interstate design

[Huckleberry]

Just for the record, the Eisenhower Interstate system was developed in 1956; cargo planes in that time weren't as big as they are now. Anddd, I am sure in times of war that a good pilot COULD land a large cargo plane on anythng he needed to. If all of the airstrips were blown up, how else would you land aircraft?

YOU are the one mentioning the huge planes, not me. In times of invasion, I am sure we would be mobilizing any troops and supplies in any aircraft that we could land.

[Hangman]

My point was that the system wasn't "designed" to land planes on. Nowhere have you or anyone else came up with any written proof as I did. I have never said a plane couldn't land on an interstate. Show proof of your claim in black and white or admit you're wrong for once. It won't hurt you. You must not realize how many airports there are. The highways must be kept clear for equipment movements and evacuations.
Posted via Mobile Device

Originally Posted by SideTracked

Looks like a good allbeit unrealistic piece of fiction, made in hollywood, to me.

YOU MEAN IT ISN'T REAL???????????????
Thanks for pointing that out to me!
I didn't just happen to put it there for comic relief.

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

If you read a history of the Eisenhower Interstate system, it says that one in 5 miles, as per the story, is incorrect. It says that 1 in 5 is too many. It says that there are many straight stretches of interstates that can be used for landing aircraft, and that it was done in WW2 in Germany.

President Dwight Eisenhower and America’s Interstate Highway System HistoryNet - From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher

sidetracked and hangman, read the posts and stop just arbitrarily trying to prove people wrong. The title to post #17 is "i stand corrected".
in post #32, you hangman says:
My point was that the system wasn't "designed" to land planes on. Nowhere have you or anyone else came up with any written proof as I did. I have never said a plane couldn't land on an interstate. Show proof of your claim in black and white or admit you're wrong for once. It won't hurt you. You must not realize how many airports there are. The highways must be kept clear for equipment movements and evacuations.

The title to post 17 is "i stand corrected". And that can be read on a mobile.

What more do you want? We are learning from this thread, not proving people wrong. We learn from discussing.
Sidetracked quoted the post where she said she stood corrected to prove that she was wrong. The same article that informed her, he quoted to prove her wrong. This seems to me that sidetracked and hangman aren't reading posts, just trying to show how someone else may not be as intelligent as they are and, quite frankly, I find it condescending.
Please stop. Its becoming tiresome.

Lets discuss and learn from one another.

I rest my case.

[SideTracked]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Just for the record, the Eisenhower Interstate system was developed in 1956; cargo planes in that time weren't as big as they are now. Anddd, I am sure in times of war that a good pilot COULD land a large cargo plane on anythng he needed to. If all of the airstrips were blown up, how else would you land aircraft?

YOU are the one mentioning the huge planes, not me. In times of invasion, I am sure we would be mobilizing any troops and supplies in any aircraft that we could land.

In 1951, the United States Air Force challenged the civilian aviation development industry to design an aircraft that could achieve a level of performance excellence, allowing it to overcome virtually any operational challenge. And their list of performance requirements was long. Feature highlights called for a rugged medium range transport capable of carrying a 30,000 lb. payload of troops or equipment over distances reaching 1,500 nautical miles and with the ability to operate safely from short unimproved surfaces.

The first flight of the YC-130 took place on August 23, 1954 at Lockheed's Burbank, California plant. In December, 1956 the first C-130s were delivered to the 463rd Troop Carrier Wing at Ardmore AFB, Oklahoma.

The C-130 had been designed for the Tactical Air Command as a replacement for the twin-boom C-119 Flying Boxcar. (Wingspan 109 feet, circa 1945)

The C-119 replaced the C-47(wingspan 95 feet, circa 1935)

Your "I am sure" statement is the equivalent of an assumption, that you seem to want everyone to accept as fact, simply because you said it.

[SideTracked]

Originally Posted by Hangman

My point was that the system wasn't "designed" to land planes on. Nowhere have you or anyone else came up with any written proof as I did. I have never said a plane couldn't land on an interstate. Show proof of your claim in black and white or admit you're wrong for once. It won't hurt you. You must not realize how many airports there are. The highways must be kept clear for equipment movements and evacuations.
Posted via Mobile Device

We cant forget all the military installations active in this country now as well as all the ones that the Clinton administration closed in the 1990's. Most, if not all, of them still have serviceable runways and are National Guard fields as well. Most of the smaller planes that could land on an interstate highway could just as easily land on the small private strips that crop dusters use. Many of these are alongside the highway.

[SideTracked]

Sometimes the lack of ability for some people to use "Common Sense" amazes me.

Can you imagine the Logistics required to knock out all of the airfields in any section of this country? Not to mention all of them in the whole country?

Galileo was right.

[the4ofus]

I was merely stating in that post that it was becoming an argument.
Huck, I dont see why you chose to lump the4 into a comment about bashing or whatever.