Low Tech Tips for Previous Wars

[John Fields]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:35:59 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsnel28pti93imut689ad7rsugsmulc9i6s@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), fungus <tooby@artlum.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:22:37 PM UTC+2, Phil Allison wrote:
"fungus"
I'm not sure of the wisdom of having a tech
discussion with somebody who thinks WWII
aircraft had swept back wings.


** This one did.


Yes, but he said:

"For example, planes in WWII had swept back wings
when they should have been swept forward."

Seems to me like there's a lot of basic work
to be done before you can start a real discussion.

---
Depending on how you want to define "planes in WW2", there were, AIUI,
only one or two aircraft with wing leading and trailing edges swept
aft.

Ergo, Ian's statement that: "For example, planes in WWII had swept
back wings when they should have been swept forward." is, on its face,
seriously flawed except in one or two cases.


You should probably refrain from mixing crack, LSD & crystal meth all at
once - then you wouldn't fantasize I'd said things I didn't.

---
I have no experience with crack, so the judgment call related to the
fantasies elicited by the mix you described is yours, and I do
apologize to Brett Cahill for attributing his idiotic statements to an
even more profound idiot.

--
JF

 

[Phil Allison]

"John Fields"

Moreover, I understand that a forward swept wing is inherently
unstable, with the technology needed to tame it unavailable in the
'40's.

** Just to get the facts out, the purpose of "swept back " wings is to
reduce aerodynamic drag when travelling at close to or above the speed of
sound. It mitigates against an effect called "compressibility". So all
commercial jets and jet fighters have it - or else go to the extreme of
using a delta shaped wing.

Many prop driven planes ( ie DC3s ) had wings with swept back leading edges,
along with wings that rise from root to tips. Both these features improve
stability, both lateral and roll, at any flying speed.




.... Phil

 

[Bret Cahill]

If you could go back in time, what would be the worst tech errors you
could correct for various wars.  These should be things that could be
implemented pretty fast without first developing a whole new
industry.

 ** OK  -   think I have one for you.

The  " G suit " or more correctly, " anti G suit " .

A low tech solution to the problem of fighter pilots blacking out in high G
manoeuvres.

Towards the end of WW2, practical G suits became available ( to the Allies
at least) and were VERY effective.

Had they been available earlier, as was technically possible, thousand of
pilots lives would have been saved AND the pilots that had them would have
possessed a HUGE  advantage during " dog fights " and diving manoeuvres over
those who did not.

Very dumb not to have pushed forward  the idea much earlier.

Just before WWI some top Russian military leaders believed that guns
weren't much of an advantage over bayonets. This was 50 years after
the U. S. Civil War.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bob Masta]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:22:37 +1000, "Phil Allison"
<phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote:

"fungus"

I'm not sure of the wisdom of having a tech
discussion with somebody who thinks WWII
aircraft had swept back wings.


** This one did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163

Which looks not too dissimilar to this plane:

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum/2007/Highlights/F86Tom07.jpg

Cool! That Yankee Air Museum is in Ypsilanti, Michigan,
right next door to Ann Arbor. I *really* need to get over
there and check it out!

Best regards,


Bob Masta

DAQARTA v7.00
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Scope, Spectrum, Spectrogram, Sound Level Meter
Frequency Counter, Pitch Track, Pitch-to-MIDI
FREE Signal Generator, DaqMusic generator
Science with your sound card!

 

[Phil Allison]

"Bob Masta"

** This one did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163

Which looks not too dissimilar to this plane:

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/AirShows/YankeeAirMuseum/2007/Highlights/F86Tom07.jpg

Cool! That Yankee Air Museum is in Ypsilanti, Michigan,
right next door to Ann Arbor. I *really* need to get over
there and check it out!

** The F86 "Sabre" is one of my favourite jet fighters - mainly because
it was the first plane to break the sound barrier. That's right, not Chuck
Yeager in the Bell X1 rocket plane, but by a George Welch in a *prototype*
F86.

George broke the rules by putting his untested F86 into a vertical dive and
producing a sonic boom that dozens heard for miles around. This was about
two weeks prior to the Bell going supersonic after being launched from a B29
bomber.

George had made already himself famous during WW2 for being one of the few
pilots to engage Japanese Navy planes that attacked Pearl Harbour. He
managed to shot down three planes in a sky filled with Mitsubishi Zeros -
the events are depicted in the 1970s film " Tora Tora Tora ".

For their trouble, George was about to be court marshalled for taking off
without orders when an Gen Hap Arnold stepped in and recommend him for the
Medal of Honour instead.

Later he served in New Guinea, shot down nine more Japanese Navy planes,
unfortunately got malaria and wound up in hospital in Sydney. There he met a
gorgeous, red headed Aussie nurse and she soon became his wife.

Later he flew F86s in the Korean war and downed number of Mig15s.

George received no credit at all for his breaking of the sound barrier and
died while flight testing the F100 Super Sabre - when the tail section
fell off.

His life story is sensational and would make a terrific movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Welch_(pilot)


..... Phil

 

[notbob]

On 2012-08-15, Phil Allison <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote:

** The F86 "Sabre" is one of my favourite jet fighters - mainly because
it was the first plane to break the sound barrier. That's right, not Chuck
Yeager in the Bell X1 rocket plane, but by a George Welch in a *prototype*
F86.

Waay cool! I was not aware of that fact.

His life story is sensational and would make a terrific movie.

My fave F86 movie is The Hunters, w/ Robert Mitchum, 1958. Great
dogfight footage and close-ups of F86s with .50 cals ablazzin!



On another sad note, an F86 figured a bit too close in my family's
life when a Canadian F86 crashed into a large ice cream parlor during an
air show in Sacramento CA in 1972:

http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/Sabrejet_crash_site.htm

Fate took a benevolent hand that day when my mom and brother were
heading into that very Farrell's for a treat. At the very last
minute, my mom remembered something she'd forgotten to do and she
changed her mind. Her and my brother went back to their car and drove
out of the parking lot jes minutes before the crash.

nb



--
Definition of objectivism:
"Eff you! I got mine."
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

 

[fungus]

On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:18:27 PM UTC+2, John Fields wrote:

Ergo, Ian's statement that: "For example, planes in WWII had swept

back wings when they should have been swept forward." is, on its face,

seriously flawed except in one or two cases.

To me he seems to be implying that most
aircraft used in WWII had swept back wings,
and that this design was a mistake.

End of discussion, I believe

With an opening statement like that it should
never have started.

 

[Phil Allison]

"notbob"
Phil Allison

** The F86 "Sabre" is one of my favourite jet fighters - mainly
because
it was the first plane to break the sound barrier. That's right, not
Chuck
Yeager in the Bell X1 rocket plane, but by a George Welch in a
*prototype*
F86.

Waay cool! I was not aware of that fact.

His life story is sensational and would make a terrific movie.

My fave F86 movie is The Hunters, w/ Robert Mitcham, 1958. Great
dogfight footage and close-ups of F86s with .50 cals ablazzin!

** Mitcham was a much under rated actor as well.

Ever see the "Enemy Below" ??

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050356/


BTW: We Aussies built a licensed version of the F86 called the "Avon
Sabre".

Rolls Royce Avon engine and 2 x 30mm cannons replaced the original line up.

Flew higher, faster and packed heaps more punch.

Caused a lot of cool hostility from USAF pilots in Korea when the RAAF
turned up with them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_Sabre



..... Phil

 

[Ian Field]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:tbjl281jbs4lb2ilg0vs4v92f84fk8rs2g@4ax.com...

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:35:59 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:



"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsnel28pti93imut689ad7rsugsmulc9i6s@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), fungus <tooby@artlum.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:22:37 PM UTC+2, Phil Allison wrote:
"fungus"
I'm not sure of the wisdom of having a tech
discussion with somebody who thinks WWII
aircraft had swept back wings.


** This one did.


Yes, but he said:

"For example, planes in WWII had swept back wings
when they should have been swept forward."

Seems to me like there's a lot of basic work
to be done before you can start a real discussion.

---
Depending on how you want to define "planes in WW2", there were, AIUI,
only one or two aircraft with wing leading and trailing edges swept
aft.

Ergo, Ian's statement that: "For example, planes in WWII had swept
back wings when they should have been swept forward." is, on its face,
seriously flawed except in one or two cases.


You should probably refrain from mixing crack, LSD & crystal meth all at
once - then you wouldn't fantasize I'd said things I didn't.

---
I have no experience with crack, so the judgment call related to the
fantasies elicited by the mix you described

So you're not denying LSD & crystal meth then.

 

[Ian Field]

"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:a91nmiFqj4U1@mid.individual.net...

"notbob"
Phil Allison

** The F86 "Sabre" is one of my favourite jet fighters - mainly
because
it was the first plane to break the sound barrier. That's right, not
Chuck
Yeager in the Bell X1 rocket plane, but by a George Welch in a
*prototype*
F86.

Waay cool! I was not aware of that fact.

His life story is sensational and would make a terrific movie.

My fave F86 movie is The Hunters, w/ Robert Mitcham, 1958. Great
dogfight footage and close-ups of F86s with .50 cals ablazzin!


** Mitcham was a much under rated actor as well.

Ever see the "Enemy Below" ??

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050356/


BTW: We Aussies built a licensed version of the F86 called the "Avon
Sabre".

Rolls Royce Avon engine and 2 x 30mm cannons replaced the original line
up.

Flew higher, faster and packed heaps more punch.

Caused a lot of cool hostility from USAF pilots in Korea when the RAAF
turned up with them.

The RAF license built F86 was built by Canadiar - also a souped up version
of the basic American model.

 

[Fred Abse]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:48:27 +1000, Phil Allison wrote:

See pic of the Bell X1 - the first plane to exceed the speed of sound in
level flight.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2001/11/images/bell_x1_06.jpg

No sweep.

AFAIK, the breakthrough that allowed the X1 to fly
controllably, supersonically was the modification allowing the whole
stabilizer to rotate, rather than having a separate elevator at its
trailing edge.

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
(Richard Feynman)

 

[Fred Abse]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:53:17 -0500, John Fields wrote:

attributing his idiotic statements to an even more
profound idiot.

ROFL!

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
(Richard Feynman)

 

[Fred Abse]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 21:53:45 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:

Just before WWI some top Russian military leaders believed that guns
weren't much of an advantage over bayonets.

Tannenberg et al proved them wrong!

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
(Richard Feynman)

 

[Ian Field]

"Fred Abse" <excretatauris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2012.08.15.08.22.56.40418@invalid.invalid...

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:48:27 +1000, Phil Allison wrote:

See pic of the Bell X1 - the first plane to exceed the speed of sound in
level flight.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2001/11/images/bell_x1_06.jpg

No sweep.

AFAIK, the breakthrough that allowed the X1 to fly
controllably, supersonically was the modification allowing the whole
stabilizer to rotate, rather than having a separate elevator at its
trailing edge.

AFAIK that was a British innovation, developed to overcome control surface
compressibility at transonic speeds.

 

[Fred Abse]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 20:41:26 +0100, Ian Field wrote:

"Fred Abse" <excretatauris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2012.08.15.08.22.56.40418@invalid.invalid...
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:48:27 +1000, Phil Allison wrote:

See pic of the Bell X1 - the first plane to exceed the speed of sound
in level flight.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2001/11/images/bell_x1_06.jpg

No sweep.

AFAIK, the breakthrough that allowed the X1 to fly controllably,
supersonically was the modification allowing the whole stabilizer to
rotate, rather than having a separate elevator at its trailing edge.


AFAIK that was a British innovation, developed to overcome control surface
compressibility at transonic speeds.

AIUI, it was a field modification to the X-1, done at Muroc (later to
become Edwards) AFB, at the behest of Jack Ridley, the onsite engineer.

Maybe the Brits discovered it independently. The X-1 project was kept
under wraps for quite a long time. Nobody knew about the supersonic
flight until after someone else claimed to be the first. Quite a lot later.

--
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."
(Richard Feynman)

 

[Ian Field]

"Fred Abse" <excretatauris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2012.08.15.20.16.59.776603@invalid.invalid...

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 20:41:26 +0100, Ian Field wrote:



"Fred Abse" <excretatauris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2012.08.15.08.22.56.40418@invalid.invalid...
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:48:27 +1000, Phil Allison wrote:

See pic of the Bell X1 - the first plane to exceed the speed of sound
in level flight.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2001/11/images/bell_x1_06.jpg

No sweep.

AFAIK, the breakthrough that allowed the X1 to fly controllably,
supersonically was the modification allowing the whole stabilizer to
rotate, rather than having a separate elevator at its trailing edge.


