AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›1991 »

Agustin Cienfuegos: May 7, 2008

FiendishThingy posted:

Crash pics

Are we gonna get at least some descriptive captions or context?

Iraqi Su-25 playing in sand.

# ? Feb 12, 2011 09:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 10, 2024 00:33

Strasburgs UCL: Jul 28, 2009; Hang in there little buddy

SyHopeful posted:

Cool writeup on the Sukhoi, but I found this even more fascinating/hilarious.

You would probably like this one too:

wikipedia posted:

However, after two Su-24 were lost because of premature shell detonation in 1983, plus some different problems with gun usage (system failures, etc.), usage of the GSh-6-23 was stopped by a decision of the Soviet AF Command. For now all aircraft in the Russian AF are flying with fully operational guns, but without ammunition.

Also worth mentioning is the 10,000 rpm rate of fire. Generally speaking Soviet aircraft cannons are way more interesting than US ones. Their gatling guns were often gas-operated rather than electrically operated. They also used some weird designs like the aforementioned Su-25's GSh-30-2, which operated on the Gast principle.

# ? Feb 12, 2011 11:06

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

U.S. military has had issues as well with some of its aircraft gun ammunition; specifically, 20mm for the M61. I won't comment directly since I've got professional knowledge of the issue and don't want to say something I shouldn't, but here's what wikipedia had to say:

wikipedia posted:

Ammunition

Until the late 1980s the M61 primarily used the M50 series of ammunition in various types, typically firing a 3.5 oz (100 gram) projectile at a muzzle velocity of about 3,380 feet per second (1,030 m/s). A variety of Armor-Piercing Incendiary (API), High Explosive Incendiary (HEI), and training rounds are available. Around 1988 a new round was introduced, the PGU-28/B,[5] which is now standard for US Navy and USAF aircraft. The PGU-28/B is a "low-drag" round designed to reduce in-flight drag and deceleration, and has a slightly increased muzzle velocity of 3,450 feet per second (1,050 m/s). It is a semi-armor piercing high explosive incendiary (SAPHEI) round, providing substantial improvements in range, accuracy, and power over the preceding M56A3 HEI round. The PGU-28/B has not been without problems, however. A 2000 USAF safety report noted 24 premature detonation mishaps (causing serious damage in many cases) in 12 years with the SAPHEI round, compared to only two such mishaps in the entire recorded history of the M56 round. The report estimated that the current PGU-28/B had a potential failure rate 80 times higher than USAF standards permit.

# ? Feb 12, 2011 11:44

B4Ctom1: Oct 5, 2003; OVERWORKED COCK; Slippery Tilde

from here:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/locations.php

quote:

Approximately 50 B61 nuclear bombs inside an igloo at what might be Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. Seventy-five igloos at Nellis store �one of the largest stockpile in the free world,� according to the U.S. Air Force, one of four central storage sites in the United States.

I have been reading about a few times in war games where SU-30's are beating US aircraft because of their passive IR sensor. I knew about this sensor and the Russians used to tout it as an incredible capability for tracking down invading bombers or while fighting aircraft in the sky.

This sensor allows them to find and close in with other aircraft without ever emitting radar signals and giving up the ghost.

The US answer to this is the AWACS. It can transmit information right to the radar screen of the fighter aircraft it is supporting. This information is displayed to the fighter as if it has its own radar on but much more powerfully than it could ever emit. Enough info to even allow it to launch radar guided missiles beyond the normal capability.

What the Indian Air Force did was commit a massive force to take out the AWACS (at simulated great cost/sacrifice to themselves). Then they used passive IR equipped aircraft to mop up the remaining US planes who were forced to turn on their radars or stand zero chance.

picture of sensor just ahead of cockpit:

Supposedly this sensor is just a larger souped-up version of the argon cooled seeker found in air to air missiles. I understand that not only does this passive sensor detect but it scans and displays the info on a kind of little radar like display to allow you a locational/directional reference to close with your quarry. I had read at one time that it might be slaved to a night vision with a telescopic optic to allow long range visual identification.

This seems like a very awesome capability. I can't imagine why we would not have this simple capability on our own aircraft. I would suspect that the FLIR company has probably developed the technology to passive auto scan and display direction for suspected targets in the sky. Usually if you can imagine it, and it is within the realm of technology, then it has probably been done already.

# ? Feb 15, 2011 17:43

NosmoKing: Nov 12, 2004; I have a rifle and a frying pan and I know how to use them

Doesn't that family of planes have an "aim-able" cannon as well? I seem to recall that they could aim the gun in a small arc/cone rather than have to aim the entire aircraft the whole time. Allowed for better gun kills.

Perhaps tonight I'll get off my butt and do a write-up and video clip fest of the Nike air defense system.

# ? Feb 15, 2011 18:00

Sunday Punch: Mar 4, 2009; There you are in your home, and the soldiers smash down the door and tell you you're in the middle of World War III. Something's gone wrong with time.

B4Ctom1 posted:

Passive IR sensors

This is fascinating, although I'm kind of surprised this sort of passive sensor technology isn't more widespread, considering the huge advantage of being able to see the other guy without yourself being seen. Kind of like how subs with passive and active sonar don't go around pinging everything because it's a good way to give away your position and eat a torpedo. I would be interested to know how effective the IR sensor is, and what sort of range it can track targets at compared to the aircraft's radar.

# ? Feb 15, 2011 18:25

B4Ctom1: Oct 5, 2003; OVERWORKED COCK; Slippery Tilde

Sunday Punch posted:

This is fascinating, although I'm kind of surprised this sort of passive sensor technology isn't more widespread, considering the huge advantage of being able to see the other guy without yourself being seen. Kind of like how subs with passive and active sonar don't go around pinging everything because it's a good way to give away your position and eat a torpedo. I would be interested to know how effective the IR sensor is, and what sort of range it can track targets at compared to the aircraft's radar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-30MKI

quote:

Laser-optical locator system
OLS-30 laser-optical locator system to include a day and night FLIR capability and is used in conjunction with the helmet mounted sighting system. The OLS-30 is a combined IRST/LR device using a cooled, broader waveband, sensor. Detection range is up to 90 km, whilst the laser ranger is effective to 3.5 km. Targets are displayed on the same LCD display as the radar.

whoa..

more on the technology and its earliest uses by the US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRST

# ? Feb 15, 2011 21:02

kill me now: Sep 14, 2003; Why's Hank crying?

'CUZ HE JUST GOT DUNKED ON!

B4Ctom1 posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-30MKI

whoa..

more on the technology and its earliest uses by the US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRST

But you have to assume that the 90km range is when the target is in full burner and flying away from you. I'm sure the head on ranges at mil power or less are significantly reduced.

# ? Feb 15, 2011 21:40

Raw_Beef: Jul 2, 2004; We know what you been up to and my advice on that little venture is to pack it in. It won't work. It will all end in tears.

This thread is great. Keep doing the weapons and vehicles write ups, ill keep reading.

It seems im not alone in possessing a strange life long fascination with nuclear weapons and war. Its probably widespread since they have come to replace god as the bringer of Armageddon in the modern consciousness.

Years ago i downloaded a tiny old game from Underdogs, by the name of Bravo Romeo Delta.
The game is graphically crap, the interface is crap too. But its also an amazing game.
Its the only hard core balls nuclear war simulator ive ever seen. Defcon made me laugh, so simple in comparison.

The game is set in 1991, right after the soviet collapse, so everything is still pretty much 1980s level forces. You pick your side and get a map of your country, and a list of targets and weapons systems.
Every single weapon on line at the time the game was made is available.
Minuteman missiles, peacekeepers, f-111s, b-52s, slbms of different kinds, its all there.
Its detailed down to what submarines are in port with reactors down and what ones can set out right away. Airstrip alerts must be changed, rockets must be ordered fueled, bombs loaded into bombers, etc.

Alerts come in from BMEWS stations and sattelites, represented where possible by destroyable targets, so as the game progresses the player's C3I degrades depending on what takes a hit.

Its loving impossible to win. In the end this game suffers from the WOPR's final anaylsis. "Strange game, the only way to win is not to play"

But you should play, if you like nuclear war. The game is freeware at this point.

