Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Second the recommendations. However for a counterpoint on Yeager’s role in the NF-104 crash described at the end of the book, see this account from a trainer involved in the program: http://www.kalimera.org/nf104/stories/stories_12.html


And this, about the investigation and a supposed cover-up of alleged pilot error by Yeager: http://www.kalimera.org/nf104/stories/stories_13.html

(Although one never knows whom to believe when reading self-justifying finger pointing like this.)


Thanks, that is a great link. Here's his summary:

"The facts are clear. Chuck Yeager proved incapable of doing the job. He was totally outside his element. He was a natural pilot who had learned by experience and feel, but never really understood stability, just ‘sensed’ how airplanes would act, but aerodynamics and space dynamics are night and day. If he was to fail, I expected it to be outside the aerodynamics region.

But not even that can excuse his accident, which was his fault, alone and was an error of bad pilot technique during normal, aerodynamic flight. His shortcoming was inability to gain and maintain the 70 degree climb angle. That required strict and delicate airplane control. No more and no less."


Co. Smith's case appears to be well-documented.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: