Grumman Rules the Sky

[kvuo75]

( & the answer is, it depends..  .. i.e. - if the plane has its brakes on, or not..)

fundamental ignorance.

everyone knows wheel speed is most important in airplanes.

[J.A.W.]

'Fundamental ignorance'

Yes  indeed,
 
..since if the plane's brakes are on - the conveyer belt will ( if running forwards, & fast enough) effectively catapult it..

[WWhiskey]

The same applies to what you put up too, Brooke..



Fact, W.W., did an A-H Yak test simulation showed a similar time gain..

run 1 ;test  0 wind                       time to 10k 3.02 minutes
run 2 ; actual -----   0 wind          time to 10k 3.03 minutes
run 3 ; actual  25mph head wind     time to 10k 3.04 minutes
run 4 ; actual 40mph head wind      time to 10k 3.00 minutes


That is not fact, there was no significant time gain in any of the tests, the only gain was in length or amount of runway need to lift off the ground.

.03 seconds is not a gain, if it was, how would you explain the longest flight to be with a 25MPH headwind?

[BaldEagl]

( & the answer is, it depends..  .. i.e. - if the plane has its brakes on, or not..)

Ahh... no

This conveyor has a control system that tracks the plane's wheel speed and tunes the speed of the conveyor to be exactly the same but in the opposite direction

... so if the brakes are on the conveyer belt stops.

So answer the question.  50/50 chance you get it right by guessing.

[Brooke]

The same applies to what you put up too, Brooke..

Fact.. the maths you did shows a significant theoretical time advantage to roll out into a headwind..

The math shows the exact opposite of what you say.  Also, there is no mention of any headwind.  You are the only one mentioning that.

Fact, the WEP was admitted to be rigged..

Irrelevant -- see above references.

Fact, the 'record' was never put to the FAI for certification, & nor would it have been ratified if they had..

Irrelevant -- see above references.

Fact, it was a neatly orchestrated stunt - no contest - & no contest as any kind of 'official record' either..

Incorrect.

[J.A.W.]

Baldy, if it matters so much to you, just post the Mythbusters findings, they actually did it..

W.W., your timings appear confused, is it .03 seconds, or .03 minutes, or 3min & 3 secs?

Anyhow, given the difference in power to weight of a maxed out WEP/light load F8F on climb -  to a Yak,
-- more'n likely - the margin would be even more significant.

Brooke, if you like, forget about the headwind ( although it was mentioned in other source material),

but, simply applying the adjective 'irrelevant' in the face of the facts wont fly..

Certification criteria is obviously relevant, if you want to claim a valid record, as opposed to a stunt..

The Navy climb stunt was a craftily & cunningly executed cheater & clearly predicated on maxing out
the result, so - credit to them on the timing result.. the fact remains, however it was not kosher, nor sanctioned
as official by the FAI, as Widey claimed.


Widey made a bunch of claims that have been debunked, I suppose 'irrelevant' will be your way of
smokescreening that too..  ..do try & be a bit objective, for the sake of credibility..

[Drano]

  Didn't this guy get a vacation recently for this exact crap or is it just me?

[Brooke]

Brooke, if you like, forget about the headwind ( although it was mentioned in other source material),

It doesn't matter to me.  With no headwind, there is a 0 second difference.  With a 30 mph headwind, there is a couple second difference, which is insignificant.

Certification criteria is obviously relevant, if you want to claim a valid record, as opposed to a stunt..

It is irrelevant for reasons already stated now at least five times.  There was no FAI record process at the time.  Hence, saying that it doesn't meet FAI requirements is a misstatement and is irrelevant.  All that matters is that you do the test and see what you get, which was done.

The Navy climb stunt was a craftily & cunningly executed cheater & clearly predicated on maxing out
the result, so - credit to them on the timing result.. the fact remains, however it was not kosher, nor sanctioned
as official by the FAI, as Widey claimed.

See above.

[J.A.W.]

You are wrong, Brooke, since - just as today - if you want an FAI record, & even establish a new one..

You have to apply 1st, & meet the FAI sanctioning criteria, as stipulated..

The FAI has ratified World aviation records for over a century, in fact..

The RAF record flight went through exactly that process & claimed/were awarded the official record
( & with a quicker time too, by the way) ~5 years after the Navy's unofficial/unratified stunt..

These are,  simply,  the facts of the matter.

[WWhiskey]

3 hundredths of a minute

Or 1.8 seconds.  Sorry for the confusion,

[MiloMorai]

See Rule #2

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #2

[morfiend]

See Rule #2

[J.A.W.]

A bit too morfiend raddled there, are ya mate? L.O.L..  ..come again?

[MiloMorai]

A bit too morfiend raddled there, are ya mate? L.O.L..  ..come again?

I think I should report this to Skuzzy as non-constructive trolling and attempted provocation.