|
B52 crash? again???
mmm.
We all know that GN was re-building the B52. Now there are rumors that it crashed again! http://www.*************.co.uk/4um/i...?topic=17643.0 |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Poor guy, crashing 16 turbines in 2 flights .... really sucks.
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
At that link they are talking about a 2.5 meter B-52.
The original and Version 2 B-52 was quite a bit bigger than that wasn't it? Don |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I think you need to re-read the link.;)
That really sucks. Time for number three:D |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Yep, my mistake
Don |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Just kind of makes you sick.
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
So is it confirmed? Was there a second HUGE one and it crashed?
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
according to the link in post 1 . YES
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
There was a second one and apparently it went in on test flight.
I subscribe to Traplets Model World and there was a construction story about Version #2 (lighter/stronger). But it had not flown yet (of course the lead time on the mags is 2-3 months so it's behind.) They promised an update in the upcoming issues. Now I wonder. Don |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I must admit that I thought GN was barking mad to build a model like that. Having heard of his first disappointment and now possibly a second I really feel for him.
I really hope that it wasn't a total loss and if it is not as bad as we fear, or if it is and he decides to have another go, then I wish him all the best. With all the effort and flack he has put up with over the first crash I really hope he succeeds eventually. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Still nothing confirms it, so I'm treating it as a rumor.
Howinheck could anyone tell if a battery came loose from 250 lbs of debris???? (if it did indeed happen) There is not mention of it on Gordons site, nor Wrens, which seems to be more up to date..... |
RE: B52 crash? again???
It has crashed, that has been confirmed by the body that regulates the flying of large models. What is rumour and speculation is the cause of the crash.
H. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Lets See,
First he crashes the large beverly (twice). Then he flies the big B-17 in an unsafe manner at a few UK shows, then crashes it. He goes on to the B-52 Then he flies the B-52 at the BMFA Nats in high winds and fireballs it just because the TV cameras were there and he 'HAD' to fly. After that, the powers that be grant permission (though simpathy) to allow a bigger (MK2 version) to be again built buy a large group and again with major sponsors . . . . .and now he stuffs that one. I just would like to know what Wren Turbines think of all this. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I'd love to know what the CAA think of this! ( UK type FAA). Probably more restrictions.
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
"Come on LMA . . . . . . . Get real ! ! ! ! . . .. Whats next, a 1/4 scale version? ? ? ? Lets all chip in and get this guy a trainer so he can learn the basics of safe flying. "
You can say that again. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
its his reputations that keeps him going.
whats he flying at this years shows? His victor? |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I love our country. When someone does something different and bold all we wait is for the opportunity to criticise and degrade the attempt.
Has no one heard of the courage to fail? I am particularly interested in the verbosity of Milliways attack, and wonder if there is some bad blood between him and Gordon?[:-] I also think a fact check in order given the way the points have been delivered. Firstly I know that Gordon has used sponsorship for such a large project but that he has also contributed a fair amount of money, thousands, to the project. Getting it built for him, not true, of course he had help as have other large scale models, but again, he has performed hundreds of hours of building himself. When you scroll through these forums and some of the large manufacturer sites, there are owners of models that have been built by professional builders and flown by well known pilots...... so nothing is wrong in principle with others doing it for you, but hey, that is not the case here. So what is the point here? In France, the engine problem was not down to silicone as you suggest, but sorted by Gordon and the Wren team. Were you saying that the building techniques and materials were incorrect, because if you are, then you also infer the LMA inspection technique is lacking? But you then demand the organisation to get real, bit of a catch 22 there I think. So losing a signal is his fault too is it....... look through the threads, radio issues prevail. Again, the LMA would be inspecting the suitability and failsafe systems so by implication they must have a problem. But you would hang Gordon for that. The powers that be grant permission through sympathy......... Whose getting real now? So if I may ask Milliways what is your contribution to the leading edge and pushing the envelope???? This project is an amazing feat. We know it works it has flown, and the pilot candidly admitted error on the crash of the first one. Brave, yes, honest yes, but Milliways sees fit to insult the guy. I have seen quite a few aircraft stuffed some of my own too due to that problem of pilot error, big small and the real thing..... But you feel it in order to ridicule the man and suggest he should go back to learn the basics of safe flying. I'll bet he has more than a BMFA B cert.......... So the BMFA is now at fault eh? Bravo Milliways, with an attitude like that we are lucky enough to have people like Gordon whose pushing of the envelope helps develop and give us something to look forward to and where success can be wished for. Clearly you would not wish to be there when he flies it, would you, I mean it is so unsafe, why would place yourself in that position......... With your disdain you reduce any part of your argument to a level of insult, and thus no lessons to be learned from your diatribe. Gordon, if your reading this, I am sincerely sorry to hear of your loss, and would be most interested to understand the causation of this demise. I can only anticipate the heartache and financial loss, as well as that most precious commodity of time that goes with it. Whilst I am sure there are many views, at least you had the courage to fail, and without that, we would still be knocking people unconscious with a hammer than using the least intrusive chemical cocktail to anaesthetize people. You don't make progress without failure Gazzer |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Fair Points there ! and some interesting ones too.
