| 1) by JakeElwood [05/17/07 09:16:51 AM] |
| FIRST - and I'm stumped |
| |
| 2) by DocRosa [05/17/07 11:11:52 AM] |
| Simple... the blades are moving at the same speed as the frame rate of the camera giving the impression that the blades aren't turning when in fact they are. |
| |
| 3) by JakeElwood [05/17/07 11:43:46 AM] |
| never thought that effect could look so clean - sweet |
| |
| 4) by sparkbutt165 [05/17/07 11:46:41 AM] |
|
| |
| 5) by joeljoeljoel [05/17/07 02:03:50 PM] |
| It can fly because its not a helicopter its a herrier fighter jet in disgise...god some people are dumb. lol |
| |
| 6) by joeljoeljoel [05/17/07 02:04:50 PM] |
| lol i spelled disguise wrong |
| |
| 7) by joeljoeljoel [05/17/07 02:06:27 PM] |
| look at the wings.... helicopters dont have wings |
| |
| 8) by diego1103 [05/17/07 02:18:36 PM] |
| lmao its so obvious. all of you are wrong. its not the frame rate of the camera its that the copter is free falling. thats why the camera man never zooms out. lol its just to give the illusion that its floating but its actually just free falling. |
| |
| 9) by diego1103 [05/17/07 02:19:41 PM] |
| also notice how the blades bend upwards due to the wind resistance from falling. |
| |
| 10) by joesnose [05/17/07 02:26:10 PM] |
| helicopter freefall causes the blades to spin! they aren't spinning, im with the disguise option, lol |
| |
| 11) by J.B. [05/17/07 02:26:35 PM] |
| DocRosa is right, the frame rate or film speed of the video camera has been put in sync with the rotation of the helicopter's blades. Most of us have seen this demo in science class with a standard strobe light and a table fan. Just adjust the strobe |
| |
| 12) by joeljoeljoel [05/17/07 02:43:33 PM] |
| diego ur a retard!!! |
| |
| 13) by Roofus [05/17/07 04:16:23 PM] |
| It cant be free falling because the camera man points the camera up at one point and the chopper hovers too. |
| |
| 14) by bbbaalll [05/17/07 06:58:30 PM] |
| holy shit |
| |
| 15) by Breeeeeze Nutz [05/17/07 07:00:26 PM] |
| I agree with the frame rate discussion. That chopper is making a lot of noise just to be that blade on the tail, which is not spinning nearly fast enough to make that much noise. |
| |
| 16) by Breeeeeze Nutz [05/17/07 07:02:08 PM] |
| My ceiling fan has more rpms than the tail blade appears to have, there is no way that bird would turn without power from the tail. So fps = rps of the blades. |
| |
| 17) by dylan [05/17/07 07:55:47 PM] |
| ha ha im not going to bother lol... |
| |
| 18) by thfrbiddn1 [05/17/07 08:06:04 PM] |
| if the copter was free falling how could it steer like that? |
| |
| 19) by M.T. [05/17/07 10:41:34 PM] |
| Guys.. lol Military choppers like that one have jet engines on both sides on the chassis that they can turn on in case of a blade malfunction. they are just showing how well they can fly with jet propulsion alone. Thats also why it has wings, for sta |
| |
| 20) by Boshy [05/18/07 03:37:28 AM] |
| It flies The same way a Harrier Jump jet flies...exhaust turbo gasses... |
| |
| 21) by Mr. Keul [05/18/07 06:10:51 AM] |
| Please...those "wings" are the props that hold sidewinders. What do you think they use to attack with? Colorful language? Feather duster? The frame rate is the same as the revolution rate, simple as that. Thats why, in film, you see wheels that look |
| |
| 22) by Mr. Keul [05/18/07 06:13:48 AM] |
| like they're rotating backwards, because the frame rate is faster than the revolution rate. Actually, I changed my mind, it has harrier jets in addition to the rotors, because that's a great use of military funding. |
| |
| 23) by JakeElwood [05/18/07 08:18:41 AM] |
| OMG INVISIBLE VTOL JETS!!1! |
| |
| 24) by M.T. [05/18/07 01:42:54 PM] |
| Mr.Keul those "wings" aren't just for holding armaments. They play a large part in stability with those type of choppers. To say otherwise is complete ignorance to physics. |
| |
| 25) by M.T. [05/18/07 01:45:32 PM] |
| LOOK under the top blades on the left and right side of the helo and you will see Jet turbines on both sides. If you look up the whole video on this when they show the crowd at this airshow the people would be choppy if the cameras frame rate was mes |
| |
| 26) by Duckmurderer [05/18/07 04:25:22 PM] |
| M.T. do you have speakers or headphones? No jet propulsion can create the intense vibrations to make the common "fap fap fap fap" sound that the blades of a helo can.
You can actually clearly hear what it would sound like if the blades were not sp |
| |
| 27) by Roofus [05/18/07 04:25:42 PM] |
| I think we should all listen to M.T. because he knows about physics, it would be complete ignorance not to. |
| |
| 28) by Duckmurderer [05/18/07 04:25:54 PM] |
|
| |
| 29) by Duckmurderer [05/18/07 04:26:43 PM] |
| *spinning becuase the engine model is a jet-turbine. |
| |
| 30) by DreadGunner [05/19/07 12:34:35 AM] |
| This type of helicopter is a MI-24. though I cannot tell the version would guess it is simply a Hind E. To the best of my knowledge they get no thrust from jet engines but they do get a bit less than 28% of their lift from those wings.
|
| |
| 31) by DreadGunner [05/19/07 12:35:00 AM] |
| They are primarily a weapons platform. The Blades angle up in flight, think about it.
