Do you need to file an actual flight plan for this thing? ;)

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

KermieD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
3,019
Reaction score
8
Sorry if this has been posted before, but I've never seen it. There are actual gas turbines on this, not ducted fans.

B52_Model.jpg


Flight Video:

https://www.mcgirt.net/RC/VIDEOS/Giant_B52/B52_flight2.wmv

This is going to hurt him more than it does me:

https://www.rc-aviation.com/Videos/Gordon Nichols B-52 Crash.wmv
 
Originally posted by QuickBurst
Now that would ruin your whole day.

You wouldn't want to say "Now that would ruin your whole year?"
 
The guys name is Gordon Nichols. He actually flew and crashed two of these things.

He supposedly started a third and could not get permission to fly it.

I'm supposing there is some sort of authority where ever it is he was flying.

Sounds like something the ATFE would do.

:D
 
Ok, I know there was a video clip of a giant B-52 model that was
flown somewhere in England (I think), and on one flight the wind
was really much too strong to put this thing in the air (on the playback you can clearly hear the wind). Seems like a bad tailwind caused this B-52's controller to lose control and it nosedived and literally exploded in the distance.

My understanding is that in Great Britian they have permission
to fly there. Maybe that's changed due to recent events...
 
Originally posted by dwmzmm

My understanding is that in Great Britian they have permission
to fly there. Maybe that's changed due to recent events...

Yes, you are no longer allowed any liquids or gels while flying RC planes. :D
 
Originally posted by Thrasher
Yes, you are no longer allowed any liquids or gels while flying RC planes. :D

So, are you saying RC planes have to use solid fuels now?! I don't know about what others think, but this putting the "fear"
into the masses has gotten out of hand...
 
Dave,

I don't know about the current rules in England where this model was flown, however, you can still fly R/C in the States with Turbine fuel, Glow fuel or electric power, so there's no need to worry about it at this time.

I am surprised they let him fly another one and I would think after the second one, his team would consider a different aircraft. It is obvious in the crash video that he turned into the wind and either the wind pushed the left wing, causing it to drop or it was pilot error or both. Either way, it went into the no-lift knife edge and with it seeming to be underpowered to start, it lost motion and lift, then nosed in to the ground.

A day with less wind would have been better. Also, performing more of a rudder turn to keep the wings level and producing lift would probably have prevented the crash, that is, if the rudder was responsive enough. moreover, I can tell you there was certainly a good deal of pressure on the pilot to fly such an aircraft and can speak from experience that it can really get the nerves going! :)
 
Originally posted by CTulanko
Dave,

I don't know about the current rules in England where this model was flown, however, you can still fly R/C in the States with Turbine fuel, Glow fuel or electric power, so there's no need to worry about it at this time.

I am surprised they let him fly another one and I would think after the second one, his team would consider a different aircraft. It is obvious in the crash video that he turned into the wind and either the wind pushed the left wing, causing it to drop or it was pilot error or both. Either way, it went into the no-lift knife edge and with it seeming to be underpowered to start, it lost motion and lift, then nosed in to the ground.

A day with less wind would have been better. Also, performing more of a rudder turn to keep the wings level and producing lift would probably have prevented the crash, that is, if the rudder was responsive enough. moreover, I can tell you there was certainly a good deal of pressure on the pilot to fly such an aircraft and can speak from experience that it can really get the nerves going! :)

Yes, you're right Carl. Reminds me of what happened to my CMR
Buzzard last year at the Gulf Coast Regional meet at JSC:

https://www.nasarocketclub.com/gallery/GCR-2/FH000015_001

https://www.nasarocketclub.com/gallery/GCR-2/FH000016_001

https://www.nasarocketclub.com/gallery/GCR-2/FH000017_001

https://www.nasarocketclub.com/gallery/GCR-2/FH000018_001
 
IIRC,

That B-52 was not only built to scale, but also to same power-to-weight ratio with the original.
His motives were most likely to achieve scale-like performance and handling, but first he forgot to figure in the need for more co-pilots to throttle and fly that whale than the real thing, resulting in multiplying the possibility for a human error due to miscommunication, misjudgement, or fat fingers...
Second, he flew it into those heavy winds prolly without realizing it representing hurricane force winds in scale...
Now if he'd had un-scale like extra power reserve available,
he might have been able to save that big bird...

*sarcasm on*

The crater in the ground and the smoke pillar rising to the sky both looked very true to scale thou....

*sarcasm off*

:D
 
Funny how many places posts about this B-52 keeps popping up in. This B-52 was built in 2003/4 and crashed early last year at a giant scale rally in the UK.

Turbine models are regulated both in the UK and here by the national aeromodelling bodies (BFMA in the UK and AMA here in the US). For very large models of any power type in the UK, there is a special certification process, requiring test and demo flights as well as a design review and preflight inspection by a designated BFMA inspector. Here in the US, we have much more restrictive size/weight limitations, but a similar inspection and "certification" program.

The opinion within the jet community is that Gordon became confused as to the orientation of the model during the turn back towards the field, and applied proverse roll control, causing the roll off and resulting spiral, with absolutely no chance of recovery, regardless of the amount of power available (ample, at about 128 lbs of static thrust). The BFMA would not approve the construction of another model, for various reasons.

FWIW, I fly RC turbines (AMA turbine waiver # 7200) as well as giant scale RC (see my avatar)...
 