# ? Feb 16, 2011 06:55

Propagandalf: Dec 6, 2008; itchy itchy itchy itchy

B4Ctom1 posted:

This seems like a very awesome capability. I can't imagine why we would not have this simple capability on our own aircraft. I would suspect that the FLIR company has probably developed the technology to passive auto scan and display direction for suspected targets in the sky. Usually if you can imagine it, and it is within the realm of technology, then it has probably been done already.

We do have it.

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/AN-AAS-42-Infra-Red-Search-and-Track-System-IRSTS-United-States.html

Another Russian party to which we showed up a minute late and a ruble short:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/jhmcs.htm

Ivan fielded this in what, the late 80s? We got it in 2003. :eng99:

Propagandalf fucked around with this message at 07:04 on Feb 16, 2011

# ? Feb 16, 2011 07:01

Alaan: May 24, 2005

Propagandalf posted:

We do have it.

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/AN-AAS-42-Infra-Red-Search-and-Track-System-IRSTS-United-States.html

Another Russian party to which we showed up a minute late and a ruble short:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/jhmcs.htm

Ivan fielded this in what, the late 80s? We got it in 2003.

Did F-14s actually have a big rear end camera they could slave to that or was Clancy making poo poo up in Red Storm Rising?

# ? Feb 16, 2011 07:36

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

B4Ctom1 posted:

from here:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/locations.php

I have been reading about a few times in war games where SU-30's are beating US aircraft because of their passive IR sensor. I knew about this sensor and the Russians used to tout it as an incredible capability for tracking down invading bombers or while fighting aircraft in the sky.

This sensor allows them to find and close in with other aircraft without ever emitting radar signals and giving up the ghost.

The US answer to this is the AWACS. It can transmit information right to the radar screen of the fighter aircraft it is supporting. This information is displayed to the fighter as if it has its own radar on but much more powerfully than it could ever emit. Enough info to even allow it to launch radar guided missiles beyond the normal capability.

What the Indian Air Force did was commit a massive force to take out the AWACS (at simulated great cost/sacrifice to themselves). Then they used passive IR equipped aircraft to mop up the remaining US planes who were forced to turn on their radars or stand zero chance.

picture of sensor just ahead of cockpit:

Supposedly this sensor is just a larger souped-up version of the argon cooled seeker found in air to air missiles. I understand that not only does this passive sensor detect but it scans and displays the info on a kind of little radar like display to allow you a locational/directional reference to close with your quarry. I had read at one time that it might be slaved to a night vision with a telescopic optic to allow long range visual identification.

This seems like a very awesome capability. I can't imagine why we would not have this simple capability on our own aircraft. I would suspect that the FLIR company has probably developed the technology to passive auto scan and display direction for suspected targets in the sky. Usually if you can imagine it, and it is within the realm of technology, then it has probably been done already.

The government of the United States can neither confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons at this facility.

As for the rest of it, the issue was simply the U.S. had no need for it. Our teen series aircraft were (until the very end of the Cold War when MiG-29s and Flankers began showing up) far superior technology wise to the Soviets, and that combined with AWACS gave a drat near unbeatable advantage. Of course, there's the old joke, "Two Soviet generals meet in Paris, one asks the other, 'by the way, who won the air war?'" But yeah, "swarm" tactics like the ones you described only work when you have halfway decent aircraft and well trained crews.

The one area where the U.S. did have a need for it was with bomber interception, which is why the earliest IRST were on interceptors like the F-101 and F-102, and why the only teen series fighter to have an IRST on board was the Tomcat, with a primary mission of being a long range bomber/cruise missile destroyer.

Raw_Beef posted:

This thread is great. Keep doing the weapons and vehicles write ups, ill keep reading.

It seems im not alone in possessing a strange life long fascination with nuclear weapons and war. Its probably widespread since they have come to replace god as the bringer of Armageddon in the modern consciousness.

Years ago i downloaded a tiny old game from Underdogs, by the name of Bravo Romeo Delta.
The game is graphically crap, the interface is crap too. But its also an amazing game.
Its the only hard core balls nuclear war simulator ive ever seen. Defcon made me laugh, so simple in comparison.

The game is set in 1991, right after the soviet collapse, so everything is still pretty much 1980s level forces. You pick your side and get a map of your country, and a list of targets and weapons systems.
Every single weapon on line at the time the game was made is available.
Minuteman missiles, peacekeepers, f-111s, b-52s, slbms of different kinds, its all there.
Its detailed down to what submarines are in port with reactors down and what ones can set out right away. Airstrip alerts must be changed, rockets must be ordered fueled, bombs loaded into bombers, etc.

Alerts come in from BMEWS stations and sattelites, represented where possible by destroyable targets, so as the game progresses the player's C3I degrades depending on what takes a hit.

Its loving impossible to win. In the end this game suffers from the WOPR's final anaylsis. "Strange game, the only way to win is not to play"

But you should play, if you like nuclear war. The game is freeware at this point.

Holy gently caress, I need to play this.

Propagandalf posted:

We do have it.

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Avionics/AN-AAS-42-Infra-Red-Search-and-Track-System-IRSTS-United-States.html

Another Russian party to which we showed up a minute late and a ruble short:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/jhmcs.htm

Ivan fielded this in what, the late 80s? We got it in 2003.

And don't forget, the Air Force cut JHMCS from the F-22 (our badass AIR DOMINANCE FIGHTER) because of money, the idea being since we don't have enough money for the whole fighter fleet we would bootstrap the older Eagles (which we'll still be using for quite a while, albeit in limited numbers) so they're not as hopelessly outclassed. So our newest, highest performance fighter doesn't even have a basic helmet mounted sight.

Same justification and end result with the AIM-9X, although there are plans to get them on the newest batch of Raptors...although they won't be able to use the missile effectively (high off boresight launches) without a HMS. So, yeah. :downsgun:

Alaan posted:

Did F-14s actually have a big rear end camera they could slave to that or was Clancy making poo poo up in Red Storm Rising?

Yup: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-EO-Systems.html

(Yeah, yeah, it's APA, I know). Skip down to the part about TISEO on the F-14 (just do a ctrl+f for "tiseo"). You'll see that they had that, they had IRST on the F-14s, they even had some jets that had a combined TISEO/IRST system.

# ? Feb 16, 2011 08:06

rossmum: Dec 2, 2008; Cummander ross, reporting for duty!

I think a lot of the problem is you guys spend so loving much on all these flashy toys the Russians can't hope to match for another decade only to find you then have no capital left over to counter the kind of basic but highly effective stuff the Russians figured they'd have instead of the latest avionics tech or (in the case of the early MiG-29s and Flankers) even loving fly-by-wire.

# ? Feb 16, 2011 09:19

Crescendo: Apr 24, 2005; Strafe those atheistic degenerates. Color them green with lots of holes.

If you guys think IRST is cool, you should take a look at the proposed electro-optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35.

Imagine playing Tom Clany's HAWX, except it's real life. Missile detection and tracking, bad guys and friendlies visible at all times with colour-coding and vectors during dogfights, 360-degree views around the cockpit (including looking through the floor and sides of the airframe, i.e. wallhacking).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fm5vfGW5RY

# ? Feb 16, 2011 15:02

rossmum: Dec 2, 2008; Cummander ross, reporting for duty!

As awesome as that is, there's a long way between 'proposed' and 'in service'. There's a pretty fair chance it'll get either gimped or axed totally somewhere along the line in the name of cutting corners to save on costs.

# ? Feb 16, 2011 15:13

Propagandalf: Dec 6, 2008; itchy itchy itchy itchy

rossmum posted:

I think a lot of the problem is you guys spend so loving much on all these flashy toys....

Didn't

You Guys

just sign an $8bn upgrade contract with Us Guys for MORE P-3s, F-18s and a couple of warships? :j:

# ? Feb 16, 2011 15:25

rossmum: Dec 2, 2008; Cummander ross, reporting for duty!

I'm Army. The two retarded children we're stuck with in the ADF have nothing to do with my people. :colbert:

# ? Feb 16, 2011 15:30

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

This thread will riiiiissssseeeeee....

No time to do a long post because of the whole "being on the front lines of the Korean War" thing :patriot:

, but here are some sweet RAAF pictures:

About the coolest a P-3 will ever look:

Now you see me:

Now you don't:

RAAF used to fly some French aircraft as well:

CARIBOU!

Cool series of pics:

Farewell sweet prince :australia:

# ? Feb 26, 2011 12:30

NosmoKing: Nov 12, 2004; I have a rifle and a frying pan and I know how to use them

I still think the F-111 and other swing-wing aircraft look cool as hell.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 14:29

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

NosmoKing posted:

I still think the F-111 and other swing-wing aircraft look cool as hell.

Do you now?

Little bit of Soviet/Russian (and Indian) action:

Cue up the Kenny Loggins...I feel the need...

The need for speed

Easily the coolest Tomcat paint job, possibly one of the coolest paint jobs on a military jet period:

Second coolest Tomcat paint job:

Loaded for bear, ready to take on some Backfires:

Bombcat:

Riding off into the sunset :911:

Time for some Euro-love:

Enjoy.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 16:03

kill me now: Sep 14, 2003; Why's Hank crying?

'CUZ HE JUST GOT DUNKED ON!

iyaayas01 posted:

Easily the coolest Tomcat paint job, possibly one of the coolest paint jobs on a military jet period:

Wrong

There's something to be said about an active squadron rockin a pirate flag on their tails on the high seas all the way through the cold war.

In fact it was such a cool paint job that when the Navy decided to decommission VF-84 in '95 the Tomcat community refused to let the livery die and VF-103 took on the Jolly rogers insignia.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 16:55

Sunday Punch: Mar 4, 2009; There you are in your home, and the soldiers smash down the door and tell you you're in the middle of World War III. Something's gone wrong with time.

The F-14 will always hold a special place in my heart. Also it looks great in silhouette.

Click images for huuuge

# ? Feb 26, 2011 17:06

SyHopeful: Jun 24, 2007; May an IDF soldier mistakenly gun down my own parents and face no repercussions i'd totally be cool with it cuz accidents are unavoidable in a low-intensity conflict, man

Sunday Punch posted:

The F-14 will always hold a special place in my heart. Also it looks great in silhouette.

Click images for huuuge

Please enjoy the quoted post while listening to this.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 17:26

Crescendo: Apr 24, 2005; Strafe those atheistic degenerates. Color them green with lots of holes.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 17:37

Smiling Jack: Dec 2, 2001; I sucked a dick for bus fare and then I walked home.

kill me now posted:

In fact it was such a cool paint job that when the Navy decided to decommission VF-84 in '95 the Tomcat community refused to let the livery die and VF-103 took on the Jolly rogers insignia.

FDNY Engine 255 / Ladder 157 "The Jolly Rogers" used to have a massive picture of an F-14 and the insignia inside their firehouse. Not sure if they still do.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 17:40

Ruse: Dec 16, 2005; Gentlemen, let's broaden our minds!

F-111

# ? Feb 26, 2011 18:03

Crescendo: Apr 24, 2005; Strafe those atheistic degenerates. Color them green with lots of holes.

# ? Feb 26, 2011 20:01

Sexual Lorax: Mar 17, 2004; HERE'S TO FUCKING; Fun Shoe

When people start one-upping each other with Tomcat pictures, everybody wins.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 04:27

Frozen Horse: Aug 6, 2007; Just a humble wandering street philosopher.

iyaayas01 posted:

Time for some Euro-love:

Enjoy.

This right here is the aircraft paint-job equivalent of the wolfshirt.

The FB111 attack profile has fascinated me since I first heard it described. Fly along at medium altitude until near the threat area. Point nose 20 degrees at ground, as you descend below 10,000 feet increase dive to thirty degrees. Engage the terrain-following radar, which levels you at about 200 feet in mountainous terrain. Hope it doesn't kill you.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 06:36

Alaan: May 24, 2005

There is something to be said for hugging the ground. The only kill a Vark has is making the guy follow them plow into a hill.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 06:41

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

Alaan posted:

There is something to be said for hugging the ground. The only kill a Vark has is making the guy follow them plow into a hill.

Spark 'Vark! :eng101:

It was an EF-111 jamming aircraft that got the kill...an Iraqi Mirage F1 following too closely flew into the ground. Happened on the first fixed wing airstrike of the war.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 06:55

Sunday Punch: Mar 4, 2009; There you are in your home, and the soldiers smash down the door and tell you you're in the middle of World War III. Something's gone wrong with time.

Sexual Lorax posted:

When people start one-upping each other with Tomcat pictures, everybody wins.

