×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

338 comments

Frist post :( (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426898)

This really sucks :(

Re:Frist post :( (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427066)

81 year old? Small wonder he ran the plane into the ground. They should not let people that old ride the subway alone, not to say fly an aircraft.

Re:Frist post :( (2)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427094)

What I'm pissed about is that we're fed imaginary crashes, gore and "reality" daily and lo! the REAL reality, the real gore is immediately banned from youtube and such. Oh, the hypocrisy.

Re:Frist post :( (2)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427236)

lo! the REAL reality, the real gore is immediately banned from youtube and such. Oh, the hypocrisy.

Is it hypocrisy, or is it respect for the families of the victims, who might not want to have mangled pieces of their loved ones served up as entertainment for the masses just yet?

Re:Frist post :( (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427300)

Hypocrisy.

YouTube has no problem breaking their own rules when people post violent, gory videos that serve the US foreign interests, such as victims of Gadhafi or Assad's foot-soldiers.

Or do their families not matter because "they're just brown people"?

Re:Frist post :( (1)

digitalchinky (650880) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427350)

Although youtube seem to be deleting accounts that post the video, it is still available on sites like liveleak.com (formerly ogrish, but very toned down these days) so if it was the somewhat raw and uncensored version of life that you prefer, then it wont be going anywhere.

Re:Frist post :( (1)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427176)

If there is anything to autopsy it will be interesting to see if it was a medical condition that caused him to crash. Chances are it was mechanical. He's a pilot, meaning he's probably been one all of his life and is (was) in better condition at 80ish that most of us here posting. They only put the really fit one in those planes because ones like the Mustang were hard to fly. It's something about the mad amount of engine power wanting to turn the entire plane a certain direction.

Also this was a race, air shows put on dangerous stunts to "WOW" the crowd, low flybys and things like that. This was a race, meaning it has a "race track" and should by all means be a degree safer to spectate than an air show. It was probably one of those freaky things of things and people all being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think it was evil or someone should be to blame, it's just sad and tragic.

Re:Frist post :( (0)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427344)

I don't really have a problem with them flying somewhere but flying that close to people on the ground is very stupid.

Thought the potential of crashes was the point... (-1, Flamebait)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426904)

or do I just not understand air shows?

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (2)

dirtyhippie (259852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426932)

The potential of crashes is indeed part of the point. But in general people prefer the thrill to be derived from those engaged in the pursuit risking their lives, not those in the audience. Messed up, but true.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426956)

also the planes are cool

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427036)

Mod this guy up!

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426970)

Like the song says: You can't always get what you want...

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (1)

Powercntrl (458442) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426948)

I thought it was: NASCAR for the crashes, Superbowl for the commercials, PlayBoy for the articles and 4chan for the lulz.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427020)

That's all of the worst things about all of those.

Correct, you do not understand (4, Insightful)

drnb (2434720) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426982)

Thought the potential of crashes was the point or do I just not understand air shows?

As someone who attended quite a few air shows growing up I feel it is safe to say that people go to see the airplanes. Hell I would have gone to see a P-51 sitting on the tarmac let alone fly. Seeing one crash and be destroyed is not something that an aviation or history enthusiast wants to see, nor does anyone want to see people get hurt.

Re:Correct, you do not understand (2)

GrahamCox (741991) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427250)

Definitely. I can't believe that first comment. No-one wants to see an air crash, that's truly sick. As the blogger said, it's nothing like the movies. I saw a fatal accident at an airshow in the 1970s and it was a horrible, horrible thing to witness. It's as vivid in my mind now as it was right then - you never forget those things.

This is simply tragic and a terrible waste of life. My condolences to all those who have lost loved ones.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426994)

You totally misunderstand airshows.

Being *live* at the field when a F-(insert any number here) flys by is no match for any theatre surround sound. It's also just beautiful to watch these things move.

Then of course there are the antique aircraft. Yes, there are some "thrills" too, like wingwalking; but nobody wants to see a wingwalker die. I bet a significant portion of the crowd would like to try wingwalking just for the sheer experience of flying like a motorpowered bird on the outside.

A pity that some people can't see anything other than bloodsport in all this. Their loss.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427360)

For that matter, looking down the barrels of A-10 Gatling cannon close up is well worth it alone (from my own experience at Abbotsford in 2009).

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (1)

TxRv (1662461) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427064)

That's a big part of it. Thing is, usually the pilots try not to crash into the crowd.

Only airshow I ever went to I saw a biplane smash right into the ground.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (2)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427098)

Only in the sense that the potential of a disaster is what makes roller coasters fun. People greatly enjoy near disaster. It's exciting. But when it turns into actual disaster, it's horrifying. Another example is NASCAR races. Crashes are exciting, but only because the safety systems in the cars are robust enough to keep the drivers and fans safe. Nobody wants to see someone killed.

Re:Thought the potential of crashes was the point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427158)

People go to the Air Races because they like planes, not because they want to see a crash.

But did he have to use so many Java terms? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426906)

I really thought "garbage collection" was inappropriate when talking about the accident cleanup.

OT: moderator points?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426910)

Because slashdot itself doesn't have a "bitch about slashdot" forum on its own site... I'm posting this as AC for obvious reasons, but...

I just got notified of having 5 mod points. I've got a four-digit UID, have had "excellent" karma consistently for the last 5+ years, and this is the first time I've been granted mod points ever since the forever-denied thread-of-death where all who moderated it were mod-banned, which has been something like four years (at least).

Is this because CmdrTaco is finally gone? Or wtf?

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

DiSKiLLeR (17651) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426944)

Dunno. I've been on slashdot forever.

I get mod points all the time. Like really often. For years now. I and when I do, I always get 15 at a time.

I really have no idea why....

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427104)

I got mod points twice this week. Think it has to do with your comments being rated up. Whenever my comments hit +5 the mod points come within a few days. That makes sense, those that others think are writing good comments are probably the best people to pick as moderators, then they go out and rate up comments which make those people moderators, etc.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427136)

I don't read things unless it interests me, and if it interests me I have an opinion. When I have an opinion, good or bad, I want to express it. That is the beauty of forums, nobody is talking over you, or slapping you upside of the head to shut you up. Hire kids and put them in charge while they know it all, I say. Indians have all the fun, the chief has to fret and worry.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426976)

I don't know how it works now, but my understanding is that in the past, you only got mod points if you were generally in the middle of visitation frequency. If you visited too little, or you visited too much, then you didn't get mod points. I believe the theory was that CmdrTaco didn't want people at either extreme. So either you haven't been visiting as much, or they changed the algorithm.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427006)

He is talking about this thread of death [slashdot.org], where all posts attached to it were moderated down to -1 by an anonymous admin and anyone who used mod points on the thread was banned from getting mod points ever again.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

shadowofwind (1209890) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426998)

Although I don't have a high UID, I used to get a lot of mod points, but it stopped suddenly, and I haven't had any for several years. And I didn't post or moderate on whatever thread you're referring to.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427326)

Maybe you disagreed with one of the editors. Michael Sims banned me when I complained that one of my rejected submissions appeared word for word under Roland Pricknail's name.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427068)

It's probably because too few of your posts have been awarded with positive mod points before they expired again.

Post more, and with posts that get positive moderations.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

lexsird (1208192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427130)

Can we opt out of them? They pile up if I don't use them it seems. I hate to mod unless it's really, really over the top AND off topic. And I don't want to go on a modding spree where I just spew them out at some poor thread, nor do I want to be letting my own bias take over and start modding. I just ignore them anymore and if I got them I will use them, sparingly. The last 20 or so just expired. You would think they wouldn't give me anymore being I don't spend them. Of course you get the various really cool posts that need a mod up, but they tend to already be modded, so why pile on?

It's a good system, don't get me wrong. I am just an Indian, not a chief.

Re:OT: moderator points?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427200)

I always had mod points. One day my mod points just shut off even though my excellent karma hadn't changed. AFAIK, nothing else changed either. I was meta-moderating a lot, but I had always done that. I have moments of refreshing particular threads, but I had always done that too (and not doing it didn't change anything.) I post about 50/50 as AC, but I had always done that as well, and those posts were generally positively moderated as well.

