Thats what happens when you build a glider with extremely long wing span ,put a turbine engine on it and start flying it like a jet fighter.too much stress on those long wings.u can see them bending one way then in the opposite direction in every loop..oh well.nice job
If you ride in a glider, you'll see that they do exactly that; but yeah...he was over stressing that entire airframe to it's max from almost the start.
That was magnificent….. Right up to the time the wing folded……. Was anybody else expecting it as well?? The amount of bending those wings did was amazing. Loved it. But seriously needed a stronger spar in the wings. 👍👌❤️❤️❤️❤️. Hope they rebuild it.
@@chrisbrown4280 it was purpose built for this kind of flying, by gave in. Carf makes a DG1000 model that is also made for HARD acro with propulsion. They actually say you will get a new one for free if you manage to break it in air.
As soon as he started doing aerobatics, I knew the flight was doomed. The load factor imposed upon the spars of those long wings were immense. It failed exactly where I expected it would. There is a very valid reason that aerobatic gliders all have short, thick wings. To soar, you need long, thin, high aspect ratio wings, for aerobatics you need shorter, thicker low aspect ratio wing. Just look at the aerobatic gliders of the world. The MDM1 Fox, The S1 Swift or the SZD59 Acro. This was clearly operating the design outside its design envelope.
That was brilliant flying but it was also directly responsible for the failure. I’m not sure if many of the commenters here have actually flown a high performance competition glider. I have flown ASH25, ASW22B, ASW20BL, DG400, DG500 and can tell you that they can do aerobatics. But they are not good at them. They don’t have a sufficient roll rates, have poor g limits (both positive and negative) and are so clean that they will rapidly accelerate through their maximum permitted flap operating and Vne. Whilst model aircraft can be built stronger with better materials, limits of speed and g still remain. This glider’s end came about because because of excessive positive g. But it could also have failed earlier with a flap over speed, excessive negative g or an accumulation of minor fractures arising from previous high stress encounters. This ending was assured shortly after takeoff. Shame really.
Agree entirely. I thought when he rolled it the wings were flexing wildly each way throughout the roll. Not really a good idea on a high aspect ratio wing. Lots of high speed and high g flying is going to stress the airframe massively and it seems the designer/builder didn't quite get his sums right. Shame, lovely model.
As I watched this admittedly impressive aerial display, I was imagining the wing loading and stress factors... This turbine fitted aircraft is basically a HAR glider, which has a different wing-loading than that of a jet aircraft. The only aircraft that this 'Aerial Frankenstien' remotely resembles is possibly the Lockheed U2 spy plane, but that had reinforced spars and obviously never performed aerobatics, for had it done so, it would have ended the same way. In fact, the U2 was a notoriiously difficult aircraft to fly, as anyone researching the aircraft would note. It was even mentioned that the U2 was basically a 'sailplane with a jet engine'. And its history has had its fair share of mishaps and tragic disasters throughout. Even so, the U2's service life has been one of longest in aviation history with many variants along wth way.
Why? None of the maneuvers up to the crash would have put much stress in the glider. The final one, a high g pull up at high speed obviously exceeded the model’s s design maneuver speed
@@BillPalmer I respectfully disagree. There was a ton of G being pulled both ways throughout that flight. Did you see the wing flex? Some that negative G was gut-wrenching. Wrong aircraft for the job. Or wrong job for the aircraft.
One question: Why did you replace the fantastic music "Skyfri Himmel" of Bjoern Eidsvag of the original video clip of 2005? (and also "let's all get drunk tonight" of Afroman) ? See e.g. here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-34-YYaFoFWk.html
This is my video, I was there, and it was made like this by me the week after the crash. So if you have sees a version with "Skyfri himmel" please let me know. Someone have rippes my video....:-)
@@andershau Hi Anders, I'll have look, if I still have the bookmark, but this almost 20 years ago! Nevertheless I'll try to find it. Anyway the " audio creator" of this clip seems to admire your masterpiece! I really liked the choose of the first song "Skyfi Himmel", but in the same way I didn't understand the choose of the second son "let's all get drunk tonight" by the artist "Afroman" which started directly after the crash. Did he want to express that on such sad moments one wan'ts to get drunk? I have no idea... I'll try to find the bookmark and come back to you... EDIT Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find a bookmark :-( But what I found, is a copy (wmv format) that I made of this video! As I surely wasn't able to change video-formats in 2005, I'm preety sure that I downloaded it from somewhere.. (unfortunately I renamed it :-( )
Flying such model in that style really pushes the limit. I estimate the wing could easily generate more than 15 g load factor. They should have tested safe g loads on the ground and used telemetry to monitor it in flight. With today's equipment this is not difficult and it is easy to set an alarm sound or a spoken warning when a limit is exceeded. I am somewhat old school but I am able and willing to make use of current technology where it gives an advantage. I would not risk to lose such a valuable model and put people on the ground in danger.
Real gliders of several designs behave exactly the same way. Granted you don’t see this in a Cessna, but Cessnas don’t have 60 foot fiberglass wings with high aspect ratios either
Tja mein lieber, ein Ventus ist eben keine Extra. Schade um das schöne Flugzeug. Erfahrung steigt proportional mit dem Wert des zerstörten Gegenstandes.
@@BillPalmer Yes, but the only reason they have the engines is to take off and gain altitude... they then are shut off and most are on a pylon that folds back into the fuselage. They never do aerobatics with the power on.
please!!!! INCLUDE mODEL OR r/c ETC IN YOUR DESCRIPTIONS SO PEOPLE WHO FLY REAL AIRCRAFT AND NOT TOYS ARE NOT MISLEAD BY YOUR TITLES. This is not a large glider, it is a scale toy. It does not and can not carry a real person.
Yeah, when it all goes sh*t, it is not the money that hurts, but the time. I feel for you. Well built, well flown.., well flown until.... But putting a turbine on a thermal plane requires some throttling back. Or beefing up the airframe. You can't just add power to a stock airframe. Been there, done that. I hope the lesson learned is stay in the flight envelope of the airframe and not just toss KGs of thrust at it.
I really dislike when azz hats put up RC videos as click bait trying to get clicks as if they have a crash of an actual glider or airplane. Please be honest and post “RC” in your title.
Me to, but this is not my intention here. Fagernes Flyshow is a well known RC-only Airshow in norway. This was just not intended for the world as an audience.
@@andershau pardon my harshness; However, it seems like nearly all RC fliers post videos that hide the fact that they are for RC aircraft, I presume to get more clicks. I am guess there are bigger problems I. The world than this. Good day.
lol that was so completely stupid its hilarious. Why build a glider and put a jet engine on it.. then fly it like that? Completely stupid. The guy didnt crash.. the glider committed suicide because it hated flying like that. So not scale.
