Typhoon vs. Ferrari. . .

[Scott Ferrin]

Date line: ROME
Formula One World Champion Michael Schumacher will pit his speed
against a supersonic jet fighter screaming down the runway at an
Italian airbase next month, Italian Air Force officials told AFP.

Schumacher, at the wheel of the Ferrari 2003-GA in which he won the
world championship for a record sixth time last month, will try to
outstrip the new Eurofighter Typhoon hunter-bomber over a series of
short courses.

"We expect to have three races, over 500, 1,000 and 1,500 metres,"
Lieutenant Alessio Della Volpe told AFP by phone from Grosseto
military airport in Tuscany, where the race takes place on December
11.

"There will also be an exhibition of vintage cars and planes before
the race, then a public demonstration of the new plane," developed in
Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.

Italian astronaut and test pilot Maurizio Chelli will be at the
controls of the Eurofighter when it pairs off on the "grid" with
Schumacher, Della Volpe said.

Italy, home of style and fast cars, has seen it all before.

In 1931, Italian motor racing legend Tazio Nuvolari, at the wheel of
his Alfa Romeo 2300, was beaten by a biplane at Rome's airport.

But in 1981, Canada's Gilles Villeneuve and his Ferrari 126 CK turbo
beat a F-104 jet fighter over a kilometre (two-thirds of a mile) at
Istrana airport in northern Italy.





Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the latest
and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet getting
it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what looked
like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
big wide tires on the back.

[Ralph Savelsberg]

Scott Ferrin wrote:

<snip>
>
> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the latest
> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet getting
> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what looked
> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
> big wide tires on the back.
>
The US navy reportedly once pitted an F-14 against a hot-rod (for some Hot Rodders magazine) and won,

which was somewhat unfair since the Tomcat used a catapult ;-)


My favorite TV show about cars BBC's `Top Gear' showed a little stunt
they pulled on HMS Invincible. The BBC's own Jaguar XJS (minus every
bit of interior and exterior trim imaginable and plus a nitro kit)
accelerated across Invincible's deck. At the point where the RN's Sea
Harriers would ordinarily reach 100 mph, the Jag did 109! Sadly though,
unlike the Jag, Harriers are able to become airborne and stay there for
quite a while after passing over the end of the deck. The Jag also
became airborne briefly, but then plunged into the water.
Great Television.

Regards ,
Ralph Savelsberg

According to this week's show, the driver, only known as `The Stig'
perished, although I'm sure that's just a rather sick joke.

[NoHoverStop]

Ralph Savelsberg wrote:
>
>>
>> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
>> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the latest
>> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
>> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
>> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
>> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet getting
>> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
>> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what looked
>> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
>> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
>> big wide tires on the back.
>>
Anything with reheat has its work cut-out against a seriously powerful
car, it just takes too long to get all the jet's horses under starters
orders. What you want for the job is a lightweight (e.g. one you've just
VL'ed) Harrier. Slamming to full from 55% rpm takes hardly any time at all.

> My favorite TV show about cars BBC's `Top Gear' showed a little stunt
> they pulled on HMS Invincible. The BBC's own Jaguar XJS (minus every
> bit of interior and exterior trim imaginable and plus a nitro kit)
> accelerated across Invincible's deck. At the point where the RN's Sea
> Harriers would ordinarily reach 100 mph, the Jag did 109! Sadly though,
> unlike the Jag, Harriers are able to become airborne and stay there for
> quite a while after passing over the end of the deck. The Jag also
> became airborne briefly, but then plunged into the water.
> Great Television.
>
The "air-gun" exhaust plume was rather obvious on the shot as the car
left the ramp. I don't know for sure but I suggest they drove the car
along the deck a bit (not at anything like 109mph), stopped and then set
up the ramp-exit shot sans driver. I know a bit about ski-jump dynamics
and that car barely fell off the end. Still, I'm sure everyone had fun.

[Tony Volk]

And if you added a motorcycle, that'd smoke the Ferrari. Remember a
fighter jet weighs in at 10-30 tonnes! Of course, something like the Streak
Eagle of the stripped down Sukhoi would probably give them a run for their
money if they could ramp up to full power before being released.

