Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Looking after groundhogs is easy, I use a .17 or .22 Hornet, or a .221 Fireball, or a .204 Ruger, but I've also used 6mm Remington, .308 Winchester, and the ever popular .223 and .22/250s. I've even used the .22 and .17 rimfires, which add stalking skills and patience to the mix. Groundhogs are fun.
Interesting. Looks like nobody even bothered to paint over the flight test photogrammetry "targets" on this one. "Rode hard and put away wet."
That's okay. Right next to the .45 Kentucky in the cabinet there's a .50 cal Hawken, and I can always borrow my neighbor's .58 cal 1861 Springfield Rifle Musket or his .69 cal Brown Bess. (When my shoulder's not hurting too badly, that is!)But not if the groundhogs have nose armor. Plus anything less than a 50 cal is useless from an armament perspective....at least according to one person on this thread.
What most nonfliers and some pilots don't understand is the huge gulf in response time between the pilot who is deliberately provoking a stall and and the unwary one who gets "ambushed" by a stall when he/she least expects it. With no behavioral or systemic warning of an impending stall, especially in a plane capable of "spectacular" departures, the "prompt" recovery specified by the test pilot may not be "prompt" enough to save the day.Which part of:-
If you stall with little or no warning at low altitude, then there is an excellent chance you will hit the ground before you can recover.
Do you not understand?
KUWULL!!Interesting information on the above aircraft on Wikipedia: <i>Bell Airacobra I AH574</i>
Brown loved it as a runabout, even after being used for deck landings. Warning to viewers, Please don't try this at home on your own P-39.Interesting information on the above aircraft on Wikipedia: <i>Bell Airacobra I AH574</i>
It seems one reason the RAF weren't too fond of the P-39 was due to the length of its take-off run.
Right, Eric Brown and Chuck Yeager liked it. What did they know?
Right, Eric Brown and Chuck Yeager liked it. What did they know?
More than most in aviation they knew how to fly. Brown was noted to be exceptional at landing on carriers while training, 2,271 carrier landings with one crash, arrester hook didn't deploy, not noticed by deck crew. He loved the P-39 because for his use, hopping between airfields the tricycle landing gear meant he didn't need guiding in and out of places as you do with a tail dragger. Buying a Jimi Hendrix guitar doesn't give you the ability to play it with one hand while changing a string with the other Yeager and Brown were special aviators, if you need their ability to fly a plane in a training school you wipe out 99% of students at least.Right, Eric Brown and Chuck Yeager liked it. What did they know?
Brown also briefly flew Spitfires I believe from Wiki Following the loss of Audacity, Brown resumed operational flying, being seconded to Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) squadrons flying escort operations to USAAF Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bombers over France. His job was to train them in deck-landing techniques, though the training took place on airfields.[Note 1] As a form of quid pro quo he joined them on fighter operations.They may have both liked flying the P-39 (I'm sure we all would), but neither pilot actually flew combat in it, or would have ever wanted to do so. If I recall, Yeager flew P-51Ds, Brown - Grumman Wildcats.
Their jobs were often evaluating airplanes. They both liked the P-39.More than most in aviation they knew how to fly. Brown was noted to be exceptional at landing on carriers while training, 2,271 carrier landings with one crash, arrester hook didn't deploy, not noticed by deck crew. He loved the P-39 because for his use, hopping between airfields the tricycle landing gear meant he didn't need guiding in and out of places as you do with a tail dragger. Buying a Jimi Hendrix guitar doesn't give you the ability to play it with one hand while changing a string with the other Yeager and Brown were special aviators, if you need their ability to fly a plane in a training school you wipe out 99% of students at least.
In case you missed it (apparently you have), here's a quote by a REAL pilot that I've grown to respect greatly, and pay close attention to the areas I've highlighted:Right, Eric Brown and Chuck Yeager liked it. What did they know?
Not maintained; improved!! It seems most P39s in combat trim, or even in training command, were flying around with CG at or near the aft limit, which may have itself been not conservative enough. A more forward CG increases the pitch-down tendency in a Departure From Controlled Flight (DFCF), reducing the probability of a flat spin. Given the concentration of mass in the core and the lack of polar inertia (a deliberate attempt to improve maneuverability), the impetus needed to get rotation started in a stall situation was pretty low. Add to that the easily blanked rudder and elevator configuration and you've got a potential booby trap for the inept or unwary pilot. Intuitive fliers like Yeager or Brown would naturally fly through a stall with precise coordination, thus avoiding yawing into the asymmetric stall condition that sets up a spin. Eagles of that caliber would of course enjoy the very light stick force gradients and the light "feel" of the plane, and would have the finesse to not overcontrol it as a more ham-handed pilot would.
So get that CG forward, if you can, and make it a better flying machine!