![]() |
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"abripl" wrote in message
oups.com... With bullet/plane(s) relative horizontal speed of 820ft/s, the other plane reaches the bullet position in (50x3)/820 = 0.183 sec (pretty slow bullet). In that time the bullet falls a vertical distance of 0.5 x 32 x 0.183 x 0.183 ft = 0.536 ft. If the messer plane bottom was at least 0.537 ft (about 7 inches) below bullet firing vertical position its gona hit the other plane. Nope. You are assuming "the other plane reaches the bullet position . . .". It never reaches the bullet's position because it is traveling at 90° to the flight path of the B-17. If it was following the B-17, it could possibly run into the bullet, but only at its foward velocity. The bullet has only a downward component relative to the Earth. (Ignoring minor variations, i. e. coriolis force & wind velocity.) Ignoring air friction, whether the planes are moving or parked on the ground with same separation it does not matter. It is only the relative velocity of the bullet to the planes that counts. But with backward airstream and downward friction the bullet will fall slower down than in vacuum - so better chance of hitting the plane behind. Is this your night school physics home assignment and you are cheating here? Nope. Last physics course I took was at the U of Wash., 47 years ago. I brought this subject up because I was reading an article in the May 1942 issue of "Flying and Popular Aviation". It was titled "Speedy" and tells the story of a quiet young fellow named Andy McDonough who dove a new Army fighter to 620 mph a "few weeks ago". He'd like to try for 700. The airplane was a new P-39 Airacobra. "After his test, McDonough said he thought of that now-famous problem: 'I wondered what would have happened if I could have fired a pistol back over the tail. At that speed would the bullet have rolled out of the barrel and then fallen back?'". Well, perhaps that was a famous problem in the spring of 1942. I don't know, having entered this vale of tears late in 1941. But I thought it would be fun to toss it up here among all these reasonable, logical, polite folks. ![]() Rich S. |
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 |