AFAIK that was a British innovation, developed to overcome control
surface
compressibility at transonic speeds.

AIUI, it was a field modification to the X-1, done at Muroc (later to
become Edwards) AFB, at the behest of Jack Ridley, the onsite engineer.

Maybe the Brits discovered it independently. The X-1 project was kept
under wraps for quite a long time. Nobody knew about the supersonic
flight until after someone else claimed to be the first. Quite a lot
later.

Miles M52 - project started about mid war and completed by 1946, findings
were the foundation stone of the English Electric Lightening intercepter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_M.52

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:16:13 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:tbjl281jbs4lb2ilg0vs4v92f84fk8rs2g@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:35:59 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:



"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsnel28pti93imut689ad7rsugsmulc9i6s@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), fungus <tooby@artlum.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:22:37 PM UTC+2, Phil Allison wrote:
"fungus"
I'm not sure of the wisdom of having a tech
discussion with somebody who thinks WWII
aircraft had swept back wings.


** This one did.


Yes, but he said:

"For example, planes in WWII had swept back wings
when they should have been swept forward."

Seems to me like there's a lot of basic work
to be done before you can start a real discussion.

---
Depending on how you want to define "planes in WW2", there were, AIUI,
only one or two aircraft with wing leading and trailing edges swept
aft.

Ergo, Ian's statement that: "For example, planes in WWII had swept
back wings when they should have been swept forward." is, on its face,
seriously flawed except in one or two cases.


You should probably refrain from mixing crack, LSD & crystal meth all at
once - then you wouldn't fantasize I'd said things I didn't.

---
I have no experience with crack, so the judgment call related to the
fantasies elicited by the mix you described

So you're not denying LSD & crystal meth then.

---
Nor marijuana, hashish, psilocybin, opium, and alcohol.

And you?

--
JF

 

[Ian Field]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:kd4o28tju625pg76pnjnhugchbm9e2ickr@4ax.com...

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:16:13 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:



"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:tbjl281jbs4lb2ilg0vs4v92f84fk8rs2g@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:35:59 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:



"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsnel28pti93imut689ad7rsugsmulc9i6s@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), fungus <tooby@artlum.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 2:22:37 PM UTC+2, Phil Allison wrote:
"fungus"
I'm not sure of the wisdom of having a tech
discussion with somebody who thinks WWII
aircraft had swept back wings.


** This one did.


Yes, but he said:

"For example, planes in WWII had swept back wings
when they should have been swept forward."

Seems to me like there's a lot of basic work
to be done before you can start a real discussion.

---
Depending on how you want to define "planes in WW2", there were, AIUI,
only one or two aircraft with wing leading and trailing edges swept
aft.

Ergo, Ian's statement that: "For example, planes in WWII had swept
back wings when they should have been swept forward." is, on its face,
seriously flawed except in one or two cases.


You should probably refrain from mixing crack, LSD & crystal meth all at
once - then you wouldn't fantasize I'd said things I didn't.

---
I have no experience with crack, so the judgment call related to the
fantasies elicited by the mix you described

So you're not denying LSD & crystal meth then.

---
Nor marijuana, hashish, psilocybin, opium, and alcohol.

And you?

Not even booze.

 

[Tom Biasi]

Maybe the Brits discovered it independently. The X-1 project was kept
under wraps for quite a long time. Nobody knew about the supersonic
flight until after someone else claimed to be the first. Quite a lot later.

I had an interesting discussion about that with Chuck Yeager a few years

back

Tom

 

[Phil Allison]

"Fred Abse"

AFAIK that was a British innovation, developed to overcome control
surface
compressibility at transonic speeds.

AIUI, it was a field modification to the X-1, done at Muroc (later to
become Edwards) AFB, at the behest of Jack Ridley, the onsite engineer.

Maybe the Brits discovered it independently. The X-1 project was kept
under wraps for quite a long time.

** The X-1 et alia was built based on designs, test data and wind tunnel
models supplied by the British.

As an austerity measure after WW2, the Brits chose to abandon the idea of a
SS fighter project - an absurd move that gave the US the lead in jet
engines and jet fighters.

Nobody knew about the supersonic
flight until after someone else claimed to be the first. Quite a lot
later.

** Leaked to the press about 5 weeks later, then given a blaze of publicity.

When F86s started breaking the barrier regularly, the game was up.


..... Phil