SyHopeful posted:

Please enjoy the quoted post while listening to this.

This is also acceptable. And we'll probably need some "MiG-28s" as well:

Click to embiggen.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 09:31

Vincent Van Goatse: Nov 8, 2006; Enjoy every sandwich.; Smellrose

The Tornado isn't a cool aircraft at all. The RAF senior officers have such a hard-on for it that they've sabotaged Britain's entire force projection capacity by ditching the Harrier early, just so they can keep that useless swing-wing shitbird in service a while longer.

Meanwhile the Royal Navy is getting new carriers for the first time in forever and they'll have nothing to fly from them until the JSF gets unfucked some time in 2070.

Of course in theory they could pay for both, but Europeans in general don't seem to understand that you actually have to pay for things like armed forces.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 15:48

Armyman25: Sep 6, 2005

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

The Tornado isn't a cool aircraft at all. The RAF senior officers have such a hard-on for it that they've sabotaged Britain's entire force projection capacity by ditching the Harrier early, just so they can keep that useless swing-wing shitbird in service a while longer.

Meanwhile the Royal Navy is getting new carriers for the first time in forever and they'll have nothing to fly from them until the JSF gets unfucked some time in 2070.

Of course in theory they could pay for both, but Europeans in general don't seem to understand that you actually have to pay for things like armed forces.

It's a bitch paying for a robust social safety net.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 16:16

Laser Cow: Feb 22, 2006; Just like real cows!

Only with lasers.

My favourite as a kid was always this.

This..

And this

I have a soft spot for the Tornado just from watching the Gulf War on the news when I was 11, but otherwise those three are the cool ones. RAF Leuchars was just up the road from me, I really regret never going to an air show there.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 16:19

Vincent Van Goatse: Nov 8, 2006; Enjoy every sandwich.; Smellrose

Armyman25 posted:

It's a bitch paying for a robust social safety net.

They could afford both but they're too gutless to try. So are we, in fact.

Of course none of that helps when the RAF just flat out lied about how much it would cost to keep the Tornado afloat even though the Harrier is more useful in every way these days.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 16:32

ming-the-mazdaless: Nov 30, 2005; Whore funded horsepower

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

The Tornado isn't a cool aircraft at all. The RAF senior officers have such a hard-on for it that they've sabotaged Britain's entire force projection capacity by ditching the Harrier early, just so they can keep that useless swing-wing shitbird in service a while longer.

Meanwhile the Royal Navy is getting new carriers for the first time in forever and they'll have nothing to fly from them until the JSF gets unfucked some time in 2070.

Of course in theory they could pay for both, but Europeans in general don't seem to understand that you actually have to pay for things like armed forces.

They could always hit Dassault up for some carrier variant Rafales.

I also see SAAB was getting speculative with a carrier variant of the Gripen at one stage. I guess if the UK carriers ever get commissioned and it happens before the JSF outcome is known, then theyhave no lack of options for building an effective strike wing.

Though I fully expect the Fleet Air Arm will take 24 super hornets as an interim "gap plug" and keep them in service for the lifespan of the carriers because "LOL JSF budget".

Mirage 2000 porn:
http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/phi729/2422/

# ? Feb 27, 2011 18:12

YankeeAirPirate: Jun 3, 2006; "Be regular and orderly in your life, so that you may be violent and original in your work."

Edit

YankeeAirPirate fucked around with this message at 00:24 on May 9, 2013

# ? Feb 27, 2011 18:16

Mr Crustacean: May 13, 2009; one (1) robosexual
avatar, as ordered

Armyman25 posted:

It's a bitch paying for a robust social safety net.

It's ok, I'm glad to let the yanks pay for planes while we have the NHS :smug:

Also, I'm kinda curious about what iyaayas01 thinks the UK should do in these times of fiscal austerity, should we have shitcan'd the tornados entirely and bought more JSF for the strike fighter role?

# ? Feb 27, 2011 18:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 10, 2024 00:33

Pablo Bluth: Sep 7, 2007; I've made a huge mistake.

We could probably afford a decent number of JF-17s. But manned aircraft are so pass�, lets just skip forward and productionise Teranis.

# ? Feb 27, 2011 18:51

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›1991 »