[JoeT]

https://youtu.be/CD-WFjpthns

https://youtu.be/GmSMZ8D6DxU

Enjoy

[volksman]

either had on board starter or it was electric. its walked out not running. nice plane before whatever happened. could have been radio related as well. or just plain old not enough experience

[aquila]

Guy builds top flite giant scale mustang (looks like a top flite anyway) then makes it electric. No warbird deserves to be electric, they need to make noise and feel manly. That airplane crashed because it wanted to. It was a kamikaze mustang. Poor warbird was being forced to identify as a foamy!

[Sandy]

I notice that at just 1.20 in the slo mo, he already has right aileron in.

[RAMJET]

Originally Posted by cessna180

Reply to Arceenut. Your is explanation totally incorrect. I suggest some study of theory of flight, especially definitions of airspeed and ground speed and their effects on an aircraft in flight. Wind is a mass of air that has movement. An aircraft is flying in this mass of moving air. The only effect this wind or mass of air that is moving has on the aircraft is the aircrafts relative movement over the ground (ground speed). The airspeed remains the same. But as I explained in the dreaded downwind turn, the aircraft is banked in the turn, because of the bank the stall speed in increased and also because of the bank the drag of the aircraft is increased ( lift vector at an angle) so if power is not advanced ( more power ) the airspeed will start to decline and the aircraft enters the dreaded stall spin accident that has destroyed many rc aircraft and has taken many lives of students not properly taught at flight schools. May be an idea to sit in some ground school lectures and take a flight with a flight instructor, many mysteries of why an aircraft flys may be very educational.
Michael

Michael , I see where you are going with this and you are partly correct . but the air mass is not static relative to the aircraft . That air mass can speed up or slow down or change direction relative to the aircraft . Seeing as the air can speed up or slow down faster then the heavier mass of the airplane it's effects drastically effect the lift of the plane . That is how you get wind sheer. Now if you had a balloon floating it the air it would be less affected by changes in air direction because of it's lower mass, it could easily speed up and slow down with the air, in essence to the balloon there would be no wind at all.

[stegl]

Originally Posted by Arceenut

Beg to disagree. Not as some assume but for an extreme example to illustrate

Assume the plane is flying into a 40kph wind at an airspeed of 40 kph. The plane ground speed is zero. Now, turn the plane quickly down wind. the plane must accelerate to 80 kph GROUND speed to maintain a 40 kph AIR speed. The aircraft must overcome the inertia and get it up to 80 kph to remain at 40 kph airspeed. Therefore in a down wind turn. power must be available to get the MASS of the aircraft moving up to 80 kph ground speed.

All the rest of course is relevant.

Totally agree with Cessna180. If you get a chance to go up in a small aircraft have the pilot head into wind (relative to the ground) climb to altitude and trim the aircraft for level flight , set engine rpm and watch the airspeed indicator . As you make a gradual turn the nose will drop relative to bank, more bank , more drop. Head into or with the wind (relative to the ground) and at the same fixed rpm/power setting and trimmed out ,the the airspeed indicator will indicate the same airspeed. No change in airspeed ,only ground speed. Also the reason for the nose dropping is you have less relative lift in a bank.
They also teach you that climb/descent is done with power ;not elevator . That in itself is another lesson.

[cessna180]

Well said Len S. You are absolutely correct. In my other 2 posts I may have not made myself clear in my explanation. It has been years since I instructed on the ground and in the air. And sorry my friend Roger variation in wind speed has no effect on the lift vector of the aircraft. Turbulence or wind speed variation in the horizontal plane causes the attitude of the aircraft to change, thus a fluctuation or change in airspeed can result in the airspeed being close to a stall. Wind shear is basically a vertical change in velocity or direction of the air mass. And wind shear is another story for discussion.
Michael

[Mike Sebastien]

There is a important clue right at the beginning of the video. The windsock. If the airplane is taking off in the direction it is pointed then it would be crosswind. Steep climb on take-off, low on power, excessive elevator input, take off flaps which causes more drag, left hand turn to downwind, tip stall, .....game over.

It might have had a chance if the pilot turned upwind but I doubt it.

[stegl]

Effect of wind direction only applies to aircraft when on the ground ,taking off or on touchdown . Once in the air the ground has no real effect (other than ground effect)as it then is forward airspeed that counts for lift.
Full size aircraft pilots will have a better understanding of the whole wind/air discussion were R/C pilots have their beliefs from standing stationary on the ground perspective . As Cessna182 also stated wind shear is another discussion .

Back to the P51 I think we may all agree that it was a stall created by a number of smaller factors adding up to disaster .

[Shotgun06]

Originally Posted by Arceenut

Beg to disagree. Not as some assume but for an extreme example to illustrate

Assume the plane is flying into a 40kph wind at an airspeed of 40 kph. The plane ground speed is zero. Now, turn the plane quickly down wind. the plane must accelerate to 80 kph GROUND speed to maintain a 40 kph AIR speed. The aircraft must overcome the inertia and get it up to 80 kph to remain at 40 kph airspeed. Therefore in a down wind turn. power must be available to get the MASS of the aircraft moving up to 80 kph ground speed.

All the rest of course is relevant.

You seems to forget in your example that if you remove the wind, going 40 kph in one direction and then turning downwind while maintaining 40kph, you still have a change of 80 kph as far as groundspeed and the same inertia... and it's always going to be the case no matter where the wind is coming from. A constant wind has no effect to the aircraft once airborne as Cessna180 mentioned. Once airborne, there is no wind other than the relative wind which is directly opposite to the direction the aircraft is going through the air mass.

Alain