Lately there have been numerous fires aounrd the LA area. This night, on the news, I saw a taker trowing fire repellent chemicals and right after it threw them it's wigs folded in mid flight! As if they wanted to make a clap. Before they touched they separated from the body and the plane just crashed. It happened right after the guy started pulling up after dropping the chemicals. Could it be overstressed plane? He was flying pretty slow.It looked alful!some info can be found here:http://www.kcal9.com/http://www.fox11.comAny ideas why this might occur.Please excuse me if I don't reply for a while. I'll check back on this topic tomorrow morning. I've got stupid finals-Chem and Geometry.Alex.

I have not seen the video, but you said the wings broke as he was pulling up. well, everything and everyone is affected by G's, that is, the force of gravity. the "normal G load" is one, or one times the gravity of earth. sitting in a rollercoaster you may have noticed that on a tight loop you get "sucked" into your chair, and at the top of a big loop, you rize out of it, those are called positive and nagative G's. when an aircraft pulls uo, especially if it is a transport plane, such as the c-130 that crashed, the G-load on it's wings increases. when in a fighter aircraft, where you have short, strong wings, they rarely break, but on a c-130, which has long, big wings, there's more pressure on the wings, especially at the wing root, at lower G's they may bend a bit, at higher G's they may make squeeking noises, but at really high G's they will break off, usually at the wing root, where the pressure is strongest. another reason may be turbulence, which stressed the wing even more. those two effects may have been the reason for the crash.I hope this helpsBoaz

Yes,That is what I was suspecting.But it seems kind of strange as why hte pilot would put +Gs on the plane? After the drop there was no fire or hills. And he should've been experienced in flying the C130. Very interesting. I also think the Gs were the major factor here. Thanks for the info.Alex.

On the news this morning they talked to a witness who said one of the wings was on fire and then bent into a "V". Heat from a fire could DEFINITELY cause even minor G forces to bend or break a wing.

The plane wasn't exactly pulling up steeply, but I agree that the sight was pretty shocking.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

fire could have been a major factor, extreme heat over time can take it's toll on an aircraft, improper maintainance coud have also been the reason, if in fact the wing caught fire before ripping off, and not ignited afterwords, due to fuel fumes and heat from the fire, it could have definitely weakened the wing, steel is not mean to withstand extreme heat, as seen in the terror attack on the US, so the combination of a weakened structure, and a fairly low G-load (around 2.5-3.5) as the aircraft pulled up could have been responsible.we do not have enough information about the crash, so we cannot make a precise diagnosis Boaz

Yeah,He wasn't pulling steeply. From what I saw the plane barely even started to pull up. I did not see fire on the wing prior to rip off but there was plenty of fire after the V shape collapse. Oh well, I guess we'll have ot wait until the NTSB releases something to be sure-or at least more clear.Alex.

Alex,G-forces on a plane are cumulative; meaning pull after pull after pull takes it's toll on the structure. If you have ever experimented with a paperclip, bending one way then the other, eventually it will break. Thats a very simple explanation.The wings structures of modern aircraft are engineered to tremendous specifications. I heard this was an original C130. That would make it 30 to 40 years old. If you can imagine the takeoff and landing cycles it had seen, the loads it had carried and the stress that had accumulated, you kind of get the picture.I'm sure it was maintained well. But so far as I have learned, all metal has a lifespan. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, as are airplanes. I flew with a group who flew T34s, they lost one to an in-flight separation of a wing. The NTSB overview is below.http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=...L99FA072&akey=1Regards,

I've got it, rumour has it that this is an original A model, that makes it almost 50 years old, it's got to be fatigue

50 years old? wowThat should be it.BTW, Jim, thanks for that link. The article was very interesting to read. I even read a couple of more.http://turnhead.com/dot/alex/banner-retro-cool.gif

almost, it's around 43-45 years old, that to me means one thing-fatigue

counterfeit bolts?Tin-kickers will have their job cut out for them....Timothy