Me-262, NOT Bell X-1 Broke SB First

In article , Guy Alcala
writes
The V-2 was supersonic as it came down, so it would explode first then the sonic
boom would be heard. Whether this was identifiable above the sound of the
warhead explosion itself, I couldn't say. Probably not by the average
bystander.

I'd imagine that would be pretty low on their priorities at that moment,
as they say "If you heard the bang you'd survived".

--
John

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Lawrence Dillard wrote:



I'd sure like to know where the "77mm" stuff started. I've seen this
mentioned
in similar accounts, especially in the early war, but the Germans didn't
have
'77s'.

Yes they did. They had the FK 96/16 left over from WW1. It was built
in large numbers as a counter to the French 75mm

http://www.landships.freeservers.com..._fk16_info.htm

Keith

Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Lawrence Dillard wrote:



I'd sure like to know where the "77mm" stuff started. I've seen this
mentioned
in similar accounts, especially in the early war, but the Germans didn't
have
'77s'.

Yes they did. They had the FK 96/16 left over from WW1. It was built
in large numbers as a counter to the French 75mm

http://www.landships.freeservers.com..._fk16_info.htm


H'mm. the references I have all list the FK 16 n/A (neuer Art.) used in WW2
as 7.5 cm (75mm), but I suppose this could be one of those situations where
the caliber was changed in name but not in fact. I wonder how many were still
around and in use in WW2. It seems unlikely that any were issued to
front-line divisions, as there seem to have been enough FH 18s (or even
rechambered Russian 76.2mms) for them.

Guy

So...

Howzabout thru mach one straight up?

Caveat: from brake release (e.g: relying on thrust/weight only)
Who: ??
What: F-15?or -16?
When: Early/mid-70's?

So...

Howzabout thru mach one straight up?

Caveat: from brake release (e.g: relying on thrust/weight only)
Who: ??
What: F-15?or -16?
When: Early/mid-70's?

Caveat furthur clarification: e.g: no smash

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Keith Willshaw wrote:



H'mm. the references I have all list the FK 16 n/A (neuer Art.) used in
WW2
as 7.5 cm (75mm), but I suppose this could be one of those situations
where
the caliber was changed in name but not in fact. I wonder how many were
still
around and in use in WW2. It seems unlikely that any were issued to
front-line divisions, as there seem to have been enough FH 18s (or even
rechambered Russian 76.2mms) for them.

Guy


The caliber of the FK16 was changed in fact, the FK16 n/A was built from
1934 with new barrels to replace the 77mm FK 16's which were left over
from WW1 but in 1939 some 300 examples of the older gun were apparently
still in service being largely phased out by 1942. I'll agree that
few if any front line units would be so equipped and they seem mostly
to have been used for training.

Keith

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
...
So...

Howzabout thru mach one straight up?

Caveat: from brake release (e.g: relying on thrust/weight only)
Who: ??
What: F-15?or -16?
When: Early/mid-70's?

Who: Roland Beamont
What: English Electric Lightning
When:1959/60

The Lightnings initial climb rate was 50,000 ft per minute
which is slightly less than that of the F-15 and better than
the F-16

I recall seeing one do its party trick at RAF Middleton St George
in the 60's , take off on full reheat, unstick and then climb out at
80 degrees going supersonic while still over the field

Impressive as hell and boy was it noisy. Of course you had
to declare a fuel emergency pretty much straight away
but still

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

"Mike Marron" wrote:
So...

Howzabout thru mach one straight up?

Who: Roland Beamont
What: English Electric Lightning
When:1959/60

The Lightnings initial climb rate was 50,000 ft per minute
which is slightly less than that of the F-15 and better than
the F-16

I recall seeing one do its party trick at RAF Middleton St George
in the 60's , take off on full reheat, unstick and then climb out at
80 degrees going supersonic while still over the field

Wasn't the Lightning the first plane to do Mach 1 at sea level?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

"Mike Marron" wrote:
So...

Howzabout thru mach one straight up?

Who: Roland Beamont
What: English Electric Lightning
When:1959/60

The Lightnings initial climb rate was 50,000 ft per minute
which is slightly less than that of the F-15 and better than
the F-16

I recall seeing one do its party trick at RAF Middleton St George
in the 60's , take off on full reheat, unstick and then climb out at
80 degrees going supersonic while still over the field

Wasn't the Lightning the first plane to do Mach 1 at sea level?


Pass, it was designed as a interceptor to knock down soviet nuclear
bombers, hence the performance, I seem to recall it was less
capable at low level .

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Keith Willshaw wrote:



H'mm. the references I have all list the FK 16 n/A (neuer Art.) used in
WW2
as 7.5 cm (75mm), but I suppose this could be one of those situations
where
the caliber was changed in name but not in fact. I wonder how many were
still
around and in use in WW2. It seems unlikely that any were issued to
front-line divisions, as there seem to have been enough FH 18s (or even
rechambered Russian 76.2mms) for them.

Guy


The caliber of the FK16 was changed in fact, the FK16 n/A was built from
1934 with new barrels to replace the 77mm FK 16's which were left over
from WW1 but in 1939 some 300 examples of the older gun were apparently
still in service being largely phased out by 1942. I'll agree that
few if any front line units would be so equipped and they seem mostly
to have been used for training.

Keith

Robert Nelson of the US 3rd Division wrote that at Anzio (he was there)
they used a captured "German 77" as an anti-tank weapon because they were
more effective than "our 57s."
http://tinyurl.com/pst6

Cheers.