The rear blades turn faster than the main rotor blades, so as the main rotor would appear to be fixed, the rear rotor would continue to appear to move, but slowe |
| |
| 32) by Hard Cheese [05/19/07 05:00:33 AM] |
| Whats it flying on! |
| |
| 33) by M.T. [05/19/07 04:50:35 PM] |
| Now I'm sick of all of you. This helo is a MI-24 HIND go to http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/mi-24.htm
go down to engines it HAS A JET TURBINE!!!!! |
| |
| 34) by M.T. [05/19/07 04:51:48 PM] |
| Heres a pic of the turbine:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/ru_monino_helo_mi24b_04.jpg
Mr. Keul, Duckmurderer kiss my ass. |
| |
| 35) by M.T. [05/19/07 04:55:40 PM] |
| Oh yea.. by the way Duckmurderer take another second to listen to this clip and you will here a jet engine not the sound of a main blade. the "fap fap fap" sound you here is from the rear rotor blade. |
| |
| 36) by M.T. [05/19/07 05:35:00 PM] |
| However, since I'm not going to stand and say my theory is 100% the truth I realize if someone had a good enough camera with a fast shutter speed it is possible to do this effect so who really knows. All I know is that after all these posts I really |
| |
| 37) by Ruphy [05/20/07 02:24:00 AM] |
| it's falling. trust me, im better than you. |
| |
| 38) by DocRosa [05/20/07 03:00:20 AM] |
| I've got your back from now on "J.B.!" |
| |
| 39) by diego1103 [05/20/07 11:00:00 AM] |
| i agree with you Ruphy, and joel go fuck yourself your probably a 35 year old computer geek still living with his mom. |
| |
| 40) by Mark S. [05/20/07 11:14:53 PM] |
| What the hell is wrong you people!?! Yes, the HIND does have two turbine engines. Two GAS TURBINE engines! Even the M1-Abrams tank has a gas turbine engine. The turbines power are directed to the rotors through axles but don't directly provide thrust |
| |
| 41) by DreadGunner [05/21/07 12:05:39 AM] |
| Mark S... you beet me to it and used the same example I was going to use. No lift from the jet turbine outside of the main rotors |
| |
| 42) by DreadGunner [05/21/07 12:07:42 AM] |
| oh, the rear blades do not create a fap fap fap...the only one that has rear rotors that creat that sound is the CH47 and that is because they are the same as the frount |
| |
| 43) by Mr. Keul [05/21/07 06:22:17 AM] |
| M.T., you need to chillax man. Its just friendly debate. Besides, Mark S. is right, the turbines you see provide power to the rotors, not direct thrust (they would need to point down, opposite to the force of gravity) Mr. Physics. |
| |
| 44) by Mr. Keul [05/21/07 06:31:32 AM] |
| And yes, the "wings" can provide lift (and stabilization), but not if the chopper's hovering (see bernoulli's principle). the reason the tail rotors move so slow is the same reason the main ones don't move at all, the fps of the camera |
| |
| 45) by JakeElwood [05/21/07 08:05:13 AM] |
| I think I get it now. Mark S. is telling us that the M1-Abrams tank can fly. (kidding, don't shoot me) |
| |
| 46) by night ninja [05/22/07 01:05:55 PM] |
| I can see 7 things on it that could be jet turbines. I would go with M.T. And it is very funny reading your arguments. |
| |
| 47) by JakeElwood [05/23/07 07:16:11 AM] |
| I think we should ignore all the engineers and defense contractors we've heard from so far. |
| |
| 48) by Spraggz [05/23/07 11:17:09 AM] |
| haha...i can see 7 things on it that could indicate its a robot in disguise. Though I think I'll go with occam's razor and a little common sense. Sorry B.L.T., but you're really reaching... |
| |
| 49) by DreadGunner [05/23/07 12:55:35 PM] |
| is this a transformer? If we give the video a bit longer to run, will it turn into a large robot? |
| |
| 50) by JakeElwood [05/23/07 01:16:10 PM] |
| This video is a fake. It was shot at great expense on a soundstage in Burbank, CA using models and a green screen, with a soundtrack to suggest that the rotors are turning when in fact they are not. All this was done for no reason other than to confu |
| |
| 51) by JakeElwood [05/23/07 01:16:59 PM] |
| se visitors to this site. |
| |
| 52) by kevin [05/31/07 10:24:07 AM] |
| the_real_kevin u are such an idiot to have that nick name |
| |
| 53) by MissionPilot [06/3/07 07:41:34 PM] |
| I am a video pro. Shot footage at an airshow last week. Got the same effect on all propeller driven aircraft. Bottom line, when the video frame rate is a multiple of the propeller's RPM, it appears to stp. Case closed. |
| |
| 54) by SaS [06/13/07 08:47:31 AM] |
| It's either the frame rate isnt high enough on the camera, so seemingly it is no moving, or, if you look closely there is some sort of jet on the belly of the helicopter, which could be similar to that a harrier has - it can take off vertically. |
| |
| 55) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:51:12 PM] |
| Ok, as someone who went to college for Aerospace Theory, comes from a full line family of pilots and what not.. lets clear the air.
This is a framerate trick of the camera, you can do this with any home computer or blind luck. if we go with blind |
| |
| 56) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:51:41 PM] |
| blind luck, its the simple fact the helicopter maintains RPM rates on the rotors that induce this effect.. i do think its odd the pilot would use a steady rpm rate, but the HIND M24 is an incredibly capable machine.
M.T. is beyond wrong though, th |
| |
| 57) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:52:02 PM] |
| blind luck, its the simple fact the helicopter maintains RPM rates on the rotors that induce this effect.. i do think its odd the pilot would use a steady rpm rate, but the HIND M24 is an incredibly capable machine.
M.T. is beyond wrong though, th |
| |
| 58) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:52:35 PM] |
| though, the jet "ports" visible on the chopper, for anyone who's had the common sense and an aviation museum handy, do not point in any way that would provide adequate thrust, especially since they're straightline exhaust ducts with no sort of contr |
| |
| 59) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:53:03 PM] |
| control surfaces (like all propulsionary jet engines have, go look at any military or civilian jet aircraft.) and infact, standing directly under the path of those exhaust ports won't shove you around with monsterous wind force, it'll just make you s |
| |
| 60) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:53:31 PM] |
| sweaty from the heat.
the wings are armament designs, someone mentioned it earlier: bernoulli's principle renders those wings useless in hover situations, and they're a marginally small disadvantage in direct vertical ascents and descents, but the |
| |
| 61) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:54:09 PM] |
| they lack the necessary amount of vacuum generation surface or control surface to manage the chopper on its own.
combinining the wings and the exhaust ports of the jet engines couldn't even get this chopper off the ground, i'd be amused if it eve |
| |
| 62) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:55:14 PM] |
| even managed to bounce on its struts using the exhaust only.
