dark light

Bager1968

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 3,360 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Chuck Yeager thread (Updated) #877478
    Bager1968
    Participant

    …not to mention his belief that the all-flying tail was an on-the spot US-invented solution to control problems with the XS-1.

    It was hardly “on-the-spot”.

    Many early aircraft had one*, and during WW2 both the British and US flew aircraft fitted with it – there was a British prop-driven fighter fitted with one, and Curtis flew an modified P-36 (XP-42) with it in 1942-43.

    So you can see that both the British and American aircraft research establishments were knowledgeable about, and experienced with, the all-flying stabilizer before the Miles M.52 was designed, and before the X-1 needed to have its horizontal stabilizers modified for more control authority.

    * All flying tailplanes were used on the popular Morane-Saulnier G, H and L monoplanes from France as well as the early Fokker Eindecker monoplane and Halberstadt D.II biplane fighters from Germany.

    Bager1968
    Participant

    Then there is the about 420 other surviving T-6s – many of which are flying.

    While historic, and scarce compared to their original numbers, they are not nearly to the point where the loss of one is critical.

    Bager1968
    Participant

    However, this Learjet was operated by a contractor operating with the Luftwaffe to provide “airborne target services”, so it was deliberately operating in close proximity to the Typhoon.

    http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/23/germany-lear-jet-crashed-after-collision-with-eurofighter/

    A private Lear Jet with two on board crashed after a collision with one of two German Air Force Eurofighter jets above the town of Olsberg, Sauerland, in the German State Nordrhein Westfalen, reports local police. The pilots of the two military planes were training the intercept of an out of communication, civilian airplane. At least one of the two occupants of the Lear Jet has been killed.

    Oberst (Colonel) Andreas Hoppe of the 31st Tactical Fighter Wing, said that the pilot of the severely damaged Eurofighter was able of returning his jet to the Nörvenich Air Base near the city of Köln while the pilot of the second Eurofighter landed at Köln Wahn.

    Hoppe added that both of the pilots were very experienced and had often executed the same training exercise as the one they carried out Monday morning at the time of the crash. The Air Force spokesman said that he had no information about the causes to the collision and that both of the planes impacted at both their body as well as a wing.

    The training exercise, said Oberst Andreas Hoppe, involved the intercept of a civilian plane that failed to communicate with aviation authorities, adding that the Air Force usually establishes visual contact with such planes to guide it to one of the nearest air ports to land. The usual distance between the interceptors and the civilian plane, he added, was normally about 500 to 1,000 meters while the second military jet normally would trail the intercepted plane at a distance of 3,000 meters.

    Here is the website of the contractor.
    http://www.gfd-hohn.de/

    Bager1968
    Participant

    Welcome to Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

    For those without comedic tastes, the self-proclaimed experts at Wikipedia have an article very remotely related to Spitfire.

    in reply to: Single seat + single engines Grumman A-6 version !?! #2294618
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Note that, while the VAL RFP stated that the aircraft would have to use the TF30 turbofan*, the Grumman Design 128 (G-12) retained the two J52s of the A2F-1 (A-6A).

    * The Douglas A4D-6 (enlarged A4D Skyhawk), North American NA-295 (modified FJ-4B Fury), and the Ling-Temco-Vought Model V-463 (A-7A) all used one TF30.

    in reply to: No more recoveries Lake Michigan? :( #885077
    Bager1968
    Participant

    The cold, fresh water of Lake Michigan causes little to no corrosion now, some 70 years after they went in the water.

    Yes, if they had been pulled out 60 years ago you would be able to notice a difference – but almost all of that damage occurred in the first 20 or so years. If you pull an aircraft out 15-20 years in the future from now, very little (if any) changes will be noticeable.

    As for the oil – every year private boats put more oil & fuel into the lake than all those aircraft had aboard combined – and then you look at what the large commercial freighters leak. Possible pollution from these aircraft, from now going forward, is truly insignificant.

    in reply to: Caribou grazings #888672
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Lovely Turbo-ribou.

    in reply to: Caribou grazings #889270
    Bager1968
    Participant

    There are similar aged Caribous still flying around the world. In fact there is/or was up until recently a Caribou working in Afghanistan with a private contractor from the USA fitted with turboprops.
    It looks really nice in the bare metal finish.

    Was it a modified Caribou or a Buffalo?

    Just as a not-very-aside – the Hill Aerospace Museum at Hill AFB, Utah has come to a hard decision, and are divesting several aircraft from their holdings.

    They had gathered a lot of aircraft in anticipation of construction of a new display gallery (to be as large as their other two combined), but funding and plans for that have fallen through.

    As a result, they need to reduce the number of aircraft outside, as the upkeep for those is destroying their budget. They are looking for other museums (within the US preferably, but outside the US if necessary) to take on the aircraft (they just agreed to move a T-38 to a small museum in St. George, in southern Utah), and then they will even entertain requests from private collectors as a last alternative to scrapping.

    One of the aircraft to be given away is this ex-US Army/ex-USAF C-7A Caribou 63-9757.
    The first photo is one I took in 9 July 2009, and the others were taken on 7 March 2014.

    in reply to: A-1 Skyraider help please? #891166
    Bager1968
    Participant
    in reply to: D-day anniversary thread #894427
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Love the story of the 89 year old veteran whose care home said he couldn’t go.

    Where is he now?

    Ouisterham!

    Fan-bloody-tastic!

    Moggy

    Ha Ha the guy that escaped ! brilliant , and his mates will get him home .. 🙂

    The blooming care home should’ve taken him,not imprison him–ironic really fight for freedom and get stopped.

    I could just imagine him whistling the Great Escape theme while walking out. 😀

    To be fair to the nursing home:
    1. he had only been there a few months, and waited until not long before the day to tell them he wanted to go.
    2. they tried to get him onto an accredited tour with the Royal British Legion, but that was already full.
    3. in their concern for his well-being, they didn’t want him to go unless he had persons with him who could render proper medical aid in case of emergency (current certifications).
    4. as they didn’t have staff they could spare to escort him, they told him he’d have to wait for next year.

    in reply to: Grumman C-2A Greyhound aircrew #895052
    Bager1968
    Participant

    At PPRuNe he has been referred to specific websites dedicated to those who served in C-2 squadrons. Whether he has actually posted there or not is unknown.

    in reply to: Private warplane graveyard #895055
    Bager1968
    Participant

    So tell me if he hadn’t bought them and left them to “rot in place” where would they be now? Oh I know my mums saucepan……………………………………………

    So many on this site love distorting others’ words.

    My comment was that they should be PRESERVED!

    Rotting in a forest IS NOT PRESERVATION!

    Yes, it is better than scrapping, but if nothing is done the end result will be the same – a pile of material that is no longer an aircraft!

    in reply to: Eric "Winkle" Brown – BBC2 Tonight Wed 8th October #895880
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Eric Brown landed a P-39 on a carrier on 4 April 1945. He later claimed that this was the first carrier landing by a tricycle-gear aircraft, but I believe that F7F Tigercats had already carried out carrier landing trials in the US by this time.

    PBJ-1H (USMC B-25H) made several arrested landings and catapult take-offs from USS Shangri-La CV-38 on 15 November 1944 – the same day as the initial carrier trials of the F7F Tigercat.

    http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/pbj-1h.pdf
    http://steeljawscribe.com/2007/10/05/flightdeck-friday-more-oddities

    http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/backissues/1990s/1998/ja98/tigercat.pdf
    http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/457/language/en-US/Revenge-of-the-Shang.aspx

    But even earlier was the Lockheed XJO-3 (Model 12 Electra Junior modified with fixed tricycle gear) on 30 August 1939, aboard USS Lexington CV-2.

    http://www.microworks.net/PACIFIC/aviation/jo_r2o_r3o_electra.htm
    http://www.patriotspoint.org/news_events/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/xjo-3-takeoff-lex.jpg

    in reply to: Private warplane graveyard #895888
    Bager1968
    Participant

    So instead of being preserved, they are rotting in-place.

    in reply to: The Queen's new coach with aviation content #896710
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Danger Mouse’s car. :rolleyes:

    http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/images/smilies/biggthumpup.gif

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 3,360 total)