2006 Airshow Favourites

vulcan2912

Hi

Not sure what section to put these in so settled on this one.
Here is a selection of a few of my favourite pictures from this years airshows visited by myself.
The fast and pointy stuff.
































Way Way to many to choose from.I've actually ended up only choosing a few from RIAT.Not sure how these will go down on the forum but if anyone wants to see more i'll do a few more posts.

Cheers
Gary

Fred W

WOW !!! Those shots are incredible. Thanks for posting.

anwmn1

WOW! You have some great shots there. I prefer the ones with the sky background to the ones with ground (cars, grass, etc.)

1, 4, 6, 7, & 8 are the best of this series on my opinion.

Aaron

Awais Yaqub

Amazing photos and power

vulcan2912

Thanks for the comments.

A few more












Cheers
Gary

DoctorIt

What sort of comments could we possible give you? They're all sharp enough to cut glass, exposure is dead-on, and most of the angles are stunning.

My fav, simply perfect:

Skippy

vulcan2912 wrote:

Hi
Not sure what section to put these in so settled on this one.
Here is a selection of a few of my favourite pictures from this years airshows visited by myself.
The fast and pointy stuff.
Way Way to many to choose from.I've actually ended up only choosing a few from RIAT.Not sure how these will go down on the forum but if anyone wants to see more i'll do a few more posts.
Cheers
Gary

WOW!!! she says it again WOW!! .... :jawdrop Gary, Gary, Gary, you got yourself some simply magnificent shots at that Airshow didn't you.

I've looked at them, and looked again, and they are so clear and sharp too.
Are these all full frames or crops ???

Gosh I don't know which one I like best, they all look great, were you standing really close to runway? you seemed to have been in a good position to get some really cool shots Gary...... Well Done

Thanks for posting........ Skippy (Australia)

Antonio Correia

vulcan2912 wrote:

Gary.
Words ? What for ? They are really gorgeous pics.
But, flying so low is dangerous, isn't it ?

Am I wrong when I suppose that - to fly so low - the speed must be increased !? Or is it the idea of an ignorant ?

DoctorIt

Antonio Correia wrote:

Am I wrong when I suppose that - to fly so low - the speed must be increased !? Or is it the idea of an ignorant ?

What makes you think that? Aerodynamics is the same whether you are 10 or 10,000 feet off the ground.

Antonio Correia

DoctorIt wrote:

What makes you think that? Aerodynamics is the same whether you are 10 or 10,000 feet off the ground.

Yes. Apparently.
There is the Einstein attraction force. Not important at this speed?
Well, I don't know. Just an idea, wrong one, may be.
But, are you sure !!??

Let's think of extremes as I often do to understand the middle:

Suppose the plain flies 1 meter hight, assuming there are no obstacles.

It must be different from flying 10.000 m height at the same speed !

Right ?

Antonio Correia

Second thought:
aerodynamics must not be the same at extremes.
It just can't be.

The influence of the proximity of the Earth or some kind of surface, so near the plain, changes the aerodynamics.

Look at the Formula I.
When they want to double the front car they gain speed because of the wind/aerodynamics getting very near, taking advantage of the force of the wind.
I know it is not exactly the same situation but isn't it similar ?

Drive a car with something on top. It's different.

How about that ?

DoctorIt

Antonio Correia wrote:

Yes. Apparently.
There is the Einstein attraction force. Not important at this speed?
Well, I don't know. Just an idea, wrong one, may be.
But, are you sure !!??

I'm sure.

Antonio, a brief physics lesson, if I may. Gravitational attraction is affected by the distance between two objects - your intuition there is correct. And in fact, it varies as the square of the distance. However, the order of magnitudes is important as well. Since the earth is so massive, and the distance is measured from the center of the earth's mass, you would have to be in low earth orbit (that means very very high, spacecraft) before you would notice a considerable decrease in the earth's pull.

Tangential speed is what dictates the lift force that opposes the gravitational pull. (*obviously not just speed, angle of attack, foil design, etc... lets not get crazy)

Therefore, since all the planes seen in this thread fly well below low-earth orbit, the speed needed to keep them aloft is the same at all altitudes.

If you want to read about gravitational forces, here's a good link I found for you: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/U6L3c.html


now back to our stunning photos

Antonio Correia

DoctorIt wrote:

If you want to read about gravitational forces, here's a good link I found for you: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/circles/U6L3c.html

Much obliged.
I must confess you are right.
Now back to our stunning photos

gluwater

Gary these are absolutely amazing. What length lens did you use on these? I used a 300 and 400 at the Chicago Air and Water show and found it hard to keep the planes in the frame at close distances. I love the smoke trains in #10, they look like lightning.

Rhuarc

TECHNICAL ALERT!!! Consider yourselves warned!

Gravity really isn't the main issue here, at least not when compared to the effects of the aerodynamics of it. If you want to get technical about it a plane flying 1 meter off the ground actually requires less airspeed to remain flying. This is because of a reduction in induced drag. When flying above approx. 1 wingspan above the ground wing tip vortices are created when the high pressure air below the wing curls up around the wing and meets the low pressure air above the wing. This creates drag. When you are within that 1 wingspan area you are in what is called ground effect. By being in such close proximity to the ground it reduces the drag effect of wing tip vortices, thereby reducing the overall drag. This means that the same airspeed can produce more lift. So when you are in ground effect you can actually fly below the airplanes rated stall speed, (usually, depends on the airplane) but if you climb out of that ground effect without increasing your airspeed you will stall, and usually crash.

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread or anything, but I'm a flight instructor, and anytime I see people talking aerodynamics it gets my blood pumping!!

But back to the pictures, I really liked all of them, but my favorite has to be the one showing the pressure area above the wing with the condensation. Amazing shot, one of those in the right place at the right time, with the right equipment and the right eye!!

Do you have a gallery of the rest of your shots up? Would love to see the rest!!

Nikolai

Nice shooting!
Really N-joyed them, esp. those afterburner shots....:-)

ian408

I'll comment on all the threads. Very, very nice.

I wasn't able to get to any local show this year so these were a nice treat!

vulcan2912

Thanks again for all the nice comments.Here are just a few more for the vapour lovers among you.









And finally-an explosion


If anyone really likes this kind of thing there are 1000's more up on my website.

Rhuarc

Wow. Just amazing. You got some REALLY nice captures!! All tack sharp, and great angles. really shows off the aircraft for what they each bring to the table.

Nikolai

Gary,

vulcan2912 wrote:

Thanks again for all the nice comments.Here are just a few more for the vapour lovers among you.

Thank you, much appreciated!