They don't necessarily bust any myth (or "myth"). Sometimes the confirm it.
The reason, IMO, this one qualified for being tested is if you saw the photos of the plane the bear damaged, the damage was SO extensive and so extreme (at least the pics I remember seeing circulating) -- almost every inch of fabric torn off and possible some frame damage (IIRR).
And, IIRR, the pics showed that the pilot/owner covered much of the fuselage by wrapping it with saran wrap. So, although it looked to me like "yeah, I can see how it could be flown out, particulary if the pilot kept the speed down near the low end" I can see how some might wonder.
What I'm wondering about is why the mythbusters are doing their repair with duct tape when the one I saw was saranwrap. And in the preview of mythbusters I saw the did less damage than the bear did. Maybe I'm thinking of a different similar incident. Oh well. Either way I can see how some might wonder if it was really real.
Alex
>I don't understand why they would feel the need to do this. Patched up planes are flown out of the bush in Alaska frequently. What "myth" do they intend to "bust"? <
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment