Notices
Off Topic A place for you car junkies to boldly post off topic. ALMOST anything goes. Fun, laughs and good times here.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Flat Earth

 
  #21  
Old 08-27-2018, 04:01 PM
Busa's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: England / midlands
Posts: 2,238
Thanked 370 Times in 301 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by macdoesit View Post
"Fatuous"- A fatuous comment
Flatus- A fart.
Oratory flatulance : a propensity for much gaseosness.
​​As in FE
 
  #22  
Old 08-27-2018, 04:09 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Holly Lake Ranch, Texas
Posts: 2,051
Thanked 247 Times in 157 Posts
Default

I am not a NASA space man. But I have viewed the earth from 86,000 feet going very fast. Looking out the window during a turn I definitely saw the earth as a huge sphere rotating under us.
 
The Following User Says Thank You to EZDriver For This Useful Post:
89 Jacobra (10-18-2018)
  #23  
Old 08-27-2018, 05:24 PM
Jag-o-nomic's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 410
Thanked 152 Times in 106 Posts
Default

Hi EZDriver,

You weren't in an SR71 doing that were you?
Very, very cool if you did.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
  #24  
Old 08-28-2018, 06:21 AM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Holly Lake Ranch, Texas
Posts: 2,051
Thanked 247 Times in 157 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jag-o-nomic View Post
Hi EZDriver,

You weren't in an SR71 doing that were you?
Very, very cool if you did.

Cheers,

Nigel
As a matter of fact, I was. Just among a few things I did as a Flight Test Engineer at Edwards AFB during the Cold WAR.
 
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to EZDriver For This Useful Post:
Jag-o-nomic (08-28-2018), nosox (08-28-2018)
  #25  
Old 08-28-2018, 12:51 PM
Busa's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: England / midlands
Posts: 2,238
Thanked 370 Times in 301 Posts
Default

The SR71 is an incredible aircraft. I've seen it close up at the USAF hangar at the Imperial War Museum at RAF Duxford in England. I must have stood with my mouth open for several minutes when I first set eyes on it. Just incredible!
 

Last edited by Busa; 08-28-2018 at 12:55 PM.
  #26  
Old 08-28-2018, 05:14 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Holly Lake Ranch, Texas
Posts: 2,051
Thanked 247 Times in 157 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Busa View Post
The SR71 is an incredible aircraft. I've seen it close up at the USAF hangar at the Imperial War Museum at RAF Duxford in England. I must have stood with my mouth open for several minutes when I first set eyes on it. Just incredible!
Yes it was an incredible aircraft. Still the fastest airplane in existence and that record will probably stand for a long time due to the complexity of the construction. And there just isn't a need for such an airplane due to the advancement is other methods of surveillance. Something you may not know. The SR71 was not the first airplane of that type. The initial design was the A12. It was a C!A airplane and a single seater. But the airplane for the Air Force had to have a second station.
 
  #27  
Old 08-28-2018, 05:24 PM
Jag-o-nomic's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 410
Thanked 152 Times in 106 Posts
Default

Awesome machinery. My favourite man made vehicle of all time.

I had a good look around one at the USAF Airplane Museum at Dayton Ohio many years ago.

Even static it looked fast, purposeful, menacing and sublime just sitting there.

Sadly for me, I will never hear one spool up though.

Hey EZDriver, I bet you have more than a few good yarns to tell which aren't classified...
 
  #28  
Old 08-28-2018, 08:20 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Holly Lake Ranch, Texas
Posts: 2,051
Thanked 247 Times in 157 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jag-o-nomic View Post
Awesome machinery. My favourite man made vehicle of all time.

I had a good look around one at the USAF Airplane Museum at Dayton Ohio many years ago.

Even static it looked fast, purposeful, menacing and sublime just sitting there.

Sadly for me, I will never hear one spool up though.

Hey EZDriver, I bet you have more than a few good yarns to tell which aren't classified...
Yes, I have quite a few yarns as you say. In fact I have put together several slide show presentations that I have fun presenting to various aviation groups in the East Texas area I live in. The presentations are, "The History of Supersonic Flight", B-58 Hustler/XB70 Escape Capsule in flight testing, T-38 double engine failure testing, Boeing Supersonic Transport, Building the Long EZ and Building replica Me262s.

It is fun doing it too. History is important. Especially when it comes from people directly involved. And I worked with s lot of those that go way back.

Now, see what you got me started on.
 
  #29  
Old 08-28-2018, 10:31 PM
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 145
Thanked 21 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EZDriver View Post
Yes, I have quite a few yarns as you say. In fact I have...
Wow its very interesting to (in a small way) know a person who has experience with that type of craft and has been to those heights.
I'm not to old (yet) but one thing life has taught me is that speed and altitude are not my friends. Especially when combined! You though...

