this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
51 points (98.1% liked)

World News

2207 readers
760 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Article is written confusingly as the author does not seem to understand that the speed quoted, ~1500m/min, is the descent rate and does not include airspeed.

The plane's actual impact velocity was certainly much higher than that.

If we translate the bizarre unit of 1500 meters/minute out of anti-intellectual "I'm too stupid to divide by anything other than 10" units and into the figures the ship's instruments are calibrated in.

1500m/min works out to 4921 ft/min, which is what your typical VSI is calibrated in. For context, that's about where a 737 pilot would stop calling it a "descent" and start calling it a "dive." A 5,000 foot a minute descent is pretty quick, that's loss of cabin pressure descent territory. A more typical descent-from-cruise will be done at 3000 ft/min or so, which would take you from cruising at 30,000 feet to sea level in 10 minutes.

1500m/min works out to about 48 knots or so, that's what your typical ASI is calibrated in. I would be very surprised if you could get a B-52 moving that slow off the ground. That just happens to be the V~SO~ speed of a post-1980 Cessna 172. You can't get a Skyhawk going that slow, let alone a Stratofortress.

So yeah, the BUFF hit the dirt going faster than that.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I guess AI has replaced journalists already. That escalated quickly.