I know folks like you were blacklisted, but I don't think it was reserved for just that thread. I left for a long time and have just come back so I don't know when/if I'll get more points if they got rid of the blacklist.

Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426916)

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

Still waiting to hear from my family (2)

storkus (179708) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426938)

Though I live in Phoenix now, all of my family is there, and though its unlikely they went to the show, for some reason I can't get a hold of anyone but my dad and aunt--who are both out of town.

The Reno Air Races have a long history, and this is apparently the first time a plane crashed into the stands. The previous crashes didn't stop the event--that is, it went on again the next year--and I hope this one doesn't either.

i was there (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426960)

i saw it first hand, the galloping ghost lost control and did a barrel roll over the stands and crashed 50 feet away from me into the edge of the box seats. it looked like its aileron got stuck and he couldn't correct it. i love the air races like no other and iv been involved with it literately my whole life, but i will never forget what i saw.

Re:i was there (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427124)

I saw an air crash. I've never been the same, but still here is still here. Visiting memorial websites helps a couple years down the road when you get the heebies at night. Be aware of PTSD.

Best and a prayer to you.

Re:i was there (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427138)

50ft from the boxes? You a section 3er? How's everyone holding up?

Trajectory (0)

dirtyhippie (259852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426980)

I don't want to sound conspiratorial, but the trajectory the plane took makes no sense to me. In an airshow you always stay in a designated zone on the other side of a runway from the crowd. The other planes earlier in the video were clearly in that zone. The plane that crashed was coming in at a very steep angle - probably more than 70 degrees - and from what I can tell in the video, he was moving *away* from the bleachers towards the acrobatic zone. You're not ever supposed to be over the crowd like that or take a trajectory that crosses above the crowd, even at substantial altitude. How did this happen?

Re:Trajectory (2)

Saul Bash (1437909) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427002)

A number of people have commented on it appearing to climb abruptly, stall, and fall. The pilot was quite old—perhaps he experienced a heart attack or stroke, or there could have been a mechanical failure that caused loss of control, resulting in it drifting far off course before stalling over the crowd.

Re:Trajectory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427016)

If there is more footage I would not be surprised to see a loop being performed. Not saying the loop was intentional, but it could have been part of losing control.

80 year old pilot (1, Insightful)

Zebai (979227) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427044)

Am I the only one who finds it strange that an 80 year old man was permitted to fly high speed low altitude stunts at an air show? Most people that age have difficulty driving cars. I wouldn't care if the man knew more about flying than any man alive reaction speed and strength diminish with age its a fact of life.

Re:80 year old pilot (2)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427230)

Most people that age have difficulty driving cars.

I guess it needs to be pointed out that the pilot was an individual, not "most people". Different people age at different rates. If the pilot's health and faculties were good, then they were good, regardless of what other 80 year olds are like.

That said, I hope that all pilots in events like these (and in fact, all pilots period) are required to undergo regular physical exams.

Re:80 year old pilot (3, Informative)

narkosys (110639) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427256)

not sure how it works in the US but here in Canada pilots have to take a medical once a year, twice a year if over the age of 40. They also add more tests, such as hearing tests and ECGs on a more regular basis as you get older.

P

Re:80 year old pilot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427312)

It's starting to sound like a mechanical failure (certainly believable when you're flying an antique). It looks like his experience might have actually helped him move away from the main stands:

"I was there and I saw him clearly headed straight into the crowd, then made a last minute control input that moved slightly the nose slightly toward the tarmac, away from the stands. It hit right at the front (in the front rows of the chairs or hopefully missed the seats by a few feet) nose in. It was hard to tell exactly where it went in, even though I saw it. Seemed power was still full on. Terrible..but I think he made a heroic effort to miss the crowd, best he could."

"I'd like to add from my vantage point (front row 100 yards further down to the right) I was able to see the plane make one last second effort to miss going straight into the stand and it hit just at the front instead. I believe the pilot was a hero and did all he could to get away from the crowds with a broken airplane."

Altitude is your friend (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427046)

The first thing any air racer does at the first sign of mechanical trouble is a steep climb. It gets you out of the race, and more importantly altitude is your friend. It gives you time to recover and sort out the problem. I suspect what happened here was he started the standard emergency climb and then lost all power or otherwise catastrophically failed. He just happened to be pointed the wrong way at that time :(

Re:Trajectory (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427050)

Not to sound conspiratorial, but a plane doesn't usually crash into the fucking stands.

Re:Trajectory (5, Insightful)

spopepro (1302967) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427070)

As others have said, it's not a show, but a race. Also, unlimited class race planes are not normal planes. They chop the wings and boost the superchargers. Tiger Destifani once said that without a significant amount of thrust, the modified P51s have the aerodynamic capability of a cannonball. As they must for those speeds. One of the most amazing things I've ever seen was a P51 (I think it was the Red Baron, notable for having counter-rotating props) diving into the main straight to do a qualifying lap and see vapor trails coming off the wings at 1000ft. P51s aren't supposed go get anywhere near those speeds. The point being: these aren't normal planes, and they aren't doing normal activities, and they are always on the edge of the envelope.

Re:Trajectory (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427168)

It's hard to tell. When there's a problem where the pilot feels he needs to bow out, it's usual for them to declare mayday and climb up and around to land while the race continues. I was there, and when I first saw the plane climb I thought it was just another routine failure, but when he flipped over I could see it wobbling a bit, and it seemed like a control surface may have malfunctioned and stuck in a position outside its normal range of motion while the pilot fought for control. Also don't forget that it was windy all day. (I don't remember which way it was blowing)

As for claims of him having a heart attack or some other medical problem... It MAY be possible, but I don't think so. I personally think a person in his position would know better than to fly if he was in bad shape, not to mention the physicals they go through regularly.

Re:Trajectory (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427306)

I saw a crash at an airshow before. The plane (a Fairey Firefly... WWII British carrier fighter/bomber) was flying and something fucked up and the plane went in a weird direction did a kind of roll turn up and then literally straight down into Lake Ontario just off the Ontario Place jetty by the marina. The pilot died and we saw them pull his body out of the water an hour later. The point is, I learned that going at a high rate of speed the distances on the ground that you think are big are absolutely nothing. And when something fucks up, the plane can go in any direction really fast. And in fact, in many directions really fast. The worst part is when it comes to a sudden stop.

"better than most of what is being reported" (1)

gehrehmee (16338) | more than 2 years ago | (#37426988)

Where does the quote "better than most of what is being reported" come from? It's not in Gosling's report, and if anything, what he reports is quite a bit worse than what the media is reporting.

Re:"better than most of what is being reported" (2)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427024)

"Better" as in "more accurate."

Not "better" as in "things weren't quite as bad as reported."

Re:"better than most of what is being reported" (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427148)

This. But despite the advantages of a good eyewitness account, one of the advantages remaining for the mainstream media has is enough servers to handle a lot of traffic. *cough* slashdot effect *cough*

Re:"better than most of what is being reported" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427072)

Yeah, his report is nowhere near as thorough as the article from a mainstream media source that I read on fark a few hours ago. That article plus video also included interviews with witnesses They were already reporting 75+ injured and many dead. Not sure why the submitter felt the need to belittle the media that is apparently accurately covering this story.

Re:"better than most of what is being reported" (1)

Shag (3737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427248)

Maybe they're a Java fan and bitter that the media never gives anything Gosling does sufficient respect. ;)

Earlier Today (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37426996)

and posted at 12:31am?
so this happened like 10 minutes ago?
damn thats the fastest slashdot has every picked up on a story !

Lost control? (2)

gregh76 (121243) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427004)

From the two videos I saw, it didn't look like the pilot lost control. It looks more like he attempted an inverted loop, but misjudged the amount of altitude he needed to complete it. Then again, I wasn't there.

Re:Lost control? (1)

dougmc (70836) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427042)

From the two videos I saw, it didn't look like the pilot lost control. It looks more like he attempted an inverted loop, but misjudged the amount of altitude he needed to complete it.

Perhaps, but this was an air *race* -- there's no reason for him to do a loop.

Something went wrong before he went up like that.

