If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discovery)   Defense department contemplating use of real flying saucer. Now, if we only had aliens in this country to fly the damn thing. (With pic)   (dsc.discovery.com) divider line 105
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

24812 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Oct 2007 at 10:24 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-10-15 11:15:36 AM  
Won't even go into all the other problems with the resolution to that movie.

Why? The resolution matched the A.E. vanVogt book ending. In fact, I didn't recognize the story until the ending.
 
2007-10-15 11:16:43 AM  
Just get some Messicans to do it
 
2007-10-15 11:16:52 AM  
sortanerd: can it be used to drop care packages on Mongolia? cause i just spent $37 to send $35 of food and cd's to my girlfriend.

Dude I heard that the mail order bride business was going down hill but this is just rediculous!!

/I keed I keed.
 
2007-10-15 11:27:09 AM  
I clicked the link then came to this thread for the "I want to believe" pic. Thanks Drizzle.
 
2007-10-15 11:28:40 AM  
I'm both Nikola Tesla and a Space Alien, so I'm really getting a kick out of these lame attempts to replicate my technology.
 
2007-10-15 11:36:53 AM  
From this site: http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/aircraft/flapjack.htm

Vought V-173 / XF5U-1
"Flying Flapjack" or "Flying Pancake"
i7.photobucket.com
i7.photobucket.com


One of the most unusual aircraft ever designed for the U.S. Navy was the Chance Vought V-173, also known as the Zimmerman "Flying Pancake". It was a prototype "proof of concept" aircraft that lacked wings, instead relying on its flat circular body to provide the lifting surface. This multi-million dollar project nearly became the first V/STOL (vertical takeoff and landing) fighter. The V-173 blueprints were shown to the Navy in 1939, with wind tunnel tests on full scale models being done in 1940-41. In January 1942 BuAer requested the proposal for two prototype airplanes of an experimental version of the V-173, known as the VS-135. This version had more powerful engines and was given the military designation XF5U-1. Flight testing of the V-173 went on through 1942 and 1943, resulting in reports of "flying saucers" from surprised Connecticut locals. Mock-ups of the XF5U-1 were done in the summer of 1943, but due to Vought's preoccupation with the Corsair and Kingfisher, the program proceeded slowly during the war. The arrival of the jet age saw the cancellation of the XF5U-1 contract by the Navy in March 1947, despite the fact that the aircraft was due to take its first test flight later that year. The XF5U-1 prototype was scrapped, though the V-173 prototype was saved and was given to the Smithsonian. To this day the V-173 / XF5U-1 project remains one of the more interesting anecdotes in aviation history.

Vought V-173

Type: experimental prototype (Fighter)
Crew: 1, Pilot
Armament: none

Specifications:
Length: 26' 8"
Height: 12' 11"
Width: 23' 4"
Gross Weight: 2,258 lbs

Propulsion:
No. of Engines: 2
Powerplant: Continental A-80
Horsepower 80 hp each
Prop diameter:16' 6"

Performance:
Range: limited (20 gal. of fuel)
Max Speed: 138 mph sea level
Climb: to 5000 ft in 7 min



Vought XF5U-1

Type: Fighter
Crew: 1, Pilot
Armament: six .50 cal machine guns
or four 20mm cannon
or two 1000-lb. bombs

Specifications:
Length: 28' 7.5"
Height: 14' 9"
Width: 32' 6"
Empty Weight: n/a
Gross Weight: 14550 lbs
Max Weight: n/a

Propulsion:
No. of Engines: 2
Powerplant: Pratt & Whitney R-2000-7
Horsepower 1600 hp each
Prop diameter:16'

Performance:
Range: 910 miles
Max Speed: 504 mph at 20,000 ft.
Climb: 3000 ft/min at sea level
Ceiling: n/a
 
2007-10-15 11:42:02 AM  
Three legged dog: sortanerd: can it be used to drop care packages on Mongolia? cause i just spent $37 to send $35 of food and cd's to my girlfriend.

Dude I heard that the mail order bride business was going down hill but this is just rediculous!!

/I keed I keed.



sorry should have clarified.
she's from colorado but holds seminars in Mongolia for thier english teachers. she's there during the winter months then comes home.
i don't think i would want to go out with a mongolian girl. not really into drinking fermented mare's milk.
 
