Mythbusters duct taped plane

J

Jim Logajan

En-Route
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
4,024
Display Name
Display name:
.
I note that tonight's Mythbusters has a "myth" about duct-taping a plane to make it flyable. Except it isn't a myth, so I'm not sure yet why they decided to do it - perhaps they had spare duck/duct tape from earlier episodes? (Hopefully they followed the regs.) But its aviation related so I'm hoping for the best.

Though I'm seeing fewer episodes with "myths" that are all that interesting to me - the episode last week had a rare one that I thought neat and even applicable to flying: trying to walk, swim, or drive in a straight line while blindfolded.

I appear to be one of the few viewers who isn't interested in "myths" demanding ever bigger explosions.
 
I've seen pictures of a plane fixed by duct tape.. supposebly from a bear in Alaska? Was supposed to be real... Wonder how this will go....
 
Jim Logajan said:
I note that tonight's Mythbusters has a "myth" about duct-taping a plane to make it flyable. Except it isn't a myth, so I'm not sure yet why they decided to do it - perhaps they had spare duck/duct tape from earlier episodes? (Hopefully they followed the regs.) But its aviation related so I'm hoping for the best.

Though I'm seeing fewer episodes with "myths" that are all that interesting to me - the episode last week had a rare one that I thought neat and even applicable to flying: trying to walk, swim, or drive in a straight line while blindfolded.

I appear to be one of the few viewers who isn't interested in "myths" demanding ever bigger explosions.
Click to expand...

I don't need explosions. I love the MythBusters. Thanks for reminding me about tonight and I think they are followed by Penn and Teller who I guess recently did a rudder airplane thing on their show.

The MythBusters have done a lot over the years regarding airplanes. Up until recently, though, my Roku (netflix) showed 22 episodes streaming. They added more but not nearly all of the hundreds of episodes. I don't know why.
 
I bet it goes well... Other then the low passes with a person less then 500 feet from the plane flying overhead,,,, That and the X's on the closed runway.:yesnod::yesnod::dunno::idea:
 
N801BH said:
I bet it goes well... Other then the low passes with a person less then 500 feet from the plane flying overhead,,,, That and the X's on the closed runway.:yesnod::yesnod::dunno::idea:
Click to expand...
Looks like it will be an ultralight (BeLite).
 
yep they build those in the hangar at the gliderport here.
 
Jim Logajan said:
I note that tonight's Mythbusters has a "myth" about duct-taping a plane to make it flyable. Except it isn't a myth, so I'm not sure yet why they decided to do it - perhaps they had spare duck/duct tape from earlier episodes? (Hopefully they followed the regs.) But its aviation related so I'm hoping for the best.
Click to expand...

If you don't believe that duct tape can make a plane flyable....you just need to go to India or Africa and you will become a believer....
 
BearedCub_04.jpg

BearedCub_03.jpg

BearedCub_02.jpg

BearedCub_01.jpg

BearedCub_05.jpg

BearedCub_06.jpg


It can be done and was proven a few years back.

The problem is that duct tape is heavy and your putting a lot of it all the end on the tail, this makes a significant change in CG. So it would depends on the type of plane and the amount of duct take you used.

I read an NTSB report a while ago about a crash where the guy put a few fishing rods in the tail section of his plane. I guess he figured they were not that heavy. But because they were all the way at the end of the plane they changed the CG so much that he crashed.
I don't remember the type of plane.
 
Fearless Tower said:
If you don't believe that duct tape can make a plane flyable....you just need to go to India or Africa and you will become a believer....
Click to expand...

:confused:
I do believe one can use duct tape; that is why I said it isn't a myth. I'd read about the Alaska incident a while back.
 
Jim Logajan said:
(Hopefully they followed the regs.)
Click to expand...

All you got to do is call yourself "experimental", right?

Can't call from the middle of nowhere asking for a flight permit, if you could you'd call a mechanic to fix it properly.
I don't think I'd fly that plane unless that was the only way of me getting out of there. So screw the regs.
 
i've still never seen a picture of that duct taped super cub anywhere but where the bear left it. and it has a seriously mangled horizontal stab in picture 1.
 