From Gosling's blog in case it goes down. (4, Insightful)

leetrout (855221) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427012)

I'm alive

Friday September 16, 2011

Just fucking barely. I'm at the air races in Reno with a bunch of friends and a horrific accident just happened. One of the very high end racers, going about 500 mph, lost control and nose dived straight into the audience. The news is currently saying that the plane missed the grandstand, but that's only technically true: in front of the grandstand there are several rows of box seats. It impacted right in the middle of them. I was in a box seat with my friends only 50 feet from the impact. I was watching the plane as it lost control, so I saw the whole thing. The impact happened so fast, there was hardly any sound: just one huge shock wave. No fireball. The plane, and many people, disintegrated instantly, right in front of me. There were bodies everywhere. No crash you've ever seen in a movie is even remotely authentic.

Update: it's already on YouTube. I was in the middle of the dust cloud you see around the impact. They're saying "30 serious injuries" but I know that's a long way from the truth. At least that many died instantly in the impact. I suspect that there were not a huge number of serious injuries. It was not a small airplane. You either died or you didn't. I didn't. My brother and I are still shaking.

Another Update: They're now officially calling it a "mass casualty situation". The plane was Galloping Ghost, piloted by Jimmy Leeward. It was a very cool, highly modified, P51 mustang with a very unusual approach to engine cooling. I doubt that this was at all connected to the accident - it looked like a control system failure.

Re:From Gosling's blog in case it goes down. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427188)

A link with more details: http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/site/?pageid=event_desc&edis_id=VI-20110917-32358-USA

Mass casualty incident (4, Informative)

pfish (576318) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427378)

It's not uncommon to have a vehicle accident with 5 patients and also declare that an MCI. That just means the first responders were overwhelmed by the amount of patients and injuries and they need to declare an MCI, which prompts a number of things: additional emergency personnel, overhead to manage the incident, notifies local hospitals so they can start taking action prior to patient arrival, etc.

Link is running JAVA! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427014)

The server the link directs to is running JAVA! OH NOES! Java: All the elegance of C++ with all the speed of Smalltalk! I clicked on the link, and clicked and clicked, and clicked, and "She's Dead Jim"(tm). I remember describing my first impressions of Java to a University Prof: Inelegant Narcoticized Slug! Is there a coral cache file linking to something written in C?

Australia (0)

Dan East (318230) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427022)

Just out of curiosity, why does this story link to an Australian news site for an event that happened in Nevada? That's one of the things I dislike about Google News, is it features articles from news sources geographically distant from the story (or worse, from "news" organizations like Xinhua). It's obvious they are getting the information 2nd and 3rd hand. So I'm curious why this news source was chosen from the hundreds of copy / pastes from an Associated Press (or similar) news feed.

Re:Australia (1)

toygeek (473120) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427040)

Because the http://www.rgj.com/ [rgj.com] Reno Gazette Journal Fishwrap and Cage Liner is a piece of crap. That's why.

I live in Sparks just north of Reno and south of Stead where the races are. I was talking to a neighbor outside when I heard a million sirens all at once. I went in, and heard the news. What a mess.

Glad you're alright James. A friend of mine was going to go to the races today and decided to go four wheeling instead. He's glad he did.

Video (5, Informative)

kid_wonder (21480) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427026)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs98xkTIBQU [youtube.com]
about the 3:30 mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zusClmg4IQg [youtube.com]
about the :30 second mark

Horrible looking, but amazingly not an explosion.

Re:Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427054)

As I've seen other people say: Movies don't even come close. Even though the videos don't show the entire impact, you just get this sick feeling. You know a bunch of people just got seriously messed up. What a nightmare.

Re:Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427056)

Horrible looking, but amazingly not an explosion.

No shit. It's not a jet with tons of jet fuel. It's a fucking prop plane.

Movies have really ruined people's understanding of how physics works.

Re:Video (2)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427106)

You mean to tell me cars don't erupt into fireballs after falling down a thirty foot cliff?? Next you'll be telling me that explosions generally don't involve fireballs at all!

Re:Video (1)

seyyah (986027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427122)

Horrible looking, but amazingly not an explosion.

Serious questions here: should we expect a plane like this to explode on impact?

Re:Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427232)

Not really, the only explosive bit in a plane is the fuel; and a racing plane would want to carry as little of that as possible to save on weight.

Re:Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427328)

Horrible looking, but amazingly not an explosion.

Serious questions here: should we expect a plane like this to explode on impact?

It pretty much only happens in the movies, real life accidents are just deadly, not flashy and deadly.

Re:Video (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427342)

Horrible looking, but amazingly not an explosion.

Serious questions here: should we expect a plane like this to explode on impact?

Only if you've ever seen a movie.

BTW, condolences to the injured & bereaved.

Re:Video (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427224)

http://www.livestream.com/loadedtv/video?clipId=pla_b2efcd7d-ed04-4edf-89e8-f21ff436ccb4
accident is around 38mins in but be warned its very graphic/gorey :(

Interesting Eye Witness Description. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427060)

Not to make light of the situation, but an eye witness describing the event on Australian radio mentioned at one point that the airplane was travelling slightly above the vertical.

12 were killed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427092)

no clear how the story figures the crash "killed at least 12 spectators". The links all say 3 were killed.
Bumping it up to 12 deaths is a 300% increase over the deaths in all of the other stories, including the linked article.

Video: Another link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427118)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stv5d79aP7A same video, additional link

Sad all around, people and sport (1)

spopepro (1302967) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427128)

The air races have always been risky. Everyone knew that very well. Think about what would happen if every auto racing mishap resulted in sharp acceleration until collision with some other solid object. There have been crashes and deaths in the past, but this is really tragic as most mishaps happen far away from the grandstands.

It may be insensitive, but I'm actually most sad over losing another plane. For years there's been speculation that unlimited class racing's days were numbered. Not enough planes and parts, not enough pilots, not enough mechanics. But the unlimited class is what captures the imagination. Lefty in White Lightning, Hinton in the Red Baron, Tiger in Strega... I connected with the old warbirds and their pilots in ways that I kind of don't have words for right now.

I'm sad for the injured and dead, but I'm devastated over what feels like the end of an era.

Re:Sad all around, people and sport (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427160)

It is rare to read an "X is dead" post on /. and get choked up... at least for me. It is all devastating. The dreams of the air and space frontiers - those were our dreams and probably won't be seen culturally again.

I vote for retirement air-ships. We can all sail off into the sunset. A Wooden Ships goodbye for the age of wondering flight.

What happened to the setback and trajectory regs? (1, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427172)

US Airshows specifically prohibit any trajectories towards crowds and have large setback distances from the "box" that the display is allowed in, specifically for this reason. Clearly neither was being followed, or this crash wouldn't have killed and maimed so many people.

Was the race allowed to weasel out of those regs by not calling itself an airshow, even though that's exactly what it is?

http://www.proairshow.com/What%20to%20say.htm [proairshow.com]

"Since current regulations were put into effect in 1952, there has never been a spectator fatality in an North American air show accident. Thatâ(TM)s a safety record that is he envy of the entire motor sports industry."

So much for that record. The same page says:

"Second, air show performers â" both civilian and military â" are prohibited from performing maneuvers that direct the energy of their aircraft toward the area in which the spectators are sitting."

So much for that rule.

"Third, the industry and regulatory authorities strictly enforce minimum set-back distances that were developed to ensure that, in the event of an accident, pieces of the aircraft will not end up in the spectator area."

So much for that rule.

I hope the FAA employees, airshow promoters, and airport employees who approved the airshow plan are all charged criminally. Sadly, that'll never happen....

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427242)

The plane turned off course. For what reason, nobody yet knows. Since a fully-fueled P-51 can fly for hours, by your reasoning the entire city of Reno would have had to have been evacuated in order to hold the races.

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (2)

yodleboy (982200) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427264)

jeeez. watch the video. See allllll the other planes flying past well away from the spectators and in a COMPLETELY different trajectory than the one that crashes? I'd say they were following the rules. The real question here isn't who was in charge that can be sued. The question is why the hell was this one plane coming from way out of left field? I mean, really, had he not crashed, he'd have been flying OVER the crowd to keep in the race. The pilot must have turned waayyyy wide at the last pylon. Maybe sticky ailerons or rudder? They mention the guy was 74 years old, you certainly can't rule out a heart attack or stroke causing him to be this far off course.

Horrible judgement on the part of the pilot if it wasn't medical. You can have all the rules you want, but only the guy in the cockpit can really enforce them. RIP to all that died.

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (5, Insightful)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427278)

There is a huge difference between an unlimited air race and a display airshow. Display airshows are flown ate relatively slow speeds nowhere near the 500mph of unlimited racers

"Second, air show performers â" both civilian and military â" are prohibited from performing maneuvers that direct the energy of their aircraft toward the area in which the spectators are sitting."

The race course is parallel to the runway so clause has been followed. The issue is that a 500mph unlimited racer with control issues can come down miles away from where the control problem happened and in any direction. They don't usually just fall out of the sky like display aircraft. Even if the planned direction was not toward the audience there is no way of knowing where an aircraft with control problems will come down.

"Third, the industry and regulatory authorities strictly enforce minimum set-back distances that were developed to ensure that, in the event of an accident, pieces of the aircraft will not end up in the spectator area."

That only works if the aircraft crashes under the planned flight path. If it veers off course due to a control problem this is moot.

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (1)

Shag (3737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427280)

US Airshows specifically prohibit any trajectories towards crowds and have large setback distances from the "box" that the display is allowed in, specifically for this reason.

I presume this prohibition does not apply to shows at military bases?

Or at least, does not apply to the Blue Angels?

Or at the very least, does not apply to Fat Albert?

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427370)

This military has it's own rules which are considerably more strict than civilians. Of course that's to be expected when you are dealing with planes that will go 1.5-2x the speed of sound without really trying.

Re:What happened to the setback and trajectory reg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427330)

I hope the FAA employees, airshow promoters, and airport employees who approved the airshow plan are all charged criminally.

As well they should be, provided they approved the aircraft going out of control.

CIVILIANS JUST DON'T SEE WHAT WE'VE SEEN !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427186)

We don't go to a movie to remember, we go to =- whup !! exit from -- reality !! Oh, well, at least he didn't claim "God was looking after me" !! "Saved me for a reason" !! "God didn't pick little green apples" !! because, actually, "God is gonna get you for that" !!

"It crashed like Java does" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427214)

(ducks head)

videos (1)

drwho (4190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37427270)

yeah, I could wait for rotten.com but I'd rather people posted links to videos here. I am really annoyed that youtobe/google takes it upon themselves to decide what is fit for me to see, or not see. I am sure it was horrible. I've seen horrible. I just want the truth.

mechanical failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427272)

Supposedly the crash was due to a problem with the "elevator trim tab", whatever that is.
http://corduroyplanet.blogspot.com/2011/09/chilled.html

Security (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427346)

Where was TSA? Didn't they background check the pilot?

Moral dilemma: (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37427374)

This is yet another incident resulting in death where a seemingly large number of people were involved in shooting Youtube video or snapping photos when the spectators could have provided assistance to the injured.

I was present during a multi-car pileup with two rollovers in 2006 in front of a Borders in Fort Lauderdale where an older male was trapped upside down in his Lexus SUV that was leaking gas onto the tarmac, while approx. 20 persons where huddled around the vehicle shooting cell phone video (and giggling, etc.) and not a single person made any effort to rescue the trapped person.

I approached the scene and kicked the window out, placed his floor mats on the pavement (due to glass), and extracted him from his vehicle. One other individual (previously shooting video) assisted in the extraction.

The individual in the SUV later complained about breaking the window, etc. (even through his vehicle was totaled), and threatened a lawsuit (me).

There is some serious desensitization taking place and I feel social media may be the catalyst.

Contrast this to another accident where I was present on the German Autobahn traveling from Amsterdam to Frankfurt where an individual jackknifed his boat trailer and probably 30 other motorists pulled over immediately to render aid to the driver and remove the trailer and vehicle from the motorway by hand.

I don't know if this is strictly an American phenomenon as the Autobahn incident occurred probably 10 years ago - but the German motorists weren't concerned about lawyers or Youtube during the accident, but were focused on the victim and clearing the motorway first and foremost (not lawyers).

 

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...