2007-10-15 11:43:56 AM  
sortanerd: not really into drinking fermented mare's milk.

My friend, you haven't really lived.
 
2007-10-15 11:44:21 AM  
Giblet: blighted: So, basically, they're going to use this chassis to make those police drone things in Dark Angel.

/Tin foil hat? Check
//I'll shoot 'em down wherever I see 'em

Seriously. It's a slow-motion clay pigeon.

/.00 buckshot will knock the turbine out of alignment.


You have been reported to the authorities, who will take action based on threat level and general boredom. Join the Mobile Infantry. Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
 
2007-10-15 11:45:52 AM  
FeBolas: sortanerd: not really into drinking fermented mare's milk.

It's pretty good, once you pick out the hair...
 
2007-10-15 11:57:43 AM  
herratik: It's pretty good, once you pick out the hair...

I prefer to leave it in- makes it kind of "pulpy"
 
2007-10-15 12:01:40 PM  
rds.yahoo.com

Filthy humans
 
2007-10-15 12:02:10 PM  
Digital watches. And soon I shall have understanding of video cassette recorders and car telephones. And when I have understanding of them, I shall have understanding of computers. And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being!
 
2007-10-15 12:03:46 PM  
tech.sina.com.cn

"Skycar" Moller's Aerobot

It does actually fly. Now whether they can find something useful to do with a noisy, expensive, low lifting capacity, low flight time toy I just don't know.
 
2007-10-15 12:09:30 PM  
FeBolas: People figure out something new, and it takes off exponentially. That's how it works. It's not aliens, really.

It did not escape the more attentive here that you completely failed to address the RAMEN question. You, sir, fail at explaining RAMEN! Ipso facto, ergo, ALIENS! D'uh!

Kar98: Somebody finally got around deciphering all those notes in German?

Awesome.

And your choice in names makes me think we should grab a beer some time and talk of far off lands, dirndls and Nibelungen.

/Wunderbar!
//Op=Paperclip
 
2007-10-15 12:11:41 PM  
Oznog: "Skycar" Moller's Aerobot

It does actually fly. Now whether they can find something useful to do with a noisy, expensive, low lifting capacity, low flight time toy I just don't know.


looks kind of like a outdoor juicer.

oh and i'm gonna pass on the fermented mare's milk, hair or no hair. unless i have to, which i might.
 
2007-10-15 12:12:48 PM  
Rob4127: Back in the mid-90s, the DarkStar UAV looked like a flying saucer with wings.

Lockheed Martin RQ-3 DarkStar [designation-systems.net]


I do believe that one has been redesignated as RQ-3 Darkspot after it unpleasantly smacked itself into the end of the runway.

UAVs are fun these days... engineers realize they can come up with completely wild designs because they don't have to worry about space for people.
 
2007-10-15 12:13:01 PM  
sortanerd

I thought it was the inside of a washing machine. Just set the biatch on spincycle and watch it take it off
 
2007-10-15 12:14:16 PM  
My hovercraft is full of eels
 
2007-10-15 12:16:56 PM  
Vought V-173 / XF5U-1
"Flying Flapjack" or "Flying Pancake"


You mean THIS Flying Pancake? (new window)

/had to bring it up
 
2007-10-15 12:24:36 PM  
A friend of mine has a flying saucer. He flies it regularly, about once a week.

It is 30 inches in diameter, 6 inches thick at the widest point, and weighs about 5 Lb. Power is from a McCoy 0.60" engine developing about 1.2 HP at 12,500 rpm.

Lenticular aircraft were first discovered in Nazi Germany; they have excellent maneuverability because of their huge weight to surface area ratio, but they are inherently unstable in the air, and prone to flat-spin like a frisbee.

I have always thought that "UFOs" which people report seeing are probably classified military aircraft; take a look at a B-2 Stealth Bomber seen edge on and compare it with "flying saucer" drawings, and you see what I mean.
 
2007-10-15 12:30:54 PM  
This is very cool.

The GFS is basically a helicopter with a ducted main rotor, and vanes to counteract the main rotor's rotation instead of a tail rotor. Probably the only reason we haven't seen a practical flying saucer yet with this design is the difficulty stabilizing and controling it.

Now that we can control it, the main problem is that when you duct the rotor you have a significant loss in lift, and so it's a lot less fuel efficient than a helicopter. What people don't realize about helicopters is that during translational flight most of the lift doesn't come directly from the rotaty motion of the blades, but rather from pressure effects of air moving across the plane of the rotor. Only when the helicopter is hovering (and thus there is no horizontal motion) does the rotary motion provide the entire lift. That's why it takes a lot more fuel for helicopters to hover: the rotor has to supply the whole lifting force.

In this flying saucer, the duct on the rotor prevents external air from moving across the plane of the rotors. So even when the flying saucer is moving, the rotor is supplying nearly all of the lifting force. That's why it's so fuel inefficient.

I'd like to see if some good aerodynamic design could alleviate the problem: allowing decent fuel efficiency, while maintaining the structural advantages of having a ducted rotor.
 
2007-10-15 12:31:01 PM  
FeBolas

Fletch F. Fletch: You fail at being smart. I'm not normally one to just insult someone like that, observing the exponential growth of technology in the last century, and saying "OMG... maybe it wuz ALIENZZ" is seriously stupid. Yeah, even saying it's a possibility is pretty retarded.

Have you noticed the exponential development of (wait for it) EVERYTHING at one point or another? Why not put the aliens landing around 1800, and make them responsible for the industrial revolution, and the incredible advancements in medicine that started taking place? Why not put them in the 1650's, and make them responsible for advanced mathematics? Hell, why not just say that aliens taught the Inca and Egyptians all of their amazing architecture and construction skills?

People figure out something new, and it takes off exponentially. That's how it works. It's not aliens, really.


I doubt you are one to rarely attack the person, not the message. Calling me one who fails at being smart only diminishes any value to your counterpoint. "OMG... maybe it wuz ALIENZZ" is seriously stupid." Reread my post if you have the attention span. Did I say that word once? No. External intelligence on mankind or our ability to reverse engineer a discovery? Maybe. Again, maybe. Humans have never had the tech we have so readily now. Also in the realm of possibility, computer-assited knowledge that has made or helped this leap.


"People figure out something new, and it takes off exponentially. That's how it works. It's not aliens, really." Please reread your history, and not from wiki, thanks. What has taken man centuries is evolving over decades and this is unparalled in human history.

Love the evidence you invoke (1650 mathematicians, I guess you mean Bernoulli, Descartes et al. but not well read enough) and of course, the history channel knowledge(Egyptians, whose work took centuries) that completely contradicts your argument.


This is the internet. I have nothing to prove to you. I enjoyed this post until you came along. You comments are disgusting.


ianfer


Good morning, troll. How's your sore ass after getting spanked in the Yeager thread?

Kar98

All it said, over and over, is "schadenfreude."


That is all. Please return to your tech support desk.
 
2007-10-15 12:32:46 PM  
Fletch F Fletch: "since the 40's technology has taken an exponential leap without a source connection outside of economic growth."

Nice. 'outside of economic growth'
i.e. other than the single largest driver of technological advancement in the history of mankind.

It couldn't -possibly- be the result of a group of wealthy nations who suddenly had the time and money to dive a bit deeper into the technologies we'd already stumbled upon in the desperate race for weapons of war.

And I suppose that mountain of evidence that we've been slowly stumbling up the technological ladder --taking more missteps than leaps of genius-- that's all there to make a good show of things, right?

And where did we get all the intermediary steps; the microprocessors, integrated circuits and transistors from? Did the alien spaceship just happen to be flying around New Mexico with an alien science museum on board?

And who thought it was a good idea to ignore the optical computing and communication, until we'd putzed around with analog and copper for an arbitrary length of time?

Are we just until -after- the price of energy completely cripples our economy to pull the fusion rabbit out of our alien hat?

C'mon -- the idea that we're getting a leg up from an extraterrestrial technology buffet doesn't pass the smell test.
 
2007-10-15 12:35:25 PM  
olddinosaur

Do you know what your friend has to do with the FAA to get that registered and what about filing a flight plan? Always wondered how that worked unless you don't break a certain ceiling.
 
2007-10-15 12:40:16 PM  
If I recall correctly, Nikola Tesla developed a "flyuing saucer" which ran on electricity, in 1906.

