|
Allow me to show you the United States' newest and greatest bomber. Ten engines, four of them General Electric J47 jet turbines, and the other six the tried and proven Pratt & Whitney R-4360-53 Wasp Major, allow a cruising speed of over four hundred miles per hour. The only aircraft with the capability to carry the United States' most powerful weapon, the Mark 17 hydrogen bomb, or eighty-six thousand pounds of conventional bombs, and the capability to carry the McDonnel XF-85 parasite fighter. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the Convair B-36 Peacemaker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruE8yhkHke8
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 05:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
Styles Bitchley posted:Fun fact about the Navy version of the F-35: engineered to be able make it back to ship with only one engine running. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 05:54
|
|
|
Styles Bitchley posted:Fun fact about the Navy version of the F-35: engineered to be able make it back to ship with only one engine running.  atomicthumbs posted:Allow me to show you the United States' newest and greatest bomber. Six turnin' and four burnin'...and sometimes more when those Wasp Majors caught on fire. Or as the crews put it, "two turning, two burning, two smoking, two joking, and two unaccounted for."
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 06:37
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:
Or sometimes glowing. While the test flights with working nuclear reactors on board never involved them powering the engines, they did 47 such flights as a proof of concept. In the 1950s we had a bomber that could carry a nuclear reactor and nuclear weapons at the same time. It's always interesting to wonder where aviation would have gone if the Spruce Goose and B-36 mindset had become more practical.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 08:37
|
|
|
Styles Bitchley posted:Fun fact about the Navy version of the F-35: engineered to be able make it back to ship with only one engine running. This is a very nice burn and I was thinking this would be the first single engine carrier borne aircraft since the F-4U Corsair. But they've had several single engine jets, the F-8 Crusader, the A-4 Skyhawk and the A-7 Corsair immediately come to mind. They had more unreliable engines than the F-35 will have, but I will concede they were dedicated attack aircraft and not multi/swing-role. A quick trawl of wikipedia mid-post reveals further single engine jets, used operationally as fighters: F9F Cougar/Panther, F11 Tiger, F3H Demon. I'm sure the engine reliability of those helped seal the deal of the double barreled fighter for the following decades. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 15:48
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:Allow me to show you the United States' newest and greatest bomber. That's Colonel Potter in there as the engineer along with Brig.Gen. Jimmy Stewart. I still haven't seen this movie all the way through, but it's essentially a feature-length SAC propaganda film, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 20:27
|
|
|
benito posted:Or sometimes glowing. While the test flights with working nuclear reactors on board never involved them powering the engines, they did 47 such flights as a proof of concept. In the 1950s we had a bomber that could carry a nuclear reactor and nuclear weapons at the same time. It's always interesting to wonder where aviation would have gone if the Spruce Goose and B-36 mindset had become more practical. I just love how insane the Cold War made the US and USSR. We just did not give a gently caress about anything. I understand why this type of behavior isn't sustainable and I'm glad society tries to be normal, but just think of where humanity would be if we just went apeshit and went full bore with all technology. Either dead or the most spectacular thing for trillions of miles. Goddamn would it be awesome, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
BSAKat posted:That's Colonel Potter in there as the engineer along with Brig.Gen. Jimmy Stewart. I still haven't seen this movie all the way through, but it's essentially a feature-length SAC propaganda film, yeah? I wouldn't call it a bad movie, it's just that nothing much happens. They fly around in B-36's for most of the film, then end up transferring to B-47's, and the triumphant climax of the movie is where they fly B-47's from one place, to another place, and nothing happens. Really a very accurate and predictive metaphor for the whole cold war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 22:10
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:I wouldn't call it a bad movie, it's just that nothing much happens. They fly around in B-36's for most of the film, then end up transferring to B-47's, and the triumphant climax of the movie is where they fly B-47's from one place, to another place, and nothing happens. That's kind of the vibe I got from the bits of the movie I've seen. Still, it's cool to see those old birds flying around. Oh, and apropos of nothing, I loving love your Bucky-avatar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
