Your source claimed it would be impossible to fill up the tanks as fast as they do. I demonstrated mathematically why that is incorrect. Multiple tanks explain the fill time “issue.”
I presented you with evidence that your source is wrong about the fill time conundrum. Instead of discussing, debating, or acknowledging my point, you just called me a name. Shame.
Shame?
Who uses shame??? Have you ever seen a fire hose??? It would destroy a plane from that sort of pressure.
That fact that you also try to use the word shame in all this makes you the kike Jew.
Your source claimed it would be impossible to fill up the tanks as fast as they do. I demonstrated mathematically why that is incorrect. Multiple tanks explain the fill time “issue.”
I presented you with evidence that your source is wrong about the fill time conundrum. Instead of discussing, debating, or acknowledging my point, you just called me a name. Shame.
Shame? Who uses shame??? Have you ever seen a fire hose??? It would destroy a plane from that sort of pressure. That fact that you also try to use the word shame in all this makes you the kike Jew.
I actually used to be a firefighter.
You seem to be confused about the psi in a 2.5” fire hose. The psi is only 250. It really is not all that damaging. The plane would be fine.
In the fire academy, a 2.5” hose slipped off the hydrant and sprayed me in the face… I did not lose my skin lol. It felt like a normal punch.
We do not need to rely on my anecdotal evidence, Youtube is full of examples of people getting sprayed with a 2.5” hose:
2.5” hose is used in crowd control (people get sprayed with it). There are several Jackass stunts where they get sprayed with a 2.5” hose.
So that is TWO things that are mathematically/ demonstrably incorrect about your “theory.”
Multiple tanks makes filling up faster. You incorrectly assumed there is only 1 fill port.
The psi in a 2.5” hose would NOT “destroy a plane.” You incorrectly assumed the psi is more damaging than it actually is.
Your theory has more holes than Swiss cheese.
Now it’s your turn. Please call me another name because you are not able to formulate a good counter argument.
In your great worldly travels and experiences have you ever seen the damage causes to a plane when a bird hits a plane?
What you call “worldly travels,” I call work.
If you wish to have an actual conversation on this topic, first address my two points. Why should I continue if you don't?
Did I provide enough evidence to prove that planes can logistically fill up faster than you thought because of multiple tanks?
Did I provide enough evidence to prove that human skin can withstand a direct spray from a 2.5” fire hose?