the same airplane do the very same thing.

(2) The skeptics theory holds that the vertical image was photoshopped from a horizontal picture of the airplane sitting parked. Look at the tire. The tire in the photo shows no evidence of compression--the weight of the tail of the airplane is not resting on the tire. Look at the picture at bottom. See how the tire is compressed?? _It is not rational to believe that someone would take the time to seemlessly photoshop in a non-compressed tire._ (How would someone get a picture of a non-compressed, extended tail wheel from a parked P-51 by the way??)

(3) Five (5) separate photo-manipulation analysis programs fail to detect ANY alterations to the image.

(4) On the other hand, look at the sky in the Difference of Gaussians, Sobel Analysis and Prewitt, not to mention, the Digital mapping and Inversion images. Note how both backgrounds (the sky) matches seemlessly between the two? It is readily apparent that both images were taken within a second of each other and from the same camera.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

razor1uk said:


> The pilots head could be further back in the pit under the covered part of the canopy/hood, as they have a very much lowered 'roofline' and a semi reclined seat for high speed - no G-suit pressurisation on piston engined planes - he could be leaning forward for taxing take off purposes at that time before pulling his straps in once in the settled in the air prior to or during forming up behind the Pace Plane.
> Search for pics of Dayglo Red's or Vodoo's cockpit, they have the same cockpit hoods and similar upper decking alterations.


Sorry friend, not the case. Have you ever sat in a stock or modified P-51? I have and there is absolutely NO room for your head to move. Its a tight fit and unless a guillotine found its way into the cockpit, you are going to see something in that cockpit if some one is strapped in.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> Well, the pilot appears to be missing in multiple photos from different angles. See below. And this fact supports, rather than refutes, that the picture in question is a non-altered image.
> 
> Just think for a moment--just a split second--about the tail wheel.
> 
> ...



You're entitled to your opinion pal, I believe the photo was altered in haste to put something on the Internet that looked spectacular. I have been to the races from 2007 - 2010 and was actually a crew chief on a 2nd place aircraft in the jet class. I've worked on and sat in many of these warbirds and can tell you the fact that the pilot's torso and head is void in some of these pics raise great question in my mind. As far as the tire being compressed? I can tell you that depending on the tire, pressure rating and what the pilot and/ or crew chief whats to put into the tires, you may not see any compression when the aircraft is parked.

At a minimum those pics, if real were at least touched up. Again you're entitled to your opinion but in the future please refrain from making snide remarks about some of the members here who actually participate in these events and work on aircraft INCLUDING WARBIRDS for a living.


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 17, 2011)

Because the photograph of the exact same airplane taken before the crash (below) is conclusive evidence that regardless of the psi in the tail wheel tire, the tire clearly shows compression while on the ground. There is a flat spot of compression that appears while resting on the ground that does not appear while in the air...or in the photogragh in question.

Moss


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

You can think what you want, but the evidence points to tampering. I never said a tail wheel was added. I said that it looked like the main wheels were removed from a photo of the aircraft parked. There are many folks who would like nothing more than to ground the warbirds forever, and I wouldn't put it past that crowd to try and pull a fast one.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

You can think what you want, but the evidence points to tampering. I never said a tail wheel was added. I said that it looked like the main wheels were removed from a photo of the aircraft parked. There are many folks who would like nothing more than to ground the warbirds forever, and I wouldn't put it past that crowd to try and pull a fast one. That inverted photo that is used shows no pixellation that the vertical shot shows. Case in point, the photos below are screen grabs at 400%! I don't see the edge pixellation.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> Because the photograph of the exact same airplane taken before the crash (below) is conclusive evidence that regardless of the psi in the tail wheel tire, the tire clearly shows compression while on the ground. There is a flat spot of compression that appears while resting on the ground that does not appear while in the air...or in the photogragh in question.
> 
> Moss



The aircraft is in motion, the rubber and components of the tire will move, displace and heat up, a natural occurrence. Tell me Moss, how many aircraft tires have you serviced?


----------



## evangilder (Sep 17, 2011)

Ambient temperature can also make a difference in tire pressures. 

Okay, here is one for you that I did in about 15 minutes. Pretty convincing photo, eh? These are actually 2 photos taken 3 years apart with 2 different cameras with different megapixels. Background erase from the Mustang and then lay it down right over the clouds.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

Flyboy, I am afraid the only military pane I have sat in, was an F-111 at RAF/USAAF Upper Heyford, at its closing air fate/display in 92' - and not being in the US, cannot get the chance to sit in a stock 51, let alone a souped up one - I was only thinking aloud as I know there's less head room compared to a normal bubble top stang.

As for pixelisation - are there corresponding photo's taken of similar angles, resolutions that are from a normal Non-digital camera? This could explain some pixelation differences depending in lighting, background shadings variations perhaps. But not all of them.

I feel that some pictures could've been stupidly doctored or tweeked to have some 'nice shots' required by all mainstream media hacks editors because its expected to have 'that dramatic/iconic shot'; so those unscruplous ones can pat themselves on the back and say this scoop is ours - before they hack some victims phone and have another line of coke.

Sorry evanglider, I don't mean you and your aviation media collegues - more the sell sell brigade of newpapers...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

razor1uk said:


> Flyboy, I am afraid the only military pane I have sat in, was an F-111 at RAF/USAAF Upper Heyford, at its closing air fate/display in 92' - and not being in the US, cannot get the chance to sit in a stock 51, let alone a souped up one - I was only thinking aloud as I know there's less head room compared to a normal bubble top stang.


No worries - I can also add that these aircraft have intertia reel restraints on the seat belts that lock you into the seat when the aircraft is loaded up. That should have pinned the pilot into the seat where either his head or torso was visible.

Agree about your "nice shots" comment and as we speak there's already rumblings about banning air racing. These turds just add fuel to the fire.


----------



## barney (Sep 17, 2011)

Investigation into Air Races crash continues; 3 confirmed dead | TheUnion.com

Tim O'Brien, credited with both photographs, was on assignment for the Grassy Valley, Ca. paper and was covering the Reno event. So, I assume the photographs on the newspaper's website are as close to the originals as we are going to get.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

Thanks barney!


----------



## GrauGeist (Sep 17, 2011)

By the way, good to see you're safe, Joe


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 17, 2011)

Also, theres the possible pixelisation problem concerning the coolant vapour over pressure blow off when looking at rear fusalage shots. 

As well as what sorts of cameras ( the specs of them) they used, if say a cheaper digital camera with poor Megapixel resolution/detailing/soft-hard~ware - might the camera make it look not so life like. 
In some of the inverted pics, next to the 'missing tab', theres a crinkled/dented/contrasting area of different lighting about 3 - 6 inches further along the trailing edge towards that elevators tip.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2011)

GrauGeist said:


> By the way, good to see you're safe, Joe


Thnx


----------



## Hotntot (Sep 18, 2011)

Take a look at this footage from the other side of the airfield. The angle of the plane looks to be shallower in this footage than that shown in the Tim O'brien vertical still. It also appears to be banked over slightly to port side during decent. The vertical picture shows the wings to be level with the underside of the port wing clearly visible. And one question I have is - if both images were taken by the same photographer, would he be able to get a photograph of it inverted from the angle it's been taken and then a second one directly from port side? 

Anyone with any answers/comments?



_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaWB_7RGTQ4_


*Pic 1 *showing the Mustang inverted, flying towards camera.





*Pic 2* close up.





*Fooage stills:*


*Pic3*





*Pic4*





*Pic5*





*Pic6*





*Pic7*


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 18, 2011)

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/reno-unlimited-gold-crash-30316.html#post821619


----------



## Njaco (Sep 18, 2011)

Who cares?! People were killed and an airplane was lost. Why the persistant effort to prove a pic is real? Eric and Joe both have given reasons for their doubts and moved on - why can't everyone else? Its a tragedy, especially with us that love warbirds. Lets hope everyone injured recovers and that the families that have lost loved ones can be at peace.

Its one picture. Does it really matter?


----------



## evangilder (Sep 18, 2011)

It does matter actually, Chris. If someone is sending doctored photos to the press, they are likely to be looked at by the investigators as well. It is a huge disservice to have evidence in an investigation that is tainted. What the families of the dead and injured, and the aviation community needs is the truth, and if doctored images are used to report and investigate, they won't get it. I am not a conspiracy nut, just someone who wants to see truth prevail.


----------



## Njaco (Sep 18, 2011)

No, I understand that Eric and 'm sorry if my post seemed callous but it just irked me that some were missing the bigger 'picture' here.

BTW, you know how I doctor pics and I agree with your analysis - especially with the pixelation around the pic. Somethin I just can't remove sometimes while doin those pics. And it is indicative of photoshop.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 18, 2011)

Damn this sucks. Saw this on the news here in Germany. My condolences to those effected. 

Hey Joe, why did you not take part in it this year?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 18, 2011)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Hey Joe, why did you not take part in it this year?



I'll pm you or post in the Admin section


----------



## Ratsel (Sep 18, 2011)

Not sure how relevant this is, but CNN had an Aviation expert on who insists that this was a high speed stall. Are there any indications of that from photos or limited video available? Could that cause an elevator to fail? Or trim tab to come off? Again, not sure how relevant, but when I fly my RC models, HS stalls can be pretty violent.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 18, 2011)

Ratsel said:


> Not sure how relevant this is, but CNN had an Aviation expert on who insists that this was a high speed stall. Are there any indications of that from photos or limited video available? Could that cause an elevator to fail? Or trim tab to come off? Again, not sure how relevant, but when I fly my RC models, HS stalls can be pretty violent.



I doubt it. When the accident happened the aircraft just came out of pylon 7. At that point there is a straight away in front of the grandstand area and then another curve comes up. Unless he really loaded up the aircraft at pylon 7 I doubt this was the case. These guys fly this course several times prior to heat races and usually have a predetermined "line" they follow to get the fastest time out of their aircraft, and they rarely deviate from it. I don't know who this so-called "expert" is or what his background is, but I doubt he's ever been involved with the races. The media is probably better served to interview pilots who have flown at Stead (Reno) for a proper perspective.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 18, 2011)

Probably one of the aviation "experts" that call a pitot tube a machine gun. I really have seen that happen.