Tony

[Ralph Savelsberg]

NoHoverStop wrote:

> Ralph Savelsberg wrote:
>
>
>> My favorite TV show about cars BBC's `Top Gear' showed a little
>> stunt they pulled on HMS Invincible. The BBC's own Jaguar XJS
>> (minus every bit of interior and exterior trim imaginable and
>> plus a nitro kit) accelerated across Invincible's deck. At the
>> point where the RN's Sea Harriers would ordinarily reach 100
>> mph, the Jag did 109! Sadly though, unlike the Jag, Harriers are
>> able to become airborne and stay there for quite a while after
>> passing over the end of the deck. The Jag also became airborne
>> briefly, but then plunged into the water. Great Television.
>>
> The "air-gun" exhaust plume was rather obvious on the shot as the
> car left the ramp. I don't know for sure but I suggest they drove
> the car along the deck a bit (not at anything like 109mph),
> stopped and then set up the ramp-exit shot sans driver. I know a
> bit about ski-jump dynamics and that car barely fell off the end.
> Still, I'm sure everyone had fun.
>
That would seem like a way to do it. Obviously a camera shot with a JAG
passing over a line with the little text 109mph in the bottom courner
looks rather neat, but doesn't prove anything. It was great fun to
watch, though.

Regards,
Ralph Savelsberg

[Scott Ferrin]

>The "air-gun" exhaust plume was rather obvious on the shot as the car
>left the ramp. I don't know for sure but I suggest they drove the car
>along the deck a bit (not at anything like 109mph), stopped and then set
>up the ramp-exit shot sans driver. I know a bit about ski-jump dynamics
>and that car barely fell off the end. Still, I'm sure everyone had fun.


Or do like the US Navy did. There's a clip out ther of them using a
catapult to launch a car off the deck. I was somewhat disappointed as
I was hoping they'd really crank the juice up and LAUNCH that sucker
but it looked like it only went far enough out so the carrier wouldn't
hit it or something.

[Scott Ferrin]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:10:03 +0100, Ralph Savelsberg
> wrote:

>
>
>Scott Ferrin wrote:
>
><snip>
>>
>> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
>> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the latest
>> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
>> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
>> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
>> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet getting
>> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
>> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what looked
>> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
>> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
>> big wide tires on the back.
>>
>The US navy reportedly once pitted an F-14 against a hot-rod (for some Hot Rodders magazine) and won,
>
>which was somewhat unfair since the Tomcat used a catapult ;-)

If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.

[peter wezeman]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:10:03 +0100, Ralph Savelsberg
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Scott Ferrin wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >>
> >> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
> >> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the latest
> >> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
> >> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
> >> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
> >> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet getting
> >> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
> >> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what looked
> >> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
> >> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
> >> big wide tires on the back.
> >>
> >The US navy reportedly once pitted an F-14 against a hot-rod (for some Hot Rodders magazine) and won,
> >
> >which was somewhat unfair since the Tomcat used a catapult ;-)
>
> If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
> used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.

I seem to recall that a top fuel dragster accelerates at 2 to 3 Gs;
anyone have better info?

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

[Keith Willshaw]

"peter wezeman" > wrote in message
...
> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
>...
> > On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:10:03 +0100, Ralph Savelsberg
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >Scott Ferrin wrote:
> > >
> > ><snip>
> > >>
> > >> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
> > >> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the
latest
> > >> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
> > >> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
> > >> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
> > >> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet
getting
> > >> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
> > >> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what
looked
> > >> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
> > >> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
> > >> big wide tires on the back.
> > >>
> > >The US navy reportedly once pitted an F-14 against a hot-rod (for some
Hot Rodders magazine) and won,
> > >
> > >which was somewhat unfair since the Tomcat used a catapult ;-)
> >
> > If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
> > used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.
>
> I seem to recall that a top fuel dragster accelerates at 2 to 3 Gs;
> anyone have better info?
>

A little calculation can sort this out.

The record the 1/4 mile is about 5.2 seconds and tops out
at around 280 mph or approx 410 feet per second

v= u+ a*t

from a standing start u=0 so

a= 410/5.2 or 78 feet per second per second
which is indeed about 2.5G

Keith

[Bjørnar Bolsøy]

http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/030318-2.htm
http://www.modernracer.com/features/dodgevipervsf16.html

In a rematch a second jet, this time running full military
power plus AFTERBURNERS, ran against a Competition coupe.
Once again the car won. You could hear the General's jaw drop


A couple of images here:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=38490



The video is here (requires registration):

http://www.racingflix.com/browsevideos.asp?p=6


There's also a Corvette vs. Hornet video there. :)



Regards..

[Scott Ferrin]

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 01:20:45 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy"
> wrote:

>
>
> http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/030318-2.htm
> http://www.modernracer.com/features/dodgevipervsf16.html
>
> In a rematch a second jet, this time running full military
> power plus AFTERBURNERS, ran against a Competition coupe.
> Once again the car won. You could hear the General's jaw drop
>
>
> A couple of images here:
>
> http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=38490


Man if they were going to use a souped up Dodge Viper they should have
raced it against an F110 or -229 F-16

[Scott Ferrin]

On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 20:17:33 -0000, "Keith Willshaw"
> wrote:

>
>"peter wezeman" > wrote in message
...
>> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
>...
>> > On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:10:03 +0100, Ralph Savelsberg
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Scott Ferrin wrote:
>> > >
>> > ><snip>
>> > >>
>> > >> Should be interesting. Hopefully the video clip will be out there to
>> > >> find. I've got the one from Ripley's where an F-16 took on the
>latest
>> > >> and greatest, top of the line, Dodge Viper. The Viper (car) won to
>> > >> the quarter mile mark but the F-16 overtook it and won to the half
>> > >> mile mark. (I think a clean, low fuel load -229 F-15E might beat it
>> > >> in the quarter though IMHO). I've also got a clip of a Hornet
>getting
>> > >> it's ass handed to it by a Formula 1 race car (what were they
>> > >> thinking) and I've seen a clip of a Mig-29 getting beat by what
>looked
>> > >> like a teenager's muscle car. No a REAL muscle car not today's rice
>> > >> burner wannabees. Looked like a jacked up in the back Nova with the
>> > >> big wide tires on the back.
>> > >>
>> > >The US navy reportedly once pitted an F-14 against a hot-rod (for some
>Hot Rodders magazine) and won,
>> > >
>> > >which was somewhat unfair since the Tomcat used a catapult ;-)
>> >
>> > If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
>> > used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.
>>
>> I seem to recall that a top fuel dragster accelerates at 2 to 3 Gs;
>> anyone have better info?
>>
>
>A little calculation can sort this out.
>
>The record the 1/4 mile is about 5.2 seconds and tops out
>at around 280 mph or approx 410 feet per second

I'm almost positive they've busted 300 mph and five seconds.

Uh. . .yep

http://www.lvms.com/news/news_flash/352029.html

TOP FUEL DRAGSTER QUALIFYING

1. Doug Kalitta 4.499 sec.*/332.10 mph

2. David Baca 4.528 sec./320.36 mph

3. Larry Dixon 4.537 sec./332.75 mph**

4. Brandon Bernstein 4.557 sec./325.77 mph

5. Tony Schumacher 4.604 sec./304.53 mph

6. Darrell Russell 4.614 sec./319.29 mph

7. Doug Herbert 4.622 sec./284.62 mph

8. John Smith 4.643 sec./307.37 mph

9. Rhonda Hartman-Smith 4.648 sec./323.66 mph

10. David Grubnic 4.678 sec./303.50 mph

11. Paul Romine 4.686 sec./315.78 mph

[Ron]

Maybe they should have raced an F/A-18 against an AMC Hornet :) :)


Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

[John Keeney]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "peter wezeman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
> >...
> > > If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
> > > used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.
> >
> > I seem to recall that a top fuel dragster accelerates at 2 to 3 Gs;
> > anyone have better info?
> >
>
> A little calculation can sort this out.
>
> The record the 1/4 mile is about 5.2 seconds and tops out
> at around 280 mph or approx 410 feet per second
>
> v= u+ a*t
>
> from a standing start u=0 so
>
> a= 410/5.2 or 78 feet per second per second
> which is indeed about 2.5G

Dated data, Keith.
NHRA Top Fuel records are at least 332.18 MPH top speed and 4.477s elapsed
time, both by Kenny Bernstein in 2001.
Funny Cars are just a little behind at 326.87mph & 4.731s (different
drivers).

a=3.4g -or there abouts-

[Drewe Manton]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in
:

> Or do like the US Navy did. There's a clip out ther of them using a
> catapult to launch a car off the deck. I was somewhat disappointed as
> I was hoping they'd really crank the juice up and LAUNCH that sucker
> but it looked like it only went far enough out so the carrier wouldn't
> hit it or something.
>

Or do it like the Fleet Air Arm did. . . and launch the ship's piano off
the catapault. Unfortunately the stress of the cat stroke was rather too
much for the instrument and it entered the oggin like so much matchwood.

--
Regards
Drewe
"Better the pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colourful rag is unfurled"

[Matthew G. Saroff]

(Ron) wrote:

>Maybe they should have raced an F/A-18 against an AMC Hornet :) :)
>
Nah....Too much ugly in one place. ;)
--
--Matthew Saroff

I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Check http://www.pobox.com/~msaroff, including The Bad Hair Web Page

[peter wezeman]

"John Keeney" > wrote in message >...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "peter wezeman" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
> >...
> > > > If they used a top fuel dragster it would be close even if the Tomcat
> > > > used a catapult. Come to think of it the dragster might win.
> > >
> > > I seem to recall that a top fuel dragster accelerates at 2 to 3 Gs;
> > > anyone have better info?
> > >
> >
> > A little calculation can sort this out.
> >
> > The record the 1/4 mile is about 5.2 seconds and tops out
> > at around 280 mph or approx 410 feet per second
> >
> > v= u+ a*t
> >
> > from a standing start u=0 so
> >
> > a= 410/5.2 or 78 feet per second per second
> > which is indeed about 2.5G
>
> Dated data, Keith.
> NHRA Top Fuel records are at least 332.18 MPH top speed and 4.477s elapsed
> time, both by Kenny Bernstein in 2001.
> Funny Cars are just a little behind at 326.87mph & 4.731s (different
> drivers).
>
> a=3.4g -or there abouts-

Is the coefficient of friction of those special tires that high,
or do they use aerodynamic downforce to increase the traction?
If memory serves, the coefficient of friction of Formula One
racing tires is on the order of 1.2, but of course a drag slick doesn't
have to last nearly as long. One journalist wrote that, touching
a racing tire at operating temperature, it feels sticky, about like
wet bubble gum.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

[Keith Willshaw]

"peter wezeman" > wrote in message
m...

>
> Is the coefficient of friction of those special tires that high,
> or do they use aerodynamic downforce to increase the traction?

Both.

> If memory serves, the coefficient of friction of Formula One
> racing tires is on the order of 1.2, but of course a drag slick doesn't
> have to last nearly as long. One journalist wrote that, touching
> a racing tire at operating temperature, it feels sticky, about like
> wet bubble gum.
>

They sit at the start and deliberately induce wheelspin to get the tyres
good and hot, touch one of those tyres at racing temperature
and you'll get a 3rd degree burn

http://www.kagered-racing.com/images/Mantorp%202002_burnout.jpg

Keith

[John Keeney]

"peter wezeman" > wrote in message
m...
> "John Keeney" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> > > a= 410/5.2 or 78 feet per second per second
> > > which is indeed about 2.5G
> >
> > Dated data, Keith.
> > NHRA Top Fuel records are at least 332.18 MPH top speed and 4.477s
elapsed
> > time, both by Kenny Bernstein in 2001.
> > Funny Cars are just a little behind at 326.87mph & 4.731s (different
> > drivers).
> >
> > a=3.4g -or there abouts-
>
> Is the coefficient of friction of those special tires that high,
> or do they use aerodynamic downforce to increase the traction?
> If memory serves, the coefficient of friction of Formula One
> racing tires is on the order of 1.2, but of course a drag slick doesn't
> have to last nearly as long. One journalist wrote that, touching
> a racing tire at operating temperature, it feels sticky, about like
> wet bubble gum.

They use aerodynamic devices to increase down force (ie the
"normal force") but they also far exceed 1g acceleration off the
line (which is clearly impossible since the coefficient of friction
can not exceed one -it's a definition thing, just ask any physics
professor).
An engineer, of suitable background, will tell you the "grip" of
the tire is doing the trick.

[Ad absurdum per aspera]

> the coefficient of friction can not exceed one -it's a definition
> thing, just ask any physics professor).
> An engineer, of suitable background, will tell you the "grip" of
> the tire is doing the trick.

Friction is one of those subjects that people discover, in fits and
starts every once in a while, to be yet still more complicated (and
interesting) at the micro/nano scale than they thought as of the last
go-round. I don't have access to hardcopy or online journals at the
moment, but if memory serves, Nature has run some interesting articles
over the last couple of years.

Cheers,
--Joe

[Scott Ferrin]

On 13 Nov 2003 08:36:45 -0800, (Ad absurdum per
aspera) wrote:

>> the coefficient of friction can not exceed one -it's a definition
>> thing, just ask any physics professor).
>> An engineer, of suitable background, will tell you the "grip" of
>> the tire is doing the trick.
>
>Friction is one of those subjects that people discover, in fits and
>starts every once in a while, to be yet still more complicated (and
>interesting) at the micro/nano scale than they thought as of the last
>go-round. I don't have access to hardcopy or online journals at the
>moment, but if memory serves, Nature has run some interesting articles
>over the last couple of years.
>
>Cheers,
>--Joe


I don't know that this falls in the "friction" dept. but the stuff
they've been finding out about gecko feet is pretty interesting.

[John Penta]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:26:44 -0700, Scott Ferrin
> wrote:

>I don't know that this falls in the "friction" dept. but the stuff
>they've been finding out about gecko feet is pretty interesting.

