• sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Here’s an article about it. The tl;dr is: test pilot shoots at ocean, kicks in afterburners, bullets start out faster, but slow quickly. They reunite in mid-air and sparks fly.

    • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      What I don’t get is… I mean, the relative speed difference between the bullets and the plane just doesn’t seem like it would be enough to cause them to rip through the plane as if the plane was shot on the ground from a dude with a gun or something.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        He shot the bullets, then tilted down a little more and hit his afterburners. He had to pull up so not to continue on to a salty grave and his parabolic trajectory and the bullets surprised each other. So, a pinch of the bullets slowing significantly and a sprinkle of the plane speeding up.

      • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        The bullets lose momentum once fired, but the jet added momentum after firing, so it’s more like it caught up to the bullets.

        • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Right but what was the speed difference at impact? Like if the jet was only going say, 60 MPH faster than the bullets, wouldn’t it just be like when some gravel on the road bounces off your car on the highway?

            • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              Yeah in the end it IS what happened, so I guess the speed difference must have been considerable. I just wonder how it could have been so much. Maybe the afterburners can create a LOT of acceleration/thrust, idk.

              • theneverfox@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                There were angles involved - imagine throwing a Frisbee forward and running fast enough to bump into it. Now imagine you throw it up, and you run until it hits you in the back of the head

                No matter how fast you’re going forward, it’s still coming at you from an angle you’re not moving

  • Gilles_D@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The Tiger gained the dubious distinction of being the first jet aircraft to shoot itself down. On 21 September 1956, during a test-firing of its 20 mm (0.79 in) cannons, pilot Tom Attridge fired two bursts midway through a shallow dive. As the trajectory of the cannon rounds decayed, they ultimately crossed paths with the Tiger as it continued its descent, disabling the aircraft and forcing Attridge to crash-land the aircraft; he survived with a broken leg and multiple broken vertebrae.

    From Wikipedia

    I think just saying that it hit itself due to its high speed doesn‘t really tell the whole story.

    • atsum@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think just saying that it hit itself due to its high speed doesn‘t really tell the whole story.

      Well just like most descriptions of ADHD isn’t it?

  • doctorcrimson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    That sounds like bullshit though, the bullet would have the same speed when released from the shell in addition to speed generated by the blast in the shell. Did the plane fire and then accelerate enough to catch up to the bullet? That’s pretty convoluted and unlikely, you would have to actively try to shoot your own plane.

    EDIT: The dumbass shot at a slight down angle and then engaged the afterburners. Skill Issue.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, the initial velocity of the bullets would be the sum of the plane’s velocity plus whatever velocity the bullets gain coming out of the barrel.

      But, what apparently happened is perfectly believable (if extremely unlucky). It’s not that the F-11 was faster than its bullets, it’s that it flew in a way that its path intersected the path of the bullets it had fired. As soon as the bullets left the barrel they would have started slowing down, eventually ending up on a ballistic trajectory. The F-11 would have stayed at approximately the same speed, but if the pilot hit the afterburners it would have sped up considerably.

      Still, the likelihood of the speeding up plane hitting the slowing down bullets is extremely low.

  • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    4 months ago

    Imagine the fear and shock of test firing your guns into the water, speeding up and moving on, then suddenly your aircraft is shredded by a seemingly invisible force.

    I’d shit out my heart.

  • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Why yes, I am capable of shooting myself in the foot at record speed as soon as I open my mouth. In fact it’s mandatory!

    Lovely of you to notice!