One does not simply walk into a library in Mordor.
I would love to see a cite for this.
This sounds like a slightly garbled version of the Orion spacecraft, which was to be launched by detonating tactical nukes against a giant pusher plate.
Exapno Mapcase, where are you going with this? We have someone who described, possibly poorly, what he thought he saw, written down by a reporter who may not have heard him right, and interpreted by more recent events and concepts that probably distorted the description some more?
You are aware, I hope, that just because an honest, unbiased 9/11 observer said, “It sounded like an explosion!!!” that it doesn’t mean that planes weren’t involved?
So I’m wondering what your point is. Is it that things get reported oddly and distorted easily? If so, I heartily concur.
And I have skipped numerous stones across the water and have no problem interpreting what was meant by “flying saucers.”
Especially with an overdue book. Their fines are a bit…harsh.
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0655459&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Is that more or less what I described?
I think Exapno explained it rather well.
If there is an actual type of flight that mimics a skipping stone, that could explain what the pilot saw. If there is no way anything could ever actually fly like a skipping stone, that fact might be used to debunk the idea that it was a flying craft.
One possibility of that type of flight pattern is the US Navy’s Loon missile, our rippoff of the German V-1. It was tested off of California (Point Mugu) in the late 40’s, starting in 1945. The AAF also tested their variant. It was a pulse jet, which only fires intermittantly, which would correspond with “bright flashes”, and it would bounce in flight with each pulse. Just a WAG on my part, but it came to mind because I used to work at Point Mugu, and read all the history.
And it could be garbled by reporting, bad observation, or misunderstanding, all of which are very likely. Skipping stone, skipping saucer, skip to my Lou, are you really going to argue that there is a significant difference when all we have is third-hand reports anyway?
I didn’t see anyone arguing. Exapno asked a question about whether any known craft skip. Period. People are answering. This is GQ.
Alien flying saucer pilot here. I think the “like a saucer would if you skipped it across the water” must refer to the bouncy-like up-and-down movement of a stone on water. (I didn’t know you earthmen could do that with saucers too.) We get that kind of behavior in our interstellar transport ships sometimes, when descending into an atmosphere, if we have engine problems. If the engine can be kept sputtering along, we can withdraw from your atmosphere back into space, hopefully to perform repairs. Or, it’s possible we may be able to proceed with our mission (be it diplomatic, scientific, or overtly hostile).
And then, there’s the occasional times we may just outright crash, with death and destruction to all aboard. As, for example, you saw at Roswell (although that wasn’t one of our missions).
Not to mention that we have people right here on the Dope who can’t read.
If you had read my OP you might have noticed that I asked people not to speculate on what Arnold saw. This is the Internet, so of course people were going to do it anyway but I tried to tamp it down in advance.
And of you think I’m asking about “third-hand reports” you haven’t read about the incident either. We have plenty of first-hand testimony from Arnold. It simply doesn’t matter whether he’s a good observer or not or whether he saw a flock of geese or ball lightning. I’m asking about his words as reported immediately after the fact in an hours-long interview and wondering why he used the unusual description. I asked people whether this was even possible in real-world flying. I’m not getting very good answers but my words were as clear as I could make them.
Kittyyyyyy!!!
I thought I told you. No internet until you take your pill! 
Nit pick: Google image ‘Madonna with Saint Giovannino’
Some would believe there is a flying saucer there. (I don’t believe that but some do.)
Did anyone call it a flying saucer before 1947? No. Is it the only image from the past that modern people have gone back and cherrypicked from 5000 years of art? No. Please let’s not rehash the remarkably stupid history of the field here. Start your own thread.
I think you asked a question that begged a broader response than “yes/no there are/n’t aircraft that fly like drunken ducks.” But I’ll get out of your hair now.
Dude seriously, you need to switch to decaf.
He gave the stone-skipping-on-water example only because frisbees haven’t been invented. Maybe he should have mentioned a cafeteria fight with plates flying. But anyway, the accounts say the ships can “stop and hover, can change direction suddenly, and accelerate to ‘unknown speeds.’”
Moderator Note
Exapno Mapcase, let’s drop the snark and the junior moderating. You’ve got to expect some tangential remarks in a thread like this. If you don’t like people’s answers you can ignore them.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Probably wasn’t a Saenger bomber or other type of skip-reentry vehicle, like either the Dyna-Soar or the updated HyperSoar. Seems a bit advanced for 1947, never mind today. But those are aircraft with a skipping flight profile, not that it would probably look like skipping from his vantage point.