The 5 Most Predictable Aviation Disasters of All-Time
We take air travel for granted, but sending massive amounts of machinery hurtling into the air is still a risky endeavor. Sometimes, things go wrong and you find yourself on the business end of an emergency landing in the Hudson River.
The worst part is, you just never can tell when disaster is going to strike. Well, maybe sometimes you can...

On September 19, 1783, a sheep, a cockerel and a duck embarked on an untethered hot air balloon ride from the front courtyard of the Palace of Versailles. Incredibly, that's actual history and not the opening line of a joke.
The mastermind behind this animal-tastic adventure was Jean-Francois Pilatre de Rozier. Prior to sending a bunch of farm animals off to their inexplicably avoidable deaths in a hot air balloon (how he got them back down to Earth is anyone's guess), Monsieur Rozier was renowned for his research in flight technology.

Rare photo of Monsieur Rozier.
After his first foray into balloon flight resulted in zero animal deaths, Rozier concluded that there was no reason humans shouldn't be all up in hot air balloons also. With one unprecedented win under his belt already, he was able to convince King Louis XVI to allow him and a nobleman named Francois Laurent d'Arlandes to become the first human untethered hot air balloon pilots.
After several successful flights, Rozier figured that he was above the laws of physics and logic and decided to take a trip across the English Channel using what he dubbed as his "hybrid balloon." The balloon featured two compartments. One was heated by an open flame which was fueled by brandy, a fact historians have speculated was exactly as totally rad as it sounds.

Dad called it fuel for a reason.
However, Rozier decided to foolishly fill the other compartment with highly combustible hydrogen instead of the more reasonable choice, helium, just because that element wouldn't be discovered for another 50 years. Besides, who has time for determining an element's capacity for explosiveness when there are awesome hot air balloon flights to embark on?
Roughly 15 minutes into the English Channel flight, the flame and the hydrogen predictably found each other and joined forces to form a Voltron-like explosion. Surprisingly, the explosion wasn't fatal, but that 1,500-foot plummet to the Earth most certainly was.

Of course, the only lesson the world learned from the ordeal was that there had to be much more awesome ways to go down in one of these things. Like...

Throughout history, there have been women who have attempted to carry on their husbands' work after they've passed on. Not a problem if the husband was a day laborer or a prostitute or something. But in the case of Marie Blanchard, her husband was a balloon pilot back when balloons were still propelled by hydrogen and death wishes.

You think they just give out these babies?
Nevertheless, after Blanchard's husband died from a heart attack (followed by a fall from a hot air balloon, of course) in 1809, Marie continued his rich tradition of balloon demonstrations. Though inexperienced in balloon piloting, she made up for it with an even more astounding failure to understand anything at all about combustible gasses and what happens when you shoot off fireworks around them.

Don't even act like you don't want to keep reading now.
One night (yes, night), Marie took her balloon into the air and, figuring that piloting a flying death trap in the dark wasn't crazy enough, decided to launch fireworks from the balloon. Fireworks! Within minutes, Marie let one fly too close to the balloon and the flame ignited the hydrogen inside.

Wait 'til you land before celebrating.
After an undoubtedly flamboyant fall from the sky, Marie caught a break and landed on the roof of a building. But to the horror of the crowd below, she then slipped from the roof to the street below where her neck caught a far less lucky break. Marie not only earned the distinction of being the first female balloon pilot, but also the honor of being the first woman to die in one.

Would you fly in a plane designed by a man hellbent on convincing the world that flight science was a scam? Of course you would, because flying is awesome. If you don't believe us, look no further than the story of Henry Mignet (we recommend the linked site mostly for the far-out background music).
During WWI, he convinced a friend of his in the French Air Force to let him taxi a plane (the driving portion of a flight before takeoff). For most people, this would be enough. For Mignet, it was not. He decided to add a little bit of the ol' "let's gun this and see if we can fly it" to the end of his taxi maneuvering. Not surprisingly, he crashed. This was the moment he decided flight science is a scam.

"I'll believe it when I see a plane that I didn't just set on fire."
To alleviate this, he designed his own "aircraft," dubbed it The Sky Louse and released the design to the public.

Mignet's original "Sky Kill PainCopter" was deemed impractical.
According to people that have actually built them, the Louse was basically a coffin with a motor on the front constructed from spare wood, nails, glue and a motorcycle engine. (Look for a KISS version to be available sometime next year.) Interestingly, the Louse contains none of the conventional features of an airplane such as rudder pedals or engine cowls. It does, however, contain an extra (albeit unnecessary) set of wings behind the cockpit.

Upon its release, the numerous people that built and tried to fly them (as if you wouldn't have) found that if they sent the plane into a steep enough nose dive, the Louse would lock into that position and crash. As far as why more than one person had to conduct this experiment, we have no idea.








'Mignet's original "Sky Kill PainCopter" was deemed impractical.'
ReplySky Kill PainCopter is the best name for an aircraft ever.
One thing about #1 that bothered me immediately: 1.77 * 7,682 = 13,597. Maybe it's supposed to be 2.77?
Reply(1) None of these are really disasters. The casualty rate for all of them are 0-1 ie, not a disaster.
Reply(2) Blanchard's actual name was Sophie. Marie was her middle name.
(3) Pearson is recognized as a Canadian hero. I don't think he should be #1 in a list that includes a woman who launched fireworks out of a hydrogen balloon.
Were Marie's clothes on fire as she fell? Please tell me they were. It's not that I wish any additional suffering on this woman, it's just that you have to admit that if you're going to fall from a great height out of an exploding balloon with fireworks going off all around you at night, it would be so much more awesome to be on fire.
ReplyI am so completely disgusted that I laughed at that visual as hard as I did.
Haha, a nonplane. That is hilarious.
Replyi could be going out on a limb here, but in caproni's defense, that monstrosity did get 60 feet off the ground. color me an optimist, but that's pretty freaking impressive.
Replyi own a scion xB. even with wings and a rocket engine i doubt i could get it 3 inches off the ground.
I'm living in Canada and was amazed how stupid #1 was since we all learn at school how to convert imperial metric. A 10 years old kid knows that ^-^ Well I guess everyone can do mistakes and got to get a second chance. :-D
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesMaybe I misread #1 but didn't Canada JUST adopt the metric system during that time? If I'm right your comment makes no sense.
if only they taught you to read
And to write.
I live in Canada, went to school in the 70's and 80's, and still can't convert metric to/from imperial. But thanks to the vodka bottle in my hand, I know 750mL = 26 oz and how many grams in an ounce thanks to other vices. And according to my driver's license, I'm 5' 9" not however many centimeters or what-the-fuck ever. Now here's your second chance to post a better non-douche comment because "I guess everyone can do mistakes."
The Gimli glider thing confuses me. If I'm flying an airplane, I want my fuel level to be "as much as that f**king tank will hold."
Reply"quoted from Murilo Silva": Basically because of cost, as Sef said - if you have more fuel than necessary on board, you will burn more fuel just because of the extra weight. But some big jets like the 767 also have weight restrictions. For example, if a 747-400 is fully loaded with passengers and cargo, topping off its fuel tanks would make it heavier than the maximum take-off weight the structure was designed for.
Fuel is weight. Weight needs to be kept at the absolute minimum. Full tanks means fewer passengers. Fewer passengers means less money. Ans we all know money is the only thing that matter.
"Question: If you call a plane with two wings a bi-plane, what is a plane with nine wings called?"
ReplyA non-plane.
The best part is, that's actually right.
oh yeah...that's easy to say now. hindsight is always 20/20.
In the Gilmi Glider pilot's defense, the guy is a f**king hero! You forgot to mention about how he pulled off a sideslip on a freakin 767! Something that was unheard of, and saved everyone's lives including the ones on the ground!
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesSo, if you set fire to a building, you're an arsonist. But if you set fire to a building and put it out, you're a hero?
Love how you're saying it like the pilot deliberately underfueled the plane.
I was unaware that pulling a kickass, "Whew, that coulda sucked way worse" outta your ass meant that something was not predictable as the title of the column implies. And it does mention that the dude got a medal for it, which I assume they give out for more than "also ran" among pilots.
i think the point is that he had better skills in some areas than others. landing a 300,000 lb plane like a glider...check. simple math...not so much.
