Cramped Cockpits, pt 3 - Me 163.jpg (1/1)

[Mitchell Holman[_2_]]

[Waldo Pepper]

I know it would kill me, and potentially in a MOST unpleasant way. But
If I ws given the chance to fly one of these I would take it. (After
some un-powered flights)

How could you pass it up?

Waldo.

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:13:52 -0600, Mitchell Holman
> wrote:

[Mitchell Holman[_2_]]

Waldo Pepper > wrote in
:

> I know it would kill me, and potentially in a MOST unpleasant way. But
> If I ws given the chance to fly one of these I would take it. (After
> some un-powered flights)
>
> How could you pass it up?


I could. Falling from 30000 feet in something with
no fuel and handles like a brick does not strike me as
"flying"..........

[PLMerite]

The link's dead and I don't think it ever flew, but they had good
intentions.


Regards, PLMerite




"Waldo Pepper" > wrote in message
...
>I know it would kill me, and potentially in a MOST unpleasant way. But
> If I ws given the chance to fly one of these I would take it. (After
> some un-powered flights)
>
> How could you pass it up?
>
> Waldo.
>
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:13:52 -0600, Mitchell Holman
> > wrote:
>
>

[Waldo Pepper]

> I could. Falling from 30000 feet in something with
>no fuel and handles like a brick does not strike me as
>"flying"..........
>

Handles like a brick? I am surprised at you. I thought you were more
of the adventurous type there!

Consider the following testimony of pilot Joseph Kurtz.

A flying replica Me 163 was constructed between 1994 and 1996 by
Joseph Kurtz, a former Luftwaffe pilot who trained to fly Me 163's but
who never flew in combat. He subsequently sold the aircraft to EADS.
The replica is an unpowered glider whose shape closely matches that of
an Me 163, although its weight and internal construction differ
considerably. Reportedly, it has excellent flying characteristics.

XCOR Aerospace, an aerospace and rocketry company, proposed a rocket
powered replica. Although outwardly the same as a wartime aircraft,
the design would have differed considerably for safety reasons. It
would have been powered by a simpler and safer, pressure fed, liquid
oxygen/alcohol engine and retractable undercarriage would have been
used instead of a take-off trolley and landing skid. The project is no
longer discussed on the company's website and it appears work has
ceased on this project, possibly due to lack of commercial interest.

http://www.xcor.com/press-releases/2007/07-01-16_XCOR_begins_methane_engine_testing.html

Waldo

[jc[_4_]]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 04:18:13 GMT, Waldo Pepper >
wrote:

>I know it would kill me, and potentially in a MOST unpleasant way. But
>If I ws given the chance to fly one of these I would take it. (After
>some un-powered flights)
>
>How could you pass it up?
>
>Waldo.

I'm with you on that one! In a heart beat, in fact. Same with the shuttle, I'd
of flown the day after the Challenger if given the chance. Some things in life
are simply too good to pass up, no matter what the consequences might be.

I'll admit, the Columbia kind of soured me on NASA... all those years and they
had no idea how to repair the tiles in space? Idiots. They should have all
been stood against a wall and shot.
Cheers,
jc