Popular False rumors about war

Status
Not open for further replies.
The F-35 JSF has VTOL capability and will be able to operate on carriers

Only the Navy (STOL) and the USMC (VTOL) versions will... not the USAF version..

and ps: don't belive what you saw in the last Die Hard movie.. ;)

OK that's the funniest thing I ever heard LOL

did you really listen to their songs, or do you laugh about them being USAF pilots and part time singers ;) ?
 
IBTL.
However, I think the "myth" that the B-2 is the first nuclear-capable bomber is a myth.
Yes, I think the existence of the myth is a myth.
I've never heard even the most ignorant people say anything of the sort.
 
did you really listen to their songs, or do you laugh about them being USAF pilots and part time singers

No man... too funny. "Don't want to land on a carrier because it's only 5000 men"...... hilarious.
 
* The Harriers and Raptors are the only plains that can take-off and land on aircraft carriers without assistance.

The Russian SU-27 and American C-130 can take-of AND land on the deck of an aircraft carrier without assistance.

What about the Yaks?

Nuclear Capable Aircraft:

B-29 Liberator
B- 36 Peacemaker
B-47 Stratojet
B-50 Superfortress
B-58 Hustler
A-6 Intruder
S-3 Viking
P-3 Orion
F/A-18 Hornet
F-16 Fighting Falcon
FB-111
H-3 Sea King Helicopter
Mig 27
Tu-95 Bear
Tu-16 Badger
Tu-22 Blinder
Tu-22M Backfire "

I believe the Boeing B-29 was the "super fortress", the Cosolidated B-24 was the "Liberator".

And the F-101 Voodoo.
 
what bomber preceded the SR-71 in development?

are you thinking of the A-12, or the B-58 Hustler? err, I was thinking aircraft, not "bomber" because the SR-71 was not a bomber.

or am I just waaaay off?


also the OP's list was full of stuff. Thats about it. Stuff.
 
Last edited:
The early U-2 ac, took off and landed on American aircraft carriers in the 60's. I know because I was on the carrier when it happened.

The takeoff and landings were without tail hooks or cat's
 
Nolo said:
However, I think the "myth" that the B-2 is the first nuclear-capable bomber is a myth.
Yes, I think the existence of the myth is a myth.
I've never heard even the most ignorant people say anything of the sort.

That's what I say about the whole list of "myths". Their existence as myths is a myth created by the OP.


what bomber preceded the SR-71 in development?

Someone really asked that? Ok, maybe there really is someone who thought the B2 was the first nuclear bomber.
 
mis-spelled:
One entry found.

misspell

Main Entry: mis·spell
Pronunciation: \ˌmis-ˈspel\
Function: transitive verb
Date: 1655
: to spell incorrectly

Nope. The word is "misspell".
 
* Flamethrowers were never used until WW II.

Conventional flame throwers as we think of them, were first incorporated by the Byzantine Empire around the time of it's birth. They were a large role of paper, leather or other type of material that was filled with flammable material. They were very large and used primarily for naval combat. The popular 4th of July firework: "Roman Candle" is named after them.

umm, how is that a rebuttal of any kind? I know flamethrowers were used in WW2, and that the bolded statement is false, but anyone ignorant on the subject of flamethrower use in the modern era would continue to be ignorant, and not any better informed

* The Handgun is strictly an offensive weapon.

If this were true, then police officers would leave their handgun in the glove compartment and in stead shoulder their AR-15 or shotgun when they pull you over.

Huh? how can you disprove somethign is 'strictly an offensive weapon' by bringing up the use, or nonuse, of a more effective offensive weapon.

I agree that the handgun is mostly defensive, but your methodology of explaining this is terribly confusing.

Of all these so-called false rumors, the ONLY one I have heard before was
* It's against the Geneva convention for the military to use Hollow points.

Maybe you have heard a few lone idiots raving about some of these "oh the F-14 can go faster than an SR-71 except it will fall apart!"...."The Bismark was the biggest battleship ever!"

but even people just peripherally aware of these things are going to know that while an F-14 engine's horsepower or thrust rating or whatever you want to say is greater than many other engines, plane weight, areodynamic design, and many other factors are what determine speed.

If you want to go dispelling false rumors, fine, but maybe pick rumors that more than 7 people believe
 
Hitler was a dictator with the SS and Gestapo to do his bidding. a 'leader' by force mostly. Saddam comes to mind, as Mao.

Like him or not, he took over nearly all of Europe, and all with a country smaller than the State of Georgia. Sure, he was evil, but he darned near won the war. If the Axis had waited on attacking the US and Russia, things would have been different.
 
AND, the real top speed of the SR-71 is still classified. We may never know how fast the sucker can go.

I don't think anyone knows it's "real" top speed, nor ever will. My understanding is that the plane has never been maxed out. Whenever they want to break the record, they just bump the throttle ~1/8" further than the last scratch mark.

this aircraft is truely amazing.
 
Just one fact tells me allI need to know about usng nukes on Japan - Only in the recent past has the US needed to order new purple hearts. Those awarded during Korea, Vietnam, and other actions up to at least 10 years ago were ordered for the invasion of Japan.
 
The F-105 was nuclear-capable; the M-240 GPMG is a version of the FN MAG-58 (Mitrailleuse d`Appui Général).

I'm surprised at the misaprehension of the OPs intent. The statements are posited as wrong and to be corrected. The OP does make some factual, spelling and grammatical errors however.
 
* The Harriers and Raptors are the only plains that can take-off and land on aircraft carriers without assistance.

There are Great Planes and there is the Great Plains. Not to be confused with one another.
Just had to mention it.

Vern
 
SSN Vet said:
I don't think anyone knows it's "real" top speed, nor ever will. My understanding is that the plane has never been maxed out. Whenever they want to break the record, they just bump the throttle ~1/8" further than the last scratch mark.

this aircraft is truely amazing

A man I knew who was a range officer in Connecticut was an SR-71 pilot. When I found this out I got to talking about it, and I mentioned I'd heard it was capable of hitting Mach 3.3 (I'd read THAT in a book so it must be true {ha ha}). He just smiled so I figured I'd been misinformed. But he wouldn't be drawn out any farther on the subject .....
 
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.

National Socialism was a nationalistic fascist state and a manifestation of the rights of the state (and corporations) over the individuals (workers). RIGHT, Not leftist.

KM Bismark was a poor rework of a WW1 German design (Baden) and was reported by the Nazis to be within Washington/London Treaty limits (35,000 tons) but displaced about 50,000 and full load of 57,000. Her defeat of Hood was due to the "Golden Twinkie", sheer luck.

The Japanese built IJN Yamato class in secret displacing 64,000 with full load of 75,000. Not twice Bismark's displacement. These ships carried 18.1" (46cm) guns and contributed NOTHING to the Japanese war effort.

Iowa class BBs were built to 45,000 tons to carry 55,000 full load, were far better than either Axis ship and gave better service for nearly 6 decades.

streakr
 
Went to school with a fella that had just gotten outta the Air Force. He said he knew of an SR-71 that took off from California, quickly had both engines go out, and it landed in Florida. Don't know if it's true or not...

BTW...he was a radar technician? Said his job required he be in the back seat of an F-111 and perform checks on the system to tag for work/repair. He said he looked outside the cockpit one time when the pilot had it in terrain following mode-said that was the last time he looked out the cockpit!
After that, he said he just kept his head buried in his work.
 
Quote:
what bomber preceded the SR-71 in development?

Someone really asked that? Ok, maybe there really is someone who thought the B2 was the first nuclear bomber.

To be fair, IIRC there was some discussion about arming the A-12/RS-71 or something similar, back before it "became" the SR-71.
 
Really? Popular rumors? Among whom, exactly? Sound like straw men the OP used to so he could knock them down.
 
By rumors do you mean myths? A rumor of war would be something you heard from a neighbor that we were going to war with Russia. You have listed a number of myths (I guess)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top