Aviation Legend Darryl Greenamyer
Wayne Sagar
years but resurfaced this year to race at the Reno Air Races...
It's just been released that he's to fly an Unlimited class airplane instead
of or in adition to the Sport class (kit built) plane he had planned on
entering..
It anyone is interested in the races and this story... drop by..
Hope this is not considered "spam" just wanted to let every one know what's
going on with one of the neatest guys in the world of fast airplanes..
Wayne Sagar
Kristoffer Åberg
Wayne Sagar <shor...@mydeja.com> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:spa4cb...@corp.supernews.com...
foxtro...@my-deja.com
"Kristoffer Åberg" <kristoff...@telia.com> wrote:
> Never heard of him...I guess it takes more to make a legend.
Kristoffer ,
If you don't know him or of him does not give you the right to act like
an idiot , as a wise person once said ,"Better to look an idiot than
open your mouth and prove it !"
I suggest that if you have nothing to say , then say nothing .
Stop.
I have not met Greenamyer but have heard of him , and hope to one day
chat to him .
John
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Dudley Henriques
"Kristoffer Åberg" <kristoff...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:hecl5.1574$HK.6...@newsc.telia.net...
> Never heard of him...I guess it takes more to make a legend.
Hi there , Kristoffer is it...sorry, don't know the name :-)
I have to admit that ole' DG doesn't actually see himself as a
legend.....more like a dinosaur I'd say, but I've sent your comment
along to him anyway. I'm sure he'll get a kick out of it.
Thanks,
--
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Craig
> Never heard of him...I guess it takes more to make a legend.
Yeah....DG only did this minor little thing.....setting the low
altitude speed record in his own specialy modified F-104.
But what do you care.
Craig
P. Wezeman
Mr. Greenamyer also set a new speed record for a piston
engine aircraft in 1972. The previous record had been standing
since 1939, when it was set by a special Messerschmidt racing
plane, the Me209, with full factory support.
Peter Wezeman, anti-social Darwinist
"Carpe Cyprinidae"
QDurham
>Greenamyer also set a new speed record for a piston engine aircraft in 1972.
The previous record had been standing since 1939, when it was set by a special
Messerschmidt racing plane, the Me209, with full factory support.>
IIRC, Hitler demanded that Messerschmidt take the record away from its previous
holder -- Howard Hughes. The Messerschmidt had no cooling but was packed in
(dry?) ice -- just making the required upwind and down wind runs without
blowing up.
Hughes offered (probably for a outrageous price) his plane to the US government
but was refused. The Japanese apparently copied much/most of the Hughes racer
into the Zero.
Is the Hughes plane on display someplace?
Looking forward to reading a decent/factual biography of Hughes. Tabloid media
garbage notwithstanding, Hughes is one of the most remarkable of Americans.
Quent
Jinxx1
into the Zero.<
Where does this come from???
All evidence points to the A6M being an indigenous design. It is no more a
copy of the Hughes racer than an F8F is a copy of an Fw 190!
Maiesm72
It's a variant of the Big Lie, kind of our own aviation version of urban
legend.
Goes back to the wartime idea that the Japanese were not capable of designing
their own aircraft.
As far as the original poster goes, do we have to insult him? If he has never
heard of Darryl Greenamayer he obviously is not interested in air racing, or at
least the history of air racing. Posts about DG's career can be informative to
all of us and the original poster can learn along with the rest of us.
My contribution: DG's F-104 was not "modified" for the record flight. He built
it virtually from left over spare parts as no one would sell a civilian an
F-104 at the time.
Tom
g_al...@hotmail.com
From what I recall, he dropped part or all of a J79-10 into it, so it
wasn't exactly stock. I forget why he did this. A friend of mine who's
an F-104 nut (and an engineer) ran into him at Mojave (I think) once,
and they spent some time yakking about the a/c and setting the record.
Buried back in Dejanews are some posts by my friend describing the
record runs and the mods, which I'll try to locate.
As to the Me-209V1 (aka "Me-109R"), the record was first taken by the
Heinkel 100V8, aka "He-112U", on 30 March 1939, @ 463.945mph. The
Me-209V1 then set the new record during April (not sure of the exact
date, @ 469.22mph. The 209 used evaporative cooling, with 48 gal. of
water onboard. Apparently the loss rate was in the neighborhood of 1
gal./minute in cruise, 1.5 gal./min. at full power.