----------



## Ratsel (Sep 18, 2011)

Wow... guess they should get ex-military or alike for expert consoltation. 

FLYBOYJ, thanks for the input.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 18, 2011)

I think they try to rush a story out and a lot of "experts" come out of the woodwork. Unfortunately, they don't have time to vet these 'experts'. I agree with Joe, they should talk to people that have flown those pylons.


----------



## wheelsup_cavu (Sep 19, 2011)

I read on another forum that there may be video from inside the cockpit ??
Tragedy at the Reno Air Races - SimHQ Forums
Definitely not a video I would want to watch but I hope if it does exist it helps them determine the cause of the accident.


Wheels


----------



## N4521U (Sep 19, 2011)

evangilder said:


> Probably one of the aviation "experts" that call a pitot tube a machine gun. I really have seen that happen.



Here in Australia I saw one report he was doing "acrobatics". Duh


----------



## eddie_brunette (Sep 19, 2011)

RIP, my condolences to all the family and friend involved.


----------



## Lucky13 (Sep 19, 2011)

.........speechless.........


----------



## Gixxerman (Sep 19, 2011)

Ghastly accident, appalling for all affected involved.
Always a tragedy when this sort of thing happens.
My thoughts to those hurt and their families and the families of those killed.


----------



## Mustang nut (Sep 19, 2011)

Tragic news condolences to all the bereaved.


----------



## Thorlifter (Sep 19, 2011)

Joe, with an accident like this, is there a chance that they will learn the actual cause or will it all be "best guess"?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 19, 2011)

Thorlifter said:


> Joe, with an accident like this, is there a chance that they will learn the actual cause or will it all be "best guess"?


Oh I think they'll figure it out, especially now that they found the camera that is placed in the cockpit. From what I seen during my time at Reno I seen pilots use small cameras pointed at the windscreen so after each race they can determine how they ran their lines. I also seen a second camera pointed at the instrument panel. I don't know what was set up on this aircraft but if any data is able to be gathered. I'm sure the NTSB will find out the cause. For the most part, NTSB accident investigators are very good at their jobs.


----------



## johnbr (Sep 19, 2011)

For those ho what to read a good story on the Ghost.There is one in the January 2011 of Aeroplanemonthly .This has not been a good year at air shows and the air races.Here it is on a good day it was one great looking plane.


----------



## jimh (Sep 19, 2011)

This is an interesting read from the mindset of someone, not this person specifically, defending this case. Its just the perspective of an aviation attorney, but insightful. The Beasley Firm was founded and continues to be run by a warbird operator. Whatever happens, Reno as we knew it is forever over. Bottom line is 10 people lost thier lives and that should be foremost in our thoughts. 

Airplane Crash Liability and the Reno National Championship Air Races

jim


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 20, 2011)

jimh said:


> This is an interesting read from the mindset of someone, not this person specifically, defending this case. Its just the perspective of an aviation attorney, but insightful. The Beasley Firm was founded and continues to be run by a warbird operator. Whatever happens, Reno as we knew it is forever over. Bottom line is 10 people lost thier lives and that should be foremost in our thoughts.
> 
> Airplane Crash Liability and the Reno National Championship Air Races
> 
> jim



Great read Jim but a few comments...

This attorney quotes 43.13 but neglects to mention the fact that these aircraft carry no or provisional Type Certificates, therefore the owner operator must develop a maintenance program and present it to the FAA for approval. So where does the liability lie if the aircraft are maintained per their approved program and then something like this happens?

I'm a hopeless optimist. I believe RARA will get through this. Pylon 7 may be moved a bit but had this accident happened 10 seconds sooner or later this crash would have been front page news for 15 minutes and the races would have carried on.


----------



## jimh (Sep 20, 2011)

Under the definition of an experimental aircraft, air racing is listed, 21.191. Deep down this was still a Mustang. The only real change of note was the elimination of the scoop for the boil off system. Structurally the Mustang is painfully simple and strong. Yes it had clipped wings and the elevators tips were shortened but its basically a wing, engine and tail mounted to 4 longerons. That said there is no reason to expect more than the program dictated by the North American manuals 25hr, 50hr, 100hr, which would comply with 21.193 of the maintenance requirements. Obviously the racing Mustangs are a special case, they are subjected to a much more rigorous maintenance schedule and are constantly being looked at and tweaked, but that is by the crew, not a scheduled program mandated by the FAA. They also have to pass a Tech inspection by the powers that be at Reno and demonstrate both pilot ability and airframe integrity.

The precedent here is the "Voodoo incident", the other known elevator trim tab departure which resulted in Bob Hannah blacking out after a 10g acceleration, fortunately he survived and the lesson learned. Should there have been an AD? probably...but how many Mustang owners go out and run up to and over 400mph? Original Mustang trim tabs were made of bakelite, I don't know what these guys are using and it was mentioned by a crew member on another board that the Ghost's left elevator trim tab was non functional and faired into the trailing edge. Several Rudder trim tabs have been lost over the years without dire consequences which lead a couple racers to eliminate it altogether. It will come out in the end, we just have to patiently wait.

I've been following Reno since I was a little kid...I'd hate to see it end...it will be along time before the dust settles. Aside from the souls we lost there are alot of scars, both physical and mental resulting from this accident. 

jim


----------



## jimh (Sep 20, 2011)

johnbr said:


> For those ho what to read a good story on the Ghost.There is one in the January 2011 of Aeroplanemonthly .This has not been a good year at air shows and the air races.Here it is on a good day it was one great looking plane.




she was a beauty, and Jimmy was justifiably proud of her.


----------



## seesul (Sep 20, 2011)

Missing elevator trim tab before the crash Last photo of Galloping Ghost shows left elevator trim tab trouble - Reno Aviation | Examiner.com


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 20, 2011)

jimh said:


> Under the definition of an experimental aircraft, air racing is listed, 21.191. Deep down this was still a Mustang. The only real change of note was the elimination of the scoop for the boil off system. Structurally the Mustang is painfully simple and strong. Yes it had clipped wings and the elevators tips were shortened but its basically a wing, engine and tail mounted to 4 longerons. That said there is no reason to expect more than the program dictated by the North American manuals 25hr, 50hr, 100hr, which would comply with 21.193 of the maintenance requirements.


And that would be the case in the FAA "APPROVED" maintenance program. Sure, the general maintenance of the aircraft would be dictated by the manufacturer as applicable (certainly you're not going to do any maintenance on the armament system because more than likely it won't be there!) but in the end the FAA may add to the general requirement and ultimately APPROVE that program. In my mind they (The FAA) should share the responsibility should a maintenance action on such an aircraft turns out to be inadequate or misses something that may care a catastrophic failure.


jimh said:


> Obviously the racing Mustangs are a special case, they are subjected to a much more rigorous maintenance schedule and are constantly being looked at and tweaked, but that is by the crew, not a scheduled program mandated by the FAA. They also have to pass a Tech inspection by the powers that be at Reno and demonstrate both pilot ability and airframe integrity.


First part of your comment, probably as the Mustang operators in the Unlimiteds are spending most of the year tweaking and modifying their aircraft. As far as the Tech Inspection, I was one last year in my class and I can tell you that for the most part you're only looking for the obvious and of course ensuring all the paperwork is in place. 


jimh said:


> The precedent here is the "Voodoo incident", the other known elevator trim tab departure which resulted in Bob Hannah blacking out after a 10g acceleration, fortunately he survived and the lesson learned. Should there have been an AD? probably...but how many Mustang owners go out and run up to and over 400mph? Original Mustang trim tabs were made of bakelite, I don't know what these guys are using and it was mentioned by a crew member on another board that the Ghost's left elevator trim tab was non functional and faired into the trailing edge. Several Rudder trim tabs have been lost over the years without dire consequences which lead a couple racers to eliminate it altogether. It will come out in the end, we just have to patiently wait.


I doubt the FAA will issue an AD on an experimental aircraft over several remote incidences over the course of several years (time, money and interest). that caused little or no incident (except as noted). What should have been issued IMO was a SAIB on racing Mustangs only, and that the Mustang racing community could have induced this on their own without initial FAA intervention, but it would have been a matter of these operators to collectively recognize that they may have a problem and ensure that problem is corrected on their individual aircraft before that go race.


jimh said:


> I've been following Reno since I was a little kid...I'd hate to see it end...it will be along time before the dust settles. Aside from the souls we lost there are alot of scars, both physical and mental resulting from this accident.
> 
> jim


Me too. Several years ago I fulfilled a life long dream and actually participated in the races as a crew chief. I agree about the scars, I still hurt over the 2007 loss of Brad Morehouse who I was supposed to work for that weekend. I've had ups and downs at Reno, I hope we all can climb out of this down.


----------



## jimh (Sep 24, 2011)

I won't beat this into the ground but here is a video leading up to and just after the departure from the course. After the pitch up Jimmy is no longer visible in the cockpit and the tailwheel is extended. Onboard telemetry has been unofficially released with a spike at 22.6g's sliding back to 11g's. anyway, it's a new perspective that will hopefully dispell the fake photo question. this video does not show impact...which is good. 

jim


----------



## ww2restorer (Sep 24, 2011)

Having returned home from Reno and reading this trash, thought I would set some things straight.Yes I am involved and all week have been working with FAA, NSTB RARA. I had worked with Jimmy on his aircraft, as an engineer for the cooling system.What I can tell you within the limits of the investigation is A) The photo's are genuine, those of you that think they are photo shopped, you were not at reno when the photographers handed over there cameria's crying because they knew what photos they had captured. B) the tail wheel, is extended because the g loading overtook the hydraulic lock pressure forcing the gear out.The mains have a mechanical lock that held up through the G's.The G loadings as quoted above spiked at 22.6g's and was substained for a few seconds at 11 g's. C) the pilot (RIP Jimmy) three events happened here, he is at high probablity unconcious due to the 22.6 g loading, even the top military pilots cannot substain this.The second event is that looking at the inverted photo you can clearly see his silver/white helmet forward in the cockpit, near the glearsheild. Under the G loading his seat harness probably broke or was unlocked (many pilots unlocked there harness so the could move better in the cockpit to see other aircraft).Finally if any of you have ever been inside the office of a P51, the control stick sits up about 8 to 10 inch above the legs, with the G loads it is possible that the Pilot may have been impaled on the stick, supporting the photos of why the controls all appear to be neutral.

