Hacker News Reader

Comment by cbanek | Hacker News Reader

This is a good one, but I think the most impressive is the cornfield bomber.

The pilot ejected due to a flat spin (just like what happened in Top Gun, RIP Goose). Now a flat spin is a kind of spin and stall that tends to happen when the center of mass and center of lift are in the same place. This can make planes very unstable. So the pilot can't recover and ejects. But this changes the center of mass on the plane, and the plane recovers on its own, and eventually lands itself in a corn field.

The plane was eventually returned to service after repairs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornfield_Bomber

View on HN

Also fun fact: the F-104 Starfighter also had dart in the nick name here in Europe. It was called the lawn dart because so many of them crashed. This was due to the lesser pilot experience but also the change in role from interceptor to multirole fighter + ground support for which it was uniquely unsuited with its tiny wings. So low and slow was not a good role for it.

Actually, the F-104 aerodynamics were quite well-suited to the low-level strike mission. Small, highly-loaded wings reduce the effects of low-level turbulence. A dedicated low-level strike airframe like the TSR-2 has similarly tiny wings.

What led to the high crash rate for some operators (other operators had much lower losses) was the jump in aircraft complexity and performance combined with an inherently challenging and dangerous low-level strike mission.

Another fun fact about lawn darts:

>Starting in the late twentieth century, the safety of metal-tipped lawn darts was called into question in several countries. After thousands of injuries and at least three children's deaths were attributed to lawn darts, the sharp-pointed darts were banned for sale in the United States and Canada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawn_darts

Over in the UK in the 80s, as kids, we played lawn darts and not once did we manage to injure ourselves.

Not once have I, nor any family member, died in a car accident.

I love this part: One of the other pilots on the mission was reported to have radioed Foust during his descent by parachute that "you'd better get back in it!"

I imagine that this pilot was heavily trolled after this incident!

Maybe, but perhaps they could counter that their piloting skills are so good they don't even have to be in a plane to land it.

"It was a great landing," he said at the time. "We even got to use the plane again."

Apparently he was told over the radio to “get back in” while still on parachute.

The 3 min documentary listed in wiki is excellent…1500 mph and 57k ft capable is mind-blowing in and of itself—not to mention flying sans pilot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noriLGVL7Qo

That’s pretty interesting. Would pumping fuel from wing to the other ever be a viable way to get out of a flat spin?

That level of silliness belongs in a Looney Tunes cartoon. Thank you for sharing!

Is this a common outcome of flat spins? That is, to return to a recoverable state after ejection? I’d think this would be exceedingly rare. And what’s the stability profile on this make of plane?

I don't think many of them at all ever recover themselves like that, after a certain point you just don't have the altitude to fix it all.

Surely it should have been called the 'cornfield interceptor'?

This makes perfect sense to me. The plane was an interceptor intercepting the ground, there's no bombers at all involved!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com