Guy
bmcolwell
objected to !
"Maiesm72" <maie...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000812144830...@ng-bg1.aol.com...
Mathew Hamer
Air & Space.
Neat story about the F104 speed run - the sonic boom blew out car
headlights, and blew the contact lenses out of one woman spectator's eyes
.....
Now why don't they do these things ever near my house!
Regards, Matt
Wayne Sagar <shor...@mydeja.com> wrote in message
news:spa4cb...@corp.supernews.com...
C.C.Jordan
>>>The Japanese apparently copied much/most of the Hughes racer
>>into the Zero.<
>>
>>Where does this come from???
>>All evidence points to the A6M being an indigenous design. It is no more a
>>copy of the Hughes racer than an F8F is a copy of an Fw 190!
>
>It's a variant of the Big Lie, kind of our own aviation version of urban
>legend.
>
>Goes back to the wartime idea that the Japanese were not capable of designing
>their own aircraft.
Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that the Japanese were heavily influenced
by western technology and manufacturing methods. Can anyone explain why
they purchased the Vought (nee Northrop) V-143 and its tooling, if not to gain
technological insight? How much did the Lockheed 14 influence their designs?
Or the Seversky two seaters, for that matter. As far as I know, we only have
the word of the Japanese designers that the Zero was not influenced by the
purchased aircraft. How reliable can that be in light of the cultural proclivity
to save face above all else?
While we can say with certaincy that the Fw 190 was an indigenous design,
Kurt Tank admitted to being influenced by Palmer's H-1 layout, especially
the landing gear arrangement.
No aircraft designer functions in a vacuum. Every designer is influenced by
someone else's superior technology and incorporates these advances into
their designs. It's called "progress". The Japanese were no different. Moreover,
they were likely more dependent upon foreign technology that any other major
participant in WWII, considering that the industrialization of Japan occurred
much later than in western nations.
My regards,
C.C. Jordan
http://www.worldwar2aviation.com
http://www.cradleofaviation.org
Dudley Henriques
> No aircraft designer functions in a vacuum. Every designer is
influenced by
> someone else's superior technology and incorporates these advances
into
> their designs. It's called "progress". The Japanese were no different.
Moreover,
> they were likely more dependent upon foreign technology that any other
major
> participant in WWII, considering that the industrialization of Japan
occurred
> much later than in western nations.
I agree. Although Horikoshi was a brilliant designer, and led the
efforts of the Mitsubishi team, there can be no doubt that he was deeply
influenced by western designs. He had access, a creative mind, and the
intelligence to use any and all new developments in his design for the
Zero. Also, he was deeply advised by Genda, who came back from China in
38 to help with the development of the new fighter. Genda was a student
of western design and held high regard for what he had seen.
g_al...@hotmail.com
g_al...@hotmail.com wrote:
<snip>
> From what I recall, he dropped part or all of a J79-10 into it, so it
> wasn't exactly stock. I forget why he did this. A friend of mine
who's
> an F-104 nut (and an engineer) ran into him at Mojave (I think) once,
> and they spent some time yakking about the a/c and setting the record.
> Buried back in Dejanews are some posts by my friend describing the
> record runs and the mods, which I'll try to locate.
Apparently Dejanews is still "Temporarily" unable to access posts prior
to May 15, 1999. This has been the case for some time, so this may turn
out to be the same as "temporary" military housing.
From what I recall of the speed run Greenamyer was doing around 1,100
mph at the end of one of the passes, with the record at 979 and change.
I remember we discussed this on r.a.m., and my buddy felt it was
unlikely that any current a/c or any a/c of the period could break the
record (given the required condition of 4? passes), due to fuel and/or
available/sustained g limits. The 105 would lose too much speed in the
turns at the end of each pass, while anything with a turbofan would run
out of gas (bad sfc wet); in the case of the F-111, it's turn
rate/radius would run it out of fuel. Nowadays, such low altitude speed
runs are unlikely to be done by the military; they're just too damned
dangerous, and there's too little point.