visually, the amount of motion this chopper is undertaking would cause quite a bit of visual blade rotation if the blades were simply not in use (as well, during ascent, they would not b |
| |
| 63) by tkilljoy [06/13/07 03:55:39 PM] |
| bow upwards at the outer edges but downwards under their own weight)
remember, this is a monsterously heavy helictoper. sorry bout that double post in the middle! |
| |
| 64) by JakeElwood [06/14/07 06:23:19 AM] |
| Thanks tkilljoy (I think this site needs a longer comment field length. I also think that posting in this thread should be mandatory for all members) |
| |
| 65) by EHadley [06/14/07 05:00:01 PM] |
| What we have here is a military experiment using telekinesis to levitate, then fly this helicopter. Simple as that. I don't buy something as simple as frame-rates.lol |
| |
| 66) by J.B. [06/14/07 08:30:11 PM] |
| Look morons , it is the fucking frame rate. Don't believe me, look at the rotational speed of the tail rotor. It also appears to move very slowly because it's speed is slightly different than that of the main rotor. |
| |
| 67) by DreadGunner [06/14/07 11:21:00 PM] |
| didn't I say that? |
| |
| 68) by M.T. [06/15/07 09:41:40 PM] |
| LMFAO at this entire post. Never thought my post would cause such a funny ass response from everyone xDDD |
| |
| 69) by M.T. [06/15/07 09:46:02 PM] |
| By the way... no sh*& the chopper can't fly without its rotor. I was merely trying to piss off all of you that went to college for Aerospace theory xDDDDDDDDD |
| |
| 70) by JakeElwood [06/18/07 10:02:11 AM] |
| Sure thing M.T., you didn't mean any of your previous posts. We believe you. |
| |
| 71) by Dark_Griffer [06/19/07 05:48:04 PM] |
| Come on no one ever thought that there might be an updraft? Friggin idiots |
| |
| 72) by XxDefaultxX [06/20/07 02:37:27 PM] |
| the frame reate is the same you can hear the rotors!!!!! |
| |
| 73) by XxDefaultxX [06/20/07 02:37:38 PM] |
| rate* |
| |
| 74) by Raychel [06/21/07 06:27:53 PM] |
| M.T. is correct, as I quote,"Military choppers like that one have jet engines on both sides on the chassis that they can turn on in case of a blade malfunction." My husband is in 101st Airborne for the US Army and works on these things for a living, |
| |
| 75) by Raychel [06/21/07 06:36:19 PM] |
| By the way, wow on the discussion. |
| |
| 76) by JakeElwood [06/22/07 07:18:15 AM] |
| Damn, just when I thought I'd heard it all. Thanks Raychel. |
| |
| 77) by brianmann [06/25/07 09:56:22 PM] |
| My god,your all such fools. The helicopter was posed for each shot in the whole sequence. kinda like claymation. They just used studio max or somethings. Maybe photoshop. I once did one of a complete city skyline with time lapse phtography and posed |
| |
| 78) by brianmann [06/25/07 09:57:13 PM] |
| the sun for each frame. it was a little hot so I used baking mitts. |
| |
| 79) by claresey1 [06/29/07 04:25:58 AM] |
| For fu**s sake, its a toy helicopter on a bit of string...Most of you lot are a weeee bit stupid no? |
| |
| 80) by Monkey [07/1/07 09:32:39 PM] |
| close, claresey1... the helicopter in the clip is connected to another helicopter by cable (which is just thin enough not to be seen in this clip). The downdraft of the other helicopter is even causing the tail rotor to rotate. |
| |
| 81) by JPL [07/6/07 10:08:35 AM] |
| OK IDIOTS.
IF YOU SAID Frame rates cause the rotors to look still, YOU ARE CORRECT. if you said JET engines are providing thrust
YOU ARE WRONG. end of story.
|
| |
| 82) by Rage Kage [07/7/07 12:15:21 AM] |
| Man, some of you must be retarded. It has nothing to do with the framerate of the camera, you can tell because the blades would still appear to rotate very slowly, here they are clearly fixed. The helicopter does have turbine engines, but they do no |
| |
| 83) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:27:00 PM] |
| Fellas, I just happen to be a military pilot and engineer. The camera-man got damn lucky with the framerate--maybe unlucky--because it ends-up looking a bit awkward. The winglets do produce lift, but only during forward motion of the aircraft... the |
| |
| 84) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:27:30 PM] |
| they also help stabilize...more importantly, they hold fuel and hang weapons and sensors. The rear tail rotor appears to move because it doesn't have a 1-1 or 1..nX ratio on the gears with the main rotor (or jet engine powering the whole thing for t |
| |
| 85) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:28:10 PM] |
| that matter). So, if your camera synchs the back rotor, the main rotor appears to rotate, and vice-a-versa. The sound is prop-wash, and a bit of jet. Jet's that actually produce significant thrust will whine... not what you hear here. Some choppe |
| |
| 86) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:28:33 PM] |
| Some choppers will use a bit of the exhaust to help push the aircraft forward - but no vectored thrust that I know of. Pilots don't generally control altitude with blade rpm, but instead with power and blade pitch (via the collective)... which is wh |
| |
| 87) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:28:56 PM] |
| which is why you don't see a change in the rpm. RPM stays fixed in many/most situations. The solid rpm of what you see in the video is testament to the damn good engineering of this particular aircraft. It is not in freefall, either. If it was, y |
| |
| 88) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:29:13 PM] |
| If it was, you would see significant blade buffetting (up and down), hear some nasty noise, see the blades auto-rotating, and probably see the camera pointed at the ground as the cameraman runs away. No tricks here, but, technically, yes - stop fram |
| |
| 89) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:29:42 PM] |
| stop frame animation - though not intended. Please put this to rest, and consider each other's viewpoint. Some of you might have had the good fortune to see this demonstated in a classroom - no reason to get on those who haven't. For those of you |
| |
| 90) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:30:09 PM] |
| For those of you who haven't - believe the magic of timing. It looks damn crazy, but, well, that's just the way it works. It's not so much a physics or engineering thing, just visual "harmonics." If you want to be impressed with something, be impre |
| |
| 91) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:30:30 PM] |
| be impressed with something, be impressed with the engineering that made so much power so controllable. Cheers, Johnny |
| |
| 92) by JohnnyFlies99 [07/7/07 08:39:11 PM] |
| be impressed with something, be impressed with the engineering that made so much power so controllable. Cheers, Johnny |
| |
| 93) by atallperson [07/7/07 10:06:26 PM] |
| Its fuckin fake..duhh..just look at it |
| |
| 94) by JoeyFuquit [07/17/07 10:14:20 PM] |
| Notice you never see the ground. This video was shot from another helicopter while the one in frame does a stall exercise from high altitude. Standard military training. You may all now die in a fire, goodnight. |
| |
| 95) by cjc3usa [07/20/07 08:05:07 AM] |
| its me toy helo |
| |
| 96) by kevin [07/23/07 05:51:40 PM] |
| fake
|
| |
| 97) by kevin [07/23/07 05:52:11 PM] |
| fake |
| |
| 98) by kevin [07/23/07 05:52:32 PM] |
| fake |
| |
| 99) by donkey5 [08/1/07 03:47:48 PM] |
| just look on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-24 you retards, course the blades are rotating...hahaha fake, i love it how people shout that at anything their small brains can't work out!! |
| |
| 100) by zorro [08/14/07 11:40:25 AM] |
| Most of you are total morons.
