|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
May 16th 04, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote in message .com... What we have is two "qualifying" flights in July/August, separated by a month, two hardware failures and a couple of weather failures. So, by your own admission, they couldn't do it. Please explain how not doing it proves they couldn't do it. But, in the actual records, they *couldn't*. Computer overheat, vulnerability to weather, bad APU... nope, they couldn't manage it, even with the less-stringent "rules" in effect. Nonsense. The X-15 achieved turnaround times of less than two weeks and was flown over 100 km, that proves they could have flown it twice over 100 km within two weeks if they had chosen to do so. 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Spaceship 1 hits 212,000 feet!!!!!! | BlakeleyTB | Home Built | 10 | May 20th 04 10:12 PM |
| AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
| Hiroshima/Nagasaki vs conventional B-17 bombing | zxcv | Military Aviation | 55 | April 4th 04 07:05 AM |
| Use of 150 octane fuel in the Merlin (Xylidine additive etc etc) | Peter Stickney | Military Aviation | 45 | February 11th 04 04:46 AM |
| Ta-152H at low altitudes | N-6 | Military Aviation | 16 | October 13th 03 03:52 AM |
Threaded Mode