Of course it's fake but come on, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure it, you also missed a glaring issue. Look at the position of the under carriage in relation to the leading edge! The wings have actually moved forward, you do not need to check out the shadows or angles....
1 other thing, just before landing.....not enough rudder, you would need full left rudder to stop the nose digging in and more required as slowing down to err land!
I had a Private Pilot's License in the late 1970's. You submit an excellent debunk indeed. My only addition would be this. Stand under a maple tree in the fall and watch maple keys descend to earth. That is exactly how an airplane would want to behave if it lost a wing. Engine thrust would muck up the spin a bit. But it would still want to turn itself into a maple key. Excellent analysis. And excellent video editing by the original videographer. Devil's in the details.
How about the engine idling sound? You don't hear the the engine sputter and stop, it is like the sound just stops. If you shut off an aircraft engine, it will cough and choke while it is turning after you kill it. In the vid, you hear the engine idling with no change to its idle, while the prop has clearly stopped being powered.
YES THIS IS A FAKE VIDEO .. BUT THE REASONS YOU ARE GIVING AR WAY OFF.. they didn't use two different planes.. the camera is not in the same angle in those two pictures. the one in the air is shot from the bottom and from slightly behind making the shadow come down in to the right where it should. and that slight camera angle explains all of the other reasons you gave you cant see the inside of the control panel from that angle and also the landing gear. your sense of perportions are no good
It is truely sad that there are some folks who are so fucking numb they can't see a fake for what it is and then go into denial when it is proven to be a fake.
kauzmic's vid response raises good points, but doesn't put the matter to rest.
This manuever (minus landing) is part of a standard airshow stunt performance. This stunt is a balance of prop thrust and prop-wash induced lift over the rudder. Is the landing in this vid real? The physics are entirely possible. I have a lot of questions (why wing failure at low-load? Aeleron linkage destruction from lost wing? etc.) but cannot say "fake" w/out knowing a lot more.
It's not animated. The video was made for a german TV show. The flying airplane is a toy, but not animated. The starting and landing airplane is real.
You can tell by the nose of the plane(s) that this is a doctored up job... the other stuff I wasn't sure about until seeing the difference in the nose(s).
I agree with your analysis of the differences in the aircraft. I also noticed there were no shredded control cables, wiring or fuel lines. The wing root was not hemmoraging fuel. I'm not saying it's impossible to land with a missing wing, but this example is obviously faked. As far as the Media buying off on it, there's a lot of gullability in the media and always has been.
ya i saw this vid, and its fake. it had the most cartoonish landing, not to mention its impossible to fly with one wing, i would no, im a pilot. but good job tho
@jatroy90 It's not impossible to fly on one wing. There is a well-documented (and verified) case of an Israeli F-15 pilot losing a wing during dogfight training and landing successfully. Whether you can fly/land on one wing is all about the aerodynamics of the fuselage. This IS definitely a fake, but not all necessarily are.
@jatroy90: Look up the video "Israel F15 MinusWing". That is the Israeli pilot who landed his F15 with only one wing. Also in WW2 there was a case of a Lancaster that managed to come in with most of its left wing blown off.
@AFTERSHOCKCEX I saw the Israeli pilot one.At least half of that must have been shit luck, the rest being steady nerves and skill.The way they say that worked was that the belly of the fuselage acted as a lifting surface and let him manage to get his jet landed safely.This video though, I knew it was fake when I saw it.Not because of the details, but because the motions just didn't look right at all.
@heliarche: Personally I have to admit I was completely duped when I saw it for the first time, but then I am not a pilot :) I told my brother (he doesn't have a computer) who is a long retired air-force + commercial pilot about the original, and he told me that it was theoretically possible so I believed it.
@AFTERSHOCKCEX I'm no pilot either, just a lot of time on MS Flight Sim, and I'm just good at spotting CGI.I'm sure that it is indeed possible to get a plane down like that, but I don't know about the perfect landing while missing a wing.
@heliarche It is simply not possible ! The same stunt has been performed with RC planes , but they have a much different power to weight ratio . RC planes can actually hover like a helicopter , and untill full size planes can do the same , this will remain impossible .
@lumpy3553 I don't know about impossible.What I mean is that an incredibly skilled and incredibly lucky pilot might get the plane down far enough to crash without dying.That perfect landing he pulls off is astronomically improbable however.And of course I speak of this type of airplane.Again, there was an F-16 that made it home and landed with one wing, but the belly of it was wide and flat enough to act as a lifting surface and the pilot was good.The F-16 video is real.Look it up.
You are very wrong. It is real. This is common acrobatic manever called fifed wing hover is performed on most of the airshows. This very talented and experienced pilot used the menever to land his plane which saved his life. As you can see photography amalises can be incorrect. I recomend that you go to acrobatic airshow and eperiance it on your own eyes. Shown Tucker is one of the pilots to do the "hover" Regards Peter
@burespeter1 I'm pretty sure that if you did a Google search of this 'amazing' stunt by Sean Tucker that you would find loads of websites featuring such a stunt. Imaging my surprise when I did just that and came up with ... ZERO SITES!
Not to mention the 50 degree angle of the rear fluffhuffer.... there's no cronen shank on the right johnson rod. You wanna make it look real? Next time remember there's no pranny valve on a Papa 2 Golfenrome... which this so obviously is..
And not to mention the 50 degree angle of the rear fluffhuffer... just look at the cronen shank, it has no johnson rod. Wanna make it look real? Next time remember there's no upla pump on a Papa 5 Wingingberg, which this so obviously is...
I know it's fake, but the shadow thing didn't make any sence at all, different times of the day you have different shadow angles, thus what are the chances that they were taken at the same time of the day. Other then that, nice video.