The answer is: SHUTTER SPEED not FPS.
The FPS is 29.97 like all NTSC video. Shutter=how fast the camera takes single pictures. If it syncs up with the rotation rate it will look solid. This has nothing to do with the frame rate. It also has nothing to do with the turbine engines you tards. |
| |
| 101) by aquafight [08/21/07 05:43:15 AM] |
| if there where propellers we would see a bright light coming off. also, if the helicopter was freefalling the camera man would have ran away since he is right below. also, the tail rotor must compensate for something otherwise the aircraft spins. its the rate of the camera of course. |
| |
| 102) by aquafight [08/21/07 05:50:09 AM] |
| M.T. what you see in the picture that looks like a jet turbine is probably an exhaust. |
| |
| 103) by aquafight [08/21/07 05:50:47 AM] |
| also bear in mind that if the 'jet turbine' was to produce lift it would have to be pointed downwards. |
| |
| 104) by aquafight [08/21/07 05:58:53 AM] |
| tkilljoy i agree with you on everything except one detail. the bernoulli effect is not what produces lift in a wing and im surprised you dont know this. |
| |
| 105) by Mr. Destructo [08/22/07 12:13:39 PM] |
| Yyeess!! ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTH!! |
| |
| 106) by saint_andrew [08/23/07 09:26:55 AM] |
| Damn Dr.Destructo beat me to the coveted 106th position gonna shoot myself now! Oh yeah and its a model helicopter on a piece of string. This video was actually taken from some North Korean properganda trying to convince the world they have military technology! |
| |
| 107) by 146thAES [08/28/07 12:20:24 AM] |
| THERE IS ONE PROBLEM with the camera theory, it can be done, but as you all saw the helicopter clibs in the video, therefore it requires to put out more rotations for thrust, changing the rotor rmp= chaging fps on camera, if this was done the tail rotor would appear to be revolving slower, which it doesnt, i believe they were showing off the turbine capabilities, and the only reason the tail rotor was moving so slow is because it didnt have to counter-act the rotation of the main rotor, plus you can see the main rotor move a little bit back and forth when it banked left and right |
| |
| 108) by 146thAES [08/28/07 12:22:59 AM] |
| which would be impossible since the rotor doesnt reverce directions just because the helicopter turns |
| |
| 109) by Mathias [09/3/07 09:07:13 AM] |
| wooho i'm the last. lol |
| |
| 110) by JimmyRogers [09/16/07 09:29:04 PM] |
| no you're not......cockaessss |
| |
| 111) by cohaagen [Unreg.] [09/18/07 08:51:58 AM] |
| Just spoke to the mrs who has a degree in Animation and she knows quite a bit about film making and how cameras work and fps etc.
Ever wondered why the spokes on motorbikes seem to slow down to an eventual halt or seem to go backwards? It's the same for this. Whenever revolutions match the FPS of the camera, they appear to stand still. |
| |
| 112) by mddoyle [09/18/07 06:52:28 PM] |
| I think it has something to do with the ratio of mass/velocity in pudding. Chocolate pudding, I imagine, or maybe butterscotch. |
| |
| 113) by Spike [Unreg.] [09/20/07 07:18:09 PM] |
| MT, you need to tell your mom to change your diaper. You're alfully cranky. |
| |
| 114) by Laurie [Unreg.] [09/23/07 04:43:50 AM] |
| or its just a toy helicoptor on a string? anyone thought of that |
| |
| 115) by please [Unreg.] [09/23/07 06:26:55 PM] |
| it's an attack helicopter with turbine engines for propulsion and the rotor provides lift. If the rotor is not in use the turbine can be used for lift all the lift is provided by the turbine engine in this video |
| |
| 116) by [Unreg.][Unreg.][Unreg.] [Unreg.] [09/24/07 03:52:48 AM] |
| HMMMMM... Blades not spinning. this helicopter is not worth 980$ |
| |
| 117) by [unreg] jjlockers [Unreg.] [09/27/07 07:29:20 AM] |
| genius..
best argument ever...
definately turbines... te he |
| |
| 118) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [09/27/07 07:51:02 PM] |
| its howdy doody time! |
| |
| 119) by MadDavin [Unreg.] [09/28/07 12:04:49 PM] |
| YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!! IF YOU PAUSE IT AT THE RIGHT TIME, YOU'LL SEE IT IS A FUCKING MODEL COPTER....FAKE PROBABLY WITH FISHING LINE....BUT REAL SOUNDS OF A COPTER!!!....GEEEZ! |
| |
| 120) by never going away [Unreg.] [09/30/07 12:28:23 PM] |
| This video will be on the top rated for eternity :D |
| |
| 121) by Absolute Vengeance [Unreg.] [10/1/07 01:55:43 PM] |
| you are all morons. Obviously Chris Angle was there having sex with various men who so happened to be helicopter pilots. Mystery solved, geez. |
| |
| 122) by Absolute Vengeance [Unreg.] [10/1/07 01:57:02 PM] |
| you are all morons. Obviously Chris Angle was there having sex with various men who so happened to be helicopter pilots. Mystery solved, geez. |
| |
| 123) by dude [Unreg.] [10/3/07 08:59:56 AM] |
| you can hear the blades moving!!!! the frame rate is in sync with the movement off the blades!!! |
| |
| 124) by DAAAAH1 [Unreg.] [10/5/07 08:23:53 PM] |
| What helicopter? HUH! |
| |
| 125) by Actual Physicist [Unreg.] [10/13/07 10:07:37 PM] |
| Wow, M.T. has about the intelligence of... a rock. I bet he's a conspiracy theorist, too.
They're Not Wings, they're Pylons. They're intended for lifting, not stability, though they do serve that purpose to an extent (you can still build helos without them).
The Jet Turbine is for HIGH SPEED FLIGHT. It Points to the BACK, to make the helo move FORWARD. All of the LIFT is provided by the MAIN ROTOR, hence you only hear the ROTOR in the video, Not the Jet Turbine (it's just hovering) |
| |
| 126) by lord spidey[Unreg.] [Unreg.] [10/14/07 02:29:49 PM] |
| come on reading this made me feel sad for the internet some of these comments were so stupid i did not even understand why someone in there right mind would think that
cmon you guys i'm a 15 year old kid sitting at his computer this isn't rocket science here if the rotor makes a full turn for every image the camera captures the rotor turns a full circle [i suppose some of you don't even understand that film and video are composed of many images changed at a rapid succession to make the illusion of movement]
anyways if the camera has a fast shutter speed to prevent too much blur (cause helicopter blades move very very fast at the tip of the blade)
of the cameras capture rate is in sync with the rotors revolutions per seconds it will show the rotor blades as they are not moving because for every image the rotor does one EXACT revolution this makes the blades look still on the video
|
| |
| 127) by lord spidey [Unreg.] [Unreg.] [10/14/07 02:43:17 PM] |
| i am a conspiracy theorist im not going to get into a big argument here but i believe that the 911 were dmolished with explosive places at key places in the cental structure
many conspiracy theorist are people with diplomas and who think CRITICALLY and form there own opinions on what they they have seen heard the truth is there if you analyze the data and for some odd reason i don't trust people on the internet who say
IM A REAL PHYSICIST you don't need to be a goddamn physicist to figure this out and if you believe you are one because you realized that what half the people are saying here is utter bullshit you are further away
from being a physicist than me |
| |
| 128) by Cunjo [Unreg.] [10/14/07 09:53:29 PM] |
| Spidey, shut up before you hurt yourself. |
| |
| 129) by ME [Unreg.] [10/19/07 07:10:16 AM] |
| i love the dumbasses saying that the jet turbines are making it fly. yea they are turbines but they provid thrust forward to make the heli go faster. they don't give it lift, if they did why would helicopters have props? |
| |
| 130) by Matt [Unreg.] [10/24/07 08:33:50 AM] |
| If this thread proves anything, it's that there needs to be an IQ assessment before people are allowed onto the internet. |
| |
| 131) by Valrin [Unreg.] [10/26/07 06:05:25 PM] |
| Well, MadDavin, it's good know that I'm not the only person on the 'net that isn't a total sucker! It's a model, not a real helo. The sounds are probably comming from something off camera. |
| |
| 132) by 4 the sake of arguement [Unreg] [Unreg.] [10/27/07 03:44:16 PM] |
| I totally agree with the theory that the helicopter's blades are spinning in sync with the speed of the camera. Cohaagen's comment about the rotors spinning backwards during the turn is true, though. You can see it if you look closely. BUT... if you remember looking at a fast car's wheels, they look like they spin backwards, at different speeds. The rotor of the helicopter changing speed slightly in the turn make the rotors look like they turn in slightly in the opposite direction, then turn back. |
| |
| 133) by chinook jockey [Unreg.] [10/29/07 05:54:17 PM] |
| to all you dumb arses out there
the gas turbine engines produce shaft horse power sent through a gearbox on the front of the engine deriving power from the free power turbine right at the back of the engine imagine two sets of fans(like your desk ones) joined by a shaft the front fan is bigger and runs cool the back one is smaller and runs hot.they are directly coupled running inside this shaft is another shaft with a very efficient turbine on the rear and a gearbox fitted with a sprag clutch(free wheeling unit) to the front which via yet another shaft drives another gearbox diff unit which transfers the drive through 90 degrees and reduces the speed
the thrust produced by the jet engine drives the turbine and produces NO thrust otherwise they could NOT hover when using full power on a heavy lift according to the dumbarses on here it would move forward not recommended when trying to place a 10 ton container on a ships rear deck in a rolling sea |
| |
| 134) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [10/29/07 06:27:13 PM] |
| me (unreg) knows shit about helicopters
actual physicist (unreg)(maybe he should rename himself actually STUPID ),is in the same league as is please(unreg)
and best one 146thaes is totally devoid of any aeronautical brains as he says that the rpm rate is changed to produce the thrust
totally wrong you increase the fuelling to give you the same RPM as you increase POWER by altering the pitch of the blades thereby increasing the amount of work they do and as every scientist/engineer knows if you increase the amount of work done then you consume MORE energy i.e. the extra fuel.
some helicopters now can use the engines to vector the thrust to aid stability power climbing ability BUT the one shown is not of this type.also the speed of any helicopter is limited by the size and speed of its rotors if they get near supersonic kiss you arse goodbye so lord spidey is right about the blades freeze frame effect.
there are certain discrepancies in the video especially the sound of the engines to what the helicopter is doing but maybe down to bad mic on camera but as to the model theorists the wheels certainly retract in a very smooth fashion so unless it was a powered model and extremely good camera work I would say it is the real thing as to the frequency anomaly ever seen a car wheel moving under lights at night just like a camera fps the hertz at which the light works can cause this anomaly
AND MY FINAL COMMENT TO ALL YOU SPAMS OUT THERE GOOD JOB IT IS NOT A USof ficken A HELICOPTER OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE SHOOTING THE CROWD. IN THE FIRST GULF WAR THE AMERICANS KILLED MORE FRIENDLIES THAN ENEMIES
NICE ONE NORTH CAROLINA DICK HEAD NATIONAL GUARD PILOT PAINTING BLUE TANKS IN THE SHAPE OF A WARRIOR (THATS A BRITISH ARMOURED VEHICLE ON YOUR A10 I WILL DECK YOU AGAIN ANYTIME COUSIN BOB
oh and reprogramme your software to spell English correctly there is NO such thing as american English
THERE IS ENGLISH AND THAT'S IT WE INVENTED IT SO DON'T TRY AND ALTER IT BEACUASE YOU CAN'T SPELL |
| |
| 135) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [10/29/07 06:29:04 PM] |
| Yes because was spelt wrongly to emphasise the point |
| |
| 136) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [10/30/07 04:21:11 PM] |
| Aliasing..simple as |
| |
| 137) by OkhamsRazor [Unreg.] [11/2/07 02:21:35 PM] |
| It is indeed the frame rate of the video matching the rotational rate of the blades. The key is the sound from the video (sure, it could have been dubbed, but why?) It is exactly the sound you would expect to hear from large rotor blades beating the air.
