Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:28:12 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Very true Bama. It is, or was, an accomplished fact and they were a great plane.

Yes they were, but the B-24 was better for the pacific, more range. Not sure how many 24s were in service at that time.
Checked it, at that time the B-24 was primarily used by the RAF

< Message edited by BamaD -- 7/3/2016 9:34:23 PM >

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 261
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:30:22 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		I just read that empty, they had a possible range of about 3,100 miles, which I would say would give them plenty of range.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 262
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:34:39 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I just read that empty, they had a possible range of about 3,100 miles, which I would say would give them plenty of range.

The 17?


_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 263
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:35:20 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"Not that hard mr. mensa eligible.Simply plot a great cirlcle course from washington to pearl duuuuhhh "

They didn't have to refuel to do that ? Where could they refuel ?

Doubts here.


Great circle distance from Hamilton field, novato california where they took off to pearl is 2081 nm.
The range of a fully loaded b17 is 2000 nm. These were not loaded with bombs or their defensive armamament.


http://sawyeraviation.com/what-is-the-longest-over-water-route-of-flight-with-no-alternatives/

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 264
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:36:46 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I just read that empty, they had a possible range of about 3,100 miles, which I would say would give them plenty of range.

The 17?
That makes all this gibberish just that gibberish.



_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 265
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:39:22 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		Yes, the B-17 B had a possible range of 3,100 miles when empty, according to what I was just reading.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 266
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:41:24 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		That would have left them about 400 miles to play with on a direct flight I guess. And if they had favourable tail winds, who knows ?

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 267
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/3/2016 9:43:53 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

That would have left them about 400 miles to play with on a direct flight I guess. And if they had favourable tail winds, who knows ?


3100-2081=1019

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 268
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 8:23:17 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

That would have left them about 400 miles to play with on a direct flight I guess. And if they had favourable tail winds, who knows ?

Thanks for looking that up.
Now he just has to explain why people were willing to get killed to carry out his conspiracy.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 269
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 4:15:48 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		FR

This "if empty", umm, I heard they had a bunch of bombs on board.

T^T

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 270
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 4:27:42 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		I heard they were full of helium so they could stay in the air even when their gas ran out. Yep, I am being silly again, but why would they make a flight that was around the limit of their range and then carry a few tonnes of excess weight too ?

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 271
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 5:52:08 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

This "if empty", umm, I heard they had a bunch of bombs on board.

T^T

You heard wrong, they didn't even have guns.
Why are you still debating this, They did it so obviously it was possible.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 272
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 5:53:24 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

I heard they were full of helium so they could stay in the air even when their gas ran out. Yep, I am being silly again, but why would they make a flight that was around the limit of their range and then carry a few tonnes of excess weight too ?

Right, there was no reason for them to have bombs.


_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 273
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 6:59:24 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I heard they were full of helium so they could stay in the air even when their gas ran out.

Helium's no problem.

Hydrogen on the other hand . . .

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 274
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 7:01:20 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		If it was hydrogen, they would be one HUGE bomb !!!! A spectacular, one-off, firework display the first time anybody lit a cigarette.

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 275
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 7:33:15 PM   
epiphiny43


Posts: 688
Joined: 10/20/2006
Status: offline 		Hydrogen (H2) like any flammable substance, is only flammable when mixed with an oxidizer in appropriate proportions. Too lean or too rich, nothing. Edges of good ratio, not spectacular effects. People carry flammables, liquid or gaseous, in Containers, not in vague clouds onboard. Which would be Dangerous with unshielded old time switches everywhere arcing when used. H2 can be dangerous.
The Hindenberg fire was supposed to be a H2 leak and accidental ignition (they couldn't get He2, the US being the only source world wide, and embargoing Germany), maybe from static charge built up during the flight. More likely it was political sabotage, the Third Reich had a few enemies by then. Most fail to note, Most passengers got out and survived!
Gasoline is worse. WWII Avgas (And current car gasoline) is about as unsafe as fuel gets, other than corrosive stuff like the self-igniting (hypergolic) fuel used in control vernier rockets on large space launch vehicles. Hydrazine and Peroxide were used in the Nazi rocket interceptor, and later on early US ICBMs. Either one kills on contact if substantial. Together, a major 4th of July event.
The most powerful conventional explosive (Non-nuclear) air delivered weapon in the US arsenal was a gasoline vapor bomb, last time I checked. Delayed ignition lets sociometric air to fuel vapor develop over about a foot ball field area, then the ignitor goes off. Flame front speeds may reach several thousand meters per second in ideal conditions. Don't be there.

Long distance ferry flights during WWII, till today, are stripped down planes if necessary. Additional internal or external fuel tanks added when required. Pilots and responsible supervisors tend to obsess on the calculations. Planes are expensive, incredibly valuable resources in questionable outcome combat events, and air crew training often is more expensive in both money and time. Despite the scepticism bleeding over from political policy discussions and widespread use of 'reasonable doubt' tactics to confuse any issue, almost all technical personnel actually do know what they are doing, even Government Workers. Forgotten today, many of the long distance over-ocean ferry flights during the war were by female pilots, only now being allowed military honors burials in national cemetaries.

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 276
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 7:48:05 PM   
Dvr22999874


Posts: 2849
Joined: 9/11/2008
Status: offline 		There would be the possibility of that mix if there was any kind of leak between what the crew were breathing and this hypothetical hydrogen though *smile*.
I always thought it might be a good idea to bring airships back. Not as they were but obviously a much more modern version of them of course and filled with helium or similar, not hydrogen. I know that Manchester Liners were thinking of building a fleet of them back in the 60's or 70's but that got shelved and I have heard no more about it................................Possibly huge container ships coming into their own at about that time, might have had something to do with that. They would certainly have made for a different and more leisurely form of travel though for those who weren't in a hurry but wanted something faster than a ship.

(in reply to epiphiny43)
Profile   Post #: 277
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/4/2016 7:58:52 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I always thought it might be a good idea to bring airships back.

You might enjoy "The Airships" on YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7Hz9p5yq_Q

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Dvr22999874)
Profile   Post #: 278
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/5/2016 4:46:49 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		I thought it was from static electricity.

You know a helicopter CANNOT set you down on the ground because of the several thousand volt charge generated by the prop. You have to drop.

Whatever happened to the Hindenberg, it had to involve electricity. Nothing else would do it. Hydrogen is not like fulminate of mercury which goes off upon physical disturbance. Something has to ignite it. I have seen several suppositions on just exactly how it happened but, well, static electricity comes out as the most likely.

Maybe I am wrong.

T^T

(in reply to epiphiny43)
Profile   Post #: 279
RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? - 7/5/2016 5:31:54 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		I expect the lightning storm had a small part at Lakehurst that day.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 280
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.096