Posted on 12/20/2011 8:59:31 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
When you get ahold of Galileo have him explain this to you.
When flying tactical jets and entering a steep dive we could go to full idle (creating more drag than thrust), extend the speed brakes, and still be accelerating through 500 mph. So how does that work with your, “All objects have the same terminal velocity of 123 mph” assertion?
I do understand that if this bomb thingie were to be released from an aircraft diving at 500 mph, its initial velocity would be the same as the AC's. Now if you were to pull up your trusty T-33 in a hammerhead stall and then let it go into a Falling Leaf, what would one's terminal velocity then be?
BTW, does not this bomb-aroo remind you of that history channel special, “NAZI Wonder Weapons of 2003?”
Unfortunately Barack Hussein can’t wait to land one in the middle of Iran right where they can find it and sell it to China.
A T-33 isn't likely to complete a falling leaf stall to the ground; however, if you were to take a 737 into a hammerhead stall at 20k, shut down both engines, and use the APU to keep it controllable in a 90 degree nose down dive, you would easily exceed 550 mph before impact. More than likely you would rip off the wings as you exceeded the aircraft's design limit.
Thinking of it another way, the 737 doesn't have anything close to the thrust required to overcome the acceleration of gravity, yet it can overcome drag resistance to fly at about 600 mph in level flight. So if gravity is a more powerful force on the aircraft than its engines, why do you think that it is incapable of doing the same?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.