Brer alexander koryagin wrote to Brer Roy Witt about Re: 3xHa!:

 ak> From: alexander koryagin <koryagin@erec.ru>

 ak> Hi, Roy Witt!
 ak> I read your message from 28.10.2013 12:09

skipped ^

 ak>>>>> I read some years ago that an American Martian probe crashed on
 ak>>>>> its surface because the programmers mixed up miles and

 ak> <skipped>

 ak>>> I told you of NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter which crashed in 1999.
 ak>>> http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news...
 ak>>> article "Mars Mission's Metric Mixup"

 RW>> And I told you about the Soviet's doing it 30 years before.

 ak> We told about the problems connected with measuring systems. Those
 ak> Mars satellites are not connected with it. <skipped>

Nor, if the Soviets were using metrics, any part of the problem. Neither
was the dual use of metrics vs SAE any part of the US' Mars lander.

 ak>>> system and materials were different you would need to redraw the
 ak>>> full documentation from the scratch.

 RW>> True. And it would take an entire team of draftsmen to accomplish
 RW>> such a feat.
 ak>>> It could take months.
 RW>> Yeup, sometimes even longer if your changes were incorrect.

 ak> So, Tupolev didn't brought back the things they wanted from him,
 ak> giving him money. It was quite harsh time then. 

Never the less, he failed to get the complete information he needed to
build an airplane.

 ak> <skipped>

 RW>>>> We even take your 7.62mmx39mm AK-47 cartridges and convert them
 RW>>>> to SAE and they're made to NATO specs.

 ak>>> It's no wonder. The metric system was introduced in Russia after
 ak>>> 1917.

After it was 100 years old...

 ak>>> Before that time Russian weapon and shells were made in inches (or
 ak>>> units derived from it). So, we had "line" unit = 1/10 of inch; 3
 ak>>> lines calibers is 7.62 mm.

 RW>> Man, you guys sure make it hard on yourselves. 1/10 of an inch
 RW>> decimally is. 1 of an inch.. 1 x 3 =. 3 inch. But we require more
 RW>> accuracy in the specification, at least 3 places after the decimal
 RW>> point. So, 7.62 is not the size of the projectle. It actually
 RW>> measures. 308 inch which is actually 7.823mm, but we call it 7.62mm
 RW>> to satisfy the NATO standard. Working in fractions is taught here,
 RW>> but never used beyond the 3rd grade of primary school.

 ak> Our using a 1/10 inch unit before 1917 doesn't mean that me can't use
 ak> other units of measure.

Apparently your ancestors couldn't, as they failed.

 ak> Now we measure a caliber with millimeters and two points after the
 ak> decimal point. Therefore, we have a more fine graduation.

Really!? What is so fine about a demension that lacks the refinement of
three places after the decimal point? You can only hope that the person
who designed something in metrics did a proper rounding-off of a dimension
that may work for you.  As I have already pointed out, 7.62mm isn't the
actual dimension of .308 inch...

 ak> <skipped>

 RW>>>> their own. Even then, Soviet tanks, etc., where copies of
 RW>>>> American tanks and equipment, including airplances.
 ak>>> There was no need for that. Russian planes and tanks were superior
 ak>>> than Americans, everyone, who has some knowledge in weaponry,
 ak>>> knows such famous names as T-34 tank, Yak 3 and Yak 9 fighters.

 RW>> I'll give you the benefit of doubt on the tanks, but not the
 RW>> aircraft. Not until the Migs came along were Russian airplanes
 RW>> superior to anything. American planes were superior to German
 RW>> airplanes and you know how much better they were than any Russkie
 RW>> craft.

 ak> A groundless twaddle.

So you say. In reality, the Soviet aircraft was far inferior to the
American aircraft in the same class.

 RW>> Example: Here's a comparison of the Yak1 vs the NAA P-51 Mustang.
 RW>> These two aircraft first appeared in 1940, the P51 being larger and
 RW>> heavier thant the Yak1. In fact, the Yak1 looks like it is a direct
 RW>> copy of the Mustang, but in smaller form.
 RW>> And yet:

 RW>> Powerplant:
 RW>> Yak1 - 1 x Klimov M-105P V12 liquid-cooled inline engine delivering
 RW>> 1,180 horsepower.

 RW>> P-51 - 1 x Packard V-1650-7 Merlin piston engine generating 1,590hp.

 RW>> Conclusion: the P51 was more powerful.

 RW>> Maximum Speed:
 RW>> Yak1 368 mph (592 km/h) (320 kts)
 RW>> P51  437 mph (703 km/h) (380 kts)

 RW>> The P51 was faster.

 ak> You numbers have little sense.

Those aren't my numbers, they are facts provided by a website that can
make comparisons between aircraft of your choice. And if horsepower and
maximum speed is over your head, ask somebody who can make the comparison
by reading those facts.

 ak> For instance, you can also take a German tank "Tiger" and compare it
 ak> with T-34.

That would be silly, as the two aren't even in the same class.

 ak> In this case you would whine that Tiger has a more powerful gun,

It does.

 ak> a more powerful engine,

It does.

 ak>  a more strong armoring etc.

It does.

 ak> But in really, on a battle field, Tiger was easily bitten by T-34
 ak> because the latter was easier, more maneuverable, had more perfect
 ak> forms.

Yes, that is true as we learned to deal with the Tigers by ganging up on
them with our Sherman tanks, which your ancestors also copied into the
T34.

 ak> The same could be said for Russian Yaks fighters that overcame any
 ak> German fighters.

That's also debateable, as there were many Yaks that didn't.

 ak> Their maneuverability and fighting efficiency were extremely good.

The only superiority the Yak1 and it's sister Yak3 over the MEs was in
altitude acceleration...which the P-51 did even better.

 ak> In short, your comparison of Mustang and Yak senseless unless they
 ak> had some score fighting each other.

The Mustang does have a comparable score, in fighting the same German
aircraft, just in a different field of battle.

 ak> <skipped>

 ak>>> It's only after WW2, when the Americans captured fascist
 ak>>> constructors, they managed to construct some intricate machinery
 ak>>> and
 RW>> LOL! I can tell you're a product of Soviet propaganda... aka: Brain
 RW>> Washing...

 ak> Not Brain Washing,

Oh yes, brain washing. I put actual fact finding performance numbers in
front of you and you call them wild guesses...I win.

 ak> but Braun von Verner, whose rockets killed thousands. The Americans
 ak> saw neither blood on his hands nor his status of a SS officer.

We did, but realized that his was the expertise required to further our
own rocket science. We overlooked the fact that he was forced by his
superiors to do his duty towards his country, no matter how bad he thought
they were. Like everyone else in that situation, you sell out your
'druthers' to live another day...

 ak> BTW, in Germany there were many people who trained their skill by
 ak> killing innocent people in other ways.

Yeah...

 ak> For instance, there were doctors who tested different sorts of drags
 ak> on POWs and Jews.

You should rename those POWs, they were Soviet POWs. Americans and the
other allies weren't treated like Soviet POWs. Considering the way Soviet
troops acted when they invaded such places as eastern Poland, it's no
wonder that the Germans treated them the way they did.

 ak> I believe those doctors and their valuable materials were also moved
 ak> on the other side of the pond. Ir was impossible to refuse from them.

Nonsense. All of those people were tried, convicted and executed at
Nuremburg...

 ak> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Brau...

I know his past history.

 ak>>> even landed on the Moon before the USSR's Lunokhod. On the
 ak>>> modification of the rocket that bombed London.
 RW>> No, that was a rocket of our own design. I worked as a Tool & Die
 RW>> maker for the company that produced it.

 ak> Von Brown was the main designer of the American space program.
 ak> Probably, the US had no person to replace him.

More nonsense...just as Albert Einstein was known as the father of
the nuclear equation, Von Braun was known as the father of Rockety.

Einstein had a theory of nuclear reactions, but never worked on the
Manhatten Project. Instead a fellow scientist by the name of Fermi headed
up that project to its fruition in 1945.

Von Braun  was very much involved in the Saturn rocket design, but there
were many more rocket engineers that also contributed to that work.  And
it continues today with more improvements in design after his death in
1977...


         R\%/itt - K5RXT

 Reminder: "On Friday September 8th 2006, Mike Godwin's 16 year experiment
 was concluded and Godwin's Law was officially repealed by a MAJORITY vote
 among millions of individuals." http://repealgodwin.tripod.com/

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
--- D'Bridge 3.92
 * Origin: Lone-Star BBS - San Antonio, Texas - USA (1:387/22)