They've been using it to create Spidey-suits (my personal name for
em), haven't they?

I could see fun tactical uses for it, personally.

[Scott Ferrin]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:48:33 -0500, John Penta >
wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:26:44 -0700, Scott Ferrin
> wrote:
>
>>I don't know that this falls in the "friction" dept. but the stuff
>>they've been finding out about gecko feet is pretty interesting.
>
>They've been using it to create Spidey-suits (my personal name for
>em), haven't they?


Well they'd like to but they still haven't figured out how geckos keep
their feet clean :-) Think of the stuff they've played around with as
very sticky tape. Not that it wouldn't have it's own uses but as it
picks up dirt and dust and everything else it becomes less effective.



>
>I could see fun tactical uses for it, personally.

[funkraum]

> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote:
>>"peter wezeman" > wrote in message

>> Is the coefficient of friction of those special tires that high,
>> or do they use aerodynamic downforce to increase the traction?
>
>Both.
>
>> If memory serves, the coefficient of friction of Formula One
>> racing tires is on the order of 1.2, but of course a drag slick doesn't
>> have to last nearly as long. One journalist wrote that, touching
>> a racing tire at operating temperature, it feels sticky, about like
>> wet bubble gum.
>>
>
>They sit at the start and deliberately induce wheelspin to get the tyres
>good and hot, touch one of those tyres at racing temperature
>and you'll get a 3rd degree burn
>
>http://www.kagered-racing.com/images/Mantorp%202002_burnout.jpg
>
>Keith
>

The bottom line of automobile versus aircraft is that the piston
engined automobile is faster through the first, say, quarter, but the
advantage passes to the turbine-engined aircraft in the second
quarter.

It is a similar profile for turbine-engined drag cars versus
piston-engined drag cars and the turbine-engined cars have the
advantage over aircraft of being able to hold the engine on the
brakes.

I've seen photographs of

Cobra 427 versus F-15

Jaguar XJR-8 versus Jaguar

Don Garlits' Top-Fuel car versus F-14

I think this was 'staged', as Garlits did promotional work for the
Navy, including photo-shoot of him doing burn-out runs on the decks of
carriers. The photo-shoot with the F-14 was a problem as there was
nowhere suitable to get the two pieces of machinery together (the F-14
had to be launched from a catapult) I think Garlits had to do a run
on a section of concrete apron adjacent.

The photograph of the Jaguars showed both in the same frame with the
RAF version rotating. I am sure if I had read of a 'result' I would
have remembered.


Others events appear to have been::

Gilles Villeneuve in a Ferrari 126 CK beat an F-104 to 1000m circa
1981.

Tazio Nuvolari in an Alfa Romeo 8C 2300 lost to a Caproni Ca100 (85hp
De Haviland Gipsy 4 engine) circa 1931 in five laps of the Littorio
racetrack outside Rome.


Cat shots appear to take an F-14 to 150knots in approx two hundred and
fifty feet.

This place

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/lakehurst.htm

has a catapult which can launch up to 185knots and also looks suitable
as a testing ground. So it looks like the first 300 feet will take you
to 185 knots in around two seconds.

The narrative on the Streak Eagle launch told of how the ground-roll
was comparable to a cat-shot and so it looks like the Streak Eagle is
the aircraft best adapted to carry the colours into battle.



Schumi versus Typhoon ended with Schumi beating the Typhoon in the
600m but losing out by 900m. The track was very wet which limited
traction for the Ferrari.

F2003-GA 600m=9.4s 900m=13.2s 1200m=16.7s
Typhoon 600m=9.6s 900m=13.0s 1200m=14.2s

The F2003-GA appears to have reached 294Kkm/h in the 600m and since
the car has a maximum speed of approx 369Km/h it was mostly spent at
this stage.


The F1 car weighs around 600Kg and must produce around 850HP which
would give around 1442HP/ton (not metric tonne).


Others :


Ferrari 550 Standing Mile: 30.9s 292HP/ton

Ferrari 575 Standing Km: 22s with 300HP/ton

McLaren F1 Standing Km: 19.6s with 560HP/ton

Ferrari 512M with 764HP/ton

Ferrari 712 Can-Am with 945HP/ton

Porsche 917/30 with 1796HP/ton

Top Fuel cars give approx 6250 HP/ton (six two five zero)

Drag cars such as Pro-Gas can run the standing half mile without much
adjustment, but I am not sure what it would take in final-drive
gearing, aerodynamics and limits on tyre rpm to get a Top Fuel car to
run a mile.

But my guess is Bid Daddy would clean house.