[Remainder of this post has been deleted - Restorer, your post was informative, but your emotions associated with this most tragic event does not warrant a first post which insults moderators and senior forum members. We wish you well in your grieving and offer sincere condolences to those affected by this uncommon accident.]


----------



## johnbr (Sep 24, 2011)

Thanks for the info on this very sad event.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 24, 2011)

Indeed it is, continued thought with and for all involved in this tragic mishap.


----------



## Mustang nut (Sep 24, 2011)

ww2restorer said:


> Having returned home from Reno and reading this trash, thought I would set some things straight.Yes I am involved and all week have been working with FAA, NSTB RARA. I had worked with Jimmy on his aircraft, as an engineer for the cooling system.What I can tell you within the limits of the investigation is A) The photo's are genuine, those of you that think they are photo shopped, you were not at reno when the photographers handed over there cameria's crying because they knew what photos they had captured. B) the tail wheel, is extended because the g loading overtook the hydraulic lock pressure forcing the gear out.The mains have a mechanical lock that held up through the G's.The G loadings as quoted above spiked at 22.6g's and was substained for a few seconds at 11 g's. C) the pilot (RIP Jimmy) three events happened here, he is at high probablity unconcious due to the 22.6 g loading, even the top military pilots cannot substain this.The second event is that looking at the inverted photo you can clearly see his silver/white helmet forward in the cockpit, near the glearsheild. Under the G loading his seat harness probably broke or was unlocked (many pilots unlocked there harness so the could move better in the cockpit to see other aircraft).Finally if any of you have ever been inside the office of a P51, the control stick sits up about 8 to 10 inch above the legs, with the G loads it is possible that the Pilot may have been impaled on the stick, supporting the photos of why the controls all appear to be neutral.
> 
> [Remainder of this post has been deleted - Restorer, your post was informative, but your emotions associated with this most tragic event does not warrant a first post which insults moderators and senior forum members. We wish you well in your grieving and offer sincere condolences to those affected by this uncommon accident.]



I read this post before it was edited, the parts deleted were in my opinion valid, and an obvious product at anger at obvious ignorance of the facts. Moderators and senior members frequently make barbed comments against obvious ignorance. I sugest you re instate the post in its original form as the comments were valid and extremely thought provoking. For my part I had many thoughts and read many posts and articles on this subject but the figure of 22.6G changes everything. May the poor guy and other victims of the accident rest in eternal peace without unseemly points scoring. Let the post stand in its original form and then let it be. TY WW2 restorer for a valuble and informed insight.

To give such an obviously well informed poster, even if it is his first post a ban and an insulting and derogatory signature picture reflects very badly on the moderators and senior members the edit was supposed to be protecting, it is quite simply disgraceful. I am in UK and have no connection with the USA racing scene but I Imagine it is a very close community, I suggest strongly Flyboy is consulted on this matter, his reputation in his community could be damaged.


----------



## Mosshorn (Sep 24, 2011)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Dude - I think you better do some research and find out about the backgrounds on some of the folks around here before you start defecating brain matter from your facial modulation orifice.



FLYBOYJ consistently uses inappropriate language and name calling in his posts, and he's never called on it because he is a moderator. This is unacceptable. Moderators should NEVER be allowed, much less sanctioned, to engage in rude behavior that would get a regular member banned immediately.

So in this case, in post after post, one moderator posited a patently absurd conspiracy theory, another moderator rushed to his defense with several rude and insulting posts, and finally a third moderator asked, "Why are you spending so much time trying to prove that the images are real?" The underlying question of: Why are two moderators going out of their way to libel a professional newspaper photographer having not even been even considered by_ any of the moderators...._

Did FLYBOYJ apologize for his rude and insulting remarks? No. Do I expect that he will? No. Will I be banned for this post? Probably.

Moss


----------



## MikeGazdik (Sep 24, 2011)

I don't post often, I check in to read things posted by others frequently. There is more I can learn here than I can usually contribute, so thats good with me.

I think all maybe can use my post here as a neutral observer, if you will. I don't know the entire history of others that post, or many of thier backgrounds.

What I plainly see here are passionate people, speaking about that which they love. Many are simply overwhelmed with what happened. Obviously many of the posters are deeply, deeply connected with the events at Reno, and the sport of air racing. Some obviously connected with the pilot. 

In any argument, when passion is involved, things are often said that are regretted.

I suggest all involve step back and relax if they have to, before posting. If something angers you, dont post a response until you have time to cool down and realy think about what you want or need to say.

The amount of knowledge on this board is incredible, and I would hate to see a tragic event such as this cause people to leave or be forced out. 

Eventually, what happened will be known. Some hypothesis will be wrong, others will be correct. Thats par for the course in any investigation.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 24, 2011)

Sage words...


----------



## evangilder (Sep 25, 2011)

Patently absurd conspiracy theory? I have analyzed the photos and stand by my original assertion. It does not change the fact that several people are dead and the event was tragic. The aviation community and the families of the dead deserve the truth. Libeling professional press photographer? Hardly! I am calling BS on ONE photo that shows evidence of doctoring. You can disagree if you like but you are hardly in a position to judge others on their choice of words when you have referred to me as "libelous", "absurd conspiracy theorist" among other things. Disagree if you like, but this might be the time to just drop it. I have my beliefs, you have yours. We can leave it at that.


----------



## Readie (Sep 25, 2011)

Fancy all this name calling at such a tragic time. It does look good chaps....
John


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 25, 2011)

Any further posts where emotional rants or insults are levied at moderators or members will result in the guilty party taking some time at the beach.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 25, 2011)

Mosshorn said:


> FLYBOYJ consistently uses inappropriate language and name calling in his posts, and he's never called on it because he is a moderator. This is unacceptable. Moderators should NEVER be allowed, much less sanctioned, to engage in rude behavior that would get a regular member banned immediately.
> 
> So in this case, in post after post, one moderator posited a patently absurd conspiracy theory, another moderator rushed to his defense with several rude and insulting posts, and finally a third moderator asked, "Why are you spending so much time trying to prove that the images are real?" The underlying question of: Why are two moderators going out of their way to libel a professional newspaper photographer having not even been even considered by_ any of the moderators...._
> 
> ...


Not Probably, definitely


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 25, 2011)

I agree with one of the above posters. We all very passionate about the subject of aviation and it is easy for tempers to flare from time to time. I am sure that most members would agree on that, and in the end we are all friends who share the same passion for aviation. 

I too would recommend that everyone take a step back and try and relax (I know I should do this from time to time as well, I am as passionate about things as everyone is, and sometimes get aggravated to the say the least...). Lets not let things like this ruin this forum or the relationships that some of us have. 

I would also suggest that if people have problems with one another, use the PM function. Problems can be aired out, and it always is better than airing it out in public. Also do not flame and insult other members of the forum (that includes moderators, admin, senior members and new members), it is not tolerated. Yes we moderators sometimes get heated as well and say things that are inappropriate. We are human as well and sometimes our emotions get the better of us. We however will always stand together (especially in public, I think you can understand that). We have a section where we can speak freely amongst each other that is not viewable by the forum membership. We discuss, critic and tell each other what is good and what is not good in our own behavior. We have from time to time, even removed moderating staff because of actions detrimental to the forum. 

In short, if you have a problem with a moderator bring it to his or her attention in a PM and things can be worked out. Don't air it out in public. As stated above that goes for any forum member when you have a problem with them as well.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 25, 2011)

Mosshorn had the right to remain silent. But he did not have the ability.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 25, 2011)

Mustang nut said:


> I am in UK and have no connection with the USA racing scene but I Imagine it is a very close community, I suggest strongly Flyboy is consulted on this matter, his reputation in his community could be damaged.


I did not know or see the rest of this post so I don't know what was said, but with that if one of the other moderators had a beef with him, so be it.


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 25, 2011)

It must be that time of year, Winters coming and the brooding builds, why are people getting so agitated and contining to rub each other the wrong way, in This thread. I have noticed similar heating of other forums around the net...

It does equal disrespect dishonour to all invoilved, irrepsective of their 'sides'/opinions, even more so towards the reason and being of this topic,while ignoring the rememberance of those injured, maimed mentally /or phsyically and those whom perished.

I'd say I am truely dis-gusted at the flaming and counter flaming still ongoing from those conducting it, within this community, I am beggining to lose respect for some members.


----------



## GregP (Sep 25, 2011)

I am moved by Mr. van Gilder’s comments on the picture of the Galloping Ghost diving almost vertically. It matches almost exactly other pictures from the starboard side. The pic in question, if genuine, was obviously taken from the pit area, probably near the corner pit nearest the impact point, accounting for the pic being from the port side.

Pixelation issues aside, the remarks about the background reflected in the spinner give me pause. If the spinner were a flat plate, Mr. van Gilder’s remarks would be spot on. But the spinner is a shiny cone-shape. Not quite a pointy cone but rounded off at the front in the classic P-51 spinner shape.

Regardless of the shape of the background, the image you get off a shiny spinner will be along the axis of reflection of the spinner. Once you reach just shy of 45° angle from the spinner surface-to-center, the image is coming from 90° away. Even if the plane is diving vertically into the ground (almost the case here), the image will reflect along the axis of the spinner’s outside curve.

This is very simple to demonstrate. Go get a nice shiny spinner at any Hobby Shop and try it.

Mr. van Gilder may or may not be correct in his assertion that the pic is photoshopped. I respect his assertion while disagreeing with it and will not argue or discuss that point in this post. I just think the reflection cannot have been a horizontal line across the spinner, even if the aircraft really IS vertical, since the shiny surface is curved in only one direction … toward the spinner end point center. We’ve all seen the funhouse mirrors in which you can see yourself as tall and skinny or short and fat. The only thing that counts is the angle of the reflecting surface to the observing eye. In the case of a spinner, the reflection can be no other shape than along the reflection surface of the cone. 

Go get one and try it!

As for Mr. van Gilder, I really like his pictures and have for some time now. Keep it up EVG! If Mr. van Gilder was at Reno, maybe he has some pics of his own? 

I didn’t get my own camera up to catch it because I was too busy watching the event itself. I was in section 3 near the bottom and at one point, the Ghost was aimed directly at us all. Needless to say, we all got a big adrenaline shot. By the time I would have been able to raise my camera, acquire, focus and shoot, the event would have been over.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 25, 2011)

I fully respect your disagreement with my point, and I will try to find a similarly shaped object. I will say that I have a few members of the aviation press looking at the same things I am.

I was not at Reno, and in light of what happened this year, I am glad I wasn't. That is a photo I never want to get, ever.


----------



## GregP (Sep 25, 2011)

Hi Mr. van Gilder,

The racing was very good right up until the Galloping Ghost crash. The planes were performing and running about as expected. I am somewhat glad I wasn’t taking pics at the time because I saw the entire sequence live in real speed. Not being the sensational type of person who watches races for a crash, I did not and do not need pics of the aftermath (although I saw it in person), but am very interested in the events leading up to the emergency.

I am a volunteer at Chino Planes of Fame and spoke with Steve Hinton yesterday when he was able to be between phone calls. He thinks the tailwheel uplock failure precipitated the event (it is possible the tailwheel came down in the Valley of Speed) and, when I look at the inverted pic, I think I see that the entire trim tab did not fail. To me it looks like the inner part of the trim tab failed, from the pivot point up to the trim tab pushrod. I think the rightmost part of the trim tab, from the pushrod to the left pivot is still on the elevator.

In any case, we know the outcome and I hope we find out EXACTLY what happened so we can inspect for it in the future. I see people saying these aircraft are too old to fly but, as a warbird restoration person and as a member of the team restoring America’s first jet, a Bell YP-59A Airacomet, I very strongly disagree. If we find anything not right on the Airacomet, we replace it or fix it. When we get done, it should be as good or better than new. I think better because we did things such as installing a fire system in the engine bays that was never installed in the originals and adding firewalls that were never there to start with. In fact, there were lightening holes in the engine bays and fire in one side was passed easily to the other side! We corrected that since we want it to be SAFE. We spent over a year just fitting an emergency canopy release for safety’s sake.

Most warbird owners, as you know being who you are, lavish care on these babies, and they are usually in GREAT shape. Not always, but the people who are “sloppy” with warbirds don’t race them and they quickly go unairworthy. If they can’t afford maintenance, they surely can’t afford to go to Reno and race.

Meanwhile, keep up the great pics! If you get to Chino on a Saturday, ask for Greg in the restoration hangar. I’d love to meet you and show you around personally, even if you have been there before.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 25, 2011)

Very nice, Greg! What an offer!


----------



## evangilder (Sep 25, 2011)

Hey Greg, I am in agreement that the "old" aircraft still flying today are likely better cared for than when they were used operationally. I know that something catastrophic happened on Galloping Ghost and it precipitated the accident. I have heard a number of things speculated as to the cause and I am more prone to wait and see what the NTSB comes up with. 

I would be very interested in seeing how the P-59 is coming along and I know that the folks at the POF don't cut any corners and do it right. I haven't been out there in a while, and my schedule has been hectic lately with shoots and family. But I do plan on getting down there to spend some quality time exploring the museum. I'll keep you posted as to when.


----------



## WJPearce (Sep 26, 2011)

I was there, I watched it happen. Some years back I met the photographer who took the picture and his brother. I know some of their involvement with several airshows over the years and I saw other photos, while still in the camera, from other photographers less than an hour after the crash which show the same thing, albeit not as clear or sharp. All of us in the pits had a similar view (west of impact).

I saw that photo about 4 hours after the crash on Yahoo news I believe. To me, that is not much time to Photoshop a photo, decide to ruin your career and credibility, and submit it to the wire. I don't think many knew about the tail wheel being down or Leeward not being visible at that point. 

Here is the photographer, Tim O'Brien, in his own words (please watch till the end): 
_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpSqNtbNq7M_

I believe the photo is real. It may have been sharpened or had the contrast adjusted etc, but I do not think it was static shot overlaid in the sky. 

Maybe the best way to get to the bottom of this is to ask Tim O'Brien what he did to the photo. I don't have his contact info but he runs the Nevada County Airport AirFest air show and probably can be reached through that site, which he also runs. Nevada County AirFest 

Garrett Woodman took the other two widely circulated photos from the stands (east of impact).

WJPearce


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 26, 2011)

Mr. Pearce;

Thank you for your input regarding this “hot” subject on this forum. As an eyewitness to this accident as well as knowing the photographer who took this photo, you probably could speak on this subject matter with more authority than any one on this forum.

The initial photo I saw was posted by Associated Press (AP) and to me it looked very fake. I’ve consulted with some of my fellow pilot friends, some who have flown in the military and who have been to Reno and they shared the same opinion, but again this is my personal opinion. I am not a photographer and don’t claim to be one, just going by what I seen in the initial AP photo. I believe the photographer who you speak about is probably everything you say about him, but IMO, I wouldn’t put it past and organization like AP to “play” with a photo like this, again my opinion.

GregP – appreciate your input on all this and your very gracious invitation to Eric – a good friend and an excellent photographer.

To everyone else – this thread got sideways very quickly because one individual choose to become insultive toward one of our Mods who also has and extensive background in aerial photography. It’s one thing to disagree and passionately argue your point (something that is encouraged in this forum) but it’s another thing to come off like a d!ck straight out of the chute and that will not be tolerated here.

I appreciate the way GregP and Mr. Pearce presented their perspective on this subject, but at the same time I still stand by my personal opinions as well as my comments to certain individuals who engaged their mouths prior to rebooting their brains. My reputation is in tack IMO and I’ll just let my peers be the judge of that. I’ve said it before, if there are some members who don’t like the way this forum is run or the fact that some of our members may be a bit gruff (including me) all I can say is “don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.”

This was a terrible tragedy that might see the end of air racing at Reno, something I hope doesn’t happen. My prayers go out to all who perished in this accident and I do hope we find out very soon what caused this to happen.

Carry on all!


----------



## Midnight Special (Sep 26, 2011)

evangilder said:


> The vertical photo is a doctored fake. The AP was totally duped on that shot. I did a photo analysis on that photo and it is an obvious fake, IMO.



Good morning gentlemen,
My name is Tim O'Brien and I took the photos at Reno in question. The photos are real and the NTSB who I visited on the following morning as well as the newspaper I represented have the original files from my camera chip... In addition, I received NO payment nor will I accept any offers to capitalize on this tragedy. I was simply there to do my job while attending (and promoting) the races as I have done for 39 years. While I can appreciate (and welcome) anyone who questions authenticity, doing so in this manor only leads to your own mis-information. The vertical photo was taken from the pits on the other side of the incident from most you have seen from the grandstands, a split second before impact. I submitted the photos to The Grass Valley Union based on my assignment, and to the NTSB based on a hunch to further their investigation. I had NO idea or anticipation they would go world wide as they did... And again - NO payment or compensation was received or desired. I hope this helps to clear the air. Please join the rest of us now in prayer and support for all who were deeply affected... Thank you.

Respectfully,

Tim


----------



## razor1uk (Sep 26, 2011)

Thank you Sir. 
I humble appreciate your honesty, and I think speaking for all here, we all do too. Ideally you shouldn't have to put yourself out like this regarding such an event, just as with todays media, you can partially see how it went that way here.

I hope too as stated many times in the few relative threads to do with this, that the bereaved, injured lost and wounded recover as well and quicker than expected. Offering my continued humble thoughts of solace to them, with remorse for our human natures of inquery and hypothesis.

Respects to you Sir, for nodoubt having to go to a few/many sites for such reasons. 

Lewis M Cummings/raor1uk

P.S. Welcome to the forum too, pity were it not for better reasons...


----------



## Lighthunmust (Sep 26, 2011)

razor1uk said:


> Thank you Sir.
> I humble appreciate your honesty, and I think speaking for all here, we all do too. Ideally you shouldn't have to put yourself out like this regarding such an event, just as with todays media, you can partially see how it went that way here.
> 
> I hope too as stated many times in the few relative threads to do with this, that the bereaved, injured lost and wounded recover as well and quicker than expected. Offering my continued humble thoughts of solace to them, with remorse for our human natures of inquery and hypothesis.
> ...



Thank you Mr. Pearce for your courtesy.

Thank you Mr. O'Brien for your courtesy, patience, and honor.

Thank you Mr. Cummings for saying what I could not have said better myself.

Regards,

Steve


----------



## claidemore (Sep 26, 2011)

As a photo enthusiast for many years, I think I can offer a possible explanation for the excellent lighting on the photo in question. 
There is another forum with a series of photos from that incident. Galloping Ghost crash Reno 2011 - Page 5
In post 68 we see three photos where the plane is very dark, which shows that the auto exposure programming is taking a general reading for the available light, resulting in a dark subject (underexposed, probably from center weighted light metering). The last image shows blue sky and a properly exposed subject. 
It would look like whatever auto exposure setting was being used got fooled (subject is not in center of photo where center weighted metering would be reading the light) and exposed for backlight on the last photo, giving us a 'blue' sky and a better exposed plane.
In the O'Brien photo being discussed we again see a patch of blue, indicating to me that this photo was taken at a similar exposure setting to the last one in post 68 at the other forum. Note that in post #69 the camera has reverted back to underexposing, and note that this is a port side image as well.
Admittedly much of this could be done in post editing, but if we give the photographer the benifit of doubt, there is a perfectly good explanation.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 26, 2011)

Tim,
Thank you for coming on here to offer up your side of it. I issue a mea culpa. I don't know what caused the pixel after-effects of the image, possibly post processing by the AP or some other part of digital photography. But I will go on record to say that I was wrong in my analysis. And thanks to GregP and WJPearce for presenting their arguments in a respectful manner.

Eric


----------



## barney (Sep 26, 2011)

AAF MANUAL 51-127-5
Pilot Training Manual
P-51
page 70 – Dive Recovery Procedure

“3. As the airplane continues to accelerate, it again becomes tail heavy – increasingly heavy as speed increases.” 

So, if the speeds these souped up P-51's were traveling at was similar to what a service plane would do in a dive, there would be trim dialed in for a tail heavy condition.


----------



## jimh (Sep 26, 2011)

One of the first things changed on a racing Mustang is the wing and tail incidence. Simply put the angle of incidence is the fixed angle at which the wing and tail are mounted to the fuselage. On a stock airplane the angle is optimised to give best cruise performance. As stated, when speed increases the amount of trim becomes greater to maintain level flight. The Mustang, and T-6 for that matter, are very trim sensitive. Speed and power changes require retrimming. On the racing Mustangs the incidence is adjusted to obtain a high speed trim-free profile. Any time a trim tab is moved it creates a drag penalty which is unacceptable in the racing environment. Who am I to spout off? I instruct in T-6's and I fly P-51C Betty Jane for CF. 

jim


----------



## GregP (Sep 26, 2011)

Not to throw gas on a fire, but I saw at least one photo that depicts "oil canning" of the fuselage between the leading edge of the stab and the trailing edge of the wing. I also heard at least one person in the pits, immediately after the crash, say that they thought the rear fuselage was out of line with the wings after about pylon 8.

So, it makes me wonder if there was an internal failure of perhaps a longeron or the boil-off system, precipitating the loss of a portion of the the trim tab and the tailwheel extension. I have also heard that the tailwheel may have extended all the way back about the middle of the valley of speed. That comes from a person at Chino with a LOT of warbird experience and a history at Reno going back more than 20 years (not Steve Hinton).

Please note, this is not a "pet theory," it is a speculation that some slightly earlier event may have caused both the tailwheel extension and the loss of the trim tab piece ... it did not lose the whole trim tab. If it were not for the "oil canning" of the fuselage in the pic, I would not suspect anything other than a simple trim tab failure. However, there MAY be more to it. I'd bet if so, it will come out in the investigation. 

I wonder how long it will take to get some more information than we all have at this point, and I state categorically here that the theory above is NOT something I claim happened, only one possible explanation of events leading up to both the tab failure and the tailwheel exension ... if the oil canning of the fuselage turns out to be real and not just a digital pic anomaly. I will not speculate about the pic ... since I saw it on the web, I'm sure the NYSB has it, too. if they do, they can draw their own conclusions. I simply have never before seen a P-51's rear fuselage wrinkle in flight like this pic appears to show.

I spoke with Stu Dawson the morning after the crash, and he said Galloping Ghost was pushing him uncharacteristically hard into pylons 7 and 8. That is, the Ghost got closer to Rare Bear than it should have, and kept coming until the pull-up happened. Stu postulated there was something wrong with the Ghost even going into pylon 7, maybe pylon 6. If there is anyone who would know, it would be Stu. You may recall that Stu is the pilot who qualifies other pilots to fly in unlimited class racing.

So, this event may have a root cause that occurred back going into or through the valley of speed, and it toook 5 - 8 seconds for the effects to precipitate and catch up with the aircraft. I do not claim it is so, but it is possible given the bits of info I have heard from credible sources. I'm fairly sure the NTSB will hear or has heard all this themselves. Surely they interviewed Stu Dawson ... he was flying right next to The Galloping Ghost when the event happened!

That's the last speculation I will post until we hear definitively from the NTSB or from another credible source, and I hope we all find out the real scoop in the near future.

Glad to hear from the photographer and glad he is now a forum member. Good attutude by the members and moderators, too. I MUCH prefer reasonable discussion to the alternative.

Keep 'em flying!


----------



## barney (Sep 26, 2011)

jimh said:


> One of the first things changed on a racing Mustang is the wing and tail incidence. Simply put the angle of incidence is the fixed angle at which the wing and tail are mounted to the fuselage. On a stock airplane the angle is optimised to give best cruise performance. As stated, when speed increases the amount of trim becomes greater to maintain level flight. The Mustang, and T-6 for that matter, are very trim sensitive. Speed and power changes require retrimming. On the racing Mustangs the incidence is adjusted to obtain a high speed trim-free profile. Any time a trim tab is moved it creates a drag penalty which is unacceptable in the racing environment. Who am I to spout off? I instruct in T-6's and I fly P-51C Betty Jane for CF.
> 
> jim



This is becoming too much to expect. We've had an engineer who worked on the plane, the photographer who took the now famous pictures, and now, another expert is here to set me straight. I had no idea these planes were rebuilt to the extent of changing the wing incidence! So, while this remains a tragedy, we are provided with the opportunity of reading comments from true experts. I want this all of the time. 

Thanks Jim


----------



## evangilder (Sep 26, 2011)

Greg, I have heard speculation of the boil off as well, But am not nearly as knowledgeable of these aircraft as those who work on them. One thing I did notice was that in the inverted picture, there appears to be something coming out of the aircraft, team or smoke, from the underside. That might lend credence to the boil-off system, but I defer to the experts on that and on the NTSB.


----------



## GregP (Sep 26, 2011)

The boil-off system was two-fold.

First, it cools the engine by transferring heat from the coolant to the boil-off liquid. Second, it cools the oil in the same manner, but a separate system since you can't mix them.

Most cooling systems are not under a lot of pressure, but this one was under at least medium pressure due to steam generation.

There have been several boil-off system failures in the past. When it happens, unless the cockpit is sealed, the pilot is engulfed in 1500° steam and is incapacitated or killed. I don't have first-hand knowldege of the Galloping Ghost systems, but the boil-off is the logical fail point if, indeed anything at all failed in the fuselage. Perhaps not. If the Oxygen system had failed, there would have been a big hole in the side and tail would probably have departed the rest of the aircraft.

Nothing may have blown internally ... it COULD be simple trim tab failure, but some of the pics suggest sheet metal buckling that was not present in any earlier pohots at Reno under race power.

Might be nothing and I think maybe I should have just waited to see what is eventually found to be the cause of the crash.

As someone in here said, I had the right to remain silent, but not the ability ... beat me, make me fell cheap. I'll stop speculating and wait for the report.

Cheers!


----------



## WJPearce (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm torn here between keeping my mouth shut versus trying to keep things on the tracks. For now I will just mention a few things, then shut up.

1) I was not involved with this aircraft or team in any way. But I do have the highest level of respect for Leeward and his crew.

2) In case some don't know, Stu Dawson was flying Rare Bear which was behind the Ghost after Leeward passed him at the end of the second lap.

3) The boil off system had an exhaust port by the trailing edge of the left wing. Seeing the occasional puff of steam from that region was normal.

4) If the boil off system blew, I think the canopy would have been fogged/steamed over, which it appears (to me) to be perfectly clear.

5) Oil canning was visible on the right side mainly around the second "7" on the race number "177." Photo below is by Florin (circle too) on lap 2, 1 lap before the loss of control. Other photos (mine) show oil canning was present on 9/13 during qualifying.






6) Photos and video indicate the gear came out on the front stretch. The first indication of trouble was when the a/c quickly rolls into about 100+ degrees of left bank and about simultaneously the tail wheel comes out. Video is by Jason Schillereff and it does not show the end because Jason is a good guy. Last 1/2 lap of the Ghost is shown starting about 7:05. The incident begins at 7:36. 
_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoncG_j5AdI_

I vowed that I would not post anything about this but I feel it is important to show what is out there to keep speculation to a minimum. I will see how I feel about this tomorrow because I don't want to be one who sensationalizes this tragedy. Air Racers, pilots, crew, photogs, fans.... I see them every year and we are all like family. This all hurts and I never want to do anything to add fuel to any fire of speculation. 

I know nothing and I'm a nobody!

WJPearce


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Well Mr. Pierce, I had not seen that clip. This is definitely the best quality video of the event I have seen, and I didn't need to see the end either. Seeing it live was one time too many. 

Can I ask if the person who filmed this sent a copy to the NTSB?

From the perspective of that film clip, I can come up with a very good working theory privately ... probably any pilot can. I shall not speculate publically ... the NTSB can do that.

Thanks for the link and the words above.


----------



## Njaco (Sep 27, 2011)

Like Eric, I too, want to offer that I was wrong on the pic. Eric had valid points which I agreed with but when you have the source, that trumps all. And everyone's sentiments about where the focus of this tragedy should be are spot on. To all the family and friends, heartfelt prayers.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 27, 2011)

WJPearce, That photo is very telling. I assume that you also sent a full res copy to the NTSB. Information like this is valuable to the investigators, but it is also valuable to other aviators as something we can all learn from. It was a terrible tragedy and one no one wants to see repeated.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 27, 2011)

Great stuff guys, many thanks for the info!!!!


----------



## Messy1 (Sep 27, 2011)

Great info from all! Really appreciate all the info. Thanks all for posting!


----------



## pinsog (Sep 27, 2011)

Does "oil canning" indicate structural failure in the tail section of the Mustang?


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Unless I misremember, the P-51 has four major longerons. The "oil canning" seems to me to running right along the lower starboard longeron location ... and the skin is rivited to the longeron. I won't speculate publically any further about the internal situation in the fuselage.

Since the picture of the "oil canning" is one lap before the event, that is food for thought. The Galloping Ghost clearly experienced a wing waggle doing past pylons 1 - 2 on lap two. I saw that live and assumed it was wake turbulence. It well might be exactly that, but could also be something else and the same wing waggle preceeded the final event.

With the video supplied by Mr. Pierce and the photo, we surely have a reasonably well-documented event, and some conclusions can be drawn by a reasonable observer knowledgeable about high-performance WWII aircraft and the P-51. The exact mechanism of the failure might be tough to figure out, but seasoned aviation investigators have rarely, I would think, had a better documented event.

That's about all I can say publically without drawing conclusions or engaging in speculation. I hope we can get a report from the NTSB in a reasonable timeframe.


----------



## Mustang nut (Sep 27, 2011)

Gentlemen

Maybe there is a bit of pride involved but cant you show some heart. WW2 restorers post was edited because it said (I paraphrase because it was deleted) You guys should stick to modelling and tacking pictures, if your expertise was important you would be helping with the investigation. In view of the posts on this thread that may be deemed to insult moderators and long time members but actually its true. To disprove unfounded theories ww2 restorer had to describe his friend and coleague being impaled on a joystick. In similar circumstances i woul not be so restrained as he was his post was not profane or abusive just very very uncomfortable. everyone here can modify their posts in view of WW2restorers info and I am sure if they do he could be welcomed here with an arm around the shoulder.......jeeeez give the man a break


----------



## WJPearce (Sep 27, 2011)

Yes, photos and videos have been supplied to the NTSB.


