4 ms·

It is interesting that so much of history isn't what we think it is. For example, who broke the sound barrier first? Of course, it was Chuck Yeager in Glamorous

It is interesting that so much of history isn't what we think it is. For example, who broke the sound barrier first? Of course, it was Chuck Yeager in Glamorous Glennis, the rocket powered Bell X-1 named after his wife. Or was it? The book "Aces Wild" [1] says that it was unofficially broken before that in an XP-86 (The experimental F-86, a jet powered fighter) in a dive, and witnesses on the ground heard sonic booms before Yeager's flight that day. But history favors the hero's, and in this case, the science: We know 100% for sure, because of science, that Yeager officially broke the sound barrier first. It is quite possible that the F-86 test pilots who stuck their planes in a dive likely did it first. It is well documented that the F-86 was capable of Mach 1 in a dive. Even so, that's not what the history books say, so that's not what we teach kids in school. I suspect it'll always be the same with the F14 computer vs the Intel 4004. [1] https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-whodunit-180958702/ https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-whoduni...

breput 6y ago
There were many cases of pilots breaking the sound barrier in a dive prior to the X-1, even during World War II, and even some of them living to tell the tale. That was never in dispute. The point of the X-1 has always been that it was the first human piloted plane that broke the sound barrier in level, controlled, and repeatable flight.
- na85 6y ago
  >There were many cases of pilots breaking the sound barrier in a dive prior to the X-1, even during World War II, Aerospace engineer and amateur WWII historian here: I'm not aware of any credible claims from that era. The only WWII-era claims to have broken the sound barrier (by piloted craft) I've seen can be attributed to poor pitot tube design which gives erroneously high indicated airspeed readings when the ram pressure gets high enough. A reconnaissance Spitfire I believe is what got closest, at something like .9 of Mach measured by a fancy pitot system at the RAF test establishment.
  - redis_mlc 6y ago
    As usual, the Germans were first, with the V-2 reaching Mach 5 in the 1940's, which was to an extent controllable (they landed in England.) For an airplane to reach Mach 1, this mainly requires thin wings and enough power/dive. To control it, you need a flying tail, and swept wings and "waisting" the fuselage reduces the amount of power needed. So almost all of the planes in WW2 were "too thick" and incapable of supersonic flight, though could have exceeded Mach 1 with modified wings, tail and in a dive. The US P-80 (1945) and F-86 (1949) jets had underpowered engines, in the sense that all early jet engines had limited power. However the F-86 had swept wings, and later versions of the F-86 had a flying tail, so if you pointed it at the ground, you could get a sonic boom without losing control. Source: I study aerodynamics.
    - redis_mlc 6y ago
      Great article: Air & Space Magazine: Mach 1: Assaulting the Barrier (1990) https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-assaulting-the-barrier-22647052/?page=1 https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-assault...
  - marcodiego 6y ago
    Aerospace engineer and amateur historian... nice! Would you enlighten us about the main problems with Hans Guido Mutke claims?
    - geocrasher 6y ago
      From Wikipedia: " Compressibility in pitot tubes of the time often resulted in exaggerated speed readings near the speed of sound, particularly in German equipment, which was adversely affected by supply shortages as the war progressed" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Guido_Mutke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Guido_Mutke In other words, it's the same problem that the piston-engined aircraft of the time had: Anomalous readings at high speed.
    - na85 6y ago
      It basically boils down to the fact that machmeters hadn't been invented yet, because the physics of supersonic flight wasn't sufficiently understood back then. Shock waves develop inside the pitot tube under certain conditions, and that causes a spike (or sometimes a drop) in pressure which is interpreted by the instrument as a corresponding rise or drop in airspeed. Edit: as for the 262 claim itself it was pretty handily debunked in a post-war NACA technical note. If you dig around on the NTRS you can find it.
- navinojha 6y ago
  tuyiy
  - navinojha 6y ago
    uouio
saltyshake 6y ago
Or running speed records. I heard many stories from veterans that during ranher training they did numbers better than the official Olympic records.
- gameswithgo 6y ago
  rangers aren’t above being delusional
hapless 6y ago
The X-1 could break the sound barrier in level flight. That is to say, it could move across geography, in a measurable way, faster than the speed of sound. Creating a sonic boom in a deep and dangerous dive is an interesting quirk in a fighter, but it doesn’t set new speed records that would interest the general population.
msla 6y ago
> Or was it? Yes, it was. Betteridge's Law strikes again.