As I'm sure you know by now, that video was for an advertisement. Very good debunking, though, especially independent of that information and using just the inconsistencies within the video
@GeneralGoopy suriously, lol when you watch the actual video all you have to do is watch the front wheels when he drives on the pavement for about 2 seconds and its just some horrible special effects
You went through all the trouble to make a video debunking an obviously faked, but entertaining, video? What's next - will you debunk how Ironman or The Xmen are not real? Get a life moron.
its true, Just saw it on tv being proven, and yes, an F-15 has a power to weight ratio of greater than one, that little stunt plane on the other hand does not, CGI or an RC plane, its fake either way (although if it was RC I would love to meet the guy who flew it).
Great points. Now, from a pilot's perspective: In the wing you have two things that should have been seen in the separation, wires for the navigation and strobe lights and fuel vapors. In model airplanes, the fuel (if it uses any) is in the fuselage and the navigation and strobe lights are painted on. Therefore you wouldn't see fuel vapors or wires hanging from the wing root. Plus, the original video has two points where you lose sight of the airplane and they could easily splice two videos.
Another dead give away is when the airplane was in a spin after it "lost" it's wing. You will notice the airplane is spinning around the wing that is still attached, if it had lost a wing, this would be impossible. The aircraft would be spinning around the side that the wing had departed from. Not only is the video fake (R/C plane/real plane), but it was "photoshopped" as well.
@umahuma4 True story. The F-15 still had about 25% of it's wing which was enough to create sufficient lift on it's right side to actually land it safely. But that's military, they're made to take a beating.
i agree sorry man but you gotta remember positions of the aircraft in mid-air and the position when landed. For one the way sun rays hit the external paint the shading or color of the paint may appear different than normal state. Glares from the sun can also mess with the paint appearance. As for the body style once again mid-air and ground can affect views. But, its highly possible its real or a fake I'm just giving my opinion.
two different camera angles dude unless the camera grew wings and flew perfectly parallel w the side of the plane which would also explain the difference in the shadows
Think your debunking is BS. The camara shots are different locations. I would expect different shadows from different angles. Gonna have to come back when I get more difinite proof.
Keep it simple guys. You can't keep the aircraft still with only one wing because the torque of the engine would cause an uncontrollable roll. Sean Tucker does a similar maneuver where he "hovers" the plane using full power. But to do so he has full aileron deflection to counter the torque. Can't do dat with only one wing...:)
I haven't read the other comments, I probably should and I apologise for not doing so... but I couldn't whilst laughing so hard at the thought that someone had seriously believed the original clip in the first place.
Fair play to whoever made that original clip - if they had someone out there believing it was real then full marks for b*llsh1t factor mate :)
I'm not convinced that this is a fake. I've seen these stunt planes in action during the Red Bull Air Race in Detroit and Windsor along the Detroit river for the past couple years in a row now. It is amazing what these planes are capable of. Essentially, the plane turns into a helicopter at some points, and the massive 300-350hp V6 engine combined with the light-weight chassis make it capable of incredible maneuvers like this.
@norminater Your arguments, which would work great if you were playing video crack at your local bar, are flawed because the pictures are taken at different angles. For instance, you say that both pictures were taken from the same camera position, when they clearly aren't. The first picture is taken when the plane is in the air, and the camera is looking upward, whereas the second picture is taken straight ahead.
@norminater Second, you try to say that the wheel pants are perpendicular to the plane in the first picture, but that's clearly not the case. Wheel pants are always at an angle, otherwise they wouldn't have that teardrop shape. It is clear to me that they are both at an angle, even though they look like slightly different angles, most likely due to the angle of the camera in each shot. Most of your arguments are severely flawed. It could be a fake, but this video does not prove it.
This is a propeller stunt plane of which does not have the necessary power to lift it vertically, a standard Bell Huey helicopters has a turboshaft engine capable of producing over 900 horsepower, 300 hp is a third of that. Also the helicopters weighs almost at 3 tons with empty weight. Do you honestly think that a stunt plane could achieve vertical lift while it is falling when it isn't design to lift vertically even if you purposely position it to do so?
Please point out where my math is wrong instead of saying "somewhere".
If you've seen it in person then explain in detail of the aircraft used, is it exactly the same as the plane shown in this video with similar scenarios?
Another reason why the aerodynamics in this video is off because there is no way for a pilot to guide the plane to safe landing zone while in vertical position, the other wing can't guide the plane when it's in a vertical position as well as the tail rudders.
Imagine someone goes to all this trouble to state the obvious. First it was not even a good fake, second if you have a clue how a plane flies you'd know it was a joke.
that is obviously fake..... you cannot land an aircraft without one wing.... it's like to make a paper builded plane without the other side of the paper... it won't work... it cannot glide and will have a hard bank to the missing wing direction upon a sad crash...
@AirForcedude5 well, one thing is to loose the middle of the wing and still have some ailerons functions, but, another thing is to try to find lift in the no-where
@AirForcedude5 i saw the vid... we also have to take in account that it's not a prop or a heavy jet... it's a supersonic with afterburner jet..... no the you don't even need too many lift... but it's badly and impossible with any other subsonic aircraft...
how obvious is it this is a fake,its a RC model that lands or whatever it is they spliced into this video, besides no aircraft can fly with a wing missing its impossible ,just look at the wing root and you can see its not even damaged at all. it's laughable that anyone thinks this could be real.
Stop wasting all your time trying to analyze this hoax and think about it for ten seconds: It is aerodynamically impossible for any full scale, fully functioning, human piloted, fixed wing aircraft to establish a positive rate of climb on one wing. Not only does this b.s. of a video depict that, but it actually shows it overcoming a massive rate of descent right after losing the wing and then establishing a positive rate of climb! I've got a video of pigs flying if you have time for that.
@1320runner What if it isn't the wings establishing the rate of climb, but rather the massively over-powered engine that some of these aerobatic birds have on them these days? Some of the ones built by Sukoi can hang on the prop until it runs out of gas. Landing it on one wing would be an entirely other matter though. Gives a whole new meaning to the words "going on a wing and a prayer" though, doesn't it?
To the best of my memory, an Israeli F-15 recovered from losing the entire right wing in a mid-air a number of years ago. I don't know if it ever actually climbed, but it definitely regained control, maintained altitude, flew to an airbase and safely landed.
