"Doug Semler" wrote in message
oups.com...
mmmm....well from the tone of the voice of the reporter ("they
*FI*nally got the engine to stop"...or words to that effect) seemed to
indicate that it took longer than expected to stop the engine.

Even if you could rely on a reporter's tone of voice for information, the
emphasis on the word "finally" could just as easily have referred to the
length of time after the crash until the engine finally was stopped, rather
than the duration of sprayed water and/or foam on the engine.

Personally, I find that interpretation much more likely. But even if you
don't, using that as a source of reliable information seems like a poor plan
to me.

[...]
snip WAGs about G-load ...it is an aside and an interesting
point....for a physicist perhaps g...and I have to take a look
again, and after thinking about this I am most likely wrong, but some
of the angles of the video made it appear that the tail was rightside
up whilst the wings were upside down...

I suspect you're just unfamiliar with the type of airplane. The engines on
the Commander hang below the wing, with the exhaust on top. In the video,
the engines were still hanging below the wing, and the exhaust was still
visible on top. In other words, other than the massive damage to the nose
of the airplane, the airframe was substantially intact (if a bit bent).

Pete