![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:16:00 -0500, VH wrote:
I was watching the Discovery Channel program comparing the F-86 and Mig-15 and heard that the F-86 can break the sound barrier. I know that this has been claimed many time before but is that the official position of the US Air Force? Is Yeager still officially the first man to break the sound barrier? Breaking Mach 1 was a standard flight in the curriculum for Perrin AFB's advanced flight training school for F86D interceptor pilots. You went up to max alititude, nosed over into a full vertical dive with full throttle and watched the Mach needle hit 1 before reducing power and starting the pullout. This was in 1957. No biggie, except the ego trip of claiming membership in the Machbuster's Club. John Bailey http://home.rochester.rr.com/jbxroads/mailto.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It was the Luftwaffe that broke Mach 1 back in the closing days of
WW2. Strange, no one in the Luftwaffe claimed it - unless you count everyone's favorite oddball, Dr. Mutke - who also claims that the Me 262 he defected in is actually *his* personal property! Check out the Wright Patterson Official Manual on Flying the Me-262 (circa 1946). Have it. It has one paragraph that is open to the interpretation you prefer - but they also had plenty of compressibility reports, tuck under events, and other bits that told them something was happening at a bit over 1,000 kph. Still, they never claimed to have broken Mach 1. Wind tunnel experiments and pilot anecdotes show the airframe, more specifically, the engine nacelles and wings, are incapable of exceeding .84. But if a single paragraph is enough to convince you of a non-event, not much I can say that would change your mind. Still, I think it speaks volumes that no one in Germany, officially or unofficially, claimed to have exceeded Mach 1, until fifty years after the "event". I accept that the postwar Pilot's Manual has a problematic mention of transonic flight - that doesn't suggest how, when, or where such an event could have, or did, occur. Even Messerschmitt made no such claim. My opinion, worth as much as yours, is that engineers explained the many high speed crashes and near-fatal events associated with compressibility as transonic events - by 1945-46, most test pilots and aeronautical engineers knew that the 'barrier' was there and its no stretch to assume crashes, and near crashes, during very high speed flight, were the result of teasing the barrier. Re-read the paragraph with that info in mind, and its not so damning. Or, do it my way and interview countless Me 262 pilots from fighter, nightfighter, bomber, and test units, add in US and British test pilots, and see if even ONE suggests that the Me 262 could power itself to Mach 1. It can't, and nothing you can say will change that blunt-nose Jumo OO4B into a transonic-capable engine. No air = no thrust = no possible transonic event, unless you believe you can achieve it in a glider. It says that the Me-262 can break the sound barrier in a shallow dive. So either one of the captured 262s flown by a US pilot broke Mach 1 or the information came from German sources in 1945. ....and German sources used wind tunnel data, not just pilot reports. Also, you are leaving out the possibility that the "mystery Mach 1 aviator" was not a Brit test pilot - who had more flights on captured German jets than we did. Matters not - of the three RAF test pilots that I have talked to, none suggest the Me 262 was capable of anything over Mach .84, dive or no dive. Anyway, the official manual precedes Yeager's official flight- fact. That arcane reference mentions no date, circumstance, or method of proving its single statement. As far as proof, one completely unsubstantiated comment is rarely adequate to be considered "proof". This has been gone over in minute detail by the guys at Stormbirds.com as well as other Me 262 websites and Mutke's claim is not accepted by anyone that flew with him, or flew the Me 262. His mates laugh at him, literally. What does that tell you about how honest the USAF is and how historically accurate aviation history is? You paint with such a broad brush that its hard to see where to start with correcting your claims. I'll stick with this one: you cannot show any proof that an Me 262 broke the speed of sound, beyond that single note in a 60 year old book that doesn't give enough information to check the comment in any way. Tell me which German (or American) pilot took an Me 262 transonic? If you can't, its just a really neat, but unproven, sea story. That doesn't count as "historically accurate aviation history" either, does it? Gordon |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Or, do it my way and interview countless Me 262 pilots from fighter, nightfighter, bomber, and test units, add in US and British test pilots, and see if even ONE suggests that the Me 262 could power itself to Mach 1. Schuck, Busch, Czypionka, Becker, Rudorffer, Neppach, Hans-E Bob, several others, plus several others on the German side; all meet comments about Mutke and Mach 1 with a sigh and a sad shake of their heads. Here's an idea - take an F-4 to .98, kill the engines, then enter a dive and tell me if you go transonic. If you can't, then explain to me how an Me 262, with FLAT engine intakes and no consideration made to provide airflow at Mach 1, could do the feat? Gordon |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Corey C. Jordan" There's a small problem with this myth. At speeds beyond Mach 0.88, the Me 262 begins shedding major components, wings and such. Hell, a CF-100 Mk-1 clunk broke the sound barrier in 1951! I wonder if the F89 or F94, the CF100 contemporaries could do this?? Anyway, aren't the Yanks or Russians first at everything! Hollywood claims they are so it must be true! Ed |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Hell, a CF-100 Mk-1 clunk broke the sound barrier in 1951! I wonder if the F89 or F94, the CF100 contemporaries could do this?? Anyway, aren't the Yanks or Russians first at everything! Hollywood claims they are so it must be true! Ed Hi Ed You are out by a year and a later version of the aircraft. Jan Zurakowski became the first person to exceed Mach 1 in a straight wing aircraft with out the aid of rocket power. He was flying an Avro Canada CF-100 Mk.4B Canuck (not Clunk as is affectionately known as) R.C.A.F. serial number 18112. Standard procedure for a pilot to achieve Mach 1, was to dive the CF-100 straight down from FL 450 at full power. The CF-100 was very marginal in the supersonic breakthrough. It depended largely on aerodynamic cleanliness of each individual aircraft whether it would break the sound barrier. The CF-100 would hardly ever surpass Mach 1.05. As for the Northrop F-89 Scorpion and Lockheed F-89 Starfire, only the F-89C Starfire could exceed Mach 1 in a shallow dive. Cheers...Chris |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "av8r" Jan Zurakowski became the first person to exceed Mach 1 in a straight wing aircraft with out the aid of rocket power. He was flying an Avro Canada CF-100 Mk.4B Canuck (not Clunk as is affectionately known as) R.C.A.F. serial number 18112. When I was station in Europe (ground crew) we sometimes had F-100's jump our Canadair F-86's and Mk-4 CF-100's. When the Sabres's started getting the better of them the F-100's turned tail, cut in their afterburners and slipped away. When we got the CF-104's the guys loaded the dive brakes up with toilet paper and they did an un-authorized low level run on one F-100 base. We never saw them again! ;-) I wonder why??? Ed |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() When I was station in Europe (ground crew) we sometimes had F-100's jump our Canadair F-86's and Mk-4 CF-100's. When the Sabres's started getting the better of them the F-100's turned tail, cut in their afterburners and slipped away. When we got the CF-104's the guys loaded the dive brakes up with toilet paper and they did an un-authorized low level run on one F-100 base. We never saw them again! ;-) I wonder why??? Ed Hi Ed Ahhhhhh yes, the good old days of the Royal Canadian Air Force's Air Division. Back when Canada had 12 first rate day and all weather fighter squadrons split between France and Germany ready to battle the 'Red Menace'. Well at least until Emporer DeGaulle had the gall to demand total control of the the NATO nukes in France. I read many stories of R.C.A.F. Sabre Mk. 5's and 6's bouncing U.S.A.F. Huns all over the European skies. More often than not, the gun camera footage would show the Hun dead centre in the sites of the gung ho Canadians. Man them were the days, the likes of which you will never see again. Par Ardua Ad Astra! Cheers...Chris |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Corey C. Jordan" wrote in message ... On 22 Sep 2003 09:55:54 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote: The USAF likes to cover up everything and they are very good at it. But answering your question- an emphatic "No" will suffice. It was the Luftwaffe that broke Mach 1 back in the closing days of WW2. Check out the Wright Patterson Official Manual on Flying the Me-262 (circa 1946). It says that the Me-262 can break the sound barrier in a shallow dive. So either one of the captured 262s flown by a US pilot broke Mach 1 or the information came from German sources in 1945. Anyway, the official manual precedes Yeager's official flight- fact. There's a small problem with this myth. At speeds beyond Mach 0.88, the Me 262 begins shedding major components, wings and such. But Corey, you lied about Copp, so why would anyone at ram ever believe you again? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
what is good sound proofing for interior?!?! | Rick | Home Built | 12 | May 13th 04 02:29 AM |
Pulse jet active sound attentuation | Jay | Home Built | 32 | March 19th 04 05:57 AM |
Simpy One of Many Stories of a Time Not So Long Ago | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 40 | March 16th 04 06:35 PM |