Ron
>mph at the end of one of the passes, with the record at 979 and change.
Was that about M1.5??
Seems though the F model Vark would stand a chance. Granted it wouldnt turn
much at that speeds, but it should have the gas to make up for it.
What would a 105 top out at?
Now if i could only make the PA-34 I fly RATO or water injection equipped =)
Ron Chambless
Pilot PA-34 Seneca II
"Strange Situations, Wild Occupations. Living my life like a song"
Afwtul1
>heard of Darryl Greenamayer he obviously is not interested in air racing, or
>at
>least the history of air racing. Posts about DG's career can be informative
>to
>all of us and the original poster can learn along with the rest of us.
>
>My contribution: DG's F-104 was not "modified" for the record flight. He
>built
>it virtually from left over spare parts as no one would sell a civilian an
>F-104 at the time.
>
watched the PBS special on the Kee Bird. About the B-29 that was forced down on
an icecap in the 50's and abandon by the Air Force. Darryl Greenamyer
went up there and was going to fly it back to Thule, after months of
preperation, including, changing all four engines and recovering the flight
control surfaces in the under the most trying conditions. When she was taxiing
to takeoff, the APU caught fire and the Kee Bird burned. I video taped that
special and to see how damn close they came to having another flying B-29.
Jim
C.C.Jordan
>>The Japanese apparently copied much/most of the Hughes racer
>into the Zero.<
>
>Where does this come from???
>All evidence points to the A6M being an indigenous design. It is no more a
>copy of the Hughes racer than an F8F is a copy of an Fw 190!
Ah, but the F8F was very much influenced by the Focke Wulf. In September
of 1943, Roy Grumman, Bud Gillies and Bob Hall went to Britain, where Hall
and Gillies had a chance to fly and study a captured Fw 190A-4. Being very much
impressed with the 190, they returned to Long Island and began designing what
would become the F8F Bearcat. With a basic design on paper, Grumman pitched
the design to the Navy, which immediately ordered prototypes.
In the same manner, the Japanese tested the Vought V-143. Much of what was
learned was incorporated into their designs currently on the drawing board.
Heinemann's neat landing gear design was admittedly copied, as was the
cowling and oil cooler layout. Eugene Wilson, a top executive with United
Aircraft was allowed access to a captured A6M in late 1942. He was startled
to see that Mitsubishi had copied much from the V-143. In his book "Slipstream",
Wilson states: "The powerplant installation was distinctly Chance Vought
Aircraft, and the wheel stowage into the wing roots was definitely Northrop."
Wilson should know, he was deeply involved in the V-143 program as Vought's
General Manager.
Virtually all Japanese designs before 1935 were hugely dependent upon imported
designs and technology. Curtiss, Boeing, Nieuport, Junkers, Dornier, Hawker,
North American, Blackburn, Vought, Gloster and Henriot aircraft were all used,
borrowed or openly copied by Japanese designers. Perhaps even more telling,
the Japanese reverse-engineered engines to an extent marked by copying even
the engine inspection and data plates. Pratt & Whitney, Wright, Bristol, Salmson
and BMW engines were produced as nothing less than unlicensed copies. In
light of this, how can anyone seriously believe that the Zero was a completely
indigenous design? Such thinking defies logic and flies in the face of the
known facts. What do we believe, the word of Jiro Horikoshi or the great weight
of physical evidence?
Maiesm72
>to takeoff, the APU caught fire and the Kee Bird burned.
Someone please correct me if I got this wrong, but didn't the APU fire occur
when the five gallon fuel can used for the APU, which was hanging from bungee
chords, disloged and spilled fuel onto the running APU?
Tom
K129000
>
>
He was involved with (I think in charge of) the project to get the Kee-Bird,
B-29, out of the Northern Arctic circle. It is too bad this project didn't
work out.
He also set a low altitude speed record in an F-104 known as the Red Baron.
Sadly it crashed later on. :(
That is what I know him from.
K-129
Jack
> > > Never heard of him...
Didn't he also race a DC-6 or -7 at Reno?
Must have been something to see!
--
Jack
MAIL: < mailto:bar...@earthlink.net >
HOME: < http://home.earthlink.net/~baron58/index.html >
Afwtul1
>when the five gallon fuel can used for the APU, which was hanging from bungee
>chords, disloged and spilled fuel onto the running APU?
