New Bike - woot!

EJECTION SEAT TIMELINE

a.. First patent for aircraft ejection seat (Reichpatent nr. 711045)
granted in 1939 to Karl Arnold, Oscar Nissen, Rheinhold Preuschen and Otto
Schwarz working for Junkers flugwerk. Additional patent granted to Erich
Dietz for the addition of a power cartridge to the above patent.
b.. The Heinkel 176 (Verruckte Raketenflugzeug) (1939) was the first
aircraft to be fitted with a working ejection system. This was not a
production aircraft.
c.. The Heinkel 280 and 219 were the first production aircraft fitted with
ejection seats from the outset.
d.. The first recorded live emergency ejection took place from a Heinkel
280 on the 13th January 1943. The pilot Herr Schenke, was on a ferry flight.
e.. It is estimated that some 60 emergency ejections were made in WW2 by
Luftwaffe pilots. It is not known how many were successful.
f.. SAAB (Sweden) introduce their first (Mk 1) seat in 1941. This was
fitted to the SAAB J21-A1
g.. First static live ejection test (Bernard Lynch) - 24th January 1945
h.. First UK dummy ejection in flight from Defiant aircraft - 24th June
1946
i.. First live ejection test by B. Lynch from Meteor - 24th July 1946
j.. Initial US Navy interest in MBA ejection seats, period 1944 - 1946
k.. First live ejection in flight from US Navy Douglas A26 aircraft (Lt.
Furtek using MBA seat) 1st November 1946
l.. First live runway level ejection (Sqn. Ldr. J. S. Fifield) - September
1955
m.. First live runway level ejection demonstration to US Navy (Sidney
Hughes, RAF) - August 1957
n.. First US Navy production ejection seat ordered - August 1957

 

The British Lightning was the English Electric/BAC Lightning.
http://tinyurl.com/5pklk

 

More of a boom-and-zoom interceptor than a dogfighter. There's one at
the war memorial in Canberra, it's a tiny little thing.


BTH

 

http://tinyurl.com/6ysdb

http://tinyurl.com/6eklu

* The British Royal Air Force (RAF) first encountered the FW-190A-1 in air
combat over the coast of northern France in September 1941. The new German
aircraft was more than a match for the Spitfire V. British intelligence was
initially puzzled by reports of the new German fighter, with some
speculation that the type might actually be a captured French Curtiss Hawk
75 or the Bloch 151 fighter, both of which were radial-engine machines with
a vague resemblance to the FW-190. By the end of the year, the British had
no doubt that they were up against something much more formidable.

http://tinyurl.com/5y42f

"In June, an Fw-190 landed at Pembrey after its pilot had become lost. This
gave the RAF an early opportunity to test the aircraft against the Spitfire
Mk V, and it proved superior in all respects except for turning ability."

 

They weren't _transmitting_ TV pictures when I was a kid. You had to go to
the local movies to watch the Melbourne cup a week after it was run.

Theo

 

Before you even _think_ about it, Ello, Lisa would kill you.... ;-)

regards,
CrazyCam

 

We started off on that track.. but you know this lot~~

Johno

P51 = best looking prop fighter

 

Here's a question, how come in fighters don't have weapons that fire
backwards?
In all the movies you see the pilot saying "Bogey on my tail, I can't shake
him". Surely a gun or missile that fires backwards would solve this dilemma?
I wonder how many pilots died or ejected thinking 'If only I had a gun that
fired backwards'?
Am I missing something here?

Btw I picked up the bike yesterday and man do the roads all seem so much
shorter now.

 

No, it was "live" on the radio.

Tower needs cleaning again. If only I could get a really big toothbrush.

Theo

 

http://www.greatbigstuff.com/toothbrush.html


HTH

 

Aiming a gun in a mirror isn't easy.

The Arado 234 jet bomber of WWII featured rearward firing cannons.

The Heinkel 219 nightfighter featured cannon that fired directly upward.
Excellent for culling bomber streams, particulary against the British
bombers which had a big blind spot underneath...

Then there's the Boulton-Paul Defiant, think Hurricane with a gun turret.
The weight of the turrent and gunner was it's downfall though...

Toosmoky
Ride the Penguin...
http://toosmoky.d2.net.au

 

"The Fw-190 was more than a match for the spit *at the time it was
introduced*."

: P

 

Should be a few floating around Thailand...

 

Not was. Is...

 

2 years of owning my cbr600f4i everytime i open its throttle i still go oh
f.ck.

Bikes are quick, you just get use to the speed pretty quickly.

Problem when ya jump up is you loose all that nimbleness the 250's have.

Just doesnt feel as easy to do the u turns and that sort of thing.

And i recomend and use Oggies Nobs they are proven to prevent crashes
(see ref Murphys Law) , not just protect the bike in one.

 

$199!!! I could get one of the local kiddies to clean it for a couple of
years for that.

Nice toothbrush though.

Theo

 

I like the wine glass.

http://www.greatbigstuff.com/wineglass.html

 

Well, you would, wouldn't ya! I'm gonna hold
out for the 'giant schooner glass'!

"Handcrafted in Poland by master blowers"

Hmmm, I dunno about that!


GB, "I am not an alcoholic. Alcoholics go to meetings"

 

Well... no. The Hurricane was outclassed by the Spitfire in top speed,
rate of climb, rate of dive, and turning ability. The Hurricane WAS,
however, responsible for winning the battle of Britain by the fact that
3 out of every 5 enemy planes shot down were done so by Hurricanes.

Of course, this was probably due to the fact that Hurricanes
outnumbered Spitfires by a 2:1 ratio, because they'd started production
a year or two earlier. And since it was a whole lot easier to repair a
shot-up Hurricane than a Spitfire, they tended to get back in the air
again sooner.

Here's a much better researched article on the Hurricane Vs Spitfire
controversy:

http://historynet.com/ahi/blhurricanes_spitfires/index.html


BTH
(For what it's worth, I prefer the Hurricane. A much more workmanlike
machine, without the la-de-da foppish reputation of the Spitfire!)

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that!