![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
oups.com... In your text you said the gunner fies when the ME 109 is directly behind the B17. For orthogonal ground tracks, he cannot hit the ME 109 if it is *anywhere* behind the B17 no matter where he aims because the flight paths of the ME 109 cannot intersect the path the bullet takes to the ground. That's why, in the text, I also added that he "led" the ME-109 exactly enough. Did you read the entire sentence? As I said, perhaps I wasn't clear. He fires directly behind the B-17. The ME-109 is on its way to cross the flightpath of the B-17. In your illustration, the gunner fires straight back before the Me-109 is directly behind the B17. He can hit if he fires at precisely the moment his gun crosses the flight path of the Me-109. Not so. The bullet simply falls to Earth and the ME-109 passes safely 50 yards (or so) behind the B-17. Rich "Don't use them 3-silable words like 'orthogonal'" S. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
He misses the ME-109 because the recoil of firing the bullet
accelerates the B-17 just a bit, so that the bullet, travelling at a little less than the bomber's speed actually briefly follows the bomber as it falls. A related question: Haven't there been cases of supersonic fighters shooting themselves down when they caught up to the shells they'd fired forward? Dan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
(Dan_Thomas_nospam wrote)
He misses the ME-109 because the recoil of firing the bullet accelerates the B-17 just a bit, so that the bullet, travelling at a little less than the bomber's speed actually briefly follows the bomber as it falls. Plus there is a constant speed with the B-17. The bullet needs to accelerate to reach that same speed. g A related question: Haven't there been cases of supersonic fighters shooting themselves down when they caught up to the shells they'd fired forward? 'If I drive the speed of light, and turn on the headlights - would anything happen?' Steven Wright ...and maybe also "The Lazlo Letters" (1977) by Don Novello. Montblack |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Quick question: what does a plane have that a bullet lacks?
Answer: an engine to maintain its speed. Bullets start slowing down the moment they leave the muzzle (alright, just slightly *after* they leave the muzzle), while the aircraft that fired them can maintain its speed. But in this case there is no air friction to "slow" the bullet. It leaves the gun into still air, and so if the bomber is accelerated a bit by the gun's recoil, its muzzle velocity is a bit less than the airplane's velocity and so will move "forward" a little as it falls. Dan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Harry K wrote: wrote: He misses the ME-109 because the recoil of firing the bullet accelerates the B-17 just a bit, so that the bullet, travelling at a little less than the bomber's speed actually briefly follows the bomber as it falls. A related question: Haven't there been cases of supersonic fighters shooting themselves down when they caught up to the shells they'd fired forward? Dan I was hoping someone would answer that. I recall seeing/hearing/reading somewhat the same thing back when. Best I can recall it involved an F-86 or equivalent (not supersonic) and happened by firing and then going into a dive thus flying into the bullet stream. Are 50 cal bullets supersonic? If so, the plane would also have to be. I don't know the muzzle velocity of 50 caliber ammo but even it is supersonic, it is balistic whereas the plane is powered so it could (maybe) dive and catch the bullets as they slowed. -- FF |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich S. wrote: wrote in message oups.com... In your text you said the gunner fies when the ME 109 is directly behind the B17. For orthogonal ground tracks, he cannot hit the ME 109 if it is *anywhere* behind the B17 no matter where he aims because the flight paths of the ME 109 cannot intersect the path the bullet takes to the ground. That's why, in the text, I also added that he "led" the ME-109 exactly enough. Did you read the entire sentence? Yes, you added the condition that he leads by exactly the same amount he would from a fixed condition to the statement that he fires when the ME-109 is directly behind the B17. If he waits to fire until after the B17 has crossed the flight path of the ME 109 he cannot hit no matter how he aims. It matters not how he leads. As I said, perhaps I wasn't clear. He fires directly behind the B-17. The ME-109 is on its way to cross the flightpath of the B-17. This you added in a later post. If, while firing straight back he still leads as if he were firing from a fixed position he will miss again because the B17 has already crossed the flight path of the ME-109 by the time he fires. No matter the direction, if he fires after the B17 has crossed the flightt path of the ME-109 he misses. In your illustration, the gunner fires straight back before the Me-109 is directly behind the B17. He can hit if he fires at precisely the moment his gun crosses the flight path of the Me-109. Not so. The bullet simply falls to Earth and the ME-109 passes safely 50 yards (or so) behind the B-17. That is true if he leads the ME109 as he would from a fixed position, or any way other than the *right* way. But there is a right way. I *changed* the scenario when I said he fires at precisely the moment his gun crosses the flight path of the ME-109. If he fires stright back at that moment, and the ME 109 is flying at the same airspeed as the B-17 then the bullet is *also* 50 yards behind the B17, when the ME-109 crosses. It will be a half inch or so lower than the altitude at which it exited the muzzle if it was fired exactly level. Firing straight back at the moment the B17 crosses the flight path of the ME-109 essentially drops the bullet through the flight path of the ME-109. IF the bullet is still there when the ME-109 arrives, which it will be for a range of speeds close the speed of the B17, the gunner hits. An the gunner can compensate for the ME-109 flying at a different speed and altitude by firing up or down a little, again for some range of speeds and altitudes. -- FF |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
("Rich S." wrote)
In your illustration, the gunner fires straight back before the Me-109 is directly behind the B17. He can hit if he fires at precisely the moment his gun crosses the flight path of the Me-109. Not so. The bullet simply falls to Earth and the ME-109 passes safely 50 yards (or so) behind the B-17. Agreed. (For those who don't agree) Think of a pickup truck driving along at 40 mph. I'm standing in the bed with a baseball. When we reach the manhole cover in the middle of the street I let fly out the back of the truck with my best stuff, which just happens to be a 40 mph fastball g. That ball will not go past the manhole cover. If you're a batter (or an ME-109) standing at the manhole cover - which every kid knows is home plate - you won't get hit by my fastball ...or be able to hit it. (I'm unhittable!!) Now, if I flip the ball into the air, but a little to the left, and you are standing in the street when the truck drives by, you will be hit by a 40 mph ball. Just thought I'd toss that one out there :-) So long as the ME-109 is not moving (at all) in the same direction as the "magic" B-17, when it crosses behind the Flying Fortress, it will be safe from the bullet.. I would think wind drift would not be an issue (with perpendicular plane paths) since it will drift the B-17 too ... away from the ME-109. Montblack ..."car" |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Accurate plane performace? | R | Simulators | 27 | December 19th 03 04:54 AM |