Rambler 1-1

I don't like the embedded videos, I can't load them while surfing the forums.

we had some crazy old bat ram into out '91 ford explorer with an '89 chevy cavalier. Roads were clear, no ice, we were just sitting at a stop light and she rams into us doing 90km/h (about 55 mph). Then she backed up and rammed us again. Then she backed up again, but my mom floored it and we got out of there just as she passed where we were a second ago. Then the messed up old fart proceeded to try to drive away, but cavalier VS explorer, and her car was totalled. All we had was a bent bumper and a cracked windshield! the old tart told police that somebody had hit her from behind and drove away, but there was no damage to the back of her car and we were the only two cars on the street. However, she did get a new car out of this. We got a new back bumper. Moral of the story: sure, big, heavy guzzlers make the earth warmer and empty your pocket, but in a crash, you're better off driving something built like a brick sh*t house than a little, anorexic smart car.

skyhawks for sale? how much? with that latex coating, I'll bet that if they are bought or re-comissioned, they'll be called the Trojans!

yeah, but we're talking Canada here. We still have our Snowbirds from the 50's, and out "top of the line" fighters are second-hand US navy F-18's that had finished with their carrier landing days.

I can't help but realise that some high speed planes built later on had things that look like they were yoinked from the Arrow, such as the dogtooth wing, the big, flat body, the intakes... The Arrow was suprisingly manuverable, according to chief test pilot Jan Zurakowski, because of it's fly-by-wire controll system. Apparently he thought it could out-manuver an CF-100 in a fast dogfight.

man, that looks good! do the MiGs still twirl and spin like mad when they get hit?

we'd probably still be flying Arrows today, but they'd have a bunch of upgrades and they'd be taking some heavy flak for their age. I only wish we could see the true performance.

you mean I missed it? apparently it was visible from here. I'd have liked to have seen that. report from NASA: "OH CR@P! THAT WASN'T THE SATELLITE! THAT WAS THE HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE!"

still waiting for WoC.

I heard that it was delayed because of high seas. They couldn't launch the missile.

I did hear that dief gave the arrow the chop and bought the voodoo to strengthen ties with the americans, but I wasn't sure about that, so i didn't mention it.

On this day 49 years ago, at 9:15 in the morning, the Avro Arrow and the Orenda Iroquois programs were canceled by the conservative government of John Diefenbaker for political reasons. According to diefenbaker, "By the time the Arrow program is complete (in 1961), manned intercepters will be obsolete." The Arrow was replaced by the Boeing Bomarc Missile system, known for being inacurate (about 5-10 miles from target) and only effective because of a nuclear warhead. After the Bowmarc proved completely incapable of destroying anything, diefenbaker approved an order for McDonnell F-101 Voodoos (manned intercepters!) for replacement. Oops, perhaps? The cancelation of the Arrow caused thousands of lost jobs and crippled the Canadian aircraft industry. The Arrow was the first aircraft in the world to use fly-by-wire controlls. This made it as manuverable as many smaller fighters, despite it's size (77 feet long, 50 foot wingspan, 49,000 pound empty weight). It was intended to be powered by two Orenda Iroquois engines of 30,000 pounds thrust each with burner, but only ever flew with two PW J-75s of 12,000 pounds thrust each. Despite this, it still managed to reach mach 2 in level flight and it cruised at mach 0.91. The Iroquois could never be run up to full power in flight tests because it was tested attatched to the fuselage of a B-47, and even with all the other engines off, the Iroquois alone would push the '47 past max airframe speed. The Arrow should have been a great plane, but it's demise was the result of a series of very unforunate events. Nobody will ever know what it could have been. All airframes were destroyed, along with all blueprints, notes, manufacturing equipment and models, as if diefenbaker wanted to deny that the aircraft ever existed. All that remains is the nose section of one of the prototypes and some wing and landing gear pieces. However, you can't kill a dream, and in this way, the Arrow lives on.

can't wait to get my hands on this, but I'm dead broke (had to buy a new chain and sproket for my dirtbike). Anybody know if this is gonna come out on a disk for those of us with "high speed light" (DSL) internet and no credit card?

WAHOOOO!!!! IT"S HERE! IT"S HERE!! I think I'm gonna nix SFP1 and replace it with WOI, 'cause this HD ain't big enough for the two of them... Oh well. It'll be worth it! I REALLY hope my comp can run this, even if I have to bump resolution down to 800 by 600 and put everything on "low". Maybe i'll try to find a 20MB external drive. Or for that matter, a new computer.

brings the term "augered in" to a WHOLE new level. I've got a whole bunch of "bad day" pictures. May I hijack this thread? there's some like this: and some of these: and plenty of these: too bad I lost all the captions.

I know very well that it depends on what engines you're talking/thinking about, but in general, would a plane with a radial or an inline be a better weapon? I though of the question when i considered that the last sucessful piston planes were mostly radials, then I remembered the Mustang and how great it was. Viggen- the zero has an itty-bitty twin bank of low displacement, but it was very advanced in it's construction, and it could operate at crazy-high RPMs. It's a pufter radial. May i remind all of you that the grumman bearcat and tigercat were radials? And those rivaled the early jets. oh, and THE CORSAIR WAS A FANTASTIC DOGFIGHTER!

catapults? we don't need no stinkin' catapults!

I thought radials were better for dogfighters because they have better mass centeralization and usually less overall weight, which means better manuverability. Also, the Jug and the Corsair were both pretty fast, and they had radials.

My flight lead is convinced that inline engines (Including Vs, Is and HOs) are better than radial engines (including dual, tri and quad banks). I like radials better.I'd like to settle this once and for all. No stupid "Piston-engines-are-crap-go-use-a-PT6" comments.

been speed-reading 20th century history books again, I see.

back in the 80's a DC-10 "landed" (read- "fell") at our itty-bitty little 7300 foot airport. It left 3 footprints where It "touched" (read- "stomped") down and it almost overran. Luckily, It was able to get off again the next week, after repairs were executed.

they were old the day they came out. Are they not the same age as the B-52?

are you saying that archduke Ferdinand was really assasinated by a Phalanx? Or that Hitler shouldn't have crossed the US fleet?

this same thing happened in a city close to us, but three teens jumped a vietnam vet. He broke the arm of the kid who grabbed him, then pulled a knife on the other two, who then took off. However, It was him who was charged for assult. The court case is pending. way to go, Canadian Justice System.

oops! sorry guys... I kinda took off for a couple of days there. However, i see Viggen gave you the link though. Maybe I'll try posting one of my videos on here. Once I get rid of all this lag and finish my current one.