Why I take the Bible literally

Thomas said:
Whoa! Stop stop! back it up ...

You lucky, lucky ... ! (With all due respect, and reference to Monty Python)

So –
I flew a dual control Cessna 150 Aerobat (+ points) from Denham airfield (no score). Cred points total: 3.
You flew a dual control Spitfire (+ points) from Biggin Hill (+ points) over the White Cliffs of Dover (+ points). Credit points total: 27, 348 and rising
Click to expand...
That's very funny, Thomas. 😂

It was quite an experience. Had control for most of the flight, apart from takeoff and landing; the approach to Beachy Head; and one other short stretch, just before the port of Dover. My skipper was a former RAF fighter pilot, and one time CO of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Great day.

Blessings.
 
I believe the Spitfire machine gun fires though the propellor -- synchronized amazingly to fire in between the spinning propellor blades?

They were doing this sort of stuff already in the 1940's imagine what they can do by now -- you Babylon flat earth guys, lol
 
RJM said:
I believe the Spitfire machine gun fires though the propellor -- synchronized amazingly to fire in between the spinning propellor blades?
Click to expand...
(No, that's the other lot – Messerschmitt 109 and later Focke-Wulf 190. We mounted our guns in the wings)
 
Last edited:
I was at an air display when I was a kid – we were on a hillside and a Hawker Hurricane (likewise Merlin-propelled) flew 'at us' and disappeared over the crest ... everybody started running up to watch it fly off, and the pilot did a quick u-turn – the engine noise was blanked by the hill, we never heard it coming until suddenly it was right there above us ... tremendous noise!

What's better than a Merlin in full throat? Two Merlins – a Mosquito.
What's better than two Merlins in full throat – Four! A Lancaster.

Anyway ... we're way, way off topic now, and all my fault!
 
Thomas said:
(No, that's the other lot – Messerschmitt 109 and later Focke-Wulf 190. We mounted our guns in the wings)
Click to expand...
Yes.

From ‘Flight Journal’:

‘Squadron Leader Ralph Sorley is widely unappreciated for his contribution to the Spitfire’s armament. The original specification listed four .303-caliber guns, which, considering the nature of combat, would have been woefully inadequate. But Sorley, who had flown with the Royal Navy in WW I, was the right man in the right place at the right time. Working in the operational requirements office, he recommended upgrading the new fighter’s armament to eight machine guns. As it was, eight .30 calibers proved marginal against bombers.

‘In anachronistic terms, the “throw weight” of the British and German fighters’ armament favored the latter. A three-second burst from eight .303s produced 13 pounds of projectiles downrange while the 109’s combined cannon/MG battery yielded 18 pounds. But undoubtedly far less than 10 percent of all rounds fired connected with a target, which is why so few pilots became aces. In one eye-opening episode, six Spitfires fired 7,000 rounds at a Do 17 without destroying it.

‘Sorley recommended sighting the eight machine guns into a ten-foot circle at 100 yards. That was a reasonable approach for an average pilot, but later Fighter Command adapted a 400-yard convergence that was beyond the abilities of most pilots and dispersed the pattern. In some squadrons, pilots could make their own arrangements, but if they had to fly another aircraft, their familiarity vanished. With 300 rounds per gun, the pilot had perhaps 20 seconds of trigger time.

‘Part way through the Battle, Spitfire IIB models arrived with two 20mms in place of four machine guns. Loading 60 rounds per cannon, the new mark was more lethal against bombers but the Hispano-Suiza design was unreliable, especially under G. Modifications only improved performance after the Battle when the mixed armament became standard for Spitfires. The “bump” on the wing of later models accommodated a motor to enhance feeding.’

Blessings.
 
juantoo3 said:
I'm given to understand the earth is a little pear shaped, a bit fatter in the southern hemisphere than the northern...
Click to expand...
I think it's more donut shaped. It bulges at the equator by around eight miles.
 
Niblo said:
Mmmmmm...doughnuts 😋
Click to expand...
The flat earther David Weiss, in the You Tube video posted earlier, deduces that this means the tide would rise and fall by eight miles high at the equator

Go to 36.30

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top