Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA DC10 Flying Under Golden Gate Bridge  
User currently offlineSFO From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 88 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9607 times:

In the 'Lighter Side' of this forum:

http://www.airliners.net/humor/UADC10GG.gif

there is a photo showing a United DC10 flying under the Golden Gate Bridge.

Can anybody let me know if:

1. This photo is real. Looks real to me shadows and all;
2. If this actually happened, what were the circumstances surrounding it -- like when this happened -- I'd be surprised if they even allowed this stunt using such a large aircraft.

Appreciate any information. Thank you.



22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineVirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9338 times:

It would be even more amazing if it were a UAL 747-400 instead of a UAL DC-10


"FUIMUS"
User currently offlineBig777jet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 9278 times:

This is not true! Fake and computer photo. FAA would not allowed commerical flying under any of bridges or even Archway in St. Louis. You cannot do that for maneuver flying through something like that.


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 9208 times:

some people are just too naive...

anyway I can assure you that a handful of GA aircraft and brazen pilots have flown under the golden gate bridge in the last two decades...



Cessna 4269D, Bay, altitude squawk lost, please check your transponder...

bay, 69D we'll cycle the xpdr

<2 minutes later...> Cessna 4269D, altitude indicates 2 thousand

69D


User currently offlineSamurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2458 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 9212 times:

I've seen a larger version of the same photo before! Unfortunately, I can't remember the site where I saw it. It's definitely a photo manipulation using a computer. These days, you can make some some incredible digital manipulations, if you're skilled enough.

The FAA certainly wouldn't allow this to happen! The Golden Gate Bridge is a large suspension bridge, so the air vortices generated by the DC-10 would've rocked the bridge big time like the Big One that Californians hope will never happen in their lives. People and cars would be knocked around and probably even fall nito the Bay. That is even if the DC-10 was going at a speed near the point of stalling, which I don't really know, but it must be at least 375 km/h (233 mph)! The DC-10 is a big and very heavy aircraft, that's why it can't fly as slowly as a smaller a/c like a Beechcraft 1900 or a Dash 8. Not to mention that the tail'd be ripped right off by getting caught on the bridge if the crew flew the plane too high above the water. That would be a serious and fiery accident, as the fuel tanks get torn apart and ignite. It's also a very serious hazard to shipping and smaller recreational boats if the plane was flying that low whether it was under the bridge or not.

Remember the film footage and pictures of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington State getting really whipped by high winds until it got ripped apart? This is one of the best known footage ever made of a bridge being damaged. And that's a pretty good idea of what''ll happen to the Golden gate, if the DC-10's tail got caught in the bridge, although it may not get really ripped apart by the wake vortices generated by the plane.

http://www.enm.bris.ac.uk/research/nonlinear/tacoma/tac09.gif


User currently offlineB744 From New Zealand, joined Dec 1999, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 9173 times:

You may be aware that when VS began flights to SFO, Richard Branson wanted to stage some sort of publicity stunt (which is normal for Virgin) and one idea that was floated was flying a 747 under the bridge. They ran some numbers and determined that it was actually possible, but they couldn't get approval. Hearsay has it that they were instead given permission to fly over the bridge at low altitude between the sticky - uppy things (pillars?) that support the cables......


User currently offlineTurbulence From Spain, joined Nov 1999, 963 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9104 times:

Cool pic!!

But just notice something:
The person who created this photo didn't know too much about airplanes, or just forgot something, which for me is the definitive proof of fake illusion:
This plane is flying without flaps. Maybe such a flight could be achieved at very low speed, but “clean” wing configuration is necessarily faster than the 375 km/h suggested by Samurai777.
By the way: the vortice generated by a DC10 or even a 747 would never cause any kind of problem to any people on the bridge or the bridge itself (if the airplane was flying with landing configuration). The speed at that moment is much lower than 300 km/h, even around just 250, and the vortices generated are very limited. So much, that I have been myself MANY times right below the belly of D10s, 340s and 747s landing at BCN at the exact point where the asphalt of rwy 25 begins. Even cylclists ride their bicycles there without any problem.

Best turbulences


User currently offlineA student From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9097 times:

Vortexes are the most dangerous at approach. They just dissolve before hitting the floor. Once, a 757 trailing vortex blew a small propeller aircraft out of the sky, which is why they now have to leave extra space behind a 757. The reason is that on large airliners, especially the 747, the airflow over the wing can actually reach MACH 1 on approach, while the plane moves at 250km/h. This is perfectly normal, and shows how efective the flaps are in accelerating the airflow above the aerofoil. But it would not harm the bridge.

PS: Last time I was in a big airliner, a 777, the speed at touchdown was 266 km/h, not 375!


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9070 times:

With Photoshop, you could put GE-90 engines on an elephant and it would appear 'real'.

User currently offlineThe Dane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9052 times:

After looking closer I see another error. Turbulence writes that the DC10 flyes without flaps but then look at the shadow below the starboard wing, either it is flaps or the light comes from behind.
From

The Dane


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9069 times:

See:

http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/photos.html

and scroll down to the photo entitled, "You'll never believe...."