Originally posted by dwmzmm
So, are you saying RC planes have to use solid fuels now?! I don't know about what others think, but this putting the "fear"
into the masses has gotten out of hand...

It seems not that many people are scared off, the prices of flights for me to come to XPRS and BALLS are still there usual price, I was half hoping that they'd have come down.

Cath
 
Originally posted by dbarrym
Funny how many places posts about this B-52 keeps popping up in. This B-52 was built in 2003/4 and crashed early last year at a giant scale rally in the UK.

Turbine models are regulated both in the UK and here by the national aeromodelling bodies (BFMA in the UK and AMA here in the US). For very large models of any power type in the UK, there is a special certification process, requiring test and demo flights as well as a design review and preflight inspection by a designated BFMA inspector. Here in the US, we have much more restrictive size/weight limitations, but a similar inspection and "certification" program.

The opinion within the jet community is that Gordon became confused as to the orientation of the model during the turn back towards the field, and applied proverse roll control, causing the roll off and resulting spiral, with absolutely no chance of recovery, regardless of the amount of power available (ample, at about 128 lbs of static thrust). The BFMA would not approve the construction of another model, for various reasons.

FWIW, I fly RC turbines (AMA turbine waiver # 7200) as well as giant scale RC (see my avatar)...

Awesome Model, did the pilot ever say what happened! Sounds like your saying he got into a cross controlled stall and started to spin in. looks like he could have also lost power on the left side as the asymetrical thrust would have been very difficult to deal with at such a low altitude.
Thats too bad!! What a great model!!!
 
Originally posted by sheri
Awesome Model, did the pilot ever say what happened! Sounds like your saying he got into a cross controlled stall and started to spin in. looks like he could have also lost power on the left side as the asymetrical thrust would have been very difficult to deal with at such a low altitude.
Thats too bad!! What a great model!!!

It was an awesome building project, especially as he ended up building two - the first one crashed as well.

The model was pretty far out when it crashed; far enough that it was easy, especially with a white belly and silver topside, to lose visual orientation. One of the harder aspects of flying RC (comapred to full scale) is determining what way the model is going - towards or away makes a big difference in what control inputs you provide (yaw and roll are 'reversed' when the model is coming towards you).

For example, I have a large F-18C that is painted in a Marine "low viz" flat grey scheme. When it is moving fast (150-190 knots or so) it covers a lot of ground quickly, and scale-rate turns take a lot of room. When flying against low clouds or a hazy sky, there are numerous points in the turn where I can't tell which way it is going and just have to "put myself in the cockpit" and mentally fly it around, with no changes in control input, until it is fully visible again. A lot of new or inexperienced RC pilots can get caught out by this and panic, applying hurried control inputs, causing problems.

It didn't stall/spin; the B-52 pilot admits to 'pilot error' as the cause - basically he thought the plane was rolling one way and applied "opposite" (spoileron, actually), which was actually in the same direction as the roll off, which caused the roll rate to increase. Spoilerons can cause a nose drop (loss of lift) as well as roll, explaining the increasing bank and dive angle.

Something this big flies in a very scale-like manner and once the nose was 50+ degrees or so down, with the added complication of the roll rate, it was all over. Very much like the full scale B-52 that crashed while practicing for an airshow in Washington state a few years ago.
 
I love it when grrls talk "aerodynamics".......

I guess this is why they call is "crash and burn"....

terry dean
 
Originally posted by dbarrym
It was an awesome building project, especially as he ended up building two - the first one crashed as well.

The model was pretty far out when it crashed; far enough that it was easy, especially with a white belly and silver topside, to lose visual orientation. One of the harder aspects of flying RC (comapred to full scale) is determining what way the model is going - towards or away makes a big difference in what control inputs you provide (yaw and roll are 'reversed' when the model is coming towards you).

For example, I have a large F-18C that is painted in a Marine "low viz" flat grey scheme. When it is moving fast (150-190 knots or so) it covers a lot of ground quickly, and scale-rate turns take a lot of room. When flying against low clouds or a hazy sky, there are numerous points in the turn where I can't tell which way it is going and just have to "put myself in the cockpit" and mentally fly it around, with no changes in control input, until it is fully visible again. A lot of new or inexperienced RC pilots can get caught out by this and panic, applying hurried control inputs, causing problems.

It didn't stall/spin; the B-52 pilot admits to 'pilot error' as the cause - basically he thought the plane was rolling one way and applied "opposite" (spoileron, actually), which was actually in the same direction as the roll off, which caused the roll rate to increase. Spoilerons can cause a nose drop (loss of lift) as well as roll, explaining the increasing bank and dive angle.

Something this big flies in a very scale-like manner and once the nose was 50+ degrees or so down, with the added complication of the roll rate, it was all over. Very much like the full scale B-52 that crashed while practicing for an airshow in Washington state a few years ago.

Yes, that makes sense what happened!, I saw that video of the real B-52 crashing, just terrible!! Thanks for the info!
 
Originally posted by dwmzmm
So, are you saying RC planes have to use solid fuels now?! I don't know about what others think, but this putting the "fear"
into the masses has gotten out of hand...

I believe that was a joke referencing the new rules on commercial aircraft disallowing liquids or gels being carried on...
 
Originally posted by Loopy
I believe that was a joke referencing the new rules on commercial aircraft disallowing liquids or gels being carried on...

You're right, Mark.
 
Back
Top