BSAKat posted:That's kind of the vibe I got from the bits of the movie I've seen. Still, it's cool to see those old birds flying around. Oh, and apropos of nothing, I loving love your Bucky-avatar. The Bucky avatar is by Boris Artzybasheff, GIS some more of his stuff because it is all awesome.  Check out this 1950's propaganda film awesomeness. Northrop Aviation tells you why you should stop worrying and love the wing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_NehU6fMWY&feature=player_embedded I would gleefully kill for that 4' desk model of the B-49. Slo-Tek fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jul 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 00:52
|
|
|
BSAKat posted:That's Colonel Potter in there as the engineer along with Brig.Gen. Jimmy Stewart. I still haven't seen this movie all the way through, but it's essentially a feature-length SAC propaganda film, yeah? I think it's available on Netflix Watch Instantly (although it might have been removed), but it's really not a very good movie. The flying sequences are pretty impressive, but outside of that, the plot is completely forgettable, and most of the actors are pretty bad as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 02:26
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:I wouldn't call it a bad movie, it's just that nothing much happens. They fly around in B-36's for most of the film, then end up transferring to B-47's, and the triumphant climax of the movie is where they fly B-47's from one place, to another place, and nothing happens. To be fair there is the bit where they crash one of the B-36s at Thule, but yeah, other than that bit that was a very accurate description. I kind of thought it was cool how the character Jimmy Stewart played in the movie wasn't too far removed from his real life experiences, since he flew combat missions during WWII and remained an officer in the Reserves after the war, eventually rising to the rank of Brigadier General (and flying as an observer on a combat mission over Vietnam). It is funny though...fighter pilots have Top Gun, where the main character flies by the seat of his pants, falls in love/breaks up/falls back in love with his instructor, rides motorcycles without a helmet, breaks every rule in the book, gets his back seater killed, and eventually comes to terms with his issues by saving the day and shooting down a shitload of bad guys. Bomber pilots/SAC have Strategic Air Command, where the main character flies as a team member on a crew, follows all his checklists to a T, is proud to serve his country without any sort of ego, has a dutiful wife that is happy to follow him wherever the Air Force takes him, and "saves the day" by "providing deterrence" through flying bombers from one place to another place without actually dropping any ordnance or killing any bad guys. Pretty apt cultural representation. Fighter pilots may make movies while bomber pilots make history, but goddamn is that history pretty loving boring compared to the fighter pilot movies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 03:41
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:I would gleefully kill for that 4' desk model of the B-49. If it was four feet would you be able to fit anything else on the desk Also: this book seems uniquely well targeted for this thread, the airplane thread in AI.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 04:16
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Bomber pilots/SAC have Strategic Air Command, where the main character flies as a team member on a crew, follows all his checklists to a T, is proud to serve his country without any sort of ego, has a dutiful wife that is happy to follow him wherever the Air Force takes him, and "saves the day" by "providing deterrence" through flying bombers from one place to another place without actually dropping any ordnance or killing any bad guys. There is Memphis Belle, which is decent if not terribly accurate, and honorable mention goes to Dr. Strangelove. And maybe we can squeeze in Flight of the Intruder. I wonder if you could shoehorn a Crimson Tide story into the crew of a B-52.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 06:43
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Pretty apt cultural representation. Fighter pilots may make movies while bomber pilots make history, but goddamn is that history pretty loving boring compared to the fighter pilot movies. Memphis Belle is a better movie than Top Gun. e- goddamn I'm not awake yet, look how dumb I am e2- Bat*21 is ostensibly a bomber movie, too Seizure Meat fucked around with this message at 10:53 on Jul 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 10:50
|
|
|
I have Flight of the Intruder on DVD. Pretty good movie, and definitely deals well with the difficulties some of our pilots dealt with during Vietnam, especially about having targets they weren't allowed to hit because some jackass 10000 miles away was more worried about the other side's propaganda than the lives of his men.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 16:22
|
|
|
This B-36 movie...What's the title?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 19:19
|
|
|
Strategic Air Command Pretty inspired title, eh?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2011 19:31
|
|
|
benito posted:There is Memphis Belle, which is decent if not terribly accurate, and honorable mention goes to Dr. Strangelove. And maybe we can squeeze in Flight of the Intruder. I wonder if you could shoehorn a Crimson Tide story into the crew of a B-52. Story is that after Top Gun came out, the attack guys started wearing T-shirts that said "Fighter pilots make movies, attack pilots make history." Then when Flight of the Intruder was released, the fighter pilots had shirts made up that said "Fighter pilots make movies, attack pilots make bad movies."
