This is a read-only archive of the old Madabout Kitcars forum. New posts and replies are no longer possible, but every thread is still here to browse and read.
So how are you going to mount the body onto your scooter donors? by some form of home made frame and then linking the scooters together for dual engine power?
Anything could happen - but I will have to ask Lancelot to do a couple of bits on the body before I arrange transport for the beast.
(Thinks: 'Now need to clear shed of two dead Land Rovers...')
Scooter? I've got Blackbird* in bits so could always fit the engine from that (or two).
(*Honda not Lockheed).
Hmm, SR71 powered Sammio, now there's an ambitious concept, and you could strap half a dozen Raytheon AIM9 motors to the sides for a bit of extra oomph away from the traffic lights.
JATO is an acronym for jet-fuel assisted take off. It is a system for helping overloaded aircraft into the air by providing additional thrust in the form of small rockets.
The term is used interchangeably with the (more specific) term RATO, for Rocket-Assisted Take Off (or, in RAF parlance, RATOG for Rocket-Assisted Take Off Gear).
JATO is an acronym for jet-fuel assisted take off. It is a system for helping overloaded aircraft into the air by providing additional thrust in the form of small rockets.
The term is used interchangeably with the (more specific) term RATO, for Rocket-Assisted Take Off (or, in RAF parlance, RATOG for Rocket-Assisted Take Off Gear).
Ahh, makes sense now. Google didn't throw that up and none of the RAF aircraft I worked on ever had rocket assistance for take off, although the Tornados could have done with it to get them off the ground during the day in the middle east.
Ahh, makes sense now. Google didn't throw that up and none of the RAF aircraft I worked on ever had rocket assistance for take off, although the Tornados could have done with it to get them off the ground during the day in the middle east.
Yip, it was the same for us in the Nimrod - even with 13,000 yard runway at sealevel in Iraq using power against brakes, we had to go with significantly less than max fuel just to make it off the ground....still it meant the sorties were shorter.
I remember one of my old engineers telling us about the JATO on the 8 sqn Shakletons - "4 turning, 2 burning" must have made the take off roll....interesting
Yip, it was the same for us in the Nimrod - even with 13,000 yard runway at sealevel in Iraq using power against brakes, we had to go with significantly less than max fuel just to make it off the ground....still it meant the sorties were shorter.
I remember one of my old engineers telling us about the JATO on the 8 sqn Shakletons - "4 turning, 2 burning" must have made the take off roll....interesting
I was on the Jag OCU at Lossiemouth from '82 to '86 working from the 'pan next to 8 Squadron's Shacks. Their ground crew tee shirts had the slogan 'eight screws are better than two blow jobs' if I recall. I enjoyed my time at Lossie even though it was a long way from anywhere else - I once drove for seventeen hours solid in the winter to get home to Essex to see my parents. I had a slightly different hairstyle then too Happy days...
I remember one of my old engineers telling us about the JATO on the 8 sqn Shakletons - "4 turning, 2 burning" must have made the take off roll....interesting
Ah.......nostalgia!
The '20,000 Rivets Flying in Close Formation', (AKA Avro Shackleton) had four Rolls Royce V12 Griffon engines (most RR piston engines were named after birds of prey - Kestrel, Vulture, Eagle, Merlin (No - not the wizard!), producing 1,960 hp (2,345 hp with water-methanol injection) and on the MR3 version two 2,700lb thrust Armstrong Siddeley Viper engines buried in the nacelles.
The Shackleton, when so configured, could fly on the two Vipers only. Its party piece at a Farnborough air show (or two) was to take off and fly a circuit returning with one engine feathered, then another circuit when a second engine was feathered, and so on until after the last circuit when the the aircraft returned over the airfield with all engines feathered, flying only on the Vipers. Much consternation at first from lovingly gullible crowd - probably only spoiled by a knowing 10 year old.
Jet Assisted Take Off is one thing but the solid fuel propellant Rocket Assisted Take Off is something else. Especially when it concerns a 'Zero Launch Length' F104 Starfighter!
Ah yes, the flying coffin. The original design for the F104 included a downward firing ejection seat. Really useful given that most crashes happen on the runway.
Yes, but only on the early USAF versions - (less grunt needed to drop pilot to safety and no tail strike to worry about) - great idea at 60k feet, but was quickly changed after a mishap or two at low level.
There was an issue with the German Air Force losing a lot of aircraft due to their poor training strategy, but generally the 'Widowmaker' safety record was no worse than many other 'hot ships' of the time...
(The Danes didn't loose one operationally apparently, due to ensuring their pilots logged 500 hours in the F5 before transitioning onto the F104)
Happy days... 
Just to help you guys get back on track , Maybe this should be posted here....