Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:11 pm
by Cakedaddy
TPRJones wrote:At 10 seconds if it weren't for the rope it would have flipped, not flown. Certainly not flown up over a two-story apartment complex.
The second one is irrelevant because if you pause it and study the design (hard to do with the shaking, but I got lucky) it actually has lifting surfaces built into it to act as wings. The Little Tikes bouncy castle doesn't even have a roof to act as a wing, so it's much more like your regular inner tube than the manta ray glider.
When you go tubing and it glides up to 50' high above the boat with you on it, then I'll believe it is possible.
You have to play with more tubes, outside, in the wind. I can't explain the physics. But I KNOW tubes fly with no passengers.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm
by GORDON
Well I certainly hope that people will stop talking about the fact I didn't believe some mythbusters results and use this thread, instead.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:16 pm
by TPRJones
Hey, if Mythbusters proves me wrong I'll believe them. Well, as long as it's part of the 70% of things they do reasonably well, and not the 30% where they make some glaringly obvious mistake and need to go back and try again. :p
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:40 pm
by TheCatt
TPRJones wrote:Hey, if Mythbusters proves me wrong I'll believe them. Well, as long as it's part of the 70% of things they do reasonably well, and not the 30% where they make some glaringly obvious mistake and need to go back and try again. :p
We already know you're wrong.
People keep saying MB make mistakes, etc, but I've never seen much evidence of it.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:45 pm
by Malcolm
People keep saying MB make mistakes, etc, but I've never seen much evidence of it.
They totally fucked up the hangover experiment.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:46 pm
by Cakedaddy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xm2HhYCYLI
At 45 seconds, is that tube flipping, or flying? The only reason those tubes don't continue to stay air born is the drivers are cutting the throttle. A flying tube crashing into the other rider hurts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_0UCh38oh4
At 3:10, the wipe out occurs and the tube is nosediving into the water. When the tube comes back into frame, it's on an upward trajectory until the tow rope pulls the front down and the tube dives again. These tubes want to fly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxxlennWaLM
At 10 seconds, is that tube just flipping?
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:48 pm
by Cakedaddy
Ya, at this point, multiple people on this board have witnessed first hand, inflatables flying. Not our fault you've never seen it.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 12:55 pm
by TheCatt
Malcolm wrote:People keep saying MB make mistakes, etc, but I've never seen much evidence of it.
They totally fucked up the hangover experiment.
Good explanation there. I'm convinced.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 1:03 pm
by TPRJones
Cakedaddy wrote:At 45 seconds, is that tube flipping, or flying?
...
Ya, at this point, multiple people on this board have witnessed first hand, inflatables flying. Not our fault you've never seen it.
It's flying, but it also has much more flat surface area than the bouncy house in the news story and isn't loaded down with kids.
Show me a video or tell me a truthful first hand account of one of these tubes of a similar size to the small bouncy castle loaded down with similar weight flying 50' into the air and staying up there for a couple of city blocks and then I'll believe, because that is what is being claimed as having happened in this news story. So far I've seen nothing even remotely close to that and no evidence that it should be possible given the circumstances reported. The manta ray one could do it, but it's different because it has built-in lifting surfaces as part of the design.
What I will do, however, is shut up about it for now. Fair enough? 
Edited By TPRJones on 1400173545
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 1:11 pm
by Malcolm
TheCatt wrote:Malcolm wrote:People keep saying MB make mistakes, etc, but I've never seen much evidence of it.
They totally fucked up the hangover experiment.
Good explanation there. I'm convinced.
They tried to measure hangover severity and recovery time without using:
- similar drunks
- similar alcoholic drinks