|
ATFSCrash (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
Masherbrum: As far as being 3 feet above the ground, thats quite possible to; but that is the least conservative estimate. It was almost certainly 30 feet or less. It was definitely not sane. Sorry but you havent proved yourself to be any more accurate than Wikipedia.
ATFSCrash (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
Masherbrum: That is speculation. Though it is a definite possibility. The government has not confirmed or denied the allegations. There are some hardened and guarded storage facilities in that area, as virtually all military installations; that doesnt necessarily mean they have nukes. ;) People in the know, wouldnt talk of such things. Youre obviously full of hot air.
jadeeatx (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
I would never gone on a commercial plane with that man, as a fellow passenger even. You cant punish an aircraft like that. Especially when they are not built for it.
Masherbrum (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
There was restricted airspace behind the control tower. Nuclear weapon storage at that.Bud Holland called one of his crew a "pussy" for grabbing the controls when he was about 3 ft. above the ridge line at Yakima in March of 94. He was reckless and should have been long grounded given his track record. Wikipedia has so many glaring errors, to even cite it "as a source" is laughable.
Mirage2000H (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
The pilot was flying as if he wanted to crash...
jimmybob116 (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
2 years 2 days ago this video was added
baconsandwich2007 (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
That's true. But most people learn from their mistakes. This guy was lucky with his stupid stunts and then, like most things, it ran out. It's the crew I feel sorry for.
steveshreds (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
to be honest, as skilled pilot as he was, i dont think he should be piloting an aircraft of that airframe that low. a bomber is ment for long distance flights, not tricky little turns.
33vortex (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
Why would you want to fly like that with an a/c clearly not designed for it? It's asking for trouble. There are planes built for aerobatics, clearly the B-52 is not one of them. It doesn't even have proper ailerons for crying out loud. This is some of the most retarded flying I've seen. From a safety point of view it should never have been allowed to continue for this long. It did, and it happened.
ATFSCrash (January 1, 1970 at 8:59 am)
Thebean38: There are six ejection seats on this model of B-52. Some of the early models did not have any. These ejection systems were not designed to be used under these conditions/parameters. The altitude is too low and the bank angle is too steep; its outside of the parameters. The likelihood of survival at that altitude and bank is better than nothing but virtually nil. The copilot started ejection sequence, the Hatch cleared but there wasnt enough time for the seat to clear. |