@Kauzmic forgot to mention, just the out focus from the camera all the time is volontary made to not show u details all the time so it easier for the person who make it to show you just when they want to show you so less work to do on graphic
Fake. The pilot was wearing a parachute. You have to wear a parachute when doing aerobatics because your airplane might break. (ref Federal Aviation Regulations Sec. 91.307 91[c])
So, the pilot would have been wearing a parachute for just this kind of emergency, and hecertainly had plenty of altitude at the top of the loop, and the spectators werent in danger. There is no way he would have risk his life and the spectators, trying to save the airplane.
The sequence following the "patch of blue sky" does not involve NOT a full scale airplane; it is a quarter scale model airplane. I have seen this happen many times. A model airplane like this one has a power to wight ratio in excess of one-to-one. That is, its thrust is greater than its weight. Not easy to do, but does happen fairly frequently. Real piston powered airplanes, on the other hand, are real "dogs" in the power to weight ratio arena. Great (R/C) piloting though!
Well I don't know tho i admit i can;t help wishing it were real. However your arguments are all very weak and tricks of reflected light on the white trim and the panning of the camera could explain all your points. In particyular the argument aboit the bulbous nose on landing fails cause the same shape appears on the plane immediately befpore landing.
Kauzmic: Thanks for your careful research debunking this. As a pilot, I knew this had to be fake and was having a hard time convincing some non-pilots of that. I showed them your work, and they finally believed me. Well done!
your comment about the landing pad ? the landing pad changes its angle when it lands. can you not see the the angle of the whole plane structure? it dipps down at the end.. if the wheels were flat when the plane was on the ground then it wouldnt balance.
@Twixlex fake, the first plane was real, but they cut the clip in the middle of the video and traded it with an RC plane, you can tell, the labels change through the video! besides, the plane is too small to be real. and in the end, you can even see the fake man.
remember... this was just a test from "galileo", a german science show on TV, how long it takes that users will detect it as a fake. Especially they made special mistakes like your points to find it out easily as a fake.
@GosHawk77 fake, the first plane was real, but they cut the clip in the middle of the video and traded it with an RC plane, you can tell, the labels change through the video! besides, the plane is too small to be real. and in the end, you can even see the fake man.
Just the fact that it looked cartoony (is that a word?) tipped me off. The plane just doesn't move like it should after it lands. Now, I've seen several videos of R/C airplanes doing this, and a plane that could sustain knife edge flight could do this for real. Just not in this video. ( C'mon Sean D, rig an Extra with a removable wing and really wow the crowd!) By the way, does anyone know what happened to the Pitts with the second set of landing gear so it could land inverted?
Oh god. Anyone who thinks this is real at first viewing is clueless. The whole thing is cg and is easily done. Landing with one wing is technically possible (google F-15 landing one wing) but this is cg. Pretty good though. But the landing part could be refined.
You try to pull the "old dead veteran card blah blah." I didn't mention anything about his experiences or personality...you did. I said that having a pilots license doesn't make you an authority, as you've proven with your initial comment. If anyone is dragging a deceased veteran into a position he can't defend himself, it's you. Mind your own advice; Don't try to use this dead veteran's experiences to support your views or condemn mine (and polish your ego)...it's disrespectful.
Chantervz - Getting a pilots license is NOTHING like getting a drivers license - NOTHING! But then again you never said you got a license. Ground school, flight training, cross country, weather, communications, FAA regs & solo are among the countless hours of training needed (You ever done it ?). But a monkey can drive a car.
Attacking someones credibility "Many idiots learn to fly" is out of line, except perhaps in your case, but certainly rude.
Just because he's a pilot doesn't mean anything at all. Many idiots learn to fly. I did it =-) It's like getting a driver's license, only more expensive.
I instantly knew it was fake, but not because of flying experience...because it's obvious. LOL.
I just can't understand how anyone thought this was real. Maybe because I fly, or because the video was filled with so many errors that made it obvious. This has been done with many RC planes before though. ANd, if this was an air race pilot, he'd bail out and trust his chute before attempting that landing.
You have got to be kidding me... We all know it's fake. That video fails on so many levels. When the wing falls off, it spins the WRONG way. A wing on a plane like that would never "fall off" in an instance like that. The ground roll when the airplane "lands" is ungodly-short. No one thought this video was real, you didn't have to point it out... It was probably made by a student in computer animation as a class project.
It wasn't that obvious when the video came out - why else would 300,000 people watch my video?? BTW - it was made by German Television to see how quickly a questionable video would go viral.
Actually if you examine the images you will see everything on the top of the plane is skewed forward. This could possible some camera artifact from motion, I'd have to see where that top still was grabbed from.
seriously? you mean to tell me that people needed this video debunked to realize that it was fake? i dont think it was ever even intended to fool people...
lol man, this video was made with a model RC airplane on german tv! its a serial named "galileo" and they wanted to make a video, which was not clearly real or clearly fake! so that was the goal, and as u can see it worked! :-)
there seems to be a lot of arguments between cg vs. a model...there is actual video of a similer type rc aircraft that does lose a wing. Although it does land with minimal damage, the landing was nothing close to how this plane lands. In my opinion and nothing more...I m going with CG
of course the wheel pants dont line up when it's sitting on the ground it has a nose up attitude
roofy2k 4 months ago
Just coureous......Where's the video ot the airplane crashing is it's a fake?
moondogman 6 months ago
You dont need to debunk it idiot what a waste of time. You can clearly see the plane is fake in the video at the end
Level85HumanStoner 7 months ago
its pretty crazy that people need this to realize that its fake. as pointed out in this video there's clearly a 3D model involved.
evrolicious 7 months ago
Some aircraft CAN land with a missing wing with enough aileron deflection + lifting body.
However this video breaks laws of physics (inertia) and you'd have to get moving quite fast in order to still fly.
Vid's fake, flying on one wing and landing is not.
commodore88 7 months ago
FAKE! PURE AND SIMPLE.
