"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Stealth Pilot" wrote

why are there no recordings of heavily overloaded ww2 bombers
collapsing on bomb release? didnt happen.

Plus the fact that the average life of a bomber before it was destroyed
was 17 missions, on many types in many theatres.

They were all practically new aircraft, in comparison to the C-130 in the
video.
--
Jim in NC
That's very true.

Even the few that flew a full 100 missions should have had less that 2000
airframe hours when they retired and the engines should have run
considerably less. Something similar was presumably true of the fighters
and trainers as well. Those points have continued to be a source of endless
debate involving both "warbirds" and--although off topic for this
thread--some of the related engines.

BTW, at least to my eyes, that video that has been debated so long and hard
really looks like a considerable pull up was made before dropping the load
in essentially 1g climbing flight. It could be mostly the happenstance of
timing that the wing seperation became evident at the completion of the
drop--assuming that the load was completely dropped and that the outflow
didn't simply cease as the wings ceased providing lift. Obviously, that
last would/will be part of the final report.

Peter