----------



## Njaco (Sep 27, 2011)

Mustang, there was a heated discussion about a pic, the source for the pic came forward and cleared up the question and those who guessed wrongly (including myself) have made amends. There was no place for a post such as that and the discussion is ended. Lets move on.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 27, 2011)

Mustang nut said:


> Gentlemen
> 
> Maybe there is a bit of pride involved but cant you show some heart. WW2 restorers post was edited because it said (I paraphrase because it was deleted) You guys should stick to modelling and tacking pictures, if your expertise was important you would be helping with the investigation. In view of the posts on this thread that may be deemed to insult moderators and long time members but actually its true. To disprove unfounded theories ww2 restorer had to describe his friend and coleague being impaled on a joystick. In similar circumstances i woul not be so restrained as he was his post was not profane or abusive just very very uncomfortable. everyone here can modify their posts in view of WW2restorers info and I am sure if they do he could be welcomed here with an arm around the shoulder.......jeeeez give the man a break



It is one thing to provide information or join in discussion. It is quite another to insult people that have grown together as a community, trying to understand what happened. No, we are not accident investigators, but there are several people here on the staff and as members that in aviation as pilots, mechanics and support personnel. We are not all "just modelers" or "amateur photographers". 

We are well aware of the tragedy involved and we all feel the loss. But this isn't the time to come on and throw insults and call names.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 27, 2011)

Mustang nut said:


> Gentlemen
> 
> Maybe there is a bit of pride involved but cant you show some heart. WW2 restorers post was edited because it said (I paraphrase because it was deleted) You guys should stick to modelling and tacking pictures, if your expertise was important you would be helping with the investigation. In view of the posts on this thread that may be deemed to insult moderators and long time members but actually its true. To disprove unfounded theories ww2 restorer had to describe his friend and coleague being impaled on a joystick. In similar circumstances i woul not be so restrained as he was his post was not profane or abusive just very very uncomfortable. everyone here can modify their posts in view of WW2restorers info and I am sure if they do he could be welcomed here with an arm around the shoulder.......jeeeez give the man a break


 Mustang, this individual came on here and made some insulting comments to some of the members and moderators. I did not see what was written but let me tell you that as far as me personally, I don’t know this guy and don’t know if was indeed for real, but personally I will stand behind any and all comments I have made here and make no apology for them. BTW, for the record – I have worked Reno and Crewed an airplane that took 2nd place 3 years in a row in its class. I’m also an A&P and I/A, flight instructor and been in this business for over 30 years, and I have also built model airplanes….


Njaco said:


> Mustang, there was a heated discussion about a pic, the source for the pic came forward and cleared up the question and those who guessed wrongly (including myself) have made amends. There was no place for a post such as that and the discussion is ended. Lets move on.


Agree 100%, and not to undermine my fellow mod, if there’s any more BS posted here I’m locking this thread, something that I really don’t want to do because up till now it’s gotten back on track with some really good information.


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Flyboyj,

As a member who was away from the forum for a few years and is just "returning," as it were, I have to ask ... an off-topic question ...

Sorry if this is common knowledge, but ... who is Doug Gilliss in your sig?

Just curious ... maybe this should be in a new thread, but it seems like a trival question for anew thread.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 27, 2011)

Greg, you can read all about it here:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/mo...er-fatal-jet-crash-tehachapi-calif-21070.html


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Thanks, Eric! I wondered. L-29's are fun little jets, and fast for the installed thrust!

And now ... I'll stop hijacking this otherwise very worthy thread.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 27, 2011)

GregP said:


> Thanks, Eric! I wondered. L-29's are fun little jets, and fast for the installed thrust!
> 
> And now ... I'll stop hijacking this otherwise very worthy thread.


No worries Greg, glad you asked


----------



## Mustang nut (Sep 27, 2011)

The wit and wisdom of flyboyj

quote
In the shot of he aircraft going straight down, what happened to the pilot???? Even if he was incapacitated or even dead, you are strapped into these aircraft in such a matter that a body or torso would ALWAYS be seen, especially from the side. I've sat and flown in many military type aircraft including a P-51 (just sat in it) and I can tell you once strapped in you cannot move much or remove your body from being viewed from the side!!! Explain that one genius!

Sorry friend, not the case. Have you ever sat in a stock or modified P-51? I have and there is absolutely NO room for your head to move. Its a tight fit and unless a guillotine found its way into the cockpit, you are going to see something in that cockpit if some one is strapped in. 

Dude - I think you better do some research and find out about the backgrounds on some of the folks around here before you start defecating brain matter from your facial modulation orifice. 


I don’t know this guy and don’t know if was indeed for real, but personally I will stand behind any and all comments I have made here and make no apology for them. BTW, for the record – I have worked Reno and Crewed an airplane that took 2nd place 3 years in a row in its class. I’m also an A&P and I/A, flight instructor and been in this business for over 30 years, and I have also built model airplanes….
unquote

Flyboy you are a mechanic playing at being an internet God. You let your mouth go before your peanut was engaged, I sincerely hope a pilot you mechanic for is never impaled on his joystick but it would be poetic justice. Ban me and delete the post (most of the crap is actually your posts) it is copied and will be circulated. Or you could just be a man and apologise for making a judgement without being in full knowledge of the facts....Like a real man would do. 

Oh wow you were a mechanic for a guy who didn't win, I won races on the ground and was my own mechanic so everyone should kiss my boots of course.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 27, 2011)

Mustang nut said:


> This is not a double post I have just posted it twice to show it has been copied and will be circulated. flyboys days of aviation expert and insulter in chief are drawing to a close.
> 
> 
> The wit and wisdom of flyboyj
> ...



Guess what @sshole, you're gone! Mustang Nut? The second part of your name is an understatement! Circulate all you want, and instead of kissing your boots, just kiss my @ss! Real intelligence there - did you win a snail race?

BTW - learn to spell or download a spell check dipsh!t. I see your brains are measured in turd-ounces.

Ok folks, please keep this thread on track, I really dont want to lock it.


----------



## Njaco (Sep 27, 2011)

Are these races the only ones to be flown in the US? I haven't really heard of any except Reno.


----------



## bobbysocks (Sep 27, 2011)

what pressure rating it the coolant system operated at? and what kind of glycol and ratio to they use? just a quetion.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 27, 2011)

Lord have mercy... I have never witnessed so may suicides on this forum in such a small timeframe. Next?


----------



## jimh (Sep 27, 2011)

Optimum coolant temp is 105c-110c degrees and there isn't much flexibility, maybe 115degrees before you start doing damage. This includes ground ops as well...always always keep the scoops into the wind. Speaking for myself I don't lock my harness in the Mustang, maybe I have short arms but with the harness locked I have trouble reaching the gear handle and the gps/radio on the panel. It also makes looking around extremely difficult. I do wear the seatbelt fairly snug but mobility is priority. 

jim

I shot this with a gopro camera.


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Nice video! Thanks! I am assuming your coolant temps are °C ... The Allsions run at 205°F - 225°F. That is on the ground. I haven't flown one yet ...


----------



## pinsog (Sep 27, 2011)

Matt308 said:


> Lord have mercy... I have never witnessed so may suicides on this forum in such a small timeframe. Next?



I thought the same thing but didn't want to say anything. Such an emotionaly charged issue with people so close to the incident, and while sitting at the keyboard they let their emotions build up even more and get the best of them at least long enough to type up an insulting paragraph. It's a shame to, I think all 3 of them had much to contribute to the site.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 27, 2011)

Nice clip Jim. I see you are pretty snug in there and it would seem that unless get some slack in your sholder harness you're in that seat pretty good.


----------



## jimh (Sep 27, 2011)

Thanks, yep, I like the lapbelt tight and the shoulder straps loose enough that I can get to the panel and other knobs and switches. Like any airplane the emergency checklist includes locking the harness. At the end, when I lock the controls, I have to lean forward to reach the plunger that goes into the base of the stick. With my helmet on I can get fully forward, but this would not happen if I were in the shoulder straps. It would take ALOT of force to be that far forward and essentially forced out of the shoulder restraints. The B/C cockpit feels more reclined than the D and maybe alittle less roomy than the D. 

jim


----------



## model299 (Sep 28, 2011)

I saw you crack that smile when you started to buzz the field! You can't fool me!

GREAT video. Thanks for posting it.

What kind of RPM drop do you expect when doing the magneto check on the run-up? Sounded significant, but I figure it was exaggerated by the camera system.

Damn. That just makes me ache. I gotta get my ticket back man......


----------



## MikeGazdik (Sep 28, 2011)

First off, if nobody wants to speculate I understand. But watching that video link of the Ghost, could the tail wheel dropping cause a plane in that hard turn to go through those gyrations? Or is it more likely to have dropped because of what the aircraft was going through?


----------



## jimh (Sep 28, 2011)

Yeah, you caught me smiling. I won't lie...this airplane is a magic carpet, it is so much fun to fly it's almost criminal. I'm not trying to hijack this thread, just showing what the Mustang cockpit environment is really like. The runup is done with 30" of manifold pressure and 2000rpm...and its LOUD. After almost 10 years of flying warbirds my hearing is shot. I have to wear a helmet and earbuds. 

There are ALOT of myths surrounding the P-51 and its flight characteristics. With a proper amount of tailwheel and T-6 flying it is a pussycat. The day I shot this there was a 90degree gusting 28kt crosswind at Westminister...the Mustang drives right through it, just hold the wing down into the wind and keep it straight with the rudder. 

Stalls are mundane and there is plenty of buffet before it departs, in both departure stalls and dirty stalls. Accelerated stalls are exciting and it really breaks hard BUT it gives you plenty of warning and you really have to pull hard on the stick to induce the stall, not to mention you are going to be pulling about 4 to 4.5g's so it is plenty of uncomfortable. Keep the ball centered and you will have no surprises. When it does stall, simply relax the back pressure and it is flying again. These airplanes were designed for 20 year old kids with maybe 200 hours, it is extremely stable and responsive. This is just one reason it makes such a great racer, it is a solid flying machine. 

