Another Stunning Air Force Announncement!

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:53 am

Jack Cook wrote:

BTW Memphis Belle was second and PB was a mean old fart :shock:

Ha Ha that's below the belt. :lol:

k5083 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:34 am

fritzthefox wrote:

I've noticed that throughout history, it isn't so much a matter of who's first but whose the first to get it in writing, or on film, or otherwise in the public eye. This seems especially true of inventors, who often die in poverty and obscurity while the first robber-baron to take their idea to the marketplace becomes a household name. Why is it so much more memorable to be the first man to step on the moon than the second, when both guys landed at the same time? Because ol' Neil was caught on film and broadcast all over the world, that's why.

Yeager may or may not been the first to break the sound barrier: but he was the first one that everyone heard about breaking it. This fact has helped Yeager amass a merchandising empire worth millions.

It's just as important to be loud as it is to be first.

Fritz, you're quite right. Any "first" in aviation (the Wrights, Lindbergh, Yeager, Memphis Belle, whatever) and in any other field is socially constructed. It contains elements of real achievement, lots of qualifiers, disclaimers and "fine print", and self-promotion (or promotion by other interested parties). Any famous invention or "first" examined closely in context turns out to be not as impressive as it is touted.

So any invention, "first" or record is debatable and debates then occur because there are some people who like to build up heroes and "honor" them and then there are others who like to tear them down. You can see both personality types on display here. Neither is right or wrong, it's a question of how you see the world.

mustangdriver wrote:

After the sound barrier run, the Navy challenged the USAF record y stating that the X-1 was not really an aircraft that could take off on it's own. So Yeager got the order to try and take off in the X-1 like a conventional aircraft would. He did so which was no small trick because the landing gear of the X-1 was not really built to handle the weight of the X-1 loaded with fuel.

Of course, that stunt not having been done on the sound barrier run itself, it never stood any chance of convincing the Navy or anyone else that Yeager and the X-1 deserved FAI recognition.

mustangdriver wrote:

Official proof matters the most because, well, it's truth. Try and win a court case without oficial proof, and see how far you get.

That last sentence is utter nonsense. Just so you know.

August

bipe215 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:00 am

Mustangdriver said:

I am not saying that George isn't a great pilot. He just wasn't first.

Now you've gone and left off the one word that you have always used for your arguement: "Officially" You CAN say George wasn't OFFICIALLY first, you can't say he wasn't first.

Steve G

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:37 am

k5083 wrote:

fritzthefox wrote:

I've noticed that throughout history, it isn't so much a matter of who's first but whose the first to get it in writing, or on film, or otherwise in the public eye. This seems especially true of inventors, who often die in poverty and obscurity while the first robber-baron to take their idea to the marketplace becomes a household name. Why is it so much more memorable to be the first man to step on the moon than the second, when both guys landed at the same time? Because ol' Neil was caught on film and broadcast all over the world, that's why.

Yeager may or may not been the first to break the sound barrier: but he was the first one that everyone heard about breaking it. This fact has helped Yeager amass a merchandising empire worth millions.

It's just as important to be loud as it is to be first.

Fritz, you're quite right. Any "first" in aviation (the Wrights, Lindbergh, Yeager, Memphis Belle, whatever) and in any other field is socially constructed. It contains elements of real achievement, lots of qualifiers, disclaimers and "fine print", and self-promotion (or promotion by other interested parties). Any famous invention or "first" examined closely in context turns out to be not as impressive as it is touted.

So any invention, "first" or record is debatable and debates then occur because there are some people who like to build up heroes and "honor" them and then there are others who like to tear them down. You can see both personality types on display here. Neither is right or wrong, it's a question of how you see the world.

mustangdriver wrote:

After the sound barrier run, the Navy challenged the USAF record y stating that the X-1 was not really an aircraft that could take off on it's own. So Yeager got the order to try and take off in the X-1 like a conventional aircraft would. He did so which was no small trick because the landing gear of the X-1 was not really built to handle the weight of the X-1 loaded with fuel.

Of course, that stunt not having been done on the sound barrier run itself, it never stood any chance of convincing the Navy or anyone else that Yeager and the X-1 deserved FAI recognition.

mustangdriver wrote:

Official proof matters the most because, well, it's truth. Try and win a court case without oficial proof, and see how far you get.

That last sentence is utter nonsense. Just so you know.