SUCONITNOW 7 months ago
wheel pants directly reflecting sunlight while in the umbra of the plane's shadow. The uncanny valley strikes again!
ReddmanDGZ 8 months ago
1:14 when this plane flies, its in a horisontal position
when its on the ground, its on an angle .......
you are the dumbest person i have ever seen.....
1470cool 8 months ago
0:58 well maybe the plane moved? retard....
1470cool 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of course it's fake but come on, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure it, you also missed a glaring issue. Look at the position of the under carriage in relation to the leading edge! The wings have actually moved forward, you do not need to check out the shadows or angles....
1 other thing, just before landing.....not enough rudder, you would need full left rudder to stop the nose digging in and more required as slowing down to err land!
Pittnuma 9 months ago
Comment removed
Pittnuma 9 months ago
Comment removed
Pittnuma 9 months ago
I had a Private Pilot's License in the late 1970's. You submit an excellent debunk indeed. My only addition would be this. Stand under a maple tree in the fall and watch maple keys descend to earth. That is exactly how an airplane would want to behave if it lost a wing. Engine thrust would muck up the spin a bit. But it would still want to turn itself into a maple key. Excellent analysis. And excellent video editing by the original videographer. Devil's in the details.
walgar2 9 months ago
How about the engine idling sound? You don't hear the the engine sputter and stop, it is like the sound just stops. If you shut off an aircraft engine, it will cough and choke while it is turning after you kill it. In the vid, you hear the engine idling with no change to its idle, while the prop has clearly stopped being powered.
CantorNikolaos 10 months ago
YES THIS IS A FAKE VIDEO .. BUT THE REASONS YOU ARE GIVING AR WAY OFF.. they didn't use two different planes.. the camera is not in the same angle in those two pictures. the one in the air is shot from the bottom and from slightly behind making the shadow come down in to the right where it should. and that slight camera angle explains all of the other reasons you gave you cant see the inside of the control panel from that angle and also the landing gear. your sense of perportions are no good
Mapingtheuniverse 10 months ago
Comment removed
daguy1234 11 months ago
It is truely sad that there are some folks who are so fucking numb they can't see a fake for what it is and then go into denial when it is proven to be a fake.
klesmer 1 year ago
@klesmer Oh you mean like Church? HA! stupid church people...
yellowbikemike 11 months ago
0:52 This Theorie about the straight Wheels is debunked
Jgo1704 1 year ago
kauzmic's vid response raises good points, but doesn't put the matter to rest.
This manuever (minus landing) is part of a standard airshow stunt performance. This stunt is a balance of prop thrust and prop-wash induced lift over the rudder. Is the landing in this vid real? The physics are entirely possible. I have a lot of questions (why wing failure at low-load? Aeleron linkage destruction from lost wing? etc.) but cannot say "fake" w/out knowing a lot more.
Nameunavailabletoday 1 year ago
We doesn't have to show the details. In the video, when lands the pilot, evident, that an aircraft doesn't remain in one in a landing, like this.
posseidonnnn 1 year ago
because the first picture was when he was flying and the other one was when he landed it was not fake dude it was real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
aalover123 1 year ago
It's not animated. The video was made for a german TV show. The flying airplane is a toy, but not animated. The starting and landing airplane is real.
MrChickenwarrior 1 year ago
Are you fucking retarded? ITS ANIMATED!!!!!!!!
brandonm1392 1 year ago
It look pretty stinky toward the end when it lands.
MRCAB 1 year ago
Mate, you have way toooo much time on your hands!! Why not re hash the moon landing???
browndog1965 1 year ago
it's possible to do this. But it is obvious that it's on a simulator. You didn't have to do this whole thing
Eflightheli 1 year ago
they did a good job on photoshopping it or whatever application. you could make an action movie from that clip.
BOGZASV8MA 1 year ago
That really needed to be "debunked"? It's obviously one of the worst fakes on YT.
sjtom57 1 year ago
You can tell by the nose of the plane(s) that this is a doctored up job... the other stuff I wasn't sure about until seeing the difference in the nose(s).
Thistlesifter220 1 year ago
I agree with your analysis of the differences in the aircraft. I also noticed there were no shredded control cables, wiring or fuel lines. The wing root was not hemmoraging fuel. I'm not saying it's impossible to land with a missing wing, but this example is obviously faked. As far as the Media buying off on it, there's a lot of gullability in the media and always has been.
Randyincv 1 year ago
OH realy .. .. ?
r7Nox 1 year ago
now man! now you are wrong as it is high in the air than is the light different
flyingdutchmanpilot 1 year ago
Not a fake, its documented as such.
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3458590/Video-of-pilot-landing-his-one-winged-plane-becomes-YouTube-hit.html
InTheCity3D 1 year ago
@InTheCity3D: Here is the video of how they shot the footage.. look up "Making-Of the Killa Thrill 'One Wing Landing' Viral Video" on YouTube.
AFTERSHOCKCEX 1 year ago
Comment removed
luchobello1 1 year ago
its not the point THAT WAS A FUCKING COOL VIDEO :) :)
turnnburn36789 1 year ago 2
it doesent take a genius to know its fake...
killgates1 1 year ago
Not to mention the writing on the sides which is different on each plane
jeremy1000100 1 year ago
ya i saw this vid, and its fake. it had the most cartoonish landing, not to mention its impossible to fly with one wing, i would no, im a pilot. but good job tho
jatroy90 1 year ago
@jatroy90 It's not impossible to fly on one wing. There is a well-documented (and verified) case of an Israeli F-15 pilot losing a wing during dogfight training and landing successfully. Whether you can fly/land on one wing is all about the aerodynamics of the fuselage. This IS definitely a fake, but not all necessarily are.
trane608 1 year ago
@trane608: Right the pilot was Zivi Nedivi. You can see the vid from the History Channel episode on YouTube.
AFTERSHOCKCEX 1 year ago
@jatroy90: Look up the video "Israel F15 MinusWing". That is the Israeli pilot who landed his F15 with only one wing. Also in WW2 there was a case of a Lancaster that managed to come in with most of its left wing blown off.
