F-100 "zero-length launch":
The program was played with by the Air Force, the Soviets and the Germans, but all abandoned the concept. The obvious reasons were that it would not be feasible to have a lot of pilots and fighters assigned to it without affecting the numbers available for regular tasks and, of course, they still needed a functioning runway to land at.
A blog by a "sucker" and a "loser" who served her country in the Navy.
If you're one of the Covidiots who believe that COVID-19 is "just the flu",
that the 2020 election was stolen, or
especially if you supported the 1/6/21 insurrection,
leave now.
Slava Ukraini!
Sunday, September 16, 2012
4 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
Dear Miss Fit:
ReplyDeleteHow's this for scary: the program as originally conceived called for the boosted takeoff and a zero-length landing on an inflatable mat! (We don' need no steenkin' runway.)
Sone details HERE.
Regards,
Frank
I forget whether this was done before they had zero-zero ejection seats. The takeoff was never my favorite part of a flight. I can't imagine how this felt.
ReplyDeleteBefore, I think. The zero-zero ejection seats came along in the early `60s, if what I've read about M-B is to be believed.
DeleteLove how the F-100 pilot does a roll after takeoff, as if to celebrate living through the launch.
ReplyDeleteI think the Swedes' idea of using designated stretches of highway as emergency runways made more sense.