I had this video forwarded to me, and have to say that initially I was stunned.
"Man! This pilot is one lucky guy!"
But then I immediately began to wonder, why didn't I see this on the news - like a billion times? I mean, if a camera happens to capture a horse running loose on the highway, all the major networks seem to carry it on the 5:00 news. But this? I hadn't seen it on a single channel.
So after a second look (and third), I have to admit my "awe" turned more into "Ahhhh... I think they're trying to pull a fast one on us." And I'm clearly not the only one who thinks so. In addition to a few glaring physics inconsistencies (If you have only one wing left that is providing lift, wouldn't the plane roll toward the side without a wing - not away? And wouldn't the plane receive at least some damage from a rough landing like that?) - there is also some cosmetic issues with shadows that don't match, and a change in the appearance of the plane during different parts of the video. As a result, it seems that just as many people have spent time creating videos to dispute the authenticity of the video, as have viewed it -- as you can see below.
So who would spend so much time creating a video that can pretty easily be proven to be a hoax? The little company who's name appears on the wings of the plane... that's who. This is viral video marketing at it's best. Hundreds of thousands of people viewing a video once, twice (three times) - and then forwarding it to their friend so they can check it out too. Who cares if people buy into it, or claim it as a fake? As long as they keep talking about it, and looking at it. The fact is, the company just got a lot of indirect marketing press for the cost of a homemade video, and the time it took to upload it to YouTube.
Genius.
Comments
Anonymous (not verified) | 11/25/08 | 20:57 PM
- Reply to This »
- Link
Anonymous (not verified) | 01/01/09 | 09:41 AM
Anonymous (not verified) | 01/01/09 | 09:42 AM
I just read this, hence the late comment.
OK, so, it's an advert - maybe. But such a walk-away landing is not physically impossible, given the engine power of these racers. It may turn out that this is CGI enhanced footage of a real event. Who knows?
Here's an account of a similar, but true landing. How do I know it's true? Firstly, a colleague was an eye-witness and a pupil of the instructor who performed the landing. Secondly, it was reported in Flight International - 18 June 1970.
http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/repeats/zlin_wing_failure.htm
OK, so, it's an advert - maybe. But such a walk-away landing is not physically impossible, given the engine power of these racers. It may turn out that this is CGI enhanced footage of a real event. Who knows?
Here's an account of a similar, but true landing. How do I know it's true? Firstly, a colleague was an eye-witness and a pupil of the instructor who performed the landing. Secondly, it was reported in Flight International - 18 June 1970.
http://www.aerobatics.org.uk/repeats/zlin_wing_failure.htm
Patrick Lockerby | 03/04/09 | 23:05 PM