AFTERSHOCKCEX 1 year ago
@AFTERSHOCKCEX I saw the Israeli pilot one.At least half of that must have been shit luck, the rest being steady nerves and skill.The way they say that worked was that the belly of the fuselage acted as a lifting surface and let him manage to get his jet landed safely.This video though, I knew it was fake when I saw it.Not because of the details, but because the motions just didn't look right at all.
heliarche 1 year ago
@heliarche: Personally I have to admit I was completely duped when I saw it for the first time, but then I am not a pilot :) I told my brother (he doesn't have a computer) who is a long retired air-force + commercial pilot about the original, and he told me that it was theoretically possible so I believed it.
AFTERSHOCKCEX 1 year ago
@AFTERSHOCKCEX I'm no pilot either, just a lot of time on MS Flight Sim, and I'm just good at spotting CGI.I'm sure that it is indeed possible to get a plane down like that, but I don't know about the perfect landing while missing a wing.
heliarche 1 year ago 2
@heliarche It is simply not possible ! The same stunt has been performed with RC planes , but they have a much different power to weight ratio . RC planes can actually hover like a helicopter , and untill full size planes can do the same , this will remain impossible .
lumpy3553 1 year ago
@lumpy3553 I don't know about impossible.What I mean is that an incredibly skilled and incredibly lucky pilot might get the plane down far enough to crash without dying.That perfect landing he pulls off is astronomically improbable however.And of course I speak of this type of airplane.Again, there was an F-16 that made it home and landed with one wing, but the belly of it was wide and flat enough to act as a lifting surface and the pilot was good.The F-16 video is real.Look it up.
heliarche 1 year ago
I could see it was fake the first time I saw it
robloxguggi 1 year ago
not fake first i was their
greenday1092 1 year ago
awwww geee and to think i was impressed by a fake gee not kool...
creearcher 1 year ago
either it is fake or it is supernatural
robertwc82 1 year ago
You are very wrong. It is real. This is common acrobatic manever called fifed wing hover is performed on most of the airshows. This very talented and experienced pilot used the menever to land his plane which saved his life. As you can see photography amalises can be incorrect. I recomend that you go to acrobatic airshow and eperiance it on your own eyes. Shown Tucker is one of the pilots to do the "hover" Regards Peter
burespeter1 1 year ago
@burespeter1 I'm pretty sure that if you did a Google search of this 'amazing' stunt by Sean Tucker that you would find loads of websites featuring such a stunt. Imaging my surprise when I did just that and came up with ... ZERO SITES!
darrindwp 1 year ago
What? No! Everything on the internet is TRUE. 'Scuse me, I'm going back to the 911 conspiracy theory sites.
azimuth361 1 year ago
"Gullible is not in the dictionary." (He replies) "Really?"
propho1 1 year ago
dude ur looking at a differnt angle the sun cast a shotow at differnt andgles and refelctts off the aircraft making its shine
thriller415 1 year ago
Different decals too.
aidler2 1 year ago
The difference the commentator does not mention is the lettering on the side. It looks like CTII above and The thrill below.
Scott6113 1 year ago
those pictures are obviously takin at different angles
vnbdv8or7104 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Not to mention the 50 degree angle of the rear fluffhuffer.... there's no cronen shank on the right johnson rod. You wanna make it look real? Next time remember there's no pranny valve on a Papa 2 Golfenrome... which this so obviously is..
HedgesTree 1 year ago
And not to mention the 50 degree angle of the rear fluffhuffer... just look at the cronen shank, it has no johnson rod. Wanna make it look real? Next time remember there's no upla pump on a Papa 5 Wingingberg, which this so obviously is...
HedgesTree 1 year ago
I know it's fake, but the shadow thing didn't make any sence at all, different times of the day you have different shadow angles, thus what are the chances that they were taken at the same time of the day. Other then that, nice video.
Asuraith 1 year ago
no point in putting so much time into proving its fake when you can simply say FAKE AND GAY
aweomae 1 year ago
As I'm sure you know by now, that video was for an advertisement. Very good debunking, though, especially independent of that information and using just the inconsistencies within the video
nocturnezero 1 year ago
youd have to be the stupidest peice of shit ever to think this is real...
a 10 year old could figure out this is fake
GeneralGoopy 1 year ago
@GeneralGoopy suriously, lol when you watch the actual video all you have to do is watch the front wheels when he drives on the pavement for about 2 seconds and its just some horrible special effects
aweomae 1 year ago
this is a fake this video made a tv show from germany
The1910SVE 1 year ago
what r u analyzing exactly
its very clear that the last shoot is graphics made
sheko2000 1 year ago
what r u analyzing exactly
its very clear that the last shoot is graphics made
sheko2000 1 year ago
You went through all the trouble to make a video debunking an obviously faked, but entertaining, video? What's next - will you debunk how Ironman or The Xmen are not real? Get a life moron.
theothertroll 1 year ago
its true, Just saw it on tv being proven, and yes, an F-15 has a power to weight ratio of greater than one, that little stunt plane on the other hand does not, CGI or an RC plane, its fake either way (although if it was RC I would love to meet the guy who flew it).
RichardHammond11 1 year ago
Great points. Now, from a pilot's perspective: In the wing you have two things that should have been seen in the separation, wires for the navigation and strobe lights and fuel vapors. In model airplanes, the fuel (if it uses any) is in the fuselage and the navigation and strobe lights are painted on. Therefore you wouldn't see fuel vapors or wires hanging from the wing root. Plus, the original video has two points where you lose sight of the airplane and they could easily splice two videos.
tmp0529 1 year ago
Another dead give away is when the airplane was in a spin after it "lost" it's wing. You will notice the airplane is spinning around the wing that is still attached, if it had lost a wing, this would be impossible. The aircraft would be spinning around the side that the wing had departed from. Not only is the video fake (R/C plane/real plane), but it was "photoshopped" as well.