I believe so, but they did'nt quite clearly say that on the video, I believe
I read that somewhere.
Jim
Jinxx1
evidence? <
The case of the A6M has always been one of how it was "a copy" of this plane,
or that plane or some other plane. It ignores the experience that the Japanese
learned on the A5M and rests on a belief that because Japanese technology
learned from others, that the Zero must therefore be a copy. As you pointed
out, aviation technology builds upon that learned by others, but that does not
make the Zero a copy of the Hughes Racer or the V-143. By the same token, the
F-86 used a similar slat to some German designs and an axial flow engine. Does
that make it an Me 262? The BMW 801 grew out of experience (and over many
years) from BMW's license production of P&W engines, yet that does not make it
a R1830.
I feel that the extent of "copying" used in the A6M is more of myth than fact.
In some sense all airplanes share technology with others. There are only so
many possible, workable design philosophies. Give the Japanese credit where
credit is due.
Dudley Henriques
"Jack" <bar...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:39963D8A...@earthlink.net...
> > >Kristoffer Åberg wrote
>
> > > > Never heard of him...
>
> Didn't he also race a DC-6 or -7 at Reno?
I believe that would be Clay Lacy.
C.C.Jordan
>>What do we believe, the word of Jiro Horikoshi or the great weight of physical
>evidence? <
>
>The case of the A6M has always been one of how it was "a copy" of this plane,
>or that plane or some other plane. It ignores the experience that the Japanese
>learned on the A5M and rests on a belief that because Japanese technology
>learned from others, that the Zero must therefore be a copy.
I doubt that the Japanese learned much of anything from the A5M that they
didn't already glean from western designs. The A5M1 through A5M3 were not
especially noteworthy, other than being world's first monoplane carrier fighter.
Now, that may seem to be important, but it really isn't when you consider that
its performance was generally inferior to the Grumman F3F, which unlike the
Mitsubishi, had a retractable undercarriage. Of course, the Northrop XFT-1
was designed before the A5M, and it was a monoplane with fixed gear as
well. However, the Navy preferred the better performance of the Grumman
biplane. The A5M was the first carrier based monoplane by default.
>
>I feel that the extent of "copying" used in the A6M is more of myth than fact.
>In some sense all airplanes share technology with others. There are only so
>many possible, workable design philosophies. Give the Japanese credit where
>credit is due.
I have given you two specific examples of what Horikoshi copied. At least the
he admitted that the landing gear was taken straight from the Vought. However,
when we look at the engine installation, this cannot be viewed as minor. It
includes frame, accessories, exhaust, cowling and cooler ducting. Essentially,
everything from the firewall forward. Not even the engine, nor the
constant-speed propeller was of original Japanese design. How then, can
you argue that "the extent of 'copying' used in the A6M is more of myth than
fact"?
Beyond the actual aircraft, the paper trail is extensive as well. Have you
(or anyone else here) seen the report of the Pearl Harbor Committee? I have seen
portions of the report and it cites specific Japanese documents that connect the
dots between the A6M and technology purchased from Vought, Northrop and
Douglas. One of the Committee's conclusions is striking in that it states that
without purchased American technology (specifically the V-143), the A6M
could not have been developed in the form that appeared in 1940. I was unable
to obtain a copy of the report during my last visit to College Park. Next time,
I will be sure to do so.
Now, after all is said and done, there is no question that Horikoshi design team
borrowed extensively from the V-143. However, the basic design of the A6M1
was focused on an entirely different concept, specifically tailored to Japanese
needs. In this regard, the Japanese can be complimented on a superlative,
if overly frail fighter, that owed much to American technology and Japanese
innovation. Certainly, the Japanese deserve credit where due, but on the other
hand, don't hand out the accolades without an honest analysis of the facts.
The idea that some present, that the Zero was a totally indigenous design is
as misleading as saying that they simply copied the V-143. Neither is correct.
Once the war began, and the Japanese were isolated from western technology
(with the exception of the Germany's limited contribution), the Japanese
aviation industry quickly fell behind and never had a chance to catch up.
That speaks volumes about how important designs like the V-143 were to
Japanese aviation in the late 1930s.
My regards,
My regards,
Jinxx1
Japanese aviation in the late 1930s.<
C.C.
Never the less, the A6M was not a "copy". Influenced by others, maybe, but not
"copied". Looking at the specs on the V-143, it was not a great performer.
(Ironically, the Vought website http://www.vought.com/ has very little on the
aircraft) It was condidered "obsolete" when sold to Japan. I think you could
make a far better case that the BMW 801 was a "copy" of a P&W R1830, but even
that comparison is very tenuous.
I wonder how much the Ki 61 was influenced by the He 100? As a kid in the I
remember reading of pilots reffering to Ki- 61s as Me 109s! It seemed that
little credit could be given to the Japanese, as their technology had to have
come from others. They certainly never developed their powerplants past a
certain point, but there is great danger in underestimating the capability of
others. Fortunately few others ever built anything that rivaled the R2800!
CB
C.C.Jordan
>>That speaks volumes about how important designs like the V-143 were to
>Japanese aviation in the late 1930s.<
>
>C.C.
>
>Never the less, the A6M was not a "copy". Influenced by others, maybe, but not
>"copied". Looking at the specs on the V-143, it was not a great performer.
>(Ironically, the Vought website http://www.vought.com/ has very little on the
>aircraft) It was condidered "obsolete" when sold to Japan.
Thanks to author Warren Bodie, I have just about the second best collection
of original V-143 factory materials in existance. I have the massive company
sales brochure. I have copies of hand written test reports. I have dozens of
photos, and factory performance figures. So, let's compare the V-143 to the
A6M1 and the Ki-43-I.
Maximum speed:
V-143: 311 mph (specs on the Vought website are for the V-141)
A6M1: 312 mph
Ki-43: 306 mph
Climb rate:
V-143: 3,225 fpm
A6M1: 3,050 fpm
Ki-43: 3,100 fpm
Maximum range, internal fuel:
V-143: 860 miles
A6M1: 1,127 miles
Ki-43: 808 miles
Armament:
V-143: 2 x .30 mgs (provision for one Oerlikon 20 mm cannon in each wing)
A6M1: 2 x 7.7 mm mgs and 2 x 20 mm cannon
KI-43: 2 x 7.7 mm mgs
If we stop here, we see that there is little to distinguish from these three
aircraft, especially in terms of performance. Generally unknown is the fact that
the Vought gave up nothing to the Japanese fighters in maneuverability.
Having a maximum gross weight wing loading of 23.4 lbs per sq/ft was
not quite as good as the Zero's 22 lbs per sq/ft. But it was better than
that of the Ki-43-I which came in at just over 24 lbs per sq/ft. Vought test
pilot Paul Baker, who did the majority of the V-143 test flights, later flew
a captured A6M2 and wrote, without hesitation: "I would classify the V-143
as the equal to the Zero in turn rate. I was surprised at the severe effect
that high speed had upon the ailerons of the Zero. The V-143's ailerons
displayed a more progressive increase in required force, and owing to
the advanced slot design, the ailerons are fully effective from below stall
through Vne. Any stiffening was linear as opposed to the Zero's ailerons,
which were completely ineffective above 300 mph indicated." (letter to
S.A. McClellan dated July 8, 1944. Courtesy of Warren Bodie)
>I wonder how much the Ki 61 was influenced by the He 100?
I would imagine that the Japanese had many other examples of V-12
powered fighters with ventral radiators that may have influenced them
as well. But yes, I have also wondered about the similarities between the
two designs.
>As a kid in the I
>remember reading of pilots reffering to Ki- 61s as Me 109s!
Word spread throughout the American military that Germany had been
sending Bf 109s to Japan. Since most pilots had never seen a Bf 109,
it should not be surprising that some would identify the Tony as a
Messerschmitt. Of course, it didn't take long to properly identify the
aircraft once a downed example was inspected. My question is; how
did the Ki-61 evolve into a super-fighter with the installation of a relatively
low powered, ill-fitting radial engine? The myth of the Ki-100 perhaps
even exceeds the A6M in false superlatives. That it was more than
100 mph slower than the P-47N fails to dissuade the advocates of Japanese
aviation, who swear it was a world class fighter. Of course, the fact that it
offered no performance improvement on the Ki-61 is ignored. Then we have
the Ki-84 Hayate. The Japanese advocates gleefully report that the Frank
could pull 426 mph. However, they carefully avoid the truth, which is that
this was done in a captured fighter, stripped of paint and using 100-130
avgas. Consider that Japan couldn't refine any fuel with an octane rating
greater than 87, which would not allow the Ki-84 to do much better than 390 mph
in Japanese service.
Let's face it, much of the "data" bantered around concerning the Japanese
fighters is fiction. How fast was the A6M2? Most sources cite 330 -335 mph.
In reality, the Model 11 could barely approach 315 mph. The same goes
for the A6M5, which is repeated reported to exceed 355 mph. Again, those
in service were hard pressed to get beyond 330 mph. Even as early as the
Pearl Harbor attack, the Zero was found not to be very fast. George Welch caught
one in a stern chase with relative ease. Welch was flying a P-40B. Later, over
New Guinea, Welch wrote that the lowly P-39 "could quickly outrun the Zeros
at lower altitudes." There is much disinformation out there and no small amount
came from the Japanese themselves.
>It seemed that
>little credit could be given to the Japanese, as their technology had to have
>come from others.
Perhaps that is because most of it did come from others.
>They certainly never developed their powerplants past a
>certain point, but there is great danger in underestimating the capability of
>others.
By the same token, we should not attribute the Japanese as designing
purely indigenous aircraft without understanding that very little aviation
technology was of Japanese origin. They cleverly used available technology in
their designs. Can anyone isolate a single example of aviation technology
that can be viewed as exclusively Japanese in concept or origin? Just one.
Dav1936531
<39975466....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>
>(C.C.Jordan) wrote:
>Can anyone isolate a single example of aviation technology that can be viewed
as exclusively Japanese in concept or origin? Just one.<
Yeah, I think they invented the first bio-computer guided anti-ship cruise
missle, although during WWII, the USN did have a program to teach pigeons to
guide bombs to target. The plan was to put a trained pigeon behind a little
window in the nose of a bomb. The pigeon would keep the bomb on target by
pecking at its view of the ship. Some type of electrical feedback control
system was supposed to move the bomb's control surfaces. :)
Dave
David Lednicer
-Flying the F8F-2 Conquest I, he won the Unlimited Class at Reno
numerous (8?) times in the 1960s and early 1970s. He also won in
1978(?), flying the Red Baron RB-51.
-In 1968 he attempted to set the FAI 3km prop speed record in
Conquest I, but suffered an engine failure.
-In 1969 he was succesful in breaking the FAI 3km prop speed
record, with a speed of 482.462 mph. This record was broken by
Steve Hinton, flying the RB-51, in 1979.
-The RB-104 was built up out of pieces he bought. It was a
mixture of parts from all models of -104, including reaction
controls from the NF-104. The engine was quietly supplied by the
USN. It was a one-of-a-kind -104.
-In 1976 he first flew the RB-104 and attempted to set the FAI
3/5km jet speed record, but suffered a timing camera failure.
-In 1977 he tried again and succesfully broke the record, with a
speed of 988.26 mph. This record stills stands.
-In 1978, preparing for an altitude record attempt in the RB-104,
he had landing gear problems and had to bail out. The aircraft
was totaled (I have pieces of it).
-He was a test pilot for the Lockheed Skunk Works for part of the
1960s and 1970s. He made the first flight of several SR-71s and
also flew the "big tail" SR-71 mod. He left Lockheed in the late
1970s and became an aircraft broker.
-He owned Mr. Awesome, a highly modifed Yak that raced at Reno in
the 1980s. After he sold the aircraft, it was wiped out in a
crash by Neal Anderson.
-In the early 1990s, he tried to rescue Kee Bird, a B-29 that had
been abandoned on the Greenland icecap. Unfortunately, a fire
broke out when it was being taxied on the ice and the aircraft
was totaled.
-He was building an all-new Unlimited, Shockwave, but ran short
of money. Wally Fisk bought it up, but decided to not proceed
with it, so Greenamyer has it back. I designed the cowl
several years ago and worked helping Andy Chiavetta build it this
spring.
