Grumman Rules the Sky

[Oldman731]

Do you actually read the posts?

If you did .. then you would know that I invited discussion, & did not make any such 'contention'..

I'm sorry, that's just not so.

You wrote:

Anyone with aeronautical knowledge care to discuss the effect on climb rate of
flying into a stiff headwind ?

Isn't it like the effect of a tailwind on IAS vs ground speed?

Don't real record attempts put  factor limits on wind speed assistance?


And when people responded that it didn't make any difference, you wrote:

Are you sure?

What with the climb angle lift/drag/thrust/forward speed/vertical speed=climb rate factors?


And when people noted that they were sure, you responded:

Hey, cheap shots make an easy smokescreen.. & you could show some formulae as proof..


You offered these comments to denigrate Widewing's contention that the Bearcat held a climb record.  Ordinary people reading this would surmise that you maintain that headwind increases climb rate, and that the Bearcat's record was thus somehow unfairly obtained.  Otherwise you're simply trolling; you just as easily might have said "Anyone care to discuss the effect of moulting starlings on propeller pitch?"

I regret that I'm writing this, it pains me to know that I'm a willing victim of a troll.

- oldman

[J.A.W.]

Hey ol' man, you still trippin' or what?

What you gonna do if 'n I do post the actual formulae &... prove you wrong?

Withdraw & apologise.. I doubt it..

Fact is, Ww claimed that them soggy bottom boys done got an FAI record..

Well, they didn't.. they did an airshow stunt climb & churched it up some..

& you love to take the high road.. on the cheap shot highway that is..

The thread title just aint true.. Fact.. as shown by real data.. as posted.. by me..

& even the USN kept the F4U flying combat long after the recip' Grummans were.. target drones..

[RotBaron]

This about to get fun      

[BaldEagl]

Best meltdown ever.   

[pembquist]

Definitely yes. Horsepower, super charger, fuel flo to the max boyz. Yeah, what he said, Sopwith SE5 rule the air and spank that navy iron. Coefficient of lift, drag, money in dah bank, science stuff, awesome. DISCUSS. I live under a bridge and scare people. Formula, math, BAM.

[J.A.W.]

Dang, P.. you IS trippin'..& maybe time you hit up Dr Venkmann for a shot of Thorazine..L.O.L..

[BaldEagl]

Definitely yes. Horsepower, super charger, fuel flo to the max boyz. Yeah, what he said, Sopwith SE5 rule the air and spank that navy iron. Coefficient of lift, drag, money in dah bank, science stuff, awesome. DISCUSS. I live under a bridge and scare people. Formula, math, BAM.

    QFT!

[FLS]

Fact is, Ww claimed that them soggy bottom boys done got an FAI record..

Show us where Widewing made such a silly claim.

[J.A.W.]

Sure,

Check: post #306 in the 'Best Heavy Fighter' thread.

Ww wrote, re the Navy F8F 'record'..

"...was recognised as a legitimate record by the FAI..."

& it jest aint so..

[J.A.W.]

Show us where Widewing made such a silly claim.

Well now FLS, if you think that was a silly claim for Ww to make..

Check this one in post#284, (in the same thread).. its a doozy..

Ww wrote,

"Indeed, a unmodified F8F-1 held the time to climb record from 1946 in to the mid `80s. "

Hmmm, was 'bout mid `70s when the ol' F-15 Eagle smashed a bunch of time-to-climb records
wasn't it, & didn't the good ol' F4 Phantom set some round.. `59-60? From memory..

[FLS]

I think you're arguing in bad faith. I believe the FAI would recognize a record held for 10 years. Seems reasonable to me. I also think WW referred to the piston engine record holding until the 80's.

[J.A.W.]

Not at all, zero "bad faith", just the facts.. ..man..

 & do you read the posts?, just see Ww's post on page one this thread (lucky # 13?),
 where he transcribes confirmation that there was NO FAI recognition for that 'record'..

Now  - where is the 'bad faith', there aint any, .. from me ..anyhow..  

[J.A.W.]

FLS, you can 'believe' what you like, whether it 'seems reasonable' or otherwise..

It aint necessarily so..

Ww.. did not add the 'recip record' qualifier.. if he had, there would be NO claim contention there..

There it is..

Back to topic..

We have seen that the mil-spec F8F  gives  'combat' figures of:

 2,500hp/244sq/ft wing/10,337lbs for climb.

The Sabre Fury could do:

3,000hp/280sq/ft wing/11,500lbs for climb.

Anyone want to 'do the math'?

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1946/1946%20-%202181.html

[FLS]

Not at all, zero "bad faith", just the facts.. ..man..

 & do you read the posts?, just see Ww's post on page one this thread (lucky # 13?),
 where he transcribes confirmation that there was NO FAI recognition for that 'record'..

Now  - where is the 'bad faith', there aint any, .. from me ..anyhow..  

That post does not say what you claim it says,  your response proves my point.

[J.A.W.]

See rule #4