August

August in a court of law as this is being compared to, you can't just walk in and say "My client didn't kill anyone. I know because he said so." Well then guys never mind all of the evidence that we have against him, if he said he didn't do it, then it's all good and done. The Navy said the X-1 is not a real airplane because it can't take off on it's own power. Yeager did just that, and now that isn't good enought. Well too bad. The first to fly with the measuring equipment would be first to hold the record. Everyone knew it. You guys are all up on the fact that George did it before Yeager as if that was something that the USAF couldn't have done. "The X-1 was ready to go, but without the equipment there was no point in flying it because the record wouldn't count." Chuck Yeager told me that himself face to face. That is good enough for me.

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:02 pm

Quote:

"The X-1 was ready to go, but

Goodlin was holding out for more $$$$$

Quote:

August in a court of law as this is being compared to, you can't

You're really arguing law with a attorney? :?:

k5083 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:05 pm

Honestly MD, your credibility takes a hit when you say bizarre things about which you have no expertise. You'd be better off not talking about court cases. Seriously.

As to Yeager, an airplane that can break the sound barrier one day and can take off on its own another day (in identical configuration? yeah, sure) is not an airplane that can take off on its own and break the sound barrier, and everyone knows that. It just comes down to, are you a Yeager booster or a somebody-else booster.

August

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:33 pm

k5083 wrote:

Honestly MD, your credibility takes a hit when you say bizarre things about which you have no expertise. You'd be better off not talking about court cases. Seriously.

As to Yeager, an airplane that can break the sound barrier one day and can take off on its own another day (in identical configuration? yeah, sure) is not an airplane that can take off on its own and break the sound barrier, and everyone knows that. It just comes down to, are you a Yeager booster or a somebody-else booster.

August

Your right, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a pilot. My credibility takes a hit? Why because I don't agree with you. I was trying to compare things to a court of law like someon had earlier. I never said I was a lawyer, or an expert. If you don't believe what was said about the Yeager X-1 take off which is indicated in your above post, all I can tell you is to go talk to Yeager yourself. That's what I did.

PinecastleAAF · **Joined:** Fri May 25, 2007 4:50 pm **Posts:** 1028

Hello All,

It is almost at the point I regret asking the question but thanks for the insight. Everyone has good points. The official vs. unofficial thing can be argued forever. Both men have and deserve a place in aviation history as they are both darn impressive pilots.

Thanks!

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:02 pm

Quote:

go talk to Yeager yourself. That's what I did

The one open minded person who could settle this fairly once and for all :shock:

k5083 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:05 pm

mustangdriver wrote:

Your right, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a pilot. My credibility takes a hit? Why because I don't agree with you. I was trying to compare things to a court of law like someon had earlier. I never said I was a lawyer, or an expert.

And I am not a pilot, so I don't talk on this forum about how to fly, because I would probably say absurd things and look like an idiot. And if I then said, "but I never said I was a pilot or an expert on flying," it wouldn't repair the damage. It would just be disingenuous, because in adult conversation, when one makes an assertion about something, one implies that he knows what he is talking about, and it would also establish that nothing that I say can be taken seriously because I have demonstrated a penchant for asserting things of which I am ignorant.

And Yeager, like Jack says, is neither expert nor unbiased as to whether his flight qualifies for FAI recognition. You're just name-dropping.

August

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:13 pm

I'm name dropping? WTF No I did an interview with him, and talked to him about this. Is that name dropping. It's one thing to disagree and another to insult someone. Until you can seperate the two I have no need to talk to you.

k5083 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:08 pm

Heh. Okay, if you're cool with the rest of my post, then the least I can do is withdraw the name-dropping comment, with apologies.

August

Ztex · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:32 pm

Gee whiz fellas! Take it easy.
I know the score with the sound barrier thing. I'll bet there were several guys in WWII that broke it and didn't survive to tell about it...heck there may have been a few that did live and didn't know exactly what happened...

Yeager gets the credit because he was official. I won't take anything away from the guy.
He did his duty and flew the danged thing...I don't know if I would strap on a Bell X-1 and light it.

I just think that everyone should get their credit when it is due. Heck George wasn't "supposed" to do what he did...but he did it anyway.

BTW (the first woman to officially break the sound barrier was flying an...F-86! )

I'm just trying to have some fun.

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:51 pm

Quote:

Heck George wasn't "supposed" to do what he did...

that came right from the secretary of the AF himself! to much time and $$ into the X-1 not to mention the embarrassment to the AF itself.

AirJimL2 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:52 pm

Ztex wrote:

BTW (the first woman to officially break the sound barrier was flying an...F-86! )

Not really...she was flying a Canadair Sabre.

Jim

P.S.:

mustangdriver wrote:

Try and win a court case without oficial proof, and see how far you get.

I guess I'm not a very good lawyer or something, because I have no idea what "official proof" is. Guess I better go back to law school.

Warbird Information Exchange

Another Stunning Air Force Announncement!

Who is online