In case there’s a living pilot out there who hasn’t seen this before, there’s this:
I’d prefer this lineup 😄:
At first these images always look amazing but after counting the people I hope that the Mooney wing doesn’t break when one adds another 100kg bloke. That’s only 30 people. Only 2g for the Mooney. Yeah, I know, the wing spar does not need to support the wing’s weight in flight. Allegedly that wing can carry more than 9g so one could add another 60 people or so and it wouldn’t break.
Not sure about that Mooney model but one M20F was tested under +12g and -6g and was signed off to fly again, so I am more concerned about the average GA pilot than the aircraft wings 
Obviously, unless it is an Acclaim it will lose the tail then the wing at 260kts under 1g !
Still my M20J has “NO STEP” on the wings, so I don’t beleive those pictures and I tend to throttle it back to 80kts when I have some doubts (I did anything with stick and rudder at that speed and I am still alive )
@Clipperstorch from a 50th-hand report, they flew the Mooney right after, so no deformation…
Also, great shot of the ladies from my grandma’s youth!
@Ibra “Still my M20J has “NO STEP” on the wings” – right, I was dinged 120EUR for el cheapo labels of “do not push” and “no step” added all over my plane (Austrian Reg requires this funny stuff).
So not only can I not step on my wings, but I can’t push my plane from the elevator, which came as a real surprise to me! ;)
How do you get the aircraft out of the hangar with all those stickers? You call it by it’s name
Regarding the mooney remember it is negative load so it brings it up to max give or take.
Nice static test. A dynamic test with these folks dancing in a coordinated way may provide a less pretty picture after a while.
Many manufacturers claim to support amazing overload situations but I would say it makes the plane too heavy. All parts should be build to support a defined load and then break. This way the plane ends up as light as possible and in flight strength from some parts does not help much if not all structural parts support the load.
aart wrote:
Nice static test. A dynamic test with these folks dancing in a coordinated way may provide a less pretty picture after a while.
The “dance test” has to do more with aero-elastic frequencies (mass & elasticity & true TAS speeds) than aerodynamic forces (geometry & strength & indicated IAS speeds), something that goes into the certification requirements for high speed designs VNE via flutter requirements
So the aircraft may go ugly with barely 2 guys depending if they do their rock party in “2 temps” or “4 temps” while it is rock solid with 100 sitting on the wings
I recall studying this for bridges: there is combination of structure shape, mass and excitation frequency where any structure no matter how solid it is will wiggle until it breaks, aircraft will have same airframe-airflow resonance at specific frequencies (more to do with TAS, mass and shape than the amount of aerodynamic force which relate to geometry & indicate airspeed), for bridges, most are designed to take lot of force but they do fail at the wrong harmonics, Angers bridge case: could handle the weight of 10 million soldiers but failed with just 200 marching on it in sync
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angers_Bridge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)