breput 6y ago

There were many cases of pilots breaking the sound barrier in a dive prior to the X-1, even during World War II, and even some of them living to tell the tale. That was never in dispute. The point of the X-1 has always been that it was the first human piloted plane that broke the sound barrier in level, controlled, and repeatable flight.

na85 6y ago
>There were many cases of pilots breaking the sound barrier in a dive prior to the X-1, even during World War II, Aerospace engineer and amateur WWII historian here: I'm not aware of any credible claims from that era. The only WWII-era claims to have broken the sound barrier (by piloted craft) I've seen can be attributed to poor pitot tube design which gives erroneously high indicated airspeed readings when the ram pressure gets high enough. A reconnaissance Spitfire I believe is what got closest, at something like .9 of Mach measured by a fancy pitot system at the RAF test establishment.
- redis_mlc 6y ago
  As usual, the Germans were first, with the V-2 reaching Mach 5 in the 1940's, which was to an extent controllable (they landed in England.) For an airplane to reach Mach 1, this mainly requires thin wings and enough power/dive. To control it, you need a flying tail, and swept wings and "waisting" the fuselage reduces the amount of power needed. So almost all of the planes in WW2 were "too thick" and incapable of supersonic flight, though could have exceeded Mach 1 with modified wings, tail and in a dive. The US P-80 (1945) and F-86 (1949) jets had underpowered engines, in the sense that all early jet engines had limited power. However the F-86 had swept wings, and later versions of the F-86 had a flying tail, so if you pointed it at the ground, you could get a sonic boom without losing control. Source: I study aerodynamics.
  - redis_mlc 6y ago
    Great article: Air & Space Magazine: Mach 1: Assaulting the Barrier (1990) https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-assaulting-the-barrier-22647052/?page=1 https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach-1-assault...
- marcodiego 6y ago
  Aerospace engineer and amateur historian... nice! Would you enlighten us about the main problems with Hans Guido Mutke claims?
  - geocrasher 6y ago
    From Wikipedia: " Compressibility in pitot tubes of the time often resulted in exaggerated speed readings near the speed of sound, particularly in German equipment, which was adversely affected by supply shortages as the war progressed" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Guido_Mutke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Guido_Mutke In other words, it's the same problem that the piston-engined aircraft of the time had: Anomalous readings at high speed.
  - na85 6y ago
    It basically boils down to the fact that machmeters hadn't been invented yet, because the physics of supersonic flight wasn't sufficiently understood back then. Shock waves develop inside the pitot tube under certain conditions, and that causes a spike (or sometimes a drop) in pressure which is interpreted by the instrument as a corresponding rise or drop in airspeed. Edit: as for the 262 claim itself it was pretty handily debunked in a post-war NACA technical note. If you dig around on the NTRS you can find it.
navinojha 6y ago
tuyiy
- navinojha 6y ago
  uouio

saltyshake 6y ago

Or running speed records. I heard many stories from veterans that during ranher training they did numbers better than the official Olympic records.

gameswithgo 6y ago
rangers aren’t above being delusional

hapless 6y ago

The X-1 could break the sound barrier in level flight. That is to say, it could move across geography, in a measurable way, faster than the speed of sound. Creating a sonic boom in a deep and dangerous dive is an interesting quirk in a fighter, but it doesn’t set new speed records that would interest the general population.

msla 6y ago

> Or was it? Yes, it was. Betteridge's Law strikes again.