|
It's funny because it's true. http://www.dailytech.com/Lockheeds+F22+Raptor+Gets+Zapped+by+International+Date+Line/article6225.htm
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2012 15:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
HeyEng posted:The overall strategy of the United States Military is to not ever being anywhere near equal footing with an enemy. We do not like going into a conflict knowing that a potential loss is about to be had. We take the risks but usually a very heavy one-sided battle is the goal. In abstract, a fine policy. But without some upper limit to how much force you need, it can turn into a ruinous waste of resources. The USSR could tell you about this. iyaayas01 posted:This has happened to some degree (the discussion around shifting our force posture to be able to fight one major theater war while deterring another adversary is an example of this) but I'm concerned that we're not really doing that, that at the core these cuts are the same ol' 33%/33%/33% everyone share the pain cut a few random underperforming programs here and there, instead of going about it smartly. I can't find the quote but it's something like "When politicians instead of generals are making war decisions, victory is impossible." I the same thing could be said about procurement decisions. But then I know from you guys that these decisions are being made by people *in* the military, so... Anyway, images from Life:         
Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Feb 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
Those bow galleries on the FDR must have been a treat when the seas rose. I seem to recall reading that those carriers were wet anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
 Supermarine Spitfire Mk. V
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
Somewhat AI for us Canadians, Westjet has officially started the wheels in motion to start a new regional airline. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/02/08/biz-westjet-regional-airline.html quote:WestJet employees have voted overwhelmingly to endorse the company's plans to launch a regional subsidiary starting in 2013. I fear for Westjets future as they get bigger and bigger, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't happy about this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Somewhat AI for us Canadians, Westjet has officially started the wheels in motion to start a new regional airline. That's a dubious choice for the employees; AA and many of the US majors have had problems coming to labor agreements about plane size and who operates smaller routes. For example, a route like MIA-TPA might be better served for customers and the airline as five 90-seat E-175 flights than it would be for three 130-seat 737-600 flights, but the airline is usually limited in how many regional jets it can contract out to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I fear for Westjets future as they get bigger and bigger, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't happy about this. You mean, the future that was lost eight years ago? Seriously, Westjet is just Air Canada with blue tails these days.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 22:46
|
|
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:
The late model spits could nearly do that indefinitely. I swear they climbed like jets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:
 That's not a Mk.V - they had clipped wingtips. That particular Spitfire is a Mk.IX.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 00:30
|
|
|
MrChips posted:You mean, the future that was lost eight years ago? Seriously, Westjet is just Air Canada with blue tails these days. As an aside, it might be a bit pessimistic of me, but I think all airlines in Canada and US are eventually destined for bankruptