Grumman Rules the Sky

[FLS]

You miss the mark again. There were no FAI records prior to the FAI. I think we all agree with that.
The FAI acknowledges that records were set prior to the FAI which seems to be more than you can do.

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[MiloMorai]

FLS... too funny.. Do you even know how long the FAI has been around?

Here's a clue.. Glenn Curtiss was setting speed records in France ~100 years ago..

& where is the FAI based? Why Paris France of course..

Look it up...

The Fédération Aéronautique Internationale, FAI - The World Air Sports Federation, is the world governing body for air sports, aeronautics and astronautics world records. Its head office is in Lausanne, Switzerland.

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[FLS]

FLS... too funny.. Do you even know how long the FAI has been around?

Here's a clue.. Glenn Curtiss was setting speed records in France ~100 years ago..

& where is the FAI based? Why Paris France of course..

Look it up...

Here's the part you decided not to quote when you claimed WW was wrong.

"Years ago, having tired of dealing with experts, an inquiry made to the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale produced the following from Thierry Montigneaux, Assistant Secretary General of the at FAI:
“The 'time to climb' record category was proposed to FAI by the National Aeronautic Association of the USA at the June 1950 FAI General Conference. It was then added to the Sporting Code.

“The first mention of a 'time to climb' world record in our books was for a flight made by a British pilot onboard a Gloster Meteor on 31th August 1951.

“No performance set in 1946 could therefore have qualified as an official ‘world’ record, as this category of record did not exist then. However, it may well be that the NAA had accepted a category of ‘national records’ for time-to-climb prior to their June 1950 proposal to FAI.”

So I didn't write "before FAI time to climb records". Does that change my point? No. If there was a national record that nobody else in the world had beat that would not be anything like a world record right?

Again you prove my point, you're arguing just to argue. Lucky me I had time to waste tonight but that's over.  

[MiloMorai]

See Rule #4

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[GScholz]

The Bearcat was a tremendous aircraft. A Pacific Focke-Wulf.

[Widewing]

I did say that the FAI recognized the original record, based upon FAI acceptance of the Rare Bear record that beat it. Clearly, the FAI recognized that it existed, or how would they acknowledge that it was beaten? Obviously, all records established prior to the forming of the FAI existed.... In fact, a great many records were set before the FAI. The P-82's record non-stop flight Hawaii to New York was accomplished before the FAI. Does that make it invalid? Of course not.

[Widewing]

The Bearcat was a tremendous aircraft. A Pacific Focke-Wulf.

Grumman designed the Bearcat after the design team had flown a captured 190. Grumman looked at the 190 concept and realized that they could stretch it by designing the smallest airframe into which they could install the R-2800. After a few tweeks to the prototype, they took it to the Joint Fighter Conference in October of 1944. There, it was the hit of the conference. Still, Grumman learned from other aircraft manufacturers. The installed a dorsal fillet after talking to the NAA engineers. They included dive recovery flaps after talking to NACA engineers. Like the F6F-5, the F8F incorporated spring tab ailerons, providing a roll rate in excess of 100 degrees per second. What they ended up with very well may have been the best air to air dogfighter even designed. It wasn't a stroke of genius, it was solid engineering that took the best ideas from other designers along with their own and combined them into a single aircraft. The F8F-2 was the final evolution. It ruled the roost at a time when the Navy was transitioning to jet fighters. Thus, it never had a chance to establish itself in combat against other aircraft. It did, however prove to a very capable attack aircraft in Southeast Asia.

Every pilot I know who has flown the Bearcat says the same thing... There's nothing else quite like it.

[WWhiskey]

Conveyor Belts,, and head winds   I got it now!!!  of course!

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[J.A.W.]

"Conveyer belts"  & that'd be a CV function - in principle - wouldn't it ?

[Karnak]

"Conveyer belts"  & that'd be a CV function - in principle - wouldn't it ?

No, it is a reference to the silly question that a lot of people get wrong:  If an airplane tried to take off on a conveyer belt running in opposite direction, could it?

[WWhiskey]

No, it is a reference to the silly question that a lot of people get wrong:  If an airplane tried to take off on a conveyer belt running in opposite direction, could it?

the conver belt speeds up relative to the planes speed in the opposite direction  as well