I swear this one is real and untouched. Elvis told me so....  


User currently offlineTurbulence From Spain, joined Nov 1999, 963 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9044 times:

To my above post, I forgot to make clear one simple point: the “flight level” of these airplanes over me (or the cyclists) when landing at BCN is for absolute sure hardly above 20-to-25 metres (60-to-75 ft. or so).

Best turbulences


User currently offlineAerLingus A330 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9040 times:

I think British and Air France should do the same thing and have a Concorde land on an aircraft carrier!  

User currently offlineWoodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9006 times:

If anybody tried something like this and actually made it through without crashing they would all be in Federal Prison for the rest of their lives!

User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8997 times:

check out this picture the one called elian.jpg

it is unreleated but humorous....


aaron


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 8966 times:

Great pix, wasn't your white pick-up I hope...!

User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 8964 times:

AerLingus A330 wrote:
-------------------------------
I think British and Air France should do the same thing and have a Concorde land on an aircraft carrier!

------------------------------

Actually, I wouldn't mind having one cruising around so I could find a legal alternate when I needed one...  


User currently offlineFDXmech From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 8960 times:

If you get a chance watch the movie "30 Seconds Over
Tokyo" about the WW2 Doolittle raid. They fly a B25
under the Goldengate Bridge. Looked hairy.



You're only as good as your last departure.
User currently offlineEngelhardt From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 8959 times:

Hmm, seems a bit unreal, flying a DC10 under the Golden Gate. Check it out! NO traffic on the water.
Okay.. Maybe the DC10 is not real. But how about the 3-5 fighters (F-16??) in the movie "The Rock".
Personally I've read somewere that THEY are very real, and that the moviecompany got a special permit.
Anybody outthere have an opinion about that?? I mean, some of you might know a little more about it than me (no comments from big companys allowed).

Engelhardt


User currently offlineEngelhardt From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8882 times:

By the way!! Is it even possible to take such a sharp and focused picture of a fast flying object (DC10), when you are standing on the ground?? I mean, this picture can't have been taken by a tourist. Am I right??

User currently offlineBoeing727 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8861 times:

Here are a couple of odd flying occasions:

1.)A private pilot in France flew his General Aviation Airplane through the Arc D'Triumph in Paris back in the 80's. I remeber seeing it on the news in Germany.
2,)Also in the 80's (late) a German pilot flew a Cessna through Soviet Defenses onto the Red Square in Moscow.
If anybody has additional information to add to these incidents, please do!!!

Boeing727


User currently offlineAaron atp From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 533 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8838 times:

>>>the airflow over the wing can actually reach MACH 1 on approach

If you knew anything about transonic flow or aerodynamics in general, you probably would not have written that.


User currently offlineB744 From New Zealand, joined Dec 1999, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (14 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8810 times:

At the time when the German flew his Cessna into Red Square, the Soviet Government and the media reported that he had acted alone in penetrating Soviet defences. However it wasn't until some years later when the truth finally emerged. When Gorbachev first came to power, he did not believe he did not have the vital support of the top air force brass. So, he came up with a plan to remove them. He got the KGB to hatch this plan and they arranged the flight. They provided the pilot with a route map that bypassed Soviet air defence radar, ensuring that the pilot successfully made it to red square undetected. The fact that a foreign aircraft was able to penetrate USSR air space and land in the middle of the capital severely embarrassed the Air Force top brass, and the Air defence Commander Koldunov was forced to resign. Gorbachev appointed a new Commander (Dmitri Yazov) who was loyal to him, and he was able to govern in the knowledge that he had full support from all divisions of the military.

The German pilot Mathias Rust became something of a hero in West Germany. A popular West German T-shirt depicted a Cessna in Red Square with lettering above the picture that read: "International Airport, Rotor Platz" (Red Square).



Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Golden Gate Bridge Incident posted Fri Feb 1 2002 20:35:08 by Sleekjet
UA DC10,TWA L1011 Still Flying? Sweet Home Alabama posted Mon Feb 10 2003 02:33:59 by Bobcat
UA DC10's SEA-HKG posted Tue Jul 25 2006 06:13:34 by Alexinwa
Info On Golden Gate Airlines posted Fri Jul 7 2006 06:36:16 by Ramprat74
Did UA Stop Flying To Aruba? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 21:54:24 by Flybynight
UA At DEN Under Regulation posted Mon Sep 6 2004 16:22:29 by Frugalqxnwa
Pilot Flying Under The Effects Of Alcohol posted Mon Dec 22 2003 16:39:07 by MarcJet66
Illegal Flying Under Scottish Bridges posted Fri Jul 4 2003 23:46:49 by GDB
Flying Under Etops Rules posted Thu Jun 21 2001 16:31:33 by Bragi
UA DC10 Low On Fuel Landing At Washington National posted Tue Feb 27 2001 23:52:47 by Cedarjet