Physics question

"T o d d P a t t i s t" wrote in message
...

Then next time, be considerate and tell us that you don't
have a real question.

You know, I was going to just let this dog go to sleep but this last "bit of
advice" ****es me off. You have been acting like an egotistical pompous ass
throughout the entire discussion, while I have tried my best to be polite.

Stuff it, T o d d!

Rich S.

"T o d d P a t t i s t" wrote in message
...
It's really not too much to ask that you
differentiate puzzlers from legitimate requests for help.

Although it was not in my original query, I *did* explain exactly where the
question arose and my purpose in asking it. You must have missed my post of
September 7 @ 6:35 PM in reply to "abripl". I quote:

"I brought this subject up because I was reading an article in the May 1942
issue of "Flying and Popular Aviation". It was titled "Speedy" and tells the
story of a quiet young fellow named Andy McDonough who dove a new Army
fighter to 620 mph a "few weeks ago". He'd like to try for 700."

The airplane was a new P-39 Airacobra. "After his test, McDonough said he
thought of that now-famous problem: 'I wondered what would have happened if
I could have fired a pistol back over the tail. At that speed would the
bullet have rolled out of the barrel and then fallen back?'".

Well, perhaps that was a famous problem in the spring of 1942. I don't know,
having entered this vale of tears late in 1941. But I thought it would be
fun to toss it up here among all these reasonable, logical, polite folks.
"

I have already stated that I regret not stating the problem more clearly and
I feel that it has been obvious from the beginning that I wasn't really
asking for help in attempting to shoot down a Hun. My viewpoint.

Now, shall we put this dog to sleep? We both have more serious things to
worry about, I'm sure.

Rich S.

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:

"Rich S." wrote:


Why did you ask a question
you knew the answer to? Was it just because you thought it
was an interesting topic for discussion?

Bingo.


Then next time, be considerate and tell us that you don't
have a real question.


T o d d P a t t i s t
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

Todd, most of us enjoyed the exercise. Rich reminded many of us
including me how much we have forgotten over the years. My personal
revenge will be to place a dead skunk under the seat of he airplane.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired" wrote in message
news:MA%Te.10746$dm.4627@lakeread03...
My personal revenge will be to place a dead skunk under the seat of he
airplane.

Eeeyew! And how you gonna do it without smelling like the perp? Bathe in
tomato juice and vodka?

Rich S.

Rich S. wrote:

"Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired" wrote in message
news:MA%Te.10746$dm.4627@lakeread03...

My personal revenge will be to place a dead skunk under the seat of he
airplane.


Eeeyew! And how you gonna do it without smelling like the perp? Bathe in
tomato juice and vodka?

Rich S.


I'll never tell g

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"T o d d P a t t i s t" wrote in message
...

Yep - Sorry if I seemed a bit grumpy - It's other things,
not you - I actually like physics puzzlers.

Know what you mean. They said my back surgery would last ten years. It's
been nine and the Vicodin count is rising rapidly. I am also sorry for
yelling.

Rich S.

Oh come on you guys.... don't get serious now... that would ruin your
reputations on USENET.

John (I learned to like Rum and Cokes from Rich S) Ammeter

( I ALSO learned to dread his almost daily reports on his bowel
movements... I learned to NEVER take another road trip with Rich)

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
"Rich S." wrote:


You know, I was going to just let this dog go to sleep but this last "bit of
advice" ****es me off. You have been acting like an egotistical pompous ass
throughout the entire discussion, while I have tried my best to be polite.


Interesting. I thought I was trying to be polite too. If I
gave offense, it was unintentional, and I apologize. (I can
hear the Usenet gasps - an apology! - coming through my
network connection :-) From my point of view, someone asked
for help, I spent time trying to give it, then I found out
that it was a trick question, somewhat poorly expressed at
that. It's really not too much to ask that you
differentiate puzzlers from legitimate requests for help.

T o d d P a t t i s t
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:

"Rich S." wrote:

Know what you mean. They said my back surgery would last ten years. It's
been nine and the Vicodin count is rising rapidly. I am also sorry for
yelling.


I've been out of flying twice this year with a back problem.
While I was out, a developer signed a contract to buy our
airport (N82) and the current airport manager is destined to
be his partner. The town offered to buy the airport for
more money than the developer, but the executrix of the
estate and heir to the airport property sold it to the
developer instead. (Two of the 4 heirs fought the
executrix, as they love the airport, but one recently died
of appendicitis, and the other is being evicted from her
family home on the airport property.)

The town doesn't want to lose the airport. The pilots were
told if they spoke at the town meeting against the developer
they'd be kicked off the airport.
There are laws against coersion I'd have my lawyer suit for enough for you
to take over the airport for payment! ;-)
John
I put developers in the same catagory as doctors (especially FAA!) and
lawyers.

You've made an irrelevant assumption here.


The answer is "It's all a matter of relativity"
With the correct lead, it does not matter what speed relative to the ground
the bullet is travelling, relative to the two aircraft is what is important.
remember the bullet is spinning so also maintains some gyroscopic stability.

All bullets fall to earth at 9.8 m/s^2 regardless of their path over the
surface of the earth.

With the correct lead the bullet and the ME-109 colide, at which point the
tragectory of the bullet is drasticaly altered such that it, and teh ME-109
all fall/fly to earth as one mass.

If the case is simplified such that the bullet is simply fired backwards but
at nothing, then it will accelarate to earth, only with a 0 lateral velocity
relative to the ground.


Rgds,

"Rich S." wrote in message
...
There is a (magic) B-17 flying along at 560 mph. The tail gunner is out of
.50 caliber ammo. He sees a Messerschmitt ME-109 crossing behind the B-17,
50 yards away.

He pulls out his trusty .45 Colt auto (muzzle velocity 820 fps) and fires
at the Hun when the ME-109 is directly behind the B-17. He leads the
Messerschmitt by exactly enough to hit the pilot (if he were firing from a
fixed position).

Does the bullet exit the muzzle and fall directly to earth?

Rich "Scratching my head" S.

Quick question: what does a plane have that a bullet lacks?


Answer: an engine to maintain its speed.


Bullets start slowing down the moment they leave the muzzle (alright,
just slightly *after* they leave the muzzle), while the aircraft that
fired them can maintain its speed.

But in this case there is no air friction to "slow" the bullet.
It leaves the gun into still air, and so if the bomber is accelerated a
bit by the gun's recoil, its muzzle velocity is a bit less than the
airplane's velocity and so will move "forward" a little as it falls.


Dan