I'm a bit disappointed that the thing where the pilot and co-pilot of a small aircraft decided 'Hey, wanna have sex?' And so they did...and with no pilot to...well..pilot, the plane crashed and they both died wasn't on the list. I bet the black box from that plane was something else, though. (Even though I don't think small planes have black boxes.)
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesNo, they don't. Only commercial airplanes have.
having sex in the cockpit (um...) doesn't *necessarily* spell disaster...
okay, having typed that and read it aloud, i see your point.
if they both died, how do you know they were having sex anyway?
#1 Why not fill the fuel tanks completely?
Reply Hide All See All 8 RepliesFor the same reason they still don't do it today - Would you believe that Airline companies believe it would encourage pilots to "waste" fuel if they were given more than they were needed to fly just the route?
what Sef said. Also, because fuel is heavy, so having more fuel than necessary weighs the plane down, which means you have to burn more fuel to keep the plane in the air.
also, reduces the chance of the excessive fuel to burn you alive :D
It also prevents hijackers from demanding to be flown to some destination farther than the aircraft is fuelled to go.
so why not get more fuel to burn so you can carry even more fuel? simple, yes?!
f**k it, let's just make the plane out of fuel!
Basically because of cost, as Sef said - if you have more fuel than necessary on board, you will burn more fuel just because of the extra weight. But some big jets like the 767 also have weight restrictions. For example, if a 747-400 is fully loaded with passengers and cargo, topping off its fuel tanks would make it havier than the maximum take-off weight the structure was designed for.
By the way, airliners don't carry around "just enough fuel to get to the destination". The law mandates that the airplane also has enough fuel to fly to an alternative airport, in for some reason the flight has to be diverted. If it weren't for this, every time an airport was closed due to bad weather, we would see a spectacle of jets gliding helplessly into highways and rivers.
murilo: shouldn't you be flying your plane instead of posting a comment on cracked?
A 9-winged plane would be a non-plane.
Reply"... made an even more emergencier landing..."
ReplyLMFAO! XD
actually, probably the emergenciest.
No, Jehy, you're wrong. I really hope you're not a Torontonian (or even Canadian for that matter). Pearson airport is named for Lester B. Pearson, a Canadian Prime Minister.
ReplyUm... Where's the Hindenburg?
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesBecause Zeppelins were completely plausible and pretty much accident free (when compared to other popular pastimes such as mustard gas and trench foot) at the time.
So it wasn't really predictable in the way that these accidents are.
Yes, but the Hindenburg was filled with Hydrogen, not helium like most other zeppelins were using at the time
Also, the heat-reflective coating they painted it with (to keep the hydrogen from igniting) turned out to basically be rocket fuel.
Also, that would be too obvious.
I still think we in the US should stop being retarded and convert to metric system.
Reply Hide All See All 6 RepliesThe US adopted the metric system during Lincoln's presidency, but everyone ignored it and never switched.
Huh. Lincoln had it right.
Why do we never listen to the smart people?
because it'd be a massive project to correct EVERYTHING
we'd have to have s**tload of extra cash just to change up ALL the signs on EVERY highway
Who gives a s**t what system is used, the object is the same size any way you measure it.
american currency is kind of metric. And many scientists use metric but they kind of cheat. Nasa, for example, will use a bolt that is 3/8 but convert it to a metric size in the plans. They use non-metric because they are easier to acquire here.
here in america, we see it differently. the rest of the world is retarded. period.
Yeah Jehy, and they named the Statue of Liberty after William Liberty, one of the labourers who helped build it. And they named it after him 10 years before he was hired to build it.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesRemember that when you fly into the airport of the city Jehy's from.
Your sarcasm is delicious. Also, I'm going to get my name legally changed to William Liberty, which is possibly the most patriotic name I've ever seen.
I'd go with Falconhawk Von Asskick McFuckhauser, but whatever.
I'm going to get my name changed to Eugene Oregon and claim that they named a town after me.
The second wing of the Flying Flea is "unnecessary"? Oddly, I always thought that a plane needed to keep it's tail from dragging on the ground, especially considering that the Flea has no airfoil built into it's rudder.
ReplyThis was a great article, but please, at least glance over it before you publish it. If mistakes like "a 300,000 'glider'" are getting past your editor, it's time to take away his bourbon.
Replyagreed. This whole site is rife with those sorts of errors.
the deadlines must be killer...