The engine features a manifold pressure regulator, basically set the throttle where you want it and forget it. Most aerobatics can be accomplished with 35-36" of Manifold pressure. The cooling system has an automatic feature that operates the lower coolant door. I glance at the coolant temps every 10-20 seconds. If there is an achilles heel to this airplane it is the cooling system. Once temperatures start to climb and the manual procedures don't fix the problem you have about 10-15 minutes to find a place to land, even less if you experience a significant leak. 

pm me if you have any specific questions

Jimmy's memorial is Friday, still hard to believe.

jim


----------



## model299 (Sep 28, 2011)

Thanks Jim.

RIP Mr Leeward.


----------



## Njaco (Sep 29, 2011)

Excellent post Jim. I think you just put an end to all our "Whats the best fighter..." threads with that insight.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 29, 2011)

Thanks as well for the info and the video was very nice to see as well.


----------



## barney (Sep 29, 2011)

jimh said:


> One of the first things changed on a racing Mustang is the wing and tail incidence. Simply put the angle of incidence is the fixed angle at which the wing and tail are mounted to the fuselage. On a stock airplane the angle is optimised to give best cruise performance. As stated, when speed increases the amount of trim becomes greater to maintain level flight. The Mustang, and T-6 for that matter, are very trim sensitive. Speed and power changes require retrimming. On the racing Mustangs the incidence is adjusted to obtain a high speed trim-free profile. Any time a trim tab is moved it creates a drag penalty which is unacceptable in the racing environment. Who am I to spout off? I instruct in T-6's and I fly P-51C Betty Jane for CF.
> 
> jim



The photograph displayed in post 138 shows a buckle in the skin of the aircraft behind the wing. In other words, the fuselage is flexing slightly which would be a change from the ideal incidence. To compensate for this would require an additional deflection of both the elevator and the elevator trim tab.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 29, 2011)

Not being a mechanical engineer, but with some background, the skin stress indicators sure look like sheer forces to me (like B-52 45degree stress lines). The tail either twisting longitudinally wrt the fuselage or experienced sheering vertically. The B-52 example was part of my engineering Strength of Materials class curriculum. Makes this arm chair engineer wonder if an aerodynamic situation resulted in a nose up max-G incapacitating the pilot. Once GLOC, then the end would be predicatable.


----------



## barney (Oct 1, 2011)

What Went Wrong at the Reno Air Races - P-51 Crash - Popular Mechanics


----------



## Readie (Oct 1, 2011)

Another disaster.
Such a crying shame.
John


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 3, 2011)

Ah, so the trim tab results in flutter which then manifests itelf as shear stress (oil canning) of the fuselage. Question, do we know for certain that the oil canning pic occurred after loss of the trim tab?


----------



## GregP (Oct 3, 2011)

No. The "oil canning" pic was taken on lap two (creditted as lap two when first posted by the guy who took the pic), before the incident which resulted in the crash. 

I heard several people who are P-51 people say that was not unusual at high speed, but I can't vouch for the truth of it, one way or the other. I rarely see a Mustang going 495 mph except at Reno, and I'm usually watching the race, not taking high-res pics of it.


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 3, 2011)

i dont know..i have a hard time believing the aircraft is going to "oil can" that much consistantly and be ok. i have seen aircraft components flex...wings for instance. on larger aircraft wings will droop a little until airborne ( and much of that is engineered in )... but a twisting and the stress it places on the airframe is going to weaken it to the point of breakage sooner or later.


----------



## GregP (Oct 3, 2011)

I don't think it is normal for a P-51, as I said, but most P-51's never GET to 500 moph these days. In WWII, they could and did in dives from 30,000 feet, but most P-51 owners stay VFR below 14,500 feet these days. Who wants to spend money running a Merlin or an Allison on instruments?

Also, The Galloping Ghost didn't have a doghouse for the non-existent radiator, and I'm pretty sure the airflow is considerably different from a stock P-51 fuselage at that point. Maybe not, but it would make sense to me. The aorflow that comes out from the bottom of the wing trailing edge usually has to interact with the airflow from the doghouse ... but not on the Ghost.

I'll refrain from speculation, but I still believe this is one of the best-documented incidents an aiviation accident investigator has had since the Hindeburg fire, so I suppose we'll see what they come up with. Of course, there have been airshows in the past with video of an accident, too. I'm thinking of when Wes Winter pulled the wings off a Partenavia P-68 in Texas nack in the 1980's. I think the final report may take year, even with all this great documentation ... and that is outrageous. If you can't complete a report quickly given the amount of information on this incident, when CAN you?


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 3, 2011)

i would suppose they get as indepth with these crashes as they do with airliners. in those cases every scrap is brought to an area and the plane basically laid out. each piece is inspected for potential causes...of course certain sections that are of higher suspect are given more and first scrutiny. when 427 went down locally....it ended up being spread out on the floors of one of the hangers here at pittsburgh airport. that kind of investigation takes a long time...so preliminary reports may be released but the official cause will be a while in coming i suspect.


----------



## ww2restorer (Oct 3, 2011)

This will be my second post on this site, and the last.
Thank you Mr O'Brien for your post validating that you had not manipulated the photograph as accused by so blatantly by many.
Any person with any basic knowledge would have known that if it was "Photoshopped" the Authorities would have discredited its authenticity and that digital camera's also have a forensic fingerprint that can trace a photo's history. If the persons doing the analysis of the photo had only looked they would have known it was not a converted ground photo.
A) The Propeller is running at a Constant Speed setting, (the blades look thicker) If the engine was stopped as on the ground the blades would be set at a High RPM setting, (the blades will look thinner)Also the blades look stopped because the photographer was using a very high shutter speed.
B) The evaporation cooler outlet, the steam is trailing the length of the empennage, if it was on the ground,(with propeller stopped)it wouldn't be working, period.
The wobble in the video, passing through wake turbulence, it is constant in racing and when flying close to other aircraft.
The Oil Canning, due to the stresses on the empannage from two factors, torque and changing the aircraft line of flight through its Longitudinal Axis.The tail structure is doing its job trying to keep the aircarft flying straight and level, however the person flying the aircarft is wanting the aircraft to change direction, so the airframe flexes, as designed and for a micro second we see oil canning.
The sudden pitch up. As JimH has correctly posted, when flying a high speed aircraft to counter the aerodynamic tendency for the aircraft to climb (Speed increases lift) the pilot must put in nose down trim, in air racing this is rather large. When the trim tab began to fail this nose down trim was rapidly lost and the opposite results, a rapid climb. In this case to an extent that it placed a 22.6g loading on the aircraft.Mr Leeward was instantly unconscious, no human can withstand such a G load.
The seat breaking, rubbish, the cockpit had a rear bulkhead that extended from the top of the canopy to the cockpit floor, the upper section canted rearward. Mr Leeward, those who knew the gentleman, knew he was of average build and had a flying posture of leaving forward, with the G load, his body will have travelled in the direction of least resistance, forward. In the photo of the aircarft overhead, you can clearly see the back of his helmet near the glearshield.
The change in engine sound. The Merlin is a carburetted engine, under the G loading, fuel flow to the carburettor would have been slowed until the pumps could maintain flow, the engine sputtered for a few seconds, then regained full power. This probably also induced the roll at the top of the climb.

As for Qualifications, I know there are experts here that will question this. I Graduated Auckland University in NZ with an Aeronautical Engineering Degree, a Masters and PhD in Aeronautical Engineering from MIT and University of California. I have an A&P with Inspection Authorisation and also a FAA AME. I hold Pilots licence's from several Countries including the USA, which I hold ATPL and FAA Examiner ratings. I have been involved at air racing for over 25 years although many do not know me, I am mostly in the background doing engineering, but have worked most in the era of Jimmy Leeward, Hoot Gibson, Steve Hinton Sr, Tiger.... the list goes on.I have also worked with CF, back in the 80's with Nate Mayo.Also checked out Rob C for the T6, TBM. I am an advisor to the FAA, NSTB, the US Military. I live part time in NZ, part time in USA.
Again, this will be final post, good luck, and thank the Moderators for letting me use your photo for my Avatar, I am honoured that you let me use it. , I have not had such a good laugh in a long time, this last week has been extremely hilarious, over such a tragic event. I will now go and attend to my duty at NTSB at trying to further solve this case.
Good bye.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 3, 2011)

I'm glad you got that off your chest and you do have some good info there. 

The AP photo I seen looks different from the others posted here. I maintain that the AP photo was tampered with, but that's my opinion....

Be on your way, personally I have no beef with you and if you are who you say you are, I do hope you help find out what happened.


----------



## drgondog (Oct 3, 2011)

ww2restorer said:


> This will be my second post on this site, and the last.
> Thank you Mr O'Brien for your post validating that you had not manipulated the photograph as accused by so blatantly by many.
> Any person with any basic knowledge would have known that if it was "Photoshopped" the Authorities would have discredited its authenticity and that digital camera's also have a forensic fingerprint that can trace a photo's history. If the persons doing the analysis of the photo had only looked they would have known it was not a converted ground photo.
> A) The Propeller is running at a Constant Speed setting, (the blades look thicker) If the engine was stopped as on the ground the blades would be set at a High RPM setting, (the blades will look thinner)Also the blades look stopped because the photographer was using a very high shutter speed.
> ...



Good Post


----------



## GregP (Oct 3, 2011)

It was a pretty good post. 

But ... I think a P-51 will shed its wings or horizontal tail before sustaining 22.5 g's. Just my opinion. I'd believe 10 - 12 g's, certainly more than 8, but not 22.5 without many small parts fluttering down immediately thereafter. An F-22 Raptor would likely shed its wings before 22.5 g's, and it is much stronger than a P-51.

The P-51 was designed to sustain 8 g at 8,000 pounds, and not much more. To find the g-level at higher weight, you divide 64,000 by the weight in pounds. So a 10,000 pound Mustang is a 6.4 g airplane. I realize the wings were clipped, but I seriously doubt that triples the g-capability of the airframe.


----------



## barney (Oct 3, 2011)

What are the chances that a G-meter placed in an 8 G airplane would ever be calibrated to 22.5 G's?


----------



## GregP (Oct 4, 2011)

Zero ... but it's not important, either. The Ghost pulled up VERY sharply, and they can probably calculate it from a motion analysis, given time.

P-51's lost wings in WWII at much less than 22.5 g's, but I will end my own speculation until we hear officially.


----------



## drgondog (Oct 4, 2011)

I missed the 22.5 G point - doubt that the 51 could do more than 12 (as light as that bird was it was probably back to 8000 pound GW) that even with an instantaneous 'point' G load. I suspect he may have meant 12.5 G


----------



## GregP (Oct 4, 2011)

I'd believe 12.5 g ... 

I also saw somone else somewhere in a news blog say the telemetry said 9 - 11 g, but that was in the news and should be taken with a grain of salt. 

Most news services know that an airplane flies and that's about the extent of it. Well, they could probably get the main color of the aircraft right, too.


----------



## jimh (Oct 4, 2011)

Here's another video that shows the true violence of the pitch out...its around the 3:15 mark. 


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbkxKJCM4x8_


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

jimh said:


> Here's another video that shows the true violence of the pitch out...its around the 3:15 mark.
> 
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbkxKJCM4x8_




Thanks for posting that jim!!! "Trim Tab?"


----------



## barney (Oct 4, 2011)

After watching this video a few times I am almost ready to believe 22.5 G's. I understand the craft was recently rebuilt. It would be interesting to know what went into her. 

Judging from the distant landmarks, I notice the position over land at where she is almost vertical (at this point the camera moves and the aircraft is no longer visible) and where she hits the ground is almost the same. Is there any video of what happened at the top of the excursion? Was it a stall?


----------



## Ratsel (Oct 4, 2011)

FLYBOYJ said:


> "Trim Tab?"


Doubt it very much. Something happened to the Pilot beforehand in my humble opinion. Possibly pulling to much G during the turn.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

Ratsel said:


> Doubt it very much. Something happened to the Pilot beforehand in my humble opinion. Possibly pulling to much G during the turn.


 
Hi torque, or high trust aircraft with an aft CG (which I beleive most if not all of the unlimiteds have) have a tendency to pitch up at high speeds. There was mention of the tail and wing incidence being changed. At higher airspeeds you're using a lot of trim to keep the nose down. I worked with a warbird owner who had a trim problem at high speed. The aircraft pitched up violently.

On that course the maximum G you're going to experience is 6 so I was told, most of the time the course is run 3.5 - 4Gs.

I don't know if this was the most current course chart, but this came directly from RARA. From all the clips shown so far it doesn't seem he was pulling anything excessive, IMO.


----------



## drgondog (Oct 4, 2011)

The loss of the trim tab at that speed is as likelyto have caused the violent pitch up as anything if he was applying nose down trim (as he probably was at that speed) .. IIRC they were in a straight run but I could be wrong. And he most definitely lost left elevator trim tab completely.


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 4, 2011)

i had a hard time with 22.5 Gs but with the tone of the thread and the direction it was going, i wasnt wanting to add fuel to a fire. at that rate of G's, i'm with gregp, and would have to believe that the wings would have folded at the beginning of the climb and the plane would have projected forward instead of skyward. that may have resulted in more tragedy. at that altitude and at those speeds you cant afford to black out for a second. i am assuming they are wearing G-suits???!!! if so what are they rated to??


----------



## Ratsel (Oct 4, 2011)

_"And he most definitely lost left elevator trim tab completely."_ 

looks like it came off near the apex of the loop after she rolled onto her back. Unless another pic shows otherwise. My theory is the pilot became incapacitated during the exit of the turn. I'll make it clear I'm no aviation expert though..

also, isn't there two trim tabs? Would it still pitch up that fast if one failed? One last question, would the incidents on the Horz.stabs have been changed if these planes flew tail heavy? thanks.


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 4, 2011)

it doesnt have to come off to fail...just break loose of its control linkage. a break in the linkage and the trim setting suddenly is lost...it then is fluttering and could have broken later.


----------



## drgondog (Oct 4, 2011)

Bobbysocks - the photos are clear that the trim tab departed completely.

To other speculation regarding beefing up the bird. A Mustan was a holistic design stressed for 8g at 8000 GW. They would have to redesign EVERY vritical component - not just main spar and longerons to re-stree the bird to a higher G... even if the re-designed the wings, the eppenage would have departed long before 12+G was experienced.


----------



## GregP (Oct 4, 2011)

One more time:

The Galloping Ghost was a heavily modified aircraft, not a stock P-51. Not only did it have no radiator, but also they removed the starboard trim tab from operation; it ws fixed in place for lower trim drag. The port trim tab was supplying all the trimming force.

When it failed there was no trim adjustment at all, which would very probably result in a considerable nose-up moment ... but I will not comment on it further. The real question is whether or not the failure of the trim tab was caused by an on-board failure of some other system, such as the coolant boil-off, the oil boil-off, or Oxygen system.

I won't speculate any further and will defer to the NTSB investigation board. Some people Iw as at Reno with have all stated that there was a loud noise (like an explosion) from the Ghost down in the valley of speed, and they thougt the effects might have been made apparent in turns 7 - 8 right at the point of the incident. I refuse to speculate on it, but wonder if they are correct.

Maybe we'll find out ... I hope so, so it can be prevented from happening again except in mechanical failure conditions/


----------



## Aaron Brooks Wolters (Oct 4, 2011)

In one of the videos posted on this thread earlier you can see the trim tab fall off in the last seconds of flight and it was flopping around before this. The video link is in post #104 on page 7 and was posted by jimh.


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 5, 2011)

drgondog: yes i understand that and saw it missing in the pics. i was merely saying that it didnt have to break off from the ac first to cause the plane to lerch due to unexpected loss of trim. it very well could have...but it could have also broken in place....get disconnected from its linkage and thus making it go into a neutral position or fluttered first. had that happened the setting for the trim wold have been viloently lost. the tab it could have dislodged shortly after that.


----------



## GregP (Oct 5, 2011)

Got an update from Bobby Graham of Bobby's Aero Services in Redlands, CA. Bobby Graham says...

Good News for the future of air racing.

Our new crew member, Matt Jackson, is not only a race pilot, aircraft business owner and aircraft owner (he also takes care of Tom Cruises P-51) but he is also the VP of the Unlimited Racing Class and head of the Safety Committee. 

We had a long talk about the Reno crash on the way to Mojave today.

Matt believes the cause of the crash was due to The Galloping Ghost having a CG too close to the aft limit which resulted in pitch instability. There are instructions on the P-51 regarding no combat missions with the aft fuel tank full resulting in an aft CG problem. Instructions specify to empty the aft fuel tank first in flight. 

During qualifying Matt watched Galloping Ghost from inside the cockpit of Furias and could not believe how much trouble Leeward was having in keeping the Ghost in a stable pattern around the course.

Since Leeward lives in Florida and the Galloping Ghost was modified for racing in Calif., when Leeward picked up the Ghost for the Reno races at the last minute, a complete flight test program had not been done based on available information.

There is a video of the entire last lap of the Ghost before the crash which Matt showed me. As Leeward was coming around pylon #8 at about 480 mph after passing Rare Bear, he hit turbulence which pitched his left wing down, Leeward corrected with hard right rudder and aileron. Just as the aircraft was straightening out, he hit a second mountain of turbulence which caused the tail to 'dig in' resulting in a 10+ G climb rendering Leeward unconscious instantly and resulted in the tail wheel falling out. (broken tail wheel support structure was found on the course). As the Ghost shot upward the LH aileron trim tab broke loose. This can be heard on the tape, so the elevator trim tab did not cause the accident.

Since the Ghost was racing at 480 mph with full right rudder and the stick full right, this is where everything stayed when Leeward blacked out. Cockpit camera film that was salvaged from the wreck shows Leeward slumped over to the right in the cockpit. As a result, the Ghost climbed up and to the right, rolled over on her back and then headed for the box seats. Most in the box seats never saw it coming because it came in from behind them.

Matt has had long conversations with the NTSB who call the accident a 'fluke'. They are not going to recommend canceling future races. He has also talked to the insurance companies covering the races for Reno and they also say they are not going to cancel their coverage of future races. Now we wait for the FAA to make a decision.

Ironically, Matt bought box seats tickets for his good friends who stayed with him for a few days before the races. They were the husband and wife who were killed.
-- 
Thank You for choosing 
Bobby's Aero Services
1641 Sessums Dr .
Redlands , Ca 92374


----------



## Aaron Brooks Wolters (Oct 5, 2011)

It's good to see things are getting sorted out and hopefully the FAA will rule favorably. Thank you for the post Greg.


----------



## GregP (Oct 5, 2011)

You are quite welcome, and I sincerely hope this scenario proves to be the case.

It is an update from a "credible source" until we hear from the NTSB and FAA, but I believe Matt Jackson and assume the particulars are correct. 

Matt is one of the good guys in ari racing and a great stick, to boot.

Perhaps one rule may be to disallow any racers without a complete documented flight test before the racing starts. Who can say at this point?


----------



## bobbysocks (Oct 5, 2011)

that's intersting...thanks for the update greg.


----------



## barney (Oct 5, 2011)

A Ghost Story - How We Almost Made Reno | Florida's Premier Airpark - Leeward Air Ranch


----------



## jimh (Oct 10, 2011)

Becareful what you believe out there. Matt Jackson has rebuked this email as BS. 

jim

What Didn’t Cause the Reno Air Race Crash | Jeff Wise


----------



## GregP (Oct 11, 2011)

Very interesting since I got the email froma Reno racer. However, if it is BS, then we all need to take that into account. I'll wait for the final report and refrain from coming to a conclusion in public.

I am now sorry I posted the email but it seemed relevant to the topic at the time. It was not then and is not now my own conclusion, but it seemed to come from a good source. I suppose it was too good to be true ... a fast resolution is almost never the real case, is it? No more updates that don;t come from the NTSB or froma personal source taht us unimpeachable!

OK, back to reality. We saw the video as did the NTSB, the FAA, and almost everyone esle, I suppose. That much is certain. 

The rest can be ignored. Speculation in private is almost impossible to stop, but it doesn't seem appropriate publically since I am not on the board.


----------