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 01:42
|
|
|
I think I might have seen every airplane move ever made, thanks to my father. He got his pilot's license as a teenager in the 60s and has worked in commercial aviation ever since. So my entire childhood involved watching any and every aviation-themed flick that tended to be on in the middle of the night when Dad got home from work. Air & Space magazine even used to give pointers. "TBS is showing The Great Waldo Pepper at 2 a.m. on February 20, 1988." On any other movie, Dad always pays attention to the planes. "This movie is set in 1963! That version of the blah blah blah didn't come out until 1965!" My grandparents always complained about getting weird photos from vacations that involved a featureless speck in a blue sky, and Dad would point out that he'd snapped a shot of a DC-3 or something. On the plus side, Dad took Mom on dates back when they were in high school, delivering planes from Memphis to St. Louis, MO and then moving another plane from St. Louis to Louisville, KY, and then another one back to Memphis. So I'm probably here because of his love of planes. (Plenty more stories if anyone is interested--I grew up surrounded by model airplanes and pictures of planes and attending airshows. I knew pilots and flight attendants and mechanics and air traffic controllers, and even got to spend time on the back end of military air bases during Scout trips. But I'm guessing that everyone else in this thread has similar backgrounds.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 04:49
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Story is that after Top Gun came out, the attack guys started wearing T-shirts that said "Fighter pilots make movies, attack pilots make history." Blam. Advantage fighter pilots. Of course, now they're all fighter attack pilots, so I guess it doesn't matter. But that whole debate has been going on for some time...  More F-8 porn:  Have some bombs too:  And tell some more stories.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 07:24
|
|
|
The Crusader was a goddamned workhorse. Plus, who can hate 4x20mm? Last of the Gunfighters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 13:14
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Blam. Advantage fighter pilots. Attack pilots make movies. Fighter pilots make incredibly homoerotic movies. You really can't live that volleyball scene down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 16:58
|
|
|
Couple of shots from Shoreham RAFA airshow. I think it was '09. And one of that poor, poor Mustang back in it's more airborne days. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2011 23:55
|
|
|
Great pics! I absolutely love the Mustang. Not as much as the Lanc though, 4 Merlins beats 1 every time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 13:42
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:
Goddamn this is one of the coolest things I have ever watched.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 16:13
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:Great pics! I absolutely love the Mustang. Not as much as the Lanc though, 4 Merlins beats 1 every time. You mean this bad boy?  That was there too. I had a sweet one from that year where it was flying with two Spitfires as escort, but was looking into the sun, so it was mostly silhouette. This was from '09, and still a bit dark. I really need a low f-stop zoom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2011 18:40
|
|
|
benito posted:There is Memphis Belle, which is decent if not terribly accurate, and honorable mention goes to Dr. Strangelove. And maybe we can squeeze in Flight of the Intruder. I wonder if you could shoehorn a Crimson Tide story into the crew of a B-52. What about Broken Arrow for B-1 crew?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 22:56
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:What about Broken Arrow for B-1 crew? Stealth for our robotic drone friends?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 23:05
|
|
|
The Right Stuff for, well, everybody. It's still awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2011 23:12
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:The Right Stuff for, well, everybody. It's still awesome. God help me, but I didn't like The Right Stuff. I love the book, and I read it every year, but the movie just seemed, I don't know, messy, ugly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 03:24
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:The Right Stuff for, well, everybody. It's still awesome. Interesting bit of trivia about that movie (which I saw in the theater and still love). Zooey Deschanel's the actress that's in all kinds of movies and is about to have a sitcom on NBC. Her sister Emily is the lead on "Bones" on Fox. Their father, Caleb, was the cinematographer for The Right Stuff, and their mom Mary Jo played John Glenn's wife in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 06:48
|
|
|
Up In The Air for frequent passengers like me; on flight number five of nine for the July-August timeframe. In-flight wifi and first class beverage options own own own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 13:15
|
|
|
Boeing 747 test flights must be quite fun. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE523/history/20110802/1330Z/KPAE/KPAE
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 14:38
|
|
|
PREYING MANTITS posted:Boeing 747 test flights must be quite fun. I wonder what they're checking there; a seventeen hour flight would require some extra pilots to spell each other off. Also, I can't figure out where I am  http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL1169
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
They are testing the range.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 14:57
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:I wonder what they're checking there; a seventeen hour flight would require some extra pilots to spell each other off. Weird, can't see the track on FA either. HelloFlight seems to be putting you right over the border of New Mexico/Arizona though: http://www.helloflight.com/Flight/DAL1169.cfm
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 15:49
|
|
|
PREYING MANTITS posted:Weird, can't see the track on FA either. HelloFlight seems to be putting you right over the border of New Mexico/Arizona though: http://www.helloflight.com/Flight/DAL1169.cfm Shows up now  Only 45 minutes or so to drink a whole bunch! (Killed so far: three coffee + Bailey's, a Glenlivet, and working on a Woodford; it's only 8am where I'm going)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2011 15:56
|
|
|
Does this count? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUx35zuI5GI It's for sale: http://www.jrlcycles.com/page/page/4187437.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 04:44 |
|
|
Does this bring new meaning to "Get to the choppah!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2011 14:09
|
|