SteveD328 1 year ago
Can i just say if you look really close the orange of the bottom plane you can see that the white is slightly lighter around the white.
Still different in other ways though.
Damn i though it was real :(
winatube 1 year ago
the pics were from different angles so, i am still not convinced.
MrRockoutLoud 1 year ago
Yes... and nevermind the physical impossibility of landing an airplane with one wing, and the terrible acting.
bernard90404 1 year ago
@bernard90404 well, an F-15 did land with one wing once.
umahuma4 1 year ago
@umahuma4 True story. The F-15 still had about 25% of it's wing which was enough to create sufficient lift on it's right side to actually land it safely. But that's military, they're made to take a beating.
fergiy89 1 year ago
i agree sorry man but you gotta remember positions of the aircraft in mid-air and the position when landed. For one the way sun rays hit the external paint the shading or color of the paint may appear different than normal state. Glares from the sun can also mess with the paint appearance. As for the body style once again mid-air and ground can affect views. But, its highly possible its real or a fake I'm just giving my opinion.
spectorx13 1 year ago
is it just me or does the landing gear, and nose look cartoonish, or cgi? in the lower picture.
Heathensword65 1 year ago
It is not a fake my friend! :-) It is a very clever cut :-) There are video omages of an RC plane combined with the images of the real one
claoodioo 1 year ago
two different camera angles dude unless the camera grew wings and flew perfectly parallel w the side of the plane which would also explain the difference in the shadows
eclipseman331 1 year ago
Think your debunking is BS. The camara shots are different locations. I would expect different shadows from different angles. Gonna have to come back when I get more difinite proof.
floatsup 1 year ago
It was obvious though, when the "plane" lands, that is not physics.
You don't need words, physics just tells you straight up, that's not me bud...
fucktheothercalmo 1 year ago
White trim, no control panel, pointed straight angle nose and ESPECIALLY the distance from wing to nose.
That is not two pictures of the same plane, just the wing position ALONE is enough to prove that.
Ye nice job lol
fucktheothercalmo 1 year ago
that guys is talking about the shadow comparing the airplane flying and the one that is in the ground...
dude.... of cource it's not going to be the sun is in same position in both occasio but the airplane is not.
K0UK0U 1 year ago
really? you spent this much time "debunking" the video. it wasn't obvious enough?
dvon2005 1 year ago
Good analysis!
:-)
skazhiprivet 1 year ago
C'mon, if you couldn't tell it was fake to begin with get a brain.
The motion and shitty lighting gave it away when it hit the ground.
Blitzkrieg1981 1 year ago
NICE JOB!
elcmusic 1 year ago
first thing was good point...rest was crap
doyoudaffy 1 year ago
Keep it simple guys. You can't keep the aircraft still with only one wing because the torque of the engine would cause an uncontrollable roll. Sean Tucker does a similar maneuver where he "hovers" the plane using full power. But to do so he has full aileron deflection to counter the torque. Can't do dat with only one wing...:)
nickschor 1 year ago
Not sure about camera angles, but the paint scheme on the plane is indeed completely different after the plane supposedly loses its wing.
Good CGI but alas attention to details (especially the white stripe) is missing.
dachande07 1 year ago
I haven't read the other comments, I probably should and I apologise for not doing so... but I couldn't whilst laughing so hard at the thought that someone had seriously believed the original clip in the first place.
Fair play to whoever made that original clip - if they had someone out there believing it was real then full marks for b*llsh1t factor mate :)
DuaneTheCat 1 year ago
I'm not convinced that this is a fake. I've seen these stunt planes in action during the Red Bull Air Race in Detroit and Windsor along the Detroit river for the past couple years in a row now. It is amazing what these planes are capable of. Essentially, the plane turns into a helicopter at some points, and the massive 300-350hp V6 engine combined with the light-weight chassis make it capable of incredible maneuvers like this.
norminater 1 year ago
@norminater Your arguments, which would work great if you were playing video crack at your local bar, are flawed because the pictures are taken at different angles. For instance, you say that both pictures were taken from the same camera position, when they clearly aren't. The first picture is taken when the plane is in the air, and the camera is looking upward, whereas the second picture is taken straight ahead.
norminater 1 year ago
@norminater Second, you try to say that the wheel pants are perpendicular to the plane in the first picture, but that's clearly not the case. Wheel pants are always at an angle, otherwise they wouldn't have that teardrop shape. It is clear to me that they are both at an angle, even though they look like slightly different angles, most likely due to the angle of the camera in each shot. Most of your arguments are severely flawed. It could be a fake, but this video does not prove it.
norminater 1 year ago
@norminater
This is a propeller stunt plane of which does not have the necessary power to lift it vertically, a standard Bell Huey helicopters has a turboshaft engine capable of producing over 900 horsepower, 300 hp is a third of that. Also the helicopters weighs almost at 3 tons with empty weight. Do you honestly think that a stunt plane could achieve vertical lift while it is falling when it isn't design to lift vertically even if you purposely position it to do so?
JohnMufasa 1 year ago
@JohnMufasa I've seen it with my own eyes, so somewhere you're getting your math wrong.
norminater 1 year ago
@norminater
Please point out where my math is wrong instead of saying "somewhere".
If you've seen it in person then explain in detail of the aircraft used, is it exactly the same as the plane shown in this video with similar scenarios?
Another reason why the aerodynamics in this video is off because there is no way for a pilot to guide the plane to safe landing zone while in vertical position, the other wing can't guide the plane when it's in a vertical position as well as the tail rudders.
JohnMufasa 1 year ago
I wanna know who thought it was real....call me.
shortfinal71 1 year ago
Imagine someone goes to all this trouble to state the obvious. First it was not even a good fake, second if you have a clue how a plane flies you'd know it was a joke.
bfgray 1 year ago
ummm...it's animated...isn't that proof enough?
cschulz316 1 year ago
that is obviously fake..... you cannot land an aircraft without one wing.... it's like to make a paper builded plane without the other side of the paper... it won't work... it cannot glide and will have a hard bank to the missing wing direction upon a sad crash...
gustavo87467357 1 year ago
Yes you can land a plane with one wing. I personally know an Israeli man who landed an F-15 after a midair crash on one wing.
AirForcedude5 1 year ago
@AirForcedude5 well, one thing is to loose the middle of the wing and still have some ailerons functions, but, another thing is to try to find lift in the no-where
gustavo87467357 1 year ago
@AirForcedude5 i saw the vid... we also have to take in account that it's not a prop or a heavy jet... it's a supersonic with afterburner jet..... no the you don't even need too many lift... but it's badly and impossible with any other subsonic aircraft...
gustavo87467357 1 year ago
Hey BrianDewey...Actually a plane CAN fly with only one wing and proof of it is an f-4 phantom did it!!Yes, this vid is a fake..I agree.
haywardkevin 1 year ago
that would be a F-15 Eagle based in Israel.
mongrul68 1 year ago
the funniest thing was someone actually sent me an im telling me that people thaught it was real when they first saw it. some people need glasses,
chubscub 1 year ago
Furthermore, it spins in the wrong direction for a plane losing its wing.
Fishnflightbum 2 years ago
how obvious is it this is a fake,its a RC model that lands or whatever it is they spliced into this video, besides no aircraft can fly with a wing missing its impossible ,just look at the wing root and you can see its not even damaged at all. it's laughable that anyone thinks this could be real.
BrianDewy 2 years ago
Stop wasting all your time trying to analyze this hoax and think about it for ten seconds: It is aerodynamically impossible for any full scale, fully functioning, human piloted, fixed wing aircraft to establish a positive rate of climb on one wing. Not only does this b.s. of a video depict that, but it actually shows it overcoming a massive rate of descent right after losing the wing and then establishing a positive rate of climb! I've got a video of pigs flying if you have time for that.
1320runner 2 years ago
@1320runner What if it isn't the wings establishing the rate of climb, but rather the massively over-powered engine that some of these aerobatic birds have on them these days? Some of the ones built by Sukoi can hang on the prop until it runs out of gas. Landing it on one wing would be an entirely other matter though. Gives a whole new meaning to the words "going on a wing and a prayer" though, doesn't it?
Chompchompyerded 1 year ago
To the best of my memory, an Israeli F-15 recovered from losing the entire right wing in a mid-air a number of years ago. I don't know if it ever actually climbed, but it definitely regained control, maintained altitude, flew to an airbase and safely landed.
spadeswings 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You took a blurry photo... Its going to affect the angles of things.
FarmerGriff 2 years ago
I had a blurry video from which to work from. What's your point??
Kauzmic 2 years ago 6
That you are trying to use the same tactics as the 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
FarmerGriff 2 years ago
not hard to see why famergriff have a point do ur study on option you will understand
Sahllem 1 year ago
@Kauzmic forgot to mention, just the out focus from the camera all the time is volontary made to not show u details all the time so it easier for the person who make it to show you just when they want to show you so less work to do on graphic
Sahllem 1 year ago
the plane is to wek a jetplane can you land if you good
95system 2 years ago
Fake. The pilot was wearing a parachute. You have to wear a parachute when doing aerobatics because your airplane might break. (ref Federal Aviation Regulations Sec. 91.307 91[c])
So, the pilot would have been wearing a parachute for just this kind of emergency, and hecertainly had plenty of altitude at the top of the loop, and the spectators werent in danger. There is no way he would have risk his life and the spectators, trying to save the airplane.
NZ74 2 years ago
The sequence following the "patch of blue sky" does not involve NOT a full scale airplane; it is a quarter scale model airplane. I have seen this happen many times. A model airplane like this one has a power to wight ratio in excess of one-to-one. That is, its thrust is greater than its weight. Not easy to do, but does happen fairly frequently. Real piston powered airplanes, on the other hand, are real "dogs" in the power to weight ratio arena. Great (R/C) piloting though!
navy7603 2 years ago
you're an idiot
beato123 2 years ago
Well I don't know tho i admit i can;t help wishing it were real. However your arguments are all very weak and tricks of reflected light on the white trim and the panning of the camera could explain all your points. In particyular the argument aboit the bulbous nose on landing fails cause the same shape appears on the plane immediately befpore landing.
ge0ffsimm0ns 2 years ago
Kauzmic: Thanks for your careful research debunking this. As a pilot, I knew this had to be fake and was having a hard time convincing some non-pilots of that. I showed them your work, and they finally believed me. Well done!
PG
PokeyGreen 2 years ago
you don't have to have a physics degree to see that the clip was faked. a pair of eyes is sufficient
al3699 2 years ago
??? 0:48 - 1:07 ??? (original video)
20wattBass 2 years ago
your comment about the landing pad ? the landing pad changes its angle when it lands. can you not see the the angle of the whole plane structure? it dipps down at the end.. if the wheels were flat when the plane was on the ground then it wouldnt balance.
Mee4hannah 2 years ago
yeah, real real! :D
stop eating the mushrooms which grow up around your house
winwon62 2 years ago
it is REAL!!!
Twixlex 2 years ago
Ho Ho Ho - so is Santa!
Kauzmic 2 years ago 16
@Kauzmic LOLz.
Twixlex 2 years ago
@Kauzmic GASP SANTA'S NOT REAL??? :D
XXXTheEpicMeowXXX 1 year ago
it is fake
snowhieu 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
were you there? no i didn't think so, so shut your mouth. dumass
Lithoushine 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
were you there? no i didn't think so, so shut your mouth. dumass
Lithoushine 1 year ago
@Twixlex fake, the first plane was real, but they cut the clip in the middle of the video and traded it with an RC plane, you can tell, the labels change through the video! besides, the plane is too small to be real. and in the end, you can even see the fake man.
Kpilot786457 1 year ago
remember... this was just a test from "galileo", a german science show on TV, how long it takes that users will detect it as a fake. Especially they made special mistakes like your points to find it out easily as a fake.
Furunculus8 2 years ago
No, its a company that makes men's shirts.
RobertGary1 2 years ago
Next you're going to tell me that the Easter Bunny isn't real. (sigh). Nice video
LETCA 2 years ago
Was there any question to begin with?
GosHawk77 2 years ago 15
@GosHawk77 fake, the first plane was real, but they cut the clip in the middle of the video and traded it with an RC plane, you can tell, the labels change through the video! besides, the plane is too small to be real. and in the end, you can even see the fake man.
Kpilot786457 1 year ago
Excellent observation! five stars!
taofledermaus 2 years ago
Good onya mate
hellbrand 2 years ago
Just the fact that it looked cartoony (is that a word?) tipped me off. The plane just doesn't move like it should after it lands. Now, I've seen several videos of R/C airplanes doing this, and a plane that could sustain knife edge flight could do this for real. Just not in this video. ( C'mon Sean D, rig an Extra with a removable wing and really wow the crowd!) By the way, does anyone know what happened to the Pitts with the second set of landing gear so it could land inverted?
jpatt1000 2 years ago
Perhaps the calmest and most well thought-out debunking of a video I've seen. Informative, relaxing and enjoyable. Thank you!
churchcody 2 years ago 5
Oh god. Anyone who thinks this is real at first viewing is clueless. The whole thing is cg and is easily done. Landing with one wing is technically possible (google F-15 landing one wing) but this is cg. Pretty good though. But the landing part could be refined.
Chuckjagermeister 2 years ago
Actually, it was anything but obvious, unless you know the story. Most casual observers thought it was real.
It was produced by a German Television station and a model was used, not cgi. (see what I mean?)
Kauzmic 2 years ago
This is cgi. A model doesn't have a pilot raising the canopy after stopping.
Chuckjagermeister 2 years ago
Hahaha,
You try to pull the "old dead veteran card blah blah." I didn't mention anything about his experiences or personality...you did. I said that having a pilots license doesn't make you an authority, as you've proven with your initial comment. If anyone is dragging a deceased veteran into a position he can't defend himself, it's you. Mind your own advice; Don't try to use this dead veteran's experiences to support your views or condemn mine (and polish your ego)...it's disrespectful.
chantervz 2 years ago
Chantervz - Getting a pilots license is NOTHING like getting a drivers license - NOTHING! But then again you never said you got a license. Ground school, flight training, cross country, weather, communications, FAA regs & solo are among the countless hours of training needed (You ever done it ?). But a monkey can drive a car.
Attacking someones credibility "Many idiots learn to fly" is out of line, except perhaps in your case, but certainly rude.
Stick to your flight sim.
Kauzmic 2 years ago 4
Just because he's a pilot doesn't mean anything at all. Many idiots learn to fly. I did it =-) It's like getting a driver's license, only more expensive.
I instantly knew it was fake, but not because of flying experience...because it's obvious. LOL.
chantervz 2 years ago
I just can't understand how anyone thought this was real. Maybe because I fly, or because the video was filled with so many errors that made it obvious. This has been done with many RC planes before though. ANd, if this was an air race pilot, he'd bail out and trust his chute before attempting that landing.
B4its2L8guy 2 years ago 2
It's a fake!!! It was a test from the german chanel Pro 7. They made this fake to show how many people belive this fake.
GTAmyths94 2 years ago
obviously it was fake u wasted your time showing this vid
coby4861 2 years ago
thank you, captain obvious?
nanturadu 2 years ago
good job you are very clever
igenther99 2 years ago
You have got to be kidding me... We all know it's fake. That video fails on so many levels. When the wing falls off, it spins the WRONG way. A wing on a plane like that would never "fall off" in an instance like that. The ground roll when the airplane "lands" is ungodly-short. No one thought this video was real, you didn't have to point it out... It was probably made by a student in computer animation as a class project.
Brewdison217 2 years ago
It wasn't that obvious when the video came out - why else would 300,000 people watch my video?? BTW - it was made by German Television to see how quickly a questionable video would go viral.
Kauzmic 2 years ago
The depth of field gives it away; the plane is a model then intercut with real footage at the end. Clever but fake.
dangoat2009 2 years ago
loser
ay0ung 2 years ago
Actually if you examine the images you will see everything on the top of the plane is skewed forward. This could possible some camera artifact from motion, I'd have to see where that top still was grabbed from.
sokol 2 years ago
seriously? you mean to tell me that people needed this video debunked to realize that it was fake? i dont think it was ever even intended to fool people...
hotblud82 2 years ago
Jeesus you are so fucking clever aren't you! you must be a doctor or somesuch.
ruinedsociety 2 years ago
two words jackass...fuck yourself
hotblud82 2 years ago
is fake!!
christo383 2 years ago
lol man, this video was made with a model RC airplane on german tv! its a serial named "galileo" and they wanted to make a video, which was not clearly real or clearly fake! so that was the goal, and as u can see it worked! :-)
roflcopter221 2 years ago
Mate are you for real, you need to study the footage to work out it was fake?
Some people are so bloody stupid
ShmeareD 2 years ago
well i knew it, but GREAT JOB MAN
wildmetal16 2 years ago
hehehe...good job... i thought that is real.
menan23 2 years ago
i could tell it was fake when i saw it on discovery....the landing graphics looked fake
mrchoppaboy 2 years ago
there seems to be a lot of arguments between cg vs. a model...there is actual video of a similer type rc aircraft that does lose a wing. Although it does land with minimal damage, the landing was nothing close to how this plane lands. In my opinion and nothing more...I m going with CG
bpbat21 2 years ago
I don't think anyone thought that was real...Don't get the point of this vid, it was obviously cg, you can just tell from looking at it.
0hmyy0utubeusername 2 years ago
you can also see that the distance between the tail fin and the cockpit changes
Artaphernes 2 years ago
Nice Work!
If the plane vould land like in the video, it would be totally destroyed.
they have used a RC plane
fifibus70 2 years ago
Brilliant deduction, Sherlock, but I think the ridiculous landing was a dead giveaway.
Spyd3rs 2 years ago