It is NOT the exhaust from the turbines keeping it up. The primary use of the turbines is to TURN THE ROTORS. The tail rotor also confirms the frame rate hypothesis. In order to exucute turns, the rotor has to adjust faster or slower to overcome or work with the torque of the main rotor blades on the airframe. Thus, while the tail rotor is nearly in sync, it must continually change it's rate of rotation to keep the bird steady or execute a turn.
Besides, if it wear freefall, do you really think the videographer would pass on showing you the impact and carnage in favor of this interesting but uneventful footage? |
| |
| 138) by [Unreg.] [Unreg.] [11/4/07 06:41:41 AM] |
| How can you say the trick is on camera FPS and rotor RPM and sleep so pacefully? I don't think that rotor RPM stays so perfectly synch'ed with the camera to produce this neat effect. I'm not a copter expert, but I don't think cameras and copters are so accurate to mantain this trick over all the video, given that camera moves its viewpoint, there's wind, etc... all that should make the copter and camera be out of sync.
Although, haven't you tuned guitar strings? When you play the same note on two strings, if there's 1Hz of difference you can feel the vibrations due of this out of sync. |
| |
| 139) by bxr225 [Unreg.] [11/5/07 03:49:15 PM] |
| wow there are alot of dumb ass kids like that diego kid and joeljoel i agree with the frame rate discussion only would make sense to a person with common sense. |
| |
| 140) by abadubidaba [Unreg.] [11/8/07 06:41:31 PM] |
| i'll tell you how it flies. it has a string tied to the top with special effects sounds. and its a FLIPPIN TOY~!!!! |
| |
| 141) by Dumbasses [Unreg.] [11/9/07 07:19:30 PM] |
| You guys are idiots..it's being towed by a helicopter above it. Those wings are not stabilizers, but hold munitions. There are turbo jets, but those alone could not support the helicopter. Simply put, there's a toe rope and it's being air lifted. |
| |
| 142) by Unbelief [Unreg.] [11/12/07 08:51:05 PM] |
| JohnnyFlies99 is the only person on this post who sounds remotely like he knows what he's talking about. The top rotor is turning with the rotation provided by the turbines. The rear rotor is turning at a different speed because it's function is to control the spin of the chopper. Did you notice the decrease in rotor speed as the helo turned? That's because the rear rotor compensated less for the rotation of the main rotor, thereby letting the chopper turn. |
| |
| 143) by FFS [Unreg.] [11/13/07 12:32:48 PM] |
| THIS SHIT IS HILARIOUS TO READ.. i am only like 3/4's done and i dont ahev time... damn.... i wish i coudl read it all.. you ppl have no lifes.... especially MT... YOU FUCKIGN DOUCHE TARD.... suck a cock my friend |
| |
| 144) by flyboy [Unreg.] [11/15/07 08:56:36 PM] |
| At best, helicopters do not fly, they beat the air into submission. This helicopter has apparently given up. Air Rules! |
| |
| 145) by VegasRocks [Unreg.] [11/18/07 07:56:06 AM] |
| Framerate match with main blade rotation. Look closely at the main blades throuought the vid and they DO move, although not much, however this is enough with the frame rate set on the video device to show small changes in rpm as the pilot performs various manuvers that would require a small rpm change in the main rotor. |
| |
| 146) by DUMBFUCKS [Unreg.] [11/23/07 07:54:21 PM] |
| OR!!! its a toy hanging in a string!!! |
| |
| 147) by Ace[Unreg.] [Unreg.] [11/26/07 08:11:16 PM] |
| It's SOOOO obvious. Bush is behind it. What do you expect from someone who p's on your back and tells you it's raining. |
| |
| 148) by Odan [Unreg.] [11/29/07 08:33:48 AM] |
| Its the frame rate of the camera.
Those wings only hold missiles.
The jet engine look is the power of the motor for the blades. |
| |
| 149) by PFC Foster [Unreg.] [12/5/07 08:06:56 AM] |
| just to clear it all up... that bird has jets just behind the hold.. if you look carefully... right as the bird is comin out of its huver ... towards the middle of the video.. you see the jets fold back.... they are under the stabalization wings... look closely |
| |
| 150) by PFC Foster [Unreg.] [12/5/07 08:10:08 AM] |
| and its not the landing gear... you kinda have to know what to look for...but ull see it if you pay attention |
| |
| 151) by dolfanjim [Unreg.] [12/8/07 02:46:48 PM] |
| OK. Look at the blades in the video. They are not completely stable. They move but so slow it is hard to notice. When the heli climbs or decends the rotors spin in opposite directions. |
| |
| 152) by Raychel is special [Unreg.] [12/9/07 02:23:07 AM] |
| Originally posted by Raychel [06/21/07 06:27:53 PM]
M.T. is correct, as I quote,"Military choppers like that one have jet engines on both sides on the chassis that they can turn on in case of a blade malfunction." My husband is in 101st Airborne for the US Army and works on these things for a living,
Are you kidding? Your husband, who works for the U.S. Military, works on Russian military aircraft? You're absolutely sure about that? |
| |
| 153) by Unreg [Unreg.] [12/11/07 01:11:41 AM] |
| Fools! It is obvious the helicopter is in water! It's being swirled around by the current! That's why there is a school of fish that appears briefly in the lower right hand corner. |
| |
| 154) by Unreg [Unreg.] [12/11/07 01:12:10 AM] |
| Fools! It is obvious the helicopter is in water! It's being swirled around by the current! That's why there is a school of fish that appears briefly in the lower right hand corner. |
| |
| 155) by frozn1 [Unreg.] [12/11/07 11:17:35 AM] |
| No wonder this country is in such bad shape. This is a Russian helicopter, like the Afghan's destroyed with CIA supplied shoulder launched missiles. Why did the Berlin wall fall and USSR collapse? Do you think they Russians have been sitting around cruising the Internet since their humiliation. They have had a well funded psy corp since the 50's. Its pretty obvious that since their defeat at the hands of Bin Laden they have applied what they learned about levitation to aviation. Light objects have been a done deal for decades. Putin has gotten all feisty in the last few months just because? He knows he has the upper hand now with helicopter gunships powered by brain waves. See the flashes of light periodical coming out of the Hind? just reflections? I think not. |
| |
| 156) by unreg [Unreg.] [12/17/07 12:15:28 AM] |
| mt your a idiot every one knows its a hind no the jet on sides cant lift it at angle its flying and wings on sides or for weapons and for god sakes accept you lost like a man |
| |
| 157) by Yoda [Unreg.] [12/19/07 12:32:04 AM] |
| I see that only a couple of you can see the truth. This is why so many of you will fail.
