From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: NOTHING Is As Dumb As Kamala Harris on Multiple Dates
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:43:42 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-09-10 14:27, AlleyCat wrote:
>
> ACK!
>
> So much off-topic bullshit. Buuut, since I'm into aircraft...
>
> =====
>
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 12:54:13 -0700, Alan says...
>
>>> So, why was the Avro Arrow being built with Pratt and Whitney engines?
>>
>> It wasn't going to end up with one.
>
> "One"?
>
> You don't know much about planes, do ya? The Arrow was a two-engined plane.
Oh, no, Pussey.
One MODEL of engine.
>
> Annnd, coulda shoulda wouldas don't count here, Ski Bunny.
>
> https://i.imgur.com/70GcSTw.mp4
>
>> The Iroquois engine was built, running and undergoing flight testing.
>
> More coulda shoulda wouldas?
>
> https://i.imgur.com/D6JfTne.mp4
>
> "Most powerful in the world", but... NEVER OPERATIONAL. Not in the 105, anyways.
>
> ONE of the fastest.
>
> The F-102/106 built the same year was a far better plane. Smaller AND more agile, with the same speed
> capabilities, it would have flown circles around the Arrow. AND it actually flew in combat. [snicker]
LOL!
>
> AND it was bought by Canada. LOL
Neither the F-102 Delta Dart, nor the F-106 Delta Dagger were ever
bought by Canada.
And the F-102 was a failure which could barely break the sound barrier.
>
> Performance
>
> Maximum speed: 1,325 kn (1,525 mph, 2,454 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,200 m)
> Maximum speed: Mach 2.3
>
>> And the Arrow was **arguably** above and beyond any aircraft of its time; far beyond.
>
> Uhhh... no. Never got past the test phase, so it could have been a total bust.
They were farther along the test phase that you know.
>
> And now you buy F-35s. Again, the F-102/106 was built the same year(s) and out-performed the 105 ANNNND
> Canada bought them. [giggle]
Wrong, wrong and wrong!
>
> It WOULD have been a great interceptor, but nothing else. Too big to fight.
You really don't understand aerodynamics.
Ability to manoeuver is largely a function of wing loading.
Good dog fighters have relatively low wing loading.
The F15: 73.1 lb/sq ft
The F16: 88.3 lb/sq ft
Both know as good dogfighters, right?
Avro Arrow: 46.5 lb/sq ft
>
> Besides, it was already obsolete. Russia was already starting to build and implement intercontinental
> ballistic missiles. Plus, when the MIG-25 was built(Mach 3.2+), it probably would have never intercepted
> THAT, even IF the Iroquois had been updated.
Interceptors were never intended to intercept other interceptors, Pussey.
And it was the Americans who claimed that interceptors were obsolete.
>
> Frames and skins can only take so much.
>
> So... why didn't Canada build something along the same lines any of the years following, instead, relying on
> AMERICAN aircraft LIKE the 102/106?
The Americans bullied them out of it.
>
>>> Did your race cars have Canadian engines?
>>
>> No.
>
> Thanks.
>
> No one asked what engines Formula Ones were using. Everyone knows about Cosworths, which are NOT Canadian
> built.
>
> What engines did YOU use?
I started with a Formula Ford with a Kent engine. I don't know where my
particular engine was made.
I'm now driving a 1998 Van Diemen RF98-2 Formula F (the new name of the
class after legalizing the new engine) Honda.
>
>> Formula Ford was started with an engine designed and manufactured in England.
>
> But... where were they MADE?
Can you not read? "manufactured in England"
And look at all you snipped!
>> Later on, Ford did build variants in the US, but it was an English engine.
>>
>> And the vast majority of Indy cars from 1976 on used an engine designed and built by Cosworth: an English company.
>