Whats the biggest myth about aircraft you have heard?

Question

Ok, yesterday- to my shame, I said the Russian Mi-24 HIND helicopter could fly without rotating its main rotor - and by pitching the rotor's propellers against the direction of movement, thus effectively working like an airplane's wings. Also the pilot can vector downwards the turbine's engines, giving it partial lift. It was a joke, but some guy got really worked up by it, So anybody who understands a helicopter rotor will know that even in a fully articulated rotor system, you can not have a wing effect.

when there is a problem, Helicopters can to a limited extent -glide without power by using the momentum in the rotors, while using downward motion to force air through them. The main rotor acts like a windmill and turns. This technique is known as autorotation. A transmission connects the main rotor to the tail rotor so that all flight controls are available after engine failure. Autorotation can allow a pilot to make an emergency landing. But do you know of any bigger myths?

and the truth behind the myth. The myth about the hind occured when some bloke shot it with a camera whoes film was running at the same speed as the rotors, making them look like they were stationary.

No stardust, the moving phones during landing - if they can penitrate the hull of the plane -cause havoc with ground ariels as they try to find a signal, and block terminal communications.

oh dear Googlywo, you should have seen that one comming

Paul & Pat, thats not a myth, its increadale, but on the whole you die if you try it. As for the roll, then most planes will roll, its just few larger planes can survive it, because the roll does not happen at sufficent altitude. And most comercial airlines like to keep the pasengers free from brain injury, they tend to sue if you do that to them.

Alopilot, depends on the simulator, a lot of training is now done in the simulator, because it is cheaper and less dangerous than in the real thing, but nothing in any area of life will ever compensate for reality. Of course I talk big full movement simulators here. for all those deluded fools ho rate MS - I can not land on a simlator like microsoft as well as I have done a few times in reality. And on MS flight simulator a idiot in a cub did not take off and nearly kill me at Granville

Brave, airplanes are designed to natrually fly, thus pilots are cool, sunglasses types with confident smiles. Helicopter piolts are nervous twitchy people, the bird can not natrually fly, it is a series of un-areodynamic forces working in opposite directions, and the pilot knows that if it aint broke, it may well soon be.

respect Honza, I was having a laugh, and should have phrased it a bit better... Its the reason I did not rate the Hind as the coolest Helicopter, would have done if it were able to do that though.

Answer 1

WARNING: Rant coming!

THE BELIEF HELD BY MANY THAT THE ABILITY TO FLY A PLANE IN FLIGHT SIMULATOR = THE ABILITY TO FLY AN AIRPLANE IN REAL LIFE!

Rant over.

Answer 2

The biggest myth I know of is that, in terms of fighters, faster is better.
Its not actually the case, power-to-weight ratios are the most important thing (I am talking about the good old days when you went toe to toe with your enemy rather then point and click from 30 miles away).
Speed means nothing in a dogfight, acceleration and energy are everything.
In a guns engagement you want to be able to turn tighter then your enemy but also be able to mantain the right speed.
Take something like the F18 Super Hornet. It could probably pull an initial 9G very briefly buts its engines wont be able to maintain the right speed (somewhere between 200 and 300mph) and so will lose energy and lose performance in the turn. The pilot will then have to drop to maybe 7G to keep his energy.
Now take something like the Typhoon. It will pull and maintain 9G quite happily until the cows come home. It also has far better acceleration so when the pilot perhaps needs to go vertical he can accelerate in the climb as opposed to waiting for the speed to rise while still flat.
This is what makes a truly great dogfighter.

Both the F18 and the Typhoon probably have roughly equal absolute speeds, around mach 1.8 to mach 2.
So thats the biggest myth I know.

I also had to dispel the idea that a 747-400 is supersonic. Someone I know thought they saw on a little screen that the jet they were going on holiday on was travelling at 702mph at 37000ft (which is more then mach 1 at that altitiude)
I then proceeded to explain that in order to go Supersonic the 747's engine would have to be redesigned to accept supersonic airflow through them otherwise they will flame out and therefore lose acceleration.
Also, the wing tips would probably be ripped off in the mach cone and that the pilot would lose control to to the surfaces losing effectiveness and crashing.
But, no, she was still supersonic!!! So my dad, an aviation engineer of 30+ years explained she was looking at the time and altitude!!!

Answer 3

great question, especially love the bit from someone claiming the typhoon is a great aircraft that matches the FA-18 HAH HAH do you work for the MoD PR people?
The typhoon is an old design conjured up in the 1970's it is 20 some years late it was designed for the cold war hence why they have only started to make a ground attack version and it is billions over budget. where as the FA18 is in mass production and in service throughout the world. Other planes better than the Typhoon? French Rafale and Russian Mig

Answer 4

The biggest myth I know about is often used in the movie industry. It goes along the line of an airliner is at cruising altitude at cruising speed and a passenger decides for what ever reason to parachute out of the plane. First he blows the door out with his trusty shot gun, the gently lowers him self out of the door, free falls for some time and then opens his chute to make a perfect landing on the ground.
Total crap.

Answer 5

To paul h..."Tex Johnson DID do a barrel roll of a 707 over Lake Washington near Seattle. It is documented history. And the guy who was sucked into an intake of a running jet....was unbelievably luckey. Most times you would not come out alive. There was a case of a suicidal individual who actually jumped intentionally into a running engine of a 747. He was sucessful.

Answer 6

as we pass conffesions, I was the one who pretty quickly started at David C since I already saw this rumor on several occasions and taken truly.

I cannot imagine anything more distant from reality. I have never ever heard anything comparable, all the other rumors were based in reality, but this one really drove me mad.

Speaking of the aviation myths, I'd like to bring into the light the myth that that F117 shotdown over Serbia was shot down intentionally. But that is not the myth but propaganda actually. Shoot enough missiles and you will bring something down.

Answer 7

What!!! I have flow a simulator several times and I land safely most of the time. You mean it's not the same?!?

BTW - the crewman who was sucked into a jet engine had a helmet on. The helmet saved his neck, literally.

Answer 8

Did somebody mention Easyjet?

Last time I was on an Easyjet flight - someone hijacked it and demanded to be taken to the same place as his luggage.

Answer 9

i saw this in a movie once where a plane loses both pilots and everyone is unconscious except one girl, by following a couple of commands from ATC she lands the plane safely

Answer 10

its not really a "myth", but the belief that if the engine of a plane fails, the plane will dive down and crash. planes with engines can glide too!