blooper

my first UFO blooper. in 'square triangle,' the interceptors are
going in to get a UFO, but haven't fired, and Straker calls them
off, yet when they return to MB..the missles are missing.......

--- In [hidden email], "Brinke" <brinkeguthrie@y...> wrote:
>
>
> my first UFO blooper. in 'square triangle,' the interceptors are
> going in to get a UFO, but haven't fired, and Straker calls them
> off, yet when they return to MB..the missles are missing.......

I have a theory for this. Somewhere I'm sure I read that if a Tomcat
carried a full load of Phoenix missles it would have to dump some to
reload on its carrier. Returning bombers in WW11 would dump their
bombs in the Channel on their way back. What if the Interceptor was
unable to land with its missle attached? It seems to me that the
Interceptors are designed to be the minimum size and weight that can
do the job and may not be able to cope at the end of its mission
with the weight of the missle contributing to its mass on landing.
So perhaps not a blooper?!

Regards,
Barry

I guess you don't know the specs of the interceptors...... you cannot land
one that is too heavy... similar to airplanes dumping fuel if they make
unexpected landing with too much fuel.

So before they land.... they fire the missiles :)

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brinke" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 11:58 PM
Subject: [SHADO] blooper

Bruce, do you know the term footage alert? When I first started watching tv I had no idea they used file footage. Only when I was older and started really watching TV did I notice this phenomenon. It really is funny. My friends and I used to watch really bad movies and we started making fun of them like Mystery Science Theatre 3000. When we saw the same thing we would yell out FOOTAGE. Then we would stop the video and throw paper plates or make airplanes. lol

Bruce Sherman <[hidden email]> wrote:

I guess you don't know the specs of the interceptors...... you cannot land
one that is too heavy... similar to airplanes dumping fuel if they make
unexpected landing with too much fuel.

So before they land.... they fire the missiles :)

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brinke"

To:
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 11:58 PM
Subject: [SHADO] blooper









Yahoo! Groups Links










signature

test'; ">

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There's one episode - Destruction, I think - where an Interceptor is sent to hover in orbit to track a signal. Given your theory it seems a bit expensive to send such a craft out to do this, and then have to waste a missile. General Henderson would hit the roof!

naughtyhector <[hidden email]> wrote:

--- In [hidden email], "Brinke"
wrote:
>
>
> my first UFO blooper. in 'square triangle,' the interceptors are
> going in to get a UFO, but haven't fired, and Straker calls them
> off, yet when they return to MB..the missles are missing.......

I have a theory for this. Somewhere I'm sure I read that if a Tomcat
carried a full load of Phoenix missles it would have to dump some to
reload on its carrier. Returning bombers in WW11 would dump their
bombs in the Channel on their way back. What if the Interceptor was
unable to land with its missle attached? It seems to me that the
Interceptors are designed to be the minimum size and weight that can
do the job and may not be able to cope at the end of its mission
with the weight of the missle contributing to its mass on landing.
So perhaps not a blooper?!

Regards,
Barry



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I know its just stock footage :)

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "legg bryan" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: [SHADO] blooper


>
> Bruce, do you know the term footage alert? When I first started
watching tv I had no idea they used file footage. Only when I was older and
started really watching TV did I notice this phenomenon. It really is
funny. My friends and I used to watch really bad movies and we started
making fun of them like Mystery Science Theatre 3000. When we saw the same
thing we would yell out FOOTAGE. Then we would stop the video and throw
paper plates or make airplanes. lol

--- In [hidden email], MICK DICKENS <docmed03@y...> wrote:
> There's one episode - Destruction, I think - where an Interceptor
is sent to hover in orbit to track a signal. Given your theory it
seems a bit expensive to send such a craft out to do this, and then
have to waste a missile. General Henderson would hit the roof! <

And rightly so, considering that the Interceptor missiles are
supposed to be nukes -- those things are expensive!

> I have a theory for this. Somewhere I'm sure I read that if a
Tomcat carried a full load of Phoenix missles it would have to dump
some to reload on its carrier. Returning bombers in WWII would dump
their bombs in the Channel on their way back. What if the Interceptor
was unable to land with its missle attached? It seems to me that the
Interceptors are designed to be the minimum size and weight that can
do the job and may not be able to cope at the end of its mission with
the weight of the missle contributing to its mass on landing. So
perhaps not a blooper?! <

If not, then extremely bad design work! I believe you're right about
the F-14, and I think that that's why a standard loadout for the
aircraft in the FAD (Fleet Air Defence) mission was 4 Phoenixes
(rather than the full 6), 2 Sparrow/AMRAAM and 2 Sidewinders, and
they tended not to carry more than 2 AIM-54s unless it was fairly
certain that some of them were going to be fired. The bomber jettison
idea is also correct, but that was because they didn't want to land a
possibly damaged aircraft with _live_ ordnance on board that could go
off on impact. Nukes aren't that prone to going off unexpectedly --
no impact fuzes, for instance, and they won't go off if simply
bumped; what bothers people about nukes in crashes is _leaks_ -- of
radioactive and highly toxic material like plutonium. I would expect
that an Interceptor missile could be armed and disarmed in flight,
since Interceptors are SHADO's primary (only?) combat spacecraft.

So, while I can come up with plenty of examples of similar real-world
situations (i.e., where all of what goes up cannot come down in one
piece), I would regard it as extremely bad practice for an
Interceptor to be limited in that way; there are simply too many
other uses for the craft, and given the nature of spaceflight, I
can't see that designing them to be able to retain their main
armament when it wasn't needed is going to lead to _that_ much of a
degradation of their performance; if it does, then SHADO is pushing
the envelope even more than we thought: they're using barely capable
spacecraft as their first line of defence, and should expect a
bloodbath once the aliens realise just how marginal the Interceptors'
capability really is.

Phil

Here's my thoughts on this; it was a blooper! The Interceptors take off more or less vertically, and also you have the Moon's 1/6 gravity, so I don't think landing with the same payload in the same manner in which you took off would be too much of a problem. (Like Dennis Miller sez..."Just my opinion, I could be wrong...") M.T.

MICK DICKENS <[hidden email]> wrote:
There's one episode - Destruction, I think - where an Interceptor is sent to hover in orbit to track a signal. Given your theory it seems a bit expensive to send such a craft out to do this, and then have to waste a missile. General Henderson would hit the roof!

naughtyhector wrote:

--- In [hidden email], "Brinke"
wrote:
>
>
> my first UFO blooper. in 'square triangle,' the interceptors are
> going in to get a UFO, but haven't fired, and Straker calls them
> off, yet when they return to MB..the missles are missing.......

I have a theory for this. Somewhere I'm sure I read that if a Tomcat
carried a full load of Phoenix missles it would have to dump some to
reload on its carrier. Returning bombers in WW11 would dump their
bombs in the Channel on their way back. What if the Interceptor was
unable to land with its missle attached? It seems to me that the
Interceptors are designed to be the minimum size and weight that can
do the job and may not be able to cope at the end of its mission
with the weight of the missle contributing to its mass on landing.
So perhaps not a blooper?!

Regards,
Barry



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links










---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Guys its a Nuclear Missle! Any little accident and you take out a large area
of the moon including Moonbase! Figure a blast radius of at least a mile.
Sort of hard to miss. The aliens would just love us to blow up our own base
with our own missle.

James K.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]