Re: Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing
From: Ami Silberman (silber_at_mitre.org)
Date: 01/05/05
- Next message: Revision: "Re: Black Holes Q?"
- Previous message: Pat Flannery: "Re: UK Honour for Michael Foale"
- In reply to: OM: "Re: Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing"
- Next in thread: Jeff Findley: "Re: Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:50:54 -0500
"OM" <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research_facility.org> wrote
in message news:nnult0lvp9rark2mhngvj8afkv1v52vc49@4ax.com...
> On 4 Jan 2005 10:42:03 -0800, "pat" <bahn@tgv-rockets.com> wrote:
>
> >No guns, no missiles, pure flight simulation.
>
> ...To me, that equals a quick flight path to boredom, with stopovers
> at tedium, drudgery, and a plane change at monotony. After all, what
> good are flight sims if you can't escape into the sheer absurdity of
> dogfights between 747s?
>
> OM
I read once of a "dogfight" between a PBY and a Japanese flying boat. I
can't remember the outcome, but the PBY was ever so slightly faster and was
chasing the Japanese plane. Everytime it came within range, they fired their
forward-bearing machine guns, but the recoil slowed them down sufficiently
that they kept dropping out of range.
- Next message: Revision: "Re: Black Holes Q?"
- Previous message: Pat Flannery: "Re: UK Honour for Michael Foale"
- In reply to: OM: "Re: Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing"
- Next in thread: Jeff Findley: "Re: Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|