View Single Post
  #4  
Old September 24th 03, 04:16 AM
Gordon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hey, how are you doing Gordon.


Doing better every day - thanks for asking.

I don't doubt what you know, I just see no
purpose to parrots.


Sorry, I just get upset when I see folks posting chaff about one of the very
few subjects that I feel qualified to comment upon. I don't know what Rob's
garage looks like, but mine is packed chest high with file boxes from BAMA and
NARA, loaded with little but Me 262 documents. I know Rob loves his subject,
but I wish he'd take the extra step of trying to verify what he posts, instead
of saying, "I read it in ONE book, so its carved in stone." I've yet to see
him respond to any of the specific points I raise, concerning the engine
nacelle shape, pilot names, etc., but I guess I am ****ing him off by simply
not agreeing that the 262 is somehow capable of supersonic flight. It isn't,
and he has no ability to prove it was.

You want to know something odd? That pilot's manual, with its subtle reference
to supersonic characteristics, is one of the first books I ever owned (I had
the older Aero publications version). That paragraph really got me going and
because of it, I asked every jet pilot I could find if it were possible. Its
one of the questions that sent me off on 20+ years of researching the Me 262.
Strange to see that old book, and its single reference, leading someone else
down a blind corridor. The real problem is that he will not have the benefit
of first hand information, from people who were there, to draw from to help him
form an informed opinion on the matter.

Gordon