I thought I read that the A-26 was faster than the SR-71. Didn’t the A-26 seat one pilot and the SR-71 two, perhaps making it more sleek and weigh less to account for its higher speed?
And, hey, rockets don’t count even if they have pilots in them.
I thought I read that the A-26 was faster than the SR-71. Didn’t the A-26 seat one pilot and the SR-71 two, perhaps making it more sleek and weigh less to account for its higher speed?
And, hey, rockets don’t count even if they have pilots in them.
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution
Apparently I missed the definition of powered flight in your previous post which delineated the limitations on methods of propulsion in our discussion, Joe...Could you be kind enough to point it out to my admittedly limited scope of thought?......Ben
The future is forged on the anvil of history...The interpreter of history wields the hammer... - Unknown author...
I would say the aircraft needs to be designed to be able to take off and land under its own power to be considered.
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution
I would posit that powered flight is just what it states. Flight under power regardless if air launched or ground launched. I suppose that a distinction could be made between aircraft, those vehicles maned or otherwise using conventional fuel and intended for multiple flights and rockets using a solid or liquid fuel and intended for a single use.
Individual rights are protected only as long as they don't conflict with the desires of the state .
So I'm guessing you would not classify an XF-85 as an aircraft?......Ben
The future is forged on the anvil of history...The interpreter of history wields the hammer... - Unknown author...
"In service, the parasite fighter would be launched and retrieved by a trapeze. With the trapeze fully extended, the engine would be airstarted and the release from the mother ship was accomplished by the pilot pulling the nose back to disengage from the hook.In recovery, the aircraft would approach the mother ship from underneath and link up with the trapeze using the retractable hook in the aircraft's nose"
Interesting concept.. I had never heard of the XF-85.
Parasites have been around at least in concept almost as long as powered flight...In WWII the Japanese used Betty bombers to carry Kamikaze aircraft to within striking distance of US fleets where the pilot would detach on his suicide mission carrying a full load of bombs and just enough fuel to reach his target...The Germans used the same concept with their rocket powered airplanes against the oncoming Russian Army...Most of the later US attempts at parasite flights were made with variants of the Republic F-84 as seen below in Project Tom-Tom...Even though the XF-85 was a McDonnell project, it looks like its design roots were in the Republic F-84......Ben
![]()
The future is forged on the anvil of history...The interpreter of history wields the hammer... - Unknown author...
The Nazis’ rocket planes were used against our bombers and actually took off from the ground and theoretically skidded in for landings. The X-15 did not take off from the ground, but did skid in for landings except when it “rolled” in killing or maiming its pilots. I am not familiar with the Nazis using the few they made against the Russians, but then my knowledge of them is very limited. Can’t imagine anyone powering up in one of the death traps. I still do not grant any non-air breathing craft worthy of an aircraft record even if it went through the air.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mess...t_Me_163_Komet
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution
Open your mind, Joe...The details are not as I remembered them, but I don't get paid enough here to be perfect every time...This site also has more on parasite aircraft (whether or not Joe agrees they are worthy of the name)......Ben
![]()
The future is forged on the anvil of history...The interpreter of history wields the hammer... - Unknown author...
The photo of the two F-84’s conjoined to the B-29 is fascinating. I’ve never seen that one before. I can’t even imagine the thinking behind that or what kind of glue it took!
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution
I presume this would meet everyone's definition of self-powered flight.
Light Fuse Here
The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible - Arthur C. Clarke
I'm hoping next year the brand new Fat Albert will be debuting with the Angels at WOH...Sadly the RATO demonstrations are all history now as the inventory of bottles has been depleted...Next month's show will feature the USAF Thunderbirds...I've got an Eagle Squadron ticket as always...My one splurge of the year......Ben
The future is forged on the anvil of history...The interpreter of history wields the hammer... - Unknown author...
How many roman candles were in those things?
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution
How about an SR-72 with twice the speed of the Blackbird?
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...imagine-114971
...............
“You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.” — Too fundamental to have an attribution