	Aviation portal This file is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This file is supported by the aircraft project.

United States: Government

	United States portal This file is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
	This file is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

doubts

With all due respect, but it says that this image is self-made, i wonder how the author took it.

Also the color of the flame is not right, more like a photoshop work.

From the FPC page for the image:

A lot of people that have seen this have said it looks like I was in a plane flying alongside. Actually I did a bit of trick to get this view - of course all the keen photographers at airshows get as close to the action as they can right alongside the runway. I went way back for a different perspective, say a couple of hundred metres away amongst the milling crowds and fixed displays. That meant instead of shooting at say 45° to the horizontal as is usual for a low pass, I was only shooting at about 10°.—User:Jjron

As for the flame being incorrect, what colour do you think it should be? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 00:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

agree

I agree with the doubts that this picture is photo-shopped. A mass fuel to air mixture would produce a much darker flame with soot. No soot is even present in the picture. I have deleted it from 3 locations because of its illegitimacy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antony1103 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with you, and removing this image as being 'fake' amounts to vandalism. You obviously have never seen a dump and burn, and are speaking from supposition. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.108.168 (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]