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
Thank you Milliways,
I do realise that many people had advised against this project, and thought it too ambitious and thus there might be room for some critiscism. However, if we can make that constructive (no pun intended), then the outcome will be progress. If you said to me now, should he do it again (fiscal and time issues aside) I would say, I am not sure, I would have to understand a bit more about it, in order to form a basic opinion and it would only be an opinion, and not that scientific I am afraid. Can we give the guy some morale support, I bet his wife/partner is not that happy about this, and at least digest what has gone on. But thank you for responding and being so reasonable. Gazzer |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I saw the video of the first B-52 and I think it was a Pig.. It look very nice on the ground
but I heard it was around 250-300 lbs... That is one fat Pig.. I made my DC-10s with a thrust / weight allmost 1:1 and can drive a truck on the wing without breaking it.... My point is, because this size plane is rare there is no doute it was over built, and over weight, thus makeing it less forgiving. Eddie Weeks |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Eddie it's cause he didn't use a stitch of foam in it.. It was a built up contruction according to the pics of it I saw.. Wasn't your DC-10 mostly foam? Whatever happened to it? My helicopter friend Bill Meador said it was very very cool!
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: Gazzer I love our country. When someone does something different and bold all we wait is for the opportunity to criticise and degrade the attempt. Has no one heard of the courage to fail? I am particularly interested in the verbosity of Milliways attack, and wonder if there is some bad blood between him and Gordon?[:-] I also think a fact check in order given the way the points have been delivered. Firstly I know that Gordon has used sponsorship for such a large project but that he has also contributed a fair amount of money, thousands, to the project. Getting it built for him, not true, of course he had help as have other large scale models, but again, he has performed hundreds of hours of building himself. When you scroll through these forums and some of the large manufacturer sites, there are owners of models that have been built by professional builders and flown by well known pilots...... so nothing is wrong in principle with others doing it for you, but hey, that is not the case here. So what is the point here? In France, the engine problem was not down to silicone as you suggest, but sorted by Gordon and the Wren team. Were you saying that the building techniques and materials were incorrect, because if you are, then you also infer the LMA inspection technique is lacking? But you then demand the organisation to get real, bit of a catch 22 there I think. So losing a signal is his fault too is it....... look through the threads, radio issues prevail. Again, the LMA would be inspecting the suitability and failsafe systems so by implication they must have a problem. But you would hang Gordon for that. The powers that be grant permission through sympathy......... Whose getting real now? So if I may ask Milliways what is your contribution to the leading edge and pushing the envelope???? This project is an amazing feat. We know it works it has flown, and the pilot candidly admitted error on the crash of the first one. Brave, yes, honest yes, but Milliways sees fit to insult the guy. I have seen quite a few aircraft stuffed some of my own too due to that problem of pilot error, big small and the real thing..... But you feel it in order to ridicule the man and suggest he should go back to learn the basics of safe flying. I'll bet he has more than a BMFA B cert.......... So the BMFA is now at fault eh? Bravo Milliways, with an attitude like that we are lucky enough to have people like Gordon whose pushing of the envelope helps develop and give us something to look forward to and where success can be wished for. Clearly you would not wish to be there when he flies it, would you, I mean it is so unsafe, why would place yourself in that position......... With your disdain you reduce any part of your argument to a level of insult, and thus no lessons to be learned from your diatribe. Gordon, if your reading this, I am sincerely sorry to hear of your loss, and would be most interested to understand the causation of this demise. I can only anticipate the heartache and financial loss, as well as that most precious commodity of time that goes with it. Whilst I am sure there are many views, at least you had the courage to fail, and without that, we would still be knocking people unconscious with a hammer than using the least intrusive chemical cocktail to anaesthetize people. You don't make progress without failure Gazzer "Opportunity does not occur without risk. You can't steal second base with your foot firmly planted on first base."In this case he got caught stealing second. Hopefully he will look it over, learn a lesson and go back to do it again. As long as he is safe in his attempts, who is he hurting? His methods might need to be evaluated by an outside consultant who could offer some suggestions, but I say"Bravo due", keep on keeping on. It is becoming sad that agree too much with Gazzer lately, I may start drinking tea and eating crumpetts, whatever that may be....[&:] Tommy |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Lordy lordy, a convert!!!!
