Whiffs found on Facebook

[scooter]

A friend posted this on FaceBlock:
 

"This is the cover of an actual book, not satire as far as I can tell."

Yes, sadly, yes it is.  Here's the link to Barnes & Noble's page: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/books/1144043113?ean=9798859839476

Reviewers (on (Sc)Amazon) are appropriately scathing, with a particular theme: "Blutarsky was right!  The Germans bombed Pearl Harbor!"

[PR19_Kit]

They must be the longest ranged Fw190s on the planet! Or did the Luftwaffe have tankers in those days?

Now there's a good question, how DO you flight refuel a single engined prop plane?

(I'm already having ideas that include a few Airfix Lightning F2A kits...............)

[perttime]

...

Now there's a good question, how DO you flight refuel a single engined prop plane?
...

About the same as a four engined prop plane?


https://www.flightlineweekly.com/post/2019/10/30/air-to-air-refuelling-the-history

[Old Wombat]

Maybe it's a What If ... novel?

As is What If ... Nazi Germany actually built Graf Zeppelin, Peter Strasse, Jade, Elbe, Weser & at least one passenger ship conversion (Europa/Bremen) prior to WW2 & had carried out the attack on Pearl Harbour with Bf 109s, Ju 87s & torpedo-armed Fw 190s?

[jcf]

It's a self-published 80 page book for kids, done in honour of the authour's grandfather who was on Ford Island during the attack.

The cover is most likely AI generated and one of the truly weird parts is the black and white photo that is being revealed by scratching off the image of the Fw 190s. The photo is from a completely different point of view. 

[jcf]

It's also not Pearl Harbor and here's the image that was lifted to make the book cover. You cannot view this attachment.

[PR19_Kit]

About the same as a four engined prop plane?

Not sure that would work, unless it was a BIG single engined plane. The reason the looped hose system worked back then was because there were extra crew members to wind in the grappled hose and plug it into the receiver's fuel system.

[Rheged]

At the age of 8 (in 1934)   my mum went  to an air day at Carlisle (Kingstown) airfield.    Apart from a flight with her father in a Tiger Moth , sitting on his knee, not strapped in, she had watched a wing walkers display.  One of their party pieces was to lower cans of fuel from one aircraft to another .  The fuel was poured into the tank and the cans then thrown to the ground.  I can't imagine it as the usual  means  of refuelling a single engined aircraft but it seems to have worked

As an aside, how many health and safety rules were broken?

[scooter]

As an aside, how many health and safety rules were broken?

What H&S rules?  Ye Auld Dayes were a Darwinian field day.

[perttime]

About the same as a four engined prop plane?

Not sure that would work, unless it was a BIG single engined plane. The reason the looped hose system worked back then was because there were extra crew members to wind in the grappled hose and plug it into the receiver's fuel system.

Apparently, the Americans managed to automate it after WWII:

"After the war ended, the USAF bought a small number of FRL looped-hose units and fitted a number of B-29s as tankers to refuel specially equipped B-29s and later B-50s. The USAF made only one major change between the system used by the RAF. The USAF version had auto-coupling of the refuelling nozzle, where the leader line with the refuelling hose is pulled to the receiver aircraft and a refuelling receptacle on the belly of the aircraft, allowing high-altitude air-to-air refuelling and doing away with the aircraft having to fly to a lower altitude to be depressurised so a crew member could manually do the coupling."

[PR19_Kit]

Still difficult to do with a small single engined aircraft.

Probe and drogue with a LONG probe mounted on the wing clear of the prop would seem to be the only practical way to me.

[NARSES2]

Right I've just had to do something I both don't like doing and thankfully don't often have to do, but I will not tolerate people either making racist comments or basically accusing others of being racist, when they clearly aren't.

So let's get back to what this thread was intended for.

[tahsin]

No, I am not responsible for whatever happened to that F-35.

[Nick]

No, I am not responsible for whatever happened to that F-35.

If this was a Bond movie...

The F-35 was hijacked mid-air by remote control, the pilot forced to eject and then the stricken fighter made a safe landing out at sea on a large container ship. It (with other captured aircraft) will then be used to attack Russia/China/Iran/North Korea and start a major war against the USA. This is done by a cabal of insane criminals who plan to TAKE OVER THE WORLD! by reaping in billions from selling weapons and then taking over the ruined nations.

Or something like that. 

[Rheged]

No, I am not responsible for whatever happened to that F-35.

If this was a Bond movie...

The F-35 was hijacked mid-air by remote control, the pilot forced to eject and then the stricken fighter made a safe landing out at sea on a large container ship. It (with other captured aircraft) will then be used to attack Russia/China/Iran/North Korea and start a major war against the USA. This is done by a cabal of insane criminals who plan to TAKE OVER THE WORLD! by reaping in billions from selling weapons and then taking over the ruined nations.

Or something like that. 

i think you have successfully identified Hollywood standard thriller script 2 b.


i havn't got the F35 either.   I'll empty my pockets if they wish!