![]() |
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 Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:11:09 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 9:57:18 PM UTC-7, Charlie Quebec wrote: Thats why we call the US Retardistan. Amazing the amount of jealousy around the world. But that's OK, it keeps them busy while they stare at US movies on their iPhones, while flying around the world in a Boeing airliner, before eating at McDonalds or getting coffee at Starbucks... Last time I checked, it was a Tesla in orbit around the sun, not a (insert name of fancy car here). Yep, 'Murica. Sucks to be the best. Kirk 66 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
How about you start a "slam countries" thread, keep this crap out of here?!?!
Maybe you're ****ed Canada is called the US little brother, maybe you don't like new tariffs.....none of this belongs in a thread like this. While the US supports free speech, don't mess up a sorta technical thread. HmmmmK? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 9:57:18 PM UTC-7, Charlie Quebec wrote:
Thats why we call the US Retardistan. From RAS I have learned that the Aussies call Americans sepptos - Yank - skeptic tank = sepptos. And I have learned that some other country (CQ's) call America "Retardistan". Perhaps it is the company I keep, but I can't think of one derogatory term for another country nor their people that is in the lexicon Americans'. I guess when one struggles to keep up they feel the need to disparage another. America exports more aviation goods and technologies than any other country! America has also been the world leading in aviation since we first invented it!!!!! The 1902 Wright glider was the first controllable heavier than air craft to fly. Of course in December of 1903 these American inventers achieved the first powered aircraft flight. Helicopters, supersonic flight, tilt rotors, Moon, stealth (four gen now), stealth Helicopters (when you get to hell ask UBL about those), SR-71, fly-by-wire, first composite commercial airliner 787...…. Ok, I will give you that, we don't build a glider. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Per my earlier post, how about someone starting a "slam a country" thread, keep the crap out of here.....
HmmmmmmK?!?! Sheesh, if this site had staff, and I was part of it (like I am in other sites) I would be deleting posts and maybe throwing negative points. Cut the crap guys.....l Try to keep on topic...do a slam thread if it makes your pecker bigger..... Dang...... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jonathan, I thought that was classy, thoroughly eviscerating and well deserved. You forgot instrument flight and carrier Aviation. So America does not build a metal glider anymore, no reason to call it retradistan. We push the leading edge not muddle along on the trailing edge of aviation.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No, it’s Seppos, no surprise you can’t spell though. The reason you don’t have such terms is obvious, think about it.
You go around bombing other countries, 16 since ww2, where it is none of your business. You create and sponsor terrorism, ISIS is a direct result of the most stupid war ever. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Not true Jonathan, you yanks (or septics, seppos .. neither of which is meant by us aussies as derogatory ..) have created plenty of derogatory terms for non-Americans over the years (I won't name them all but I can think of about half a dozen straight away) so America can't claim moral superiority with that.
And those terms are just as inappropriate in a friendly discussion about gliders as the one quoted! America has created some wonderful technology (you can keep your McDonalds & Starbucks!) but sometimes (to an outsider) it does seem that Americans (generalising here ..) tend to be a little boastful & blind to the achievements/sometimes better systems of the rest of the world ... the metric system being one of them! P.S. the Wright bothers thing is very debatable! The Wright brothers had good lawyers & publicity. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If I am not mistaken, Dick Johnson was a designer of cruise missiles.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 2:14:31 PM UTC-6, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 12:26:35 PM UTC-7, Paul Agnew wrote: Meanwhile, the jigs for the Peregrine (Krosnos) are just sitting in shipping containers somewhere in Georgia. Could it be produced cost-effectively? As I understand it, the problem with the Krosnos is that the engineering and certification are based on material specifications and thicknesses common in Europe but basically unobtanium here in the US. You'd need to either source all your materials from Europe, or re-engineer the aircraft to use US materials and thicknesses. As a practical matter, it's not that hard. As a regulatory matter, however, it's a huge paperwork effort to go through every single blueprint and justify the change from some metric thickness to the nearest inch size. You basically have to re-engineer the entire structure. Sourcing materials from Europe is a huge gamble. Here in the US there is a fairly fat supply pipeline supporting the homebuilt aircraft movement that currently produces the majority of all new general aviation aircraft. In Europe, the pipeline is a lot thinner and has a lot more friction and regulatory risk aversion, so it is likely that material costs would be a lot more. Furthermore, given that prices for carbon fiber in terms of cost per unit mass and cost per unit stiffness are steadily declining, I think that carbon fiber is the way to go for any new design, even for a primary trainer. Thanks, Bob K. Yes, materials were part of the problem, Polish aluminum and Russian steel (not stamped but dated with a Sharpie), though Tim seemed to indicate substitution could be done. When surveyed, the majority of operators preferred metal over composites, but that survey is several years old now. Barry Aviation got as far as PMA and had set up the assembly line, but never achieved manufacturing certification. You have to be able to keep the lights on for a year or two at your manufacturing facility. Three have to be built under FAA observation in order to become self-certifying. If they don't like something, they leave and you will not see them again for months. Didn't seem to be a fix it and we'll come back when you're ready, we'll schedule a return when we're ready. In any event, the economy dumped in 2008 and they couldn't keep the facility open. Tim estimated a trained crew could build one per week. Frank W |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Spartan Three Seater pics 1 [13/13] - Spartan Three Seater vrt2.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | July 6th 17 02:52 PM |
Spartan Three Seater pics 1 [12/13] - Spartan Three Seater vrt1.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | July 6th 17 02:52 PM |
Spartan Three Seater pics 1 [10/13] - Spartan Three Seater VH-URB1.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | July 6th 17 02:52 PM |
Spartan Three Seater pics 1 [09/13] - Spartan Three Seater line up 895-1.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | July 6th 17 02:52 PM |
Spartan Three Seater pics 1 [08/13] - Spartan Three Seater jtaxi.jpg (1/1) | Miloch | Aviation Photos | 0 | July 6th 17 02:52 PM |