Right Tea........ fine easy to understand, hot drink flavoured leaves, lots of different blends should always be drunk with milk save for Lemon tea which don't count! Crumpet... let me explain.:) 1. Crumpet - food stuff, similar to a bread, full of aereated holes, round about 3 inches across and 1 inch high eaten hot by toasting under a grill or in front of a fire. Usually consumed on a Sunday at late tea somewhere between 5:30 and 7:00pm, smothered in butter which gets absorbed into the holes and dribbles off, must be hot...... delicious. Not got a long shelf life so can't send you some but have a go, you may be surprised (so would ET). 2. Crumpet - slang old school for a "babe" often plural in the singular, eating crumpett......... Doctor.....[X(] There is plenty to congratulate Gordon and others for, Eddie's DC10 would have had its issues and dilemmas, and he overcame them. What a way to enjpy yourself!!! Gazzer |
RE: B52 crash? again???
1 Attachment(s)
ORIGINAL: Gazzer .. lots of different blends should always be drunk with milk save for Lemon tea.. Gordons B-52 Was a magnificent achievement the first time..to raise the phoenix from the ashes in a few short months as he did bewitches and bewilders..and gives us all something to look up to. Last year at RR jet sunday... |
RE: B52 crash? again???
TS,
Your wrong pal......... Twinings tasters as seen on the Generation game, milk is compulsory for testing, so there.:D Are you really telling me, truthfully and earnestly and directly that you do not have milk in your tea?[X(] And to go public on it too, where's your manners, a little decorum in front of the chaps would you, What is the world coming to......[:-] Nice Pics of the B52 I never saw her fly, only taxi out and back at Cosford after a nosewheel problem, I really was hoping to see her this year. Patience, look how long it has taken me to build nowt!!! Gazzedr |
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: Gazzer lots of different blends should always be drunk with milk...:) ORIGINAL: Gazzer 1. Crumpet - food stuff, similar to a bread, full of aereated holes, round about 3 inches across and 1 inch high eaten hot by toasting under a grill or in front of a fire. Usually consumed on a Sunday at late tea somewhere between 5:30 and 7:00pm, smothered in butter which gets absorbed into the holes and dribbles off, must be hot...... delicious. Not got a long shelf life so can't send you some but have a go, you may be surprised (so would ET). Dan |
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: DanSavage ORIGINAL: Gazzer lots of different blends should always be drunk with milk...:) ORIGINAL: Gazzer 1. Crumpet - food stuff, similar to a bread, full of aereated holes, round about 3 inches across and 1 inch high eaten hot by toasting under a grill or in front of a fire. Usually consumed on a Sunday at late tea somewhere between 5:30 and 7:00pm, smothered in butter which gets absorbed into the holes and dribbles off, must be hot...... delicious. Not got a long shelf life so can't send you some but have a go, you may be surprised (so would ET). Dan ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!:D:D |
RE: B52 crash? again???
[/quote]
"Opportunity does not occur without risk. You can't steal second base with your foot firmly planted on first base."[/quote] Whew, that's a H$!! of a quote Tommy. That has to be one of the best I've heard in a while, so true. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I once had a crumpet who had an English muffin. Welsh, actually. I'm going to get in trouble again, especially since there are minors in the room...minors telling guys building B-52s they ought to buy a trainer and practice...ahem.
