🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:03:31 GMT, "Xan" <me@1.com> wrote:

>"br d" <misterbCOCKNEYTWAT@nildram.co.uk> wrote in message 
>news:7145i1tngonjfqq8jeg0qnftrobomb7msn@4ax.com...
>> I recently went to Bruntingthorpe near Leicester to watch a friend
>> doing one of those Ferrari track days. There was a bunch of
>> enthusiasts on the grounds there who were renovating a Lightning, got
>> chatting to one of them. I'm a lover of nice cars (hence the Skoda)
>> but talking specifications with this bloke just blew me away. The
>> Lightning used 3 gallons of fuel a second, has - wait for it - 60,000
>> bhp!!! (equivalent), and on 5 tons of fuel could only stay airborne
>> for half an hour. 40 minutes if the pilot was 'taking it easy'.
>
>That's nothing. An SR-71 needs refueling shortly after takeoff. It outputs 
>160,000 bhp and maxes out at 2193.167 mph @ 85,068.997 ft. Where's a ZPM when 
>you need it? =P

Yeah well that's pretty impressive I spose, but don't forget the
Lightning came into service in the 50's.

I actually know nothing about aircraft (which is unusual, because I'm
a complete expert on absolutely everything else) but my Brother-in-Law
is ex Air force and a real brain on it all. I like to draw outlines of
planes I've seen and show him them, he normally gets it in about .1 of
a second.

It can be very quiet around here sometimes.

br d