It was not until 2002 that some gearheads at MIT decided to build it.

Being more than 17 years old, that means the patent is public domain.

You can look it up---and you can duplicate it.

How 'bout it, Farkers? Must be a few adventurous techies on the thread, there are 350,000+ of you out there.
 
2007-10-15 12:45:26 PM  
ringersol

Either we are in the most amazing and efficient time period slowly building with extremely well funded projects more about national defense and less about modernization or we know have the ability to understand and adapt knowledge that has been around for centuries.

The central part of my argument is either this information came from previous societies, data from contact with one external, or this:

Nice. 'outside of economic growth'
i.e. other than the single largest driver of technological advancement in the history of mankind.
It couldn't -possibly- be the result of a group of wealthy nations who suddenly had the time and money to dive a bit deeper into the technologies we'd already stumbled upon in the desperate race for weapons of war.


Stop thinking with your 21st centurty logic. Capitalism and democracy are relatively new ideas and economics during Roman and Greek time more more about imperialism and raiding than developing within.

And I suppose that mountain of evidence that we've been slowly stumbling up the technological ladder --taking more missteps than leaps of genius-- that's all there to make a good show of things, right?

And where did we get all the intermediary steps; the microprocessors, integrated circuits and transistors from? Did the alien spaceship just happen to be flying around New Mexico with an alien science museum on board?


I don't have the answers. You want to state that you do? All I see is an expansion of knowledge incomparable in other economics of scale.

And who thought it was a good idea to ignore the optical computing and communication, until we'd putzed around with analog and copper for an arbitrary length of time?

Are we just until -after- the price of energy completely cripples our economy to pull the fusion rabbit out of our alien hat?


These arguments are straw men completely outside my healthy skepticism that as humans, we could create some of the things so quickly that have no organic roots in our previous understanding of science and technology.

Let me ask you something- why does this issue raise such passion and anger? Not everything in life is 1's and 0's and has a simple, explainable answer.
 
2007-10-15 12:48:52 PM  
img.youtube.com
Lifters


Cute, but it IS just ion wind ("Ionic Breeze"). It is neato, quiet, but fundamentally many times less efficient than propellers. It could not lift its own high voltage power converter much less the batteries or engine to keep providing the juice.

Lots of videos and webpages on how to make them. No, they're NOT "electrogravitic".
 
2007-10-15 01:02:45 PM  
Fletch F. Fletch: These arguments are straw men completely outside my healthy skepticism that as humans, we could create some of the things so quickly that have no organic roots in our previous understanding of science and technology.

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree.

More than any other factor, warfare has always been the catalyst for leaps in technology. World War II was followed immediately by the Cold War, and billions of dollars were funneled into a vast array of research which might conceivably provide an advantage over an enemy. THIS is how and where the new technologies are developed. Even today, there are many programs funding some really weird stuff, but who can say which will provide a useful result unless they are tried?
 
2007-10-15 01:05:57 PM  
Has anyone ever been to 2001 (the strip club) in Tampa? It looks like the spaceship where all the lapdances/prostitution happens.
 
2007-10-15 01:12:57 PM  
I want My Flying Car !!
.


/Just don't let Chrysler make it.
 
2007-10-15 01:13:29 PM  
the XF5U-1 would have been as fast and nimble as corsair but able to VTOL off an escort carrier deck in a slight headwind, or lounge around as CAP in a high altitude hover for hours, very cool.

Other intersting fact about them: they were early users of a composite structure, inthis case, "Alumalite", a lamination of aluminum and balsawood or similar light wood core. Very stiff and light for the weight. So strong in fact, that when they came to destroy the XF5U-1 prototype, the wrecking ball just kept bouncing off the Alumalite structure. They had to take torches to the spars before they could even really dent the thing. That was one plane that really wanted to get a chance to fly, by jingo.

The Germans had a similar plane in the works, but theirs did not have the rotors all the way out on the tips, and it didn't fly as well as the flapjack. The secret they misse was, the propwash blowing back over the edges of the airframe worked like huge virtual stall fences, deflecting and shedding he votices that were troubling the German plane.

Vought had trouble squeezing the engines into the airframe and more trouble with the long drive shafts to the huge props. By the time they had it sorted out, the Navy had a new hard-on for jets and they considered a VTOL prop fighter to be an anacronism. How wrong they were; since the old "sandy" prop-powered attack plane served from the late 40's or so well past Vietnam, doing the kind of jobs the pancake would have been great at.

Plus, they just look all kinds of badass. Fiddlers Green or Paper Models International sells paper models of them.
 
2007-10-15 01:15:51 PM  
Old_Chief_Scott

More than any other factor, warfare has always been the catalyst for leaps in technology. World War II was followed immediately by the Cold War, and billions of dollars were funneled into a vast array of research which might conceivably provide an advantage over an enemy. THIS is how and where the new technologies are developed. Even today, there are many programs funding some really weird stuff, but who can say which will provide a useful result unless they are tried?


Excellent argument as to catalyst but how do you explain the result? History shows countless examples of nations at war not for decades, but centuries, and whose GDP was nearly exhausted on warfare technology, yet we didn't see the rifle cartridge or plastic explosives or for that matter, flight, missles, and other much, much stranger stuff we see being cooked up at Skunkworks. Hitler couldn't get the V2 to work right but we did. I see how then we'd have missles on every corner with proximity fuses. But GPS and laser guidance?

Name the bad guy, they've spent what they had and failed more than succeeded in development of a better tomato, it but somewhere in the line of technology is lift I cannot find anywhere since we walked out of caves.


ringersol's attempt here:

And who thought it was a good idea to ignore the optical computing and communication, until we'd putzed around with analog and copper for an arbitrary length of time?

Are we just until -after- the price of energy completely cripples our economy to pull the fusion rabbit out of our alien hat?
 
2007-10-15 01:26:04 PM  
www.customreplicas.com

/remembers Lost in Space
 
2007-10-15 01:33:05 PM  
Bah. Swamp gas.
 
2007-10-15 01:45:35 PM  
It's a damn flying beanie!
 
2007-10-15 01:51:05 PM  
For more information on how this works, see "The Coanda Effect"

It really is facinating...
 
2007-10-15 02:13:06 PM  
Fletch F. Fletch: This is the internet. I have nothing to prove to you. I enjoyed this post until you came along. You comments are disgusting.

I'm glad I could disgust somebody today; make me feel like I accomplished something.

I stand by my personal attack though- if you think that MAYBE aliens are the reason we have the technology that we currently do, then I still think you are stupid, and are doing a horrible disservice to the scientific community.


On a more serious note, you should do some research; technology didn't come about as suddenly as you seem to think it did. Once certain discoveries were made, yes- related discoveries were made at an exponential rate... that's kind of how it works. There's absolutely no mystery here.
 
2007-10-15 02:16:05 PM  
Fletch F. Fletch: "These arguments are straw men completely outside my healthy skepticism that as humans, we could create some of the things so quickly that have no organic roots in our previous understanding of science and technology"

Not only do you have no knowledge of or appreciation for technological history - but you also have no idea what a straw man argument is.

Have you ever stopped to notice the parallel between the responses that your questions get, and the responses that -dumb- questions get?

ya know, the sorts of 'tough' questions from the crowds espousing 'earth is flat', 'earth is hollow', 'dinosaurs never existed', '9/11 was an inside job', 'nazis in the antarctic', etc.
 
2007-10-15 02:30:30 PM  
I understand the DoD is installing one of these on every saucer to service the crew during extended operations:

www.timemachinetoys.com
 
2007-10-15 02:36:20 PM  
FeBolas and/or ringersol Same login? hmm...

Welcome back troll(s).

Please keep working on your sign for the next protest you attend.

Honestly man, you dodge my argument, abuse rhetoric and ignorantly attempt to avoid my honest questions to understand your position. Then accuse me of the very thing. Weird. Why are you invoking 9/11, Nazism and conspiracy theory to an argument way outside the scope on how the human race has advanced in decades what historically took centuries of labored effort. If anyone needs a little polish on various topics, it is you and hell, then again, we all could.

Thank YOU for making an ass of yourself. See you in the next thread. I can't wait to see these things flying around. What next will we see... BYE.
 
2007-10-15 03:14:42 PM  
Fletch F. Fletch: I am psych med free, I asure you.


It is October 1947. We just broke the soundbarrier, barely understood quantum physics, ran everything with analog control and mechanics....

It is October 2007. This article along with 2,000 self-service examples of technology.. scramjets, quantum reactors, wireless internet, teraflop processors, carbon honeycomb fiber, synthetic resins, ramen noodles, GPS transponders, etc, etc.


Point is simple- conspiracy theory aside, since the 40's technology has taken an exponential leap without a source connection outside of economic growth.

To me, stories like this suggest possible reverse engineering. Roswell, or somewhere way weirder, if at all.

/can't toss a frog into boiling water, and such logic


THIS


//not an "conspiracy/Alien theorist" but I do agree tech has grown exponentially far and above the "normal" mean.
 
2007-10-15 03:32:50 PM  
Fletch F. Fletch: FeBolas and/or ringersol Same login? hmm...

huh?

Please keep working on your sign for the next protest you attend.

...huh??

to an argument way outside the scope on how the human race has advanced in decades what historically took centuries of labored effort.

Here's the problem: there's no mystery about how all this technology came about. My alt login is bringing up conspiracy theories because they're just as inane as your argument here.

Read this carefully:

There's no mystery about where technology advanced from.

Seriously. Whatever facet of technology you want to talk about, humans invented it through science and research, and much of it is very well documented. Try it! There's a history to all of this amazing technology that you think humans couldn't have developed so quickly... so why don't ya go look it up?
 
2007-10-15 03:34:35 PM  
wintrspawn: but I do agree tech has grown exponentially far and above the "normal" mean.

Jesus H. Christ, another one. What "normal" mean are you talking about?? Seriously? Where's the mystery?? Start naming some technology that seems beyond human capabilities to develop on our own, please, I want to understand where you guys are coming from on this.
 
2007-10-15 03:50:51 PM  
FeBolas: Jesus H. Christ, another one.

Now now, people that don't work in technical fields are not going to read the literature or study the various discoveries as we might. They will therefore not be aware of the huge diversity of research now underway in a staggering number of disciplines.

Fletch F. Fletch:

It is October 2007. This article along with 2,000 self-service examples of technology...

scramjets- A known quantity in the 30's, improved now through materials research and computer modeling

quantum reactors- I'm not sure what you mean by this one

wireless internet- radio

teraflop processors- started with the transisitor. Again, materials research and improved methods of manufacture

carbon honeycomb fiber, synthetic resins, ramen noodles, -Simple chemistry

GPS transponders- radio,

etc, etc.
 
2007-10-15 03:59:26 PM  
Old_Chief_Scott: Now now, people that don't work in technical fields are not going to read the literature or study the various discoveries as we might.

For the record, I'm majoring in classical trumpet performance...
 
2007-10-15 04:00:16 PM  
Dang it, i just came here for the fun of sci-fi and what if meet reality.

BOOO!

Stoopipd troll party....
 
2007-10-15 04:05:24 PM  
Old_Chief_Scott: I think that's what's frustrating to me about this topic- it's soooo easy (not to mention informing and *gasp* educational) to look up any and all info about technological advancement, and yet there are these people that would rather say "well, we sure have made some amazing advancements in this last century... maybe it was aliens!"
 
2007-10-15 04:57:25 PM  
FeBolas: For the record, I'm majoring in classical trumpet performance...

Ah! Almost went to Crane Institute quite a few years back to study music. Changed my mind while my buddy was doing his audition and I was waiting my turn. The nice little old lady at the desk told me how many of the students went on to excellent teaching positions, and that was absolutely the last thing I wanted to do with my life. I remain an opera and classical music fan and still have a trombone and a baritone, but haven't played for a couple of years now. Good luck to you with a performance career.
 
2007-10-15 05:00:51 PM  
Old_Chief_Scott: Good luck to you with a performance career.

Thanks! Not very lucrative, but I'm having a blast.

The nice little old lady at the desk told me how many of the students went on to excellent teaching positions, and that was absolutely the last thing I wanted to do with my life.

Yeah, kinda goes along with being a musician, at least if you hope to earn enough to buy food. I love teaching trumpet, but could never do any sort of ensemble teaching.

I remain an opera and classical music fan

What are some of your favorite composers/pieces, out of curiousity?

/threadjack
//doesn't matter, thread's dead anyway
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report