My two cents? And it's just an opinion, not to be construed as a fact...just some hyuk's two cents? That first B52 was pretty frightening. 300 pounds? Over the top. And no real engineering, just an oversized balsa model. Not sure why it went in, the pilot said pilot error, I think, but I think it was doomed anyway, and it came down in somebody's back garden, only by the grace of god did it miss the house. Scary. Why so scary? When you get into 300 pound models, you need to actually think about serious engneering issues, not just balsa, ca, and epoxy and ply. The loads are just so different. How far does the wingtip flex up when you enter a turn? Are the gaps between the surfaces engineered to accomodate such flex? What about fatigue cycles? It's really another story from a smaller model. And I did not see that engineering in this model. It's pretty cool, it's something of a neat accomplishment, but, to me, it's kind of we've been there, done that, and I don't see a need for more models that size, it's not really breaking new ground or proving anything. But, hey, if a guy has a hankering to do one like that, go for it, I don't want to see anybody stop him, I just hope nobody is underneath it when it stops flying. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Another two cents? Four recivers or not, I don't feel comfortable with hobby-grade radio gear flying a 300 pound model anywhere near a crowd. Out in the desert, sure, but it's just too unreliable and vulnerable to fly something like that near people on model airplane radio gear.
|
RE: B52 crash? again???
Your wrong pal......... Twinings tasters as seen on the Generation game, milk is compulsory for testing, so there. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Glad to report this at last,
As seen today on the large model association forum post 214 DAVE JOHNSON and LMA Committee There has been much speculation reference the B52,we can confirm this crashed on test flight last week.There has also been speculation on other moddelling forums,that a 3rd B52 could be built.The present committee have spent many hours today discussing this,and have decided we will NOT endorse another rebuild [or new build] |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Well, to be honest Gazzer, the second definition of a "crumpet" interest me more....;)
I sort of figured you could put something like bourbon in that tea rather than milk, for goodness sake what's the point....:eek: Might as well have an R/C cola and a moonpie, of course that's a southern delicacy, we have that around "onesy, or maybe twosey", and then move on to a can of vienna sausages around three....;) Tommy |
RE: B52 crash? again???
I do find this curious,
The first crash was researched and attributed to pilot error, not structural failure. I'm building my second exact same CAP at the moment having stuffed the first due to pilot error!! I have not seen why this one went down, and the circumstances. Perhaps they will reveal something. I truly wonder what the motivation is in this decision? If the model was defective, then surely the inspection system has a part to play so change that, not the desire to build and try again. If it was pilot error, then re certificate the flyer or get a new pilot. I will wholly reserve judgement but will take a particular interest in the crash report. Can't help feeling there is one bloke who had an idea and the determination to do something spectacular now being isolated by what appear at this stage to be rushed judgements, but ignorance of the facts does not make good decision making. That some should be glad about a decision to ground another attempt confuses me even more. What is the issue?[:-] Gazzer |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Perhaps the decision to not allow any more building of B-52's to this an larger scales and by the same person, may be simply to safe guard all other large models on the books with the LMA/CAA. or it my be just common sense not to build an unstable prototype like a B-52.
Afterall one crash is unfortunate and a shame. .. . . . but 2 crashes might be telling you something . . . .However, doing it a third time is just irresponsible on a grand scale. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: DocYates Well, to be honest Gazzer, the second definition of a "crumpet" interest me more....;) I sort of figured you could put something like bourbon in that tea rather than milk, for goodness sake what's the point....:eek: Might as well have an R/C cola and a moonpie, of course that's a southern delicacy, we have that around "onesy, or maybe twosey", and then move on to a can of vienna sausages around three....;) Tommy Now, you take that same lil' can of Vienna Sausages, and you bring it to ENGLAND, and it will become the culinary sensation of the century. Compared to the fiberglass-and-foam snacks they serve in the British Isles, where they consider sweetbreads(guts and gizzards) to be a delicacy, little canned sausages composed mostly of pork knees and lips are simply spectacular in comparison. This B-52, it's a bit much. I mean, its cool, but when do you say "when?" What's the REAL accomplishment in this? Why not double it? Make it 50 feet in span? What's stopping someone from doing that? What's the POINT? "Look, mine's BIGGER?" So? Except for having a LOT of everything(8 engines, etc) and everything is LARGER, I don't see any real epiphany here in modelling. Others have done the B-52 before, too. I'm glad they are not certifying him for a third Buff...how would the LMA be on the line if a third one went in and hurt someone? Again...that crash in the backyard was incredibly frightening. It was too close for comfort. I'm not going to point fingers at WHY it crashed...pilot error, whatever...the fact remains that these planes DO crash, and will continue to crash, for any number of reasons, and if WE don't retain some self-control, someone else will do it FOR us. I can TOTALLY see a mandate coming down from the FAA, in a heartbeat. It would be short and simple, something like "no models over 25 pounds" and that's that. Go see how far the protest will get, in today's "homeland security" environment. So I worry that one guy who has to prove "his is bigger" will jeopardize us all. Did you see the pics of the first crash? Flaming wreckage, about twenty feet from a house. What IF a 300 pound 8 engined turbine went into the house? |
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: Milliways Perhaps the decision to not allow any more building of B-52's to this an larger scales and by the same person, may be simply to safe guard all other large models on the books with the LMA/CAA. or it my be just common sense not to build an unstable prototype like a B-52. Afterall one crash is unfortunate and a shame. .. . . . but 2 crashes might be telling you something . . . .However, doing it a third time is just irresponsible on a grand scale. |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Sadly in this country I can recall two fatalities with model aircraft in the last few years.
One was a a 60 inch type model and the other an aerobatic craft of relatively standard size maybe about 70 inch or so, neither were large. One was in an area with public access, and several factors came in to play. The other at a club where not proof or evidence was found but radio interference was the most likely cause. So it aint, the size of the craft that is the deadly factor, its the impact and proximity to people and building, vehicles etc. However, I would agree a 300lb model likely to do more damage than a 5lb model. My point is that they are all dangerous, and as such safeguards must be taken, the larger they are, the more safeguards are taken and inspections etc, etc. Maybe if such precuations had been taken for the two smaller aircraft, the incidents may have turned out differently. Perhaps one standard for all......[:-] Secondly, If the demise of one is for a totally different reason than the demise of the other, than why would a third be expected fail? The probability of being hit by lightening is bigger than winning the lottery but there are more millionaires than shocked people!!!!:D I said earlier I could not make a judgement, information is not available to do so, I have not found out even had a hint at what happened apart from Volkans initial bits, which may or may not be the case. If the reasons for the crashes are totally unrelated, the issue of building another one or not should be in the context of that. It could well be on revelation of the problems, that I could agree a 3rd one would be folly, but for now, I know why one went down and that really is a shame, but will await info on the 2nd.:eek: Finally I take ET's point about where do you finish up, with a full size radio controlled model........... Large is for me interesting, challenging and incredible, but not the be all and end all of this hobby. But like my crumpet, I do like 'em big!!!:) Gazzer |
RE: B52 crash? again???
ORIGINAL: Gazzer If the demise of one is for a totally different reason than the demise of the other, than why would a third be expected fail? The probability of being hit by lightening is bigger than winning the lottery but there are more millionaires than shocked people!!!!:D But like my crumpet, I do like 'em big!!!:) Gazzer You logic and superior intellect are astounding. the more I talk with you I realize I may be corresponding with First Officer Spock. BTW if you like large crumpets you defintely need to come down to the south, we got sum big'uns down here....;) Tommy |
RE: B52 crash? again???
Well in the past year the following large models have had mishaps (crashes). There have been others but I don't have the details.
the big ME-262 (now repaired and re-built) the big C-17 (many mishapps so-far) last time this happened it arrived in a crop field. the big Valiant crashed and is being re-built for the next few months. the big herk crashed at a show recently (pics in the mags on that hit) just recently the big triplane had a prang at a show and the owner lost his mind and his tounge. My point is that I am begining to wonder if the skills of some of the pilots are up to scratch. I know most of these guys and though I had thought that by them having big models made them look good ad were to be applauded, I am affarid to say the skills required to do the task of flying these models has been shown to be lacking some what with what I have witnessed. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:50 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.