Ah, this happened with bullets, not missiles. Because the missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZe5J8SVCYQ

> In 1973, another Grumman test pilot, this one flying an F-14 Tomcat out in California, was struck by his own missile. Luckily, it was a dummy missile,

Sadly, in some cases where missile should be isn't where it is.

It probably happened during that time window when the stoker had started his work but the helmsman had fallen out of his chair.

https://youtu.be/yXFh54fc8GM

I'm particularly fond of this remix myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LjN3UclYzU

This is very interesting…why does it exist? Haha

the missile is currently experiencing critical levels of being a sleepy lil guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csp_OABIsBM

The missile is inspirational: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56vtZsQgAF0

The missile will be missed: https://youtu.be/nT1sSy39CuU

The missle knows where you are https://youtu.be/rKpntt0oEI8

IOW, it is what it is, and it's not what it's not, and it may be what it was - it even may have been what it will be - but it won't be what it can't be, though even then it may have been what it isn't. So it goes.

I'm still not sure if that was written as a joke or a simplified explanation for military personnel who are not engineers (pilots).

Somehow I read this in the voice of Michael Palin of the Monty Python, and it sounds just as perfect.

Too clichéd

Years ago I heard some random guy talking about how he wanted to skydive with a paintball gun and shoot at the ground as he was in free fall and my first thought was, "I bet he could end up getting hit by his own paintballs."

I did that math that evening, and yeah. Absolutely. While paintballs get shot out of a marker at ~190 mph (plus 120 mph terminal velocity for a person), their terminal velocity is closer to 50 mph. So the paintball will rapidly decelerate, and you keep chugging along at over twice its speed.

> He flew west in 1997 at the age of 74.

I’ve never heard that euphemism before. I quite like it.

My granddad (WW2 air vet) used to give his father's (WW1 air vet) toast to the whole family every thanksgiving:

Here's to the sands of the hourglass,

a measure of time as it flies;

Here's to the men who flew West today,

Three cheers for the next man who dies!

This article, while not specifically about the euphemism, details it's origin and use among pilots.

https://captain-al-speaking.com/2018/12/06/flying-west/

Going to the west as euphemism for death is mentioned on the History of Egypt Podcast (that’s Ancient history, if you didn’t guess).

Read Wolfgang Langewiesche's America from the Air: An Aviator's Story if you want to read some of the best writing about the romance of flying.

If you want romance of flying, and depending on your style of "romance", you might try _Glacier Pilot_ a biography of Bob Reeve who came back from flying in South America as a bush pilot with undiagnosed polio, made it to Alaska, and perfected the art of crash landing on glaciers as a perfectly normal way of doing business. The book was written by Beth Day (Romulo?) who I believe was his granddaughter.

I’m assuming this is the father of William?

Correct! Current editions include a foreword written by William.

Wolfgang is much better known for Stick And Rudder, which is about technical aspects of aviation.

I vaguely remember this from reading Biggles. I think came from pilots getting shot down over enemy lines on the western front in WWI.

Yes, but was he credited with the kill? Like, that's 20% of the way towards being an ace, after all.

Talk about a perverse incentive. Imagine if a pilot attained ace by shooting themselves down enough times

I think you may have just invented the Venture Capital industry.

Wouldn't it be trivial to calculate the approximate location of the bullets just 11 seconds after them being fired, and therefore warn the pilot of they're heading toward that location?

Maybe not trivial in 1956. They probably could have managed it, but the first step was to discover that the hazard exists.

The Navy says it's a one in a million event and he disagree. You concur with him based on two more events that happened decades apart. Isn't that a one in a million event?

> The Navy considered the incident a one-in-a-million fluke and was certain it would never happen again. Attridge was less convinced, however. “At the speeds we’re flying today,” he later said, “it could be duplicated any time.”

I think the idea here is that the planes and pilots are perfectly capable of hitting themselves at any time. Or in other words, this type of accident doesn't require the presence of any random one-in-a-million conditions. So, the low event frequency that is actually observed should be attributed to the fact that they intentionally avoid doing the dangerous action.

Makes sense, thanks