-With Andy, he's now getting a Lancair Legacy ready for this
year's Reno.
-According to AAFO, he will also be flying the Unlimited Voodoo
at Reno this year.
(Sorry if I'm off on some of the years, my memory has reached
saturation and numbers have been the first to go)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Scott Vetter
engine was modified to use a water alcohol injection for additional thrust.
Unfortunately this -104 was lost since he couldn't get the landing gear to
extend and ejected.
Darrell is also known for trying to fly out a B-29 out of Greenland only to have
it catch on fire. He also lost another plane out of central America I believe.
Scott
--------
Maiesm72 wrote:
> >>The Japanese apparently copied much/most of the Hughes racer
> >into the Zero.<
> >
> >Where does this come from???
> >All evidence points to the A6M being an indigenous design. It is no more a
> >copy of the Hughes racer than an F8F is a copy of an Fw 190!
>
> It's a variant of the Big Lie, kind of our own aviation version of urban
> legend.
>
> Goes back to the wartime idea that the Japanese were not capable of designing
> their own aircraft.
>
> As far as the original poster goes, do we have to insult him? If he has never
> heard of Darryl Greenamayer he obviously is not interested in air racing, or at
> least the history of air racing. Posts about DG's career can be informative to
> all of us and the original poster can learn along with the rest of us.
>
> My contribution: DG's F-104 was not "modified" for the record flight. He built
> it virtually from left over spare parts as no one would sell a civilian an
> F-104 at the time.
>
> Tom
Scott Vetter
broke while taxiing. Ironically all the tools and fire extinguishers were in the
same compartment.
Scott
----------
ludic.f...@gmail.com
He piloted an SR-71 at the end of his time at Lochheed once and was allowed to do so out of charity if you ask me.
Darryl sat in an SR-71 on four occasions in his entire time at Lockheed. He taxied one once and sat in the RSO seat twice plus that one flight.
Other than that I believe his function in the program was to be a chase plane pilot and other similar piloting duties.
Darryl is not an engineer despite finishing TPS.
Darryl is a HOTDOG and an IDIOT who has cost people their lives and has lost aircraft simply due to his ego and arrogance.
I also don't believe his story about the RB-104 landing gear failing to deploy and I think he ditched it on purpose.
In summery I think Darryl Greenamayer is a SCAM ARTIST, HOTDOG and an ASSHOLE.
I'm also certain he comes from money...
Basically a rich kid f'ing around and a HOTDOG!
Andrew Chaplin
news:c56d3051-3a2e-40d7...@googlegroups.com:
> On Monday, August 14, 2000 12:00:00 AM UTC-7, David Lednicer wrote:
>> Lets set the story straight on Darryl Greenamyer:
>
> Lochheed are bullshit.
>
> He piloted an SR-71 at the end of his time at Lochheed once and was
> allowed to do so out of charity if you ask me.
>
> Darryl sat in an SR-71 on four occasions in his entire time at
> Lockheed. He taxied one once and sat in the RSO seat twice plus that
> one flight.
>
> Other than that I believe his function in the program was to be a chase
> plane pilot and other similar piloting duties.
>
> Darryl is not an engineer despite finishing TPS.
>
> Darryl is a HOTDOG and an IDIOT who has cost people their lives and has
> lost aircraft simply due to his ego and arrogance.
>
> I also don't believe his story about the RB-104 landing gear failing to
> deploy and I think he ditched it on purpose.
>
> In summery I think Darryl Greenamayer is a SCAM ARTIST, HOTDOG and an
> ASSHOLE.
>
> I'm also certain he comes from money...
>
> Basically a rich kid f'ing around and a HOTDOG!
and defensible, then document it and amend Greenamyer's page in Wikipedia.
Otherwise, you should avoid libeling him.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)
Dudley Henriques
I've copied it out and pasted it up on a wall here at the office. If I gave you a list of the aviation brain power getting a belly laugh over this this morning you'd never believe me so I won't even try. :-))))))
Anyway, thanks a bunch. Trust me, this will be passed on to the appropriate people.
No problem for you intended. Just fun for us.
Dudley Henriques