Confessions of khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Oklahoma City, PanAm 800 and American 587

[synchro1]

Guys, your focus is badly distorted in your discussion about "ground speed"
You are missing the point
The possibility to fly on that LEVEL is immaterial as a  YES or NO.
The flying object was on a DESCENDING COURSE ANGLE trying to CRASH into  the Pentagon.
YES, crashing it did, with or without ground buffer.

So long it came to a rest into the wall is all what mattered, even if it had to use its landing gear to do so.

Red

@Red_Sunset,

It's impossible to lower the landing gear at 300 mph. The controls would be unresponsive and "Mushy" to pushing the nose into the ground with the yolk.

[CANGAS]

Incorrect again.  That would be for a drop flight.  The X-1's landing gear was designed to be used when the fuel was gone and would not support a full fuel landing or take-off.  So, Jack Ridley got out his slide rule and calculated just how much fuel they would hold and also the take-off distance required.  Yeager said that when he took off, it was exactly at the spot Ridley had driven a stake into the ground based upon his calculations.

Therefore, the climb would have been very steep indeed as the ship was very light compared to the air drop weight.

Bill

Pirate, you are among the very silliest of liars.

You originally claimed that the X-1 flew at 1,000 MPH at 10 feet above the ground.

The only documented flight of the X-1 that made a normal take off from the runway is one that you now claim was VERY STEEP.

So, in your lies, the X-1 made a VERY STEEP CLIMB in which it exceeded 1,000 MPH before it got over 10 feet 0ff the runway.

And the X-1 never even flew faster than 967 MPH (depending on the source) at ANY ALTITUDE.

You really snort some strong stuff to imagine the shit that you believe and expect us to believe.


CANGAS 177

[Pirate88179]

Pirate, you are among the very silliest of liars.

You originally claimed that the X-1 flew at 1,000 MPH at 10 feet above the ground.

The only documented flight of the X-1 that made a normal take off from the runway is one that you now claim was VERY STEEP.

So, in your lies, the X-1 made a VERY STEEP CLIMB in which it exceeded 1,000 MPH before it got over 10 feet 0ff the runway.

And the X-1 never even flew faster than 967 MPH (depending on the source) at ANY ALTITUDE.

You really snort some strong stuff to imagine the shit that you believe and expect us to believe.


CANGAS 177

I don't "now claim' anything.  It is all in the books on my shelf.  I dug one of them out and was reading it again.  I can give you quotes and page numbers...then...you would have to argue with Chuck as he is the one that wrote the books.

I have not lied about anything.  Try reading about the very first powered flight of the X-1.  Chuck buzzed the runway below control tower height and shot straight up back into the sky.   He made a low pass and buzzed the runway at .8 mach.  Then, he pointed the nose straight up and was going .75 mach while climbing and accelerating to .85 mach up to 35,000 ft.

But, according to you he could not do this as you said the X-1 can not make a steep climb.  Well, I consider going from just off the runway up to 35,000 feet straight up to be a steep climb. 

I have over 500 books here in my home library and about 1/3 of them are on aviation and aviation history.  I learned all of this history before learning to fly. 
You should try reading.  It helps you learn.  That way, when someone corrects you when you are wrong, you won't accuse them of lying.

Bill

[SeaMonkey]

Well, I consider going from just off the runway up to 35,000 feet straight up to be a steep climb.

Reminds me of the morning just as dawn was about to break
in 1964.  I had the morning watch on the quarterdeck of USS
Genesee (AOG-8) in Subic Bay, Philippines and we were tied
to a buoy (moored) just off Cubi Point Naval Air Station which
was across the bay from Subic Bay Naval Station.

I heard this tremendous roar coming from Cubi Point runway
so looked over to see a U-2 take off on a mission.  Once it
got airborne it did one of those climbs which was nearly
straight up.  Really impressive and fast and loud.

It was unusual for a U-2 to be at Cubi and it was the only one
I saw while aboard the Genesee in Subic Bay.

[CANGAS]

I don't "now claim' anything.  It is all in the books on my shelf.  I dug one of them out and was reading it again.  I can give you quotes and page numbers...then...you would have to argue with Chuck as he is the one that wrote the books.

I have not lied about anything.  Try reading about the very first powered flight of the X-1.  Chuck buzzed the runway below control tower height and shot straight up back into the sky.   He made a low pass and buzzed the runway at .8 mach.  Then, he pointed the nose straight up and was going .75 mach while climbing and accelerating to .85 mach up to 35,000 ft.

But, according to you he could not do this as you said the X-1 can not make a steep climb.  Well, I consider going from just off the runway up to 35,000 feet straight up to be a steep climb. 

I have over 500 books here in my home library and about 1/3 of them are on aviation and aviation history.  I learned all of this history before learning to fly. 
You should try reading.  It helps you learn.  That way, when someone corrects you when you are wrong, you won't accuse them of lying.

Bill

Your original statement which I disagreed with, was that the first X-1 had been flown at 1,000 MPH at 10 feet or lower and that proved something about the 911 Pentagon crash. I'm not wasting time arguing anything else with somebody like you.

There are no reports available that say you are right. Except in your imaginary books that you refuse to define so that you can be checked.

If you are somehow not lying, define the book, page and quote. That is, IF you can pick back up your same hallucination. Or dream.


CANGAS 178