MachFly said:
I read an NTSB report a while ago about a crash where the guy put a few fishing rods in the tail section of his plane. I guess he figured they were not that heavy. But because they were all the way at the end of the plane they changed the CG so much that he crashed.
I don't remember the type of plane.
Click to expand...

I'd bet that those rods fouled the rudder or elevator cables and pulleys or bellcranks.

Dan
 
tonycondon said:
i've still never seen a picture of that duct taped super cub anywhere but where the bear left it. and it has a seriously mangled horizontal stab in picture 1.
Click to expand...

The tape I follow, that stab has always bugged me though
 
Dan Thomas said:
I'd bet that those rods fouled the rudder or elevator cables and pulleys or bellcranks.

Dan
Click to expand...

That's possible, but I don't remember the report saying anything about that.
 
Obviously the taped tail section worked fine. What'd you guys thing about them reskinning the entire plane with duct tape? Supposedly the original "fabric" weighted the same as 5 rolls, but obviously they used more tape than that.

Am I the only one bothered that they called "confirmed" without leaving IGE?
 
Pi1otguy said:
Obviously the taped tail section worked fine. What'd you guys thing about them reskinning the entire plane with duct tape? Supposedly the original "fabric" weighted the same as 5 rolls, but obviously they used more tape than that.

Am I the only one bothered that they called "confirmed" without leaving IGE?
Click to expand...
I think the real test was the duplication of the Alaska bear-attack repair. Once that was confirmed, everything else is just gravy.

Besides, what additional physical impact would flying out of Ground Effect impose on the duct tape?

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Besides, what additional physical impact would flying out of Ground Effect impose on the duct tape?

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

They're contention was that the duct tape may have added too much weight. Ground effect adds an unfair advantage. It's possible to be able to fly IGE (5' AGL in that test) but not at say 100' or so.
 
Well I view it as more of a balance thing, if they flew it with the tape covering (I hope that) they were still light enough to fall into the ultralight catagory. I'll assume that folks have loaded themselves into it right up to (and probably over) that limit.

So as long as it wasn't too far out of aft CG...
 
Pi1otguy said:
Obviously the taped tail section worked fine. What'd you guys thing about them reskinning the entire plane with duct tape? Supposedly the original "fabric" weighted the same as 5 rolls, but obviously they used more tape than that.

Am I the only one bothered that they called "confirmed" without leaving IGE?
Click to expand...

A little too much sensationalism when the comment was made that the amount of duct tape doubled the aircraft weight. They meant to say that the duct tape used was more than double the weight of the fabric removed. And other than the obvious problems that could be caused by CG changes, who cares if the empty weight increased by what was it 20lbs?
 
Pi1otguy said:
They're contention was that the duct tape may have added too much weight. Ground effect adds an unfair advantage. It's possible to be able to fly IGE (5' AGL in that test) but not at say 100' or so.
Click to expand...

Yes but they said several times the winds were 30kts and the plane was only rated to 12kts - so it was not a "fair weather day" and he stayed near the ground.

They said as a test pilot he could only fly the plane as far off the ground as he would be willing to fall if it didn't work - 5 feet. And with little protection at 50mph they said he could still get hurt.
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
They said as a test pilot he could only fly the plane as far off the ground as he would be willing to fall if it didn't work - 5 feet. And with little protection at 50mph they said he could still get hurt.
Click to expand...

Kinda reminds me of my favorite flying joke. An old farmer comes to an airshow, and watches a pilot put on a breathtaking display of low-level aerobatics. They asked him what he thought, and he replied:

"Anyone can be brave near the ground...let's see him get REAL HIGH and do that stuff...."

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Kinda reminds me of my favorite flying joke. An old farmer comes to an airshow, and watches a pilot put on a breathtaking display of low-level aerobatics. They asked him what he thought, and he replied:

"Anyone can be brave near the ground...let's see him get REAL HIGH and do that stuff...."

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top