You must use the energy of all that surrounds you, let go your feelings...
The force is strong in this one.
Do or do not, there is no try!
Its a Jedi Levitation trick!
Hahahahahahaha |
| |
| 158) by Mighty Smiter [Unreg.] [Unreg.] [12/23/07 11:28:55 AM] |
| joeljoeljoel some choppers have wings, armie ones do to hold their rockets. and plus that chopper is a model and it is put infront of a background, duhbrains. |
| |
| 159) by [Unreg.] ScubaUSAF [Unreg.] [12/24/07 03:37:03 AM] |
| Wow that's cool...I work on the MH-53 Pave low and i got video like this once...yeah it's a match with shutterspeed/refresh rate. And i knwo this has already been addressed, but the turbine engines are connected to shafts that connect to a gear box that turns the main rotor, and the turbines don't creat enough thrust to PUSH the choper forward much less creat any type of LIFT thrus DOES NOT = Lift...two separate things poeple. anyways, again it's a cool effect. |
| |
| 160) by ABC [Unreg.] [12/29/07 10:39:02 PM] |
| I just feel bad for the majority of the people on this comment board that made dumb ass comments. |
| |
| 161) by IMNOTUNREGISTERED [Unreg.] [Unreg.] [12/30/07 07:12:38 AM] |
| FUCK SQUIRRLES! |
| |
| 162) by n00buler89 [Unreg.] [01/3/08 10:13:05 AM] |
| Wow. 161 comments. |
| |
| 163) by GWBush [Unreg.] [01/7/08 09:07:28 AM] |
| Y'all are useless Scientists! This thing came straight outta Area51! Thats it. |
| |
| 164) by Yoda [Unreg.] [01/13/08 08:04:06 AM] |
| penis i like |
| |
| 165) by fisisist [Unreg.] [01/16/08 08:31:13 AM] |
| must be a new stealth technology. i think the UN helicopers have those. |
| |
| 166) by mel [Unreg.] [01/19/08 10:44:59 PM] |
| It is being carried by a chinook heli. |
| |
| 167) by DV8 [Unreg] [Unreg.] [01/24/08 04:42:40 PM] |
| Wow, some people come up with wild stuff. Im in the military. The Helo has turbine engines yes, but they just exhaust the engines. The dont rotate down to allow lift(like a harrier) . Harrier?? yeah right. Thats really funny. Its the frame rate. Easily adjustable with a good Video camera. |
| |
| 168) by reg [Unreg.] [01/27/08 03:25:16 AM] |
| its being lifted by a diff. helo |
| |
| 169) by chuckles [01/27/08 01:01:08 PM] |
| Dv8 you couldent be more wrong.... I am A union camera man. I shoot blockbusters all year. Theres no way its the frame rate first of all. video cameras dont shoot multiple frame rates only one dose. Its called the Soney XD and i doubt that was that camera due to the shity resalution of the clip. plus its a 50,000 camera haha frame rate |
| |
| 170) by chuckles [01/27/08 01:05:45 PM] |
| Unless it was film but like i said the color cards dont match i have compared. This was not shot on film. But even if it was shot on film camera with a vaerable framefate ramping attachment. These people dont have the money for the DI prosess. And thats the begining i can keep going. All i have to say is that it had to do with the wind or the air craft. |
| |
| 171) by chuckles [01/27/08 01:07:53 PM] |
| NOT THE CAMERA |
| |
| 172) by Some guy [Unreg.] [01/30/08 06:56:45 PM] |
| its magic, harry potter is casting a spell on it |
| |
| 173) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [02/5/08 11:42:56 AM] |
| this is simple.. they are controlling the speed of the propellor .. if you look at a ceiling fan spinning up at one point it looks still this is the same effect it looks as if its not moving but its just moving at such a high speed that it seems to be stationary |
| |
| 174) by usaf_helicopter_crewchief [Unreg.] [02/17/08 12:52:46 AM] |
| you people are retarded (well some of you)
the wings are part of the weapons system, it not a vtol jet, they cant manuver like that, and the blades bend up cuz there lifting the entire weigt of the airframe
a camera takes so many still pictures per second (usually like 24 i think) when you wantch it back they play so fast they appear to move. kinda like a flipbook cartoon. on this it just so happens that the rpm of the rotor is causing a blade to appear in the same place every time... they are spinning, i promise
|
| |
| 175) by jesus [Unreg.] [02/20/08 02:40:21 PM] |
| Jesus Christ! are Americans really that stupid???? How did you guys out there thinking its nothing to do with the frame rate get on the internet in the first place? I think someone needs to speak to your supervisors!!! |
| |
| 176) by [bob] [Unreg.] [02/23/08 04:18:00 AM] |
| its because a camera takes 24 pictures a second and that propeller is moving faster than the camera can see |
| |
| 177) by Tom [Unreg.] [02/23/08 10:56:06 PM] |
| OK first of all I can't believe how many comments there are on this. But my two cents is this... Helicopters do not increase rotor speed for rising and falling. This is accomplished by changing the pitch of the blades using the collective control to the pilot's left. Yes, throttle is increased in order to climb, but this is to counteract the tendency of the blades to slow down when the pitch is increased. The rotor speed remains constant. So the frame rate or shutter speed relative to rotor speed theory holds water. The Tail rotor, which performs rudder functions, is rotating at a different (and much higher) speed causing it to appear to advance slowly. If you were able to see background with which you were familiar, like people or cars, they would appear to be moving in very slow motion because the film speed is so ridiculously fast. . |
| |
| 178) by Tom [Unreg.] [02/23/08 11:01:58 PM] |
| One other thing... the weapons pods on the sides of the airframe may provide a small percentage of this craft's lift IN FORWARD MOTION, however it would have to be moving forward very fast and the effect would be minimal. The jet engines on these craft drive the rotors and the exhaust is used for secondary forward thrust. However, when an helicopter is driven forward by an engine, as in the case of the class of helos called autogyros, the rotors ROTATE to keep it in the air. It is absolutely impossible for this particular aircraft to hover without it's rotor turning. This is simply a deliberate, and very cunning, optical trick perpetrated using a camera. |
| |
| 179) by joeramsayramsay [Unreg.] [03/1/08 09:06:42 AM] |
| sheesh, how did they get away with that?
|
| |
| 180) by doughnuts!! [Unreg.] [03/3/08 06:39:30 PM] |
| i'm not even gonna try to answer this question. ill find out another way. |
| |
| 181) by TekHousE [Unreg.] [03/15/08 05:09:26 AM] |
| This is real..heres another video of it..its the camera in sync..
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7076349679064042453 |
| |
| 182) by DocRosa [03/16/08 11:58:02 PM] |
| SEE... I TOLD YOU SO!!!
NOW CAN WE FINALLY ALL GO TO BED??? |
| |
| 183) by stupidmonkey6842 [Unreg.] [03/17/08 12:13:35 PM] |
| creepy |
| |
| 184) by Ololol. [Unreg.] [03/18/08 03:30:20 AM] |
| It's not the wings, or side rotor, or the thrust, as about 50% of people said its the camera syncing with the speed of the blades. If it was the additional thrust it would be a completely different noise. |
| |
| 185) by james [Unreg.] [03/25/08 05:16:42 AM] |
| maybe its a toy helicopter zoomed in and there is a helicopter in the distance. It might be an optical illusion. |
| |
| 186) by sshuggi [Unreg.] [03/27/08 12:54:29 PM] |
| Wow, so many posts, I think I'll add my opinion. First off, it's not the camera fps. As you can see, the plane is pitching and rolling, climbing and falling; all will cause the planes blades to move in aspects to camera fps. If you've ever looked out the window at another cars rims while driving, they may appear to be still, and when they speed-up a little, the rims will start to actually move. That's because your eyes have a refresh rate, just like cameras have a fps rate. So, unless the camera can fluctuate it's fps to the changing rpm of the helicopter, this idea wont work, and judging by the video quality, it wasn't that fancy of a camera.
Also, it's not in free fall, because the video is being taken from another helicopter (that's that fap fap fap sound) which would also have to be in free fall to keep-up with it. Plus, you'd be hearing about fifteen-hundred alarms going off because you're about to die in a falling metal death trap.
Disproving another point, it's not flying because of those missile armaments being wing-shaped. to make any lift they would have to be moving. You can't make a wing, set it on a table and expect it to start hovering.
I would have to say this was either one of two things, fake or M.T.'s suggestion of emergency systems. It could be held-up by another helicopter attached with a cable, although I bet that would break many federal laws and/or break the two aircraft.
This seems to be a test of the emergency semi-harrier jet propulsion, and someone that works at the base thought it would be neat to stump hundreds of people online. |
| |
| 187) by Daddy [04/3/08 07:37:11 AM] |
| Itīs cute flying this helicopter |
| |
| 188) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [04/6/08 10:36:17 AM] |
| clearly none of you know about mtf's. in the early sixties it was discovered in south peru a creature most know as fairies. with the right amount of teamwork, mtf's, (or military trained fairies) can actually maintain and control the weight of a helicopter. pshhh. |
| |
| 189) by originaltexan [Unreg.] [04/25/08 06:15:57 AM] |
| I saw Harry Blackwell do this on the old Dean Martin Show.
There's a helicopter above it transportinging it. If you look close against the clouds above it you can occasionally see the tethers. And, you can hear the blades / wash of the rotors.
How do you think these things get moved somewhere for repairs?
Man, you people are dense! |
| |
| 190) by originaltexan [Unreg.] [04/25/08 06:16:54 AM] |
| I saw Harry Blackwell do this on the old Dean Martin Show.
There's a helicopter above it transportinging it. If you look close against the clouds above it you can occasionally see the tethers. And, you can hear the blades / wash of the rotors.
How do you think these things get moved somewhere for repairs?
Man, you people are dense! |
| |
| 191) by area51 [Unreg.] [04/28/08 07:01:00 AM] |
| there's only one explanation for this... it's aliens |
| |
| 192) by area51 [Unreg.] [04/28/08 07:03:39 AM] |
| there's only one explanation for this... it's aliens |
| |
| 193) by McLovin69 [Unreg.] [04/28/08 07:13:57 AM] |
| when i was looking at this and i read this comment by area 51, i noticed there was any alien in the passengers seat. you have to look real real close and you will see that there is a transparent figure in the passengers seat. the world will end in 2012. Also, my brother works at nasa and there have been recent studies on this video, that clearly show a figure in the helicopter. i will say it again the world will be taken over by aliens in 2012, its a known fact. |
| |
| 194) by [Unreg] A physics teacher [Unreg.] [04/29/08 10:13:08 AM] |
| It's framerate... dead simple effect and there's slight blurring around the blades caused by the blades bouncing up and down out of sync with the vid. |
| |
| 195) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:48:41 PM] |
| 1 |
| |
| 196) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:49:06 PM] |
| 3 |
| |
| 197) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:49:48 PM] |
| 48848540609569598 |
| |
| 198) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:50:52 PM] |
| i did this |
| |
| 199) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:51:20 PM] |
| i did this to |
| |
| 200) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:53:21 PM] |
| I did this to get to 100th commenter
suck whatever u want |
| |
| 201) by Anonymous [Unreg.] [05/8/08 04:54:10 PM] |
| sry 200th commenter |
| |
