If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
about galloping ghost-----is #177 and #77 from the late 1940's the same aircraft?.
If you ask Jimmy Leeward it is.
If you as most Mustang historians, it's most likely not.
The NX79111 that raced as Galloping Ghost in the Post-War races was sold to Israel in the 50's...and just like the Mustangs that went to Central America in the 60's and the airframes that Trans-Florida/Cavalier refurbished, the registration number and serial numbers were just that...numbers on a piece of paper that didn't necessarily match up with what was on the airframe.
In the 1960's 'a' Mustang came back to the United States with registration paperwork that said NX79111...but there really is no way to verify if it is in fact the same airframe.
But as I have said since this theory came out twenty plus years ago, the race record of Miss Candace/Jeannie/LARS since it came back to the states and started it's 'modern era' racing career is every bit (if not more) impressive than anything it did during it's four-year period at Cleveland. At Cleveland it won one of the secondary races in 1948. In the modern era it has three Championship race victories.
according to info on mustangsmustangs.com they are the same plane.
Believe what you want. You asked a question about the provinance of the airframe that Jimmy Leeward is currently racing, and I let you know what the story is/was.
Bottom line is there is no way to prove it either way if it is the same airframe that raced at Cleveland.
If I remember correctly, MustangsMustangs.com also lists the Griffon-powered Precious Metal (N6WJ) as the same airframe as the Merlin-powered Precious Metal (N5483V). It's been proven as absolute fact that they are a different airframe (with photos of both aircraft in the same shot to prove it) that only shared a tail section for one race in 1988. But the 'experts' out there know best, so it must be the same airframe, right?
If you take an airplane and put a million dollar zero time rebuild on it, is it still the same airframe? Is there anything left of the original airplane?
If you take an airplane and put a million dollar zero time rebuild on it, is it still the same airframe? Is there anything left of the original airplane?
TJ
TJ, that is a damn good point, how many airplanes out there have had accidents where the majority of the airframe if not all has been replaced... I know there has to be lots of cessna 180/185s out there that over time have had nearly every square inch replaced....
race fan, photographer with more cameras than a camera store
The speeds we are now approaching are affecting the handling qualities negatively on all the racers. As the center of pressure shifts aft on the wing the plane becomes pitch unstable. Planes like the Bear are running right up against their critical Mach number on the wing. Careful consideration goes into every flight depending on the air temperature and density. John can probably explain that beter than anyone. In the Mustangs we have a bit more room, but we are seeing the effects now as well. I haven't gone fast enough in a Sea Fury to see anything real negative yet. I am hoping that the Sea Fury will handle better at those higher speeds,but time will tell and soon I hope. We are going faster then any of the designers ever dreamed of going. In regards to pylon school. I would love to have plane up there to run it around and feel it out. I just don't know if there will be time.
The speeds we are now approaching are affecting the handling qualities negatively on all the racers. As the center of pressure shifts aft on the wing the plane becomes pitch unstable. Planes like the Bear are running right up against their critical Mach number on the wing. Careful consideration goes into every flight depending on the air temperature and density. John can probably explain that beter than anyone
This is interesting stuff. Can anyone here bring this to Mr. Penney's attention so he can enlighten us farther on this subject.
This is interesting stuff. Can anyone here bring this to Mr. Penney's attention so he can enlighten us farther on this subject.
Thank you Mr. Jackson for your posts,
Look around on youtube for a series of videos from Reno 2009. There is a four or five part interview with John, and he goes into a lot of detail regarding the wing on Rare Bear as well as what the wing mod did. He also talks about one year when the CG was so far aft he was having to push the stick forward in the turns. I'd put the links here but I can't youtube at work.
Awesome, yes. Likely? Far from it... The Ghosts short wings will keep it behind the front runners. How strong is its engine (assuming it's still the motor for 2011)? Who knows? Rumors have been wide-ranging on it's potential, but those in the know have indicated it's not an Allison rod fire-breather like Strega and Voodoo run. I think it certainly can go faster, but taking the gold will be a tall order.
Dago?? Only time will tell...but even if it has found its way into the hands of a competitor, is there enough time to get it ready for this year?
Ya, sure. Everyone knows short wings slow you down... Oh wait, what about Conquest 1, Rare Bear, Stiletto, Super Corsair, Cook Cleland's F2G, and Jeannie (now once again Galloping Ghost). Sure slowed them down alright...
Ya, sure. Everyone knows short wings slow you down... Oh wait, what about Conquest 1, Rare Bear, Stiletto, Super Corsair, Cook Cleland's F2G, and Jeannie (now once again Galloping Ghost). Sure slowed them down alright...
There are lots of examples of wing clips that slowed a plane down overall when it was on the course. Short is not always fast when you start adding the G's in the turns. There are lots of factors at play, wing loading, aspect ratio.... The fact is that you have to balance the small incremental reduction in drag when the wing is unloaded compared to the reduced efficiency of the smaller wing area and lower aspect ratio wing. Most wing clips on racers were at points that are structurally convient and not based on any actual engineering.
I'm actually surprised we aren't seeing more effort to alter the plan form at the end of the wing instead of just reducing the span.
I know Bill Rodgers was really interested in NASA research related to cresent wing plan forms.
Comment