If you'd be so kind as to indulge me a bit there are some questions brought up by the FE crowd that I too would like to know....
1. Do planes fly over Antarctica? (there are many FE claims that planes don't because its not possible)
2. If a gyroscope is spun up before takeoff so that the gyro horizon indicator has a fixed plane of reference, how does the gyro horiz indic still show proper horizon when the plane is at a different position on the globe? For example there is approx 35deg of angle between LA & NYC. How is it the horizon shows accurate at that different angle on the ball? (some kind of precession in the gyro?)

Regards, Rich
 
  #30  
Old 08-29-2018, 07:02 AM
Busa's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: England / midlands
Posts: 2,238
Thanked 370 Times in 301 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EZDriver View Post
Yes it was an incredible aircraft. Still the fastest airplane in existence and that record will probably stand for a long time due to the complexity of the construction. And there just isn't a need for such an airplane due to the advancement is other methods of surveillance. Something you may not know. The SR71 was not the first airplane of that type. The initial design was the A12. It was a C!A airplane and a single seater. But the airplane for the Air Force had to have a second station.
I'll check that A12 out. Thank you.
When my son and I saw the SR71 there were several piles of blue absorbent paper under the aircraft. It was still leaking as I understand they do when cold.

​​​​​​My local airfield is an ex WW1 and WW2 joint raf/usaf airfield. Privately owned now. But they have started doing passenger flights in the legendary Supermarine Spitfire. They are 2 person trainers.
Starting price for a flight is 2500. Way too rich for me.

I was also at the "carpet baggers" museum last month.
​​
 
  #31  
Old 08-29-2018, 02:06 PM
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Holly Lake Ranch, Texas
Posts: 2,051
Thanked 247 Times in 157 Posts
Default

You guys have got me going now. Hope I can stay with you.

The SR-71 leaked anytime it had fuel in it. It did not seal up during flight or on the ground. The problem was that it had a lot of structure joints that when assembled the joints were sealed with sealer. But there was not a sealer that would stand up to the temperature of Mach 3.2 which is around 550 deg F. Even some pictures taken from a tanker during refueling show streaks of fuel on the upper surface of the wing. The rule was as long as no fuel leaked into the engine bay ignore the leaks. We had my airplane on the weight scales before flight inside the weight and balance hangar and it was leaking as usual. The Fire Chief came by and didn't like that. I took a cup with some fuel in it and took his lighter tried to ignite it and it wouldn't ignite. Poured it on the ground and tried again. Same thing. He left me alone after that.

As far as the FE ding bats this event I think will shut them up. My airplane was fully instrumented for flight stability testing. One of the instruments was a very accurate "g" measurement. "g" being the reaction to gravity. Sitting on the ground it would read 1.0. In all other normal aircraft it read 1.0 in straight and level flight as well. We could not figure out why in our airplane when flying straight and level (straight and level being constant altitude in relation to mean sea level) it always read less. After thinking a bit it came to me that we were flying at constant altitude but not straight. At Mach 3.2 the speed was high enough for the effect of the curvature of the earth to come into play. We were following the curvature of the earth which is not straight but curved nose down. Our g meter read 0.985 instead of 1.0. If we flew straight we would fly off into space. Now that is proof the earth is not flat.

Also, you can fly over the poles like anywhere else on the earth. Airliners always fly great circle routes which is the shortest distance between any two points on the earth. Flying from Texas to Tibet you will fly right over the North Pole. (Had to stop for a moment. Two Fawns were watching me through the office window).

In 1937 a single engine Soviet Union airplane , ANT.25 flew from Moscow across the North Pole on to Vancouver, Washington. The flight covered 5.507 miles in 62.5 hours. Who says you can't fly over the Arctic?

As far as the gyro I think they stay in sink with the center of the earth.

Best I can do for now.
 

Last edited by EZDriver; 08-29-2018 at 10:10 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to EZDriver For This Useful Post:
89 Jacobra (10-18-2018)
  #32  
Old 08-29-2018, 06:33 PM
JaguarJeffrey's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Southwest
Posts: 205
Thanked 68 Times in 49 Posts
Default

I find it interesting that the SR-71 and the Jaguar E-Type were designed and built at roughly the same time. Coincidence that these gorgeous machines came out almost in parallel? I think not!
 
  #33  
Old 08-30-2018, 04:39 AM
yarpos's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Alexandra, VIC, AU
Posts: 4,503
Thanked 1,090 Times in 811 Posts
Default

Now I am worried about global warming. Instead of sea level rise, it will all run off the edge. Lordy!!!!!!
 
  #34  
Old 08-30-2018, 05:24 AM
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 145
Thanked 21 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by yarpos View Post
Now I am worried about global warming. Instead of sea level rise, it will all run off the edge. Lordy!!!!!!
When I was a kid the world was all worried about the coming ice age. Still waiting on that one...
 
  #35  
Old 08-30-2018, 06:21 AM
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 145
Thanked 21 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by EZDriver View Post
As far as the FE ding bats this event I think will shut them up. My airplane was fully instrumented for flight stability testing. One of the instruments was a very accurate "g" measurement. "g" being the reaction to gravity. Sitting on the ground it would read 1.0. In all other normal aircraft it read 1.0 in straight and level flight as well. We could not figure out why in our airplane when flying straight and level (straight and level being constant altitude in relation to mean sea level) it always read less. After thinking a bit it came to me that we were flying at constant altitude but not straight. At Mach 3.2 the speed was high enough for the effect of the curvature of the earth to come into play. We were following the curvature of the earth which is not straight but curved nose down. Our g meter read 0.985 instead of 1.0. If we flew straight we would fly off into space. Now that is proof the earth is not flat.
Very... no make that.... extremely interesting. Thank you very much. It's this kind of real world experience that matters.


Originally Posted by EZDriver View Post
Who says you can't fly over the Arctic?
None of them argue against going over the Arctic. There is much proof that happens.
Its the antarctic they say doesn't (and can't) happen. (their words not mine)

Originally Posted by EZDriver View Post
As far as the gyro I think they stay in sink with the center of the earth.
Hum... I found two wiki's that sheds a bit of light on my question and your statement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heading_indicator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession#Torque-induced


So it seems an airplane doesn't use a simple gyroscope. It can't because the takeoff plane of relevance doesn't mean anything once you leave that longitude and latitude. (this is what I couldn't reconcile in my mind)
Instead the gyroscope has an additional function that uses gravity to induce precession (aka torque) on the spinning disks axle.
I must say though... this still doesn't make sense because if there is a weight on the gyroscope there is no way it can have a constant downward force because the non-vertical forces acting on the plane would swing the weight.
I donno.. maybe its realigned periodically like the heading indicator?


Thanks EZDriver
 

Last edited by wydopnthrtl; 08-30-2018 at 06:42 AM.
  #36  
Old 08-30-2018, 05:32 PM
yarpos's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Alexandra, VIC, AU
Posts: 4,503
Thanked 1,090 Times in 811 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by wydopnthrtl View Post
When I was a kid the world was all worried about the coming ice age. Still waiting on that one...
That concept is being tested again as we speak. The suns infuence on Earth is dominated by a couple of different solar cycles and at the moment they are overlapping and reaching a low point (you may have seen articles on low/no sunspot activitiy and the Maunder Minimum) The only certainty is that despite anything a way will be found to declare it the hottest year EVAH!
 
  #37  
Old 08-30-2018, 06:20 PM
macdoesit's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: choctaw,ok USA
Posts: 1,240
Thanked 167 Times in 126 Posts
Default

F.E. I'm amazed that we are actually discussing such stupidity.
 
  #38  
Old 08-31-2018, 01:16 AM
Steve M's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 3,727
Thanked 1,187 Times in 902 Posts
Default

We're not discussing it; we're taking the **** out of it!
 
  #39  
Old 08-31-2018, 04:44 AM
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 145
Thanked 21 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by macdoesit View Post
F.E. I'm amazed that we are actually discussing such stupidity.
Well, as people observe real science and they see it doesn't match what we have all been taught about the size and shape... it fuels people to think, observe, and ask questions. A few will actually do genuine scientific tests.
I for one am that kind of person and proud of it. I don't accept a narrative just because it was told to me. People lie all the time. Usually out of parroting what they were taught. And sometimes nefariously.

The 2 biggest problems I have with this whole issue are: 1. People assume what they have been taught w/o questioning it. 2. We can see to far for there to be a spherical diameter of 7,918 miles.
For what its worth I'm a M.E. and I specialize in camera technology. I see so much wrong information on this subject that it hurts my head sometimes. So many people want to ignore real science and just go with the narrative.. aka "truth as presented to them". And others want to make overly simple observations and draw all encompassing conclusions. I do neither and having an in depth understanding of science & the optics of the human eye and cameras I see things that don't match. So I find it a mental challenge.


 
  #40  
Old 08-31-2018, 05:20 AM
wydopnthrtl's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 145
Thanked 21 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Jag-o-nomic View Post
So what were those images and comments about what the earth looked like from the moon all those years ago.....Oh...that's right a NASA / government conspiracy to conceal never having left the earth in the first place.....Apollo 11 circa 1969 or maybe a sound lot on the back of a Hollywood studio and some creative computer editing....I dunno, got me thinking now....
Here are three vids that a person might find eye opening:

(incredible revelation around the 39-40 minute area)
 

Last edited by wydopnthrtl; 08-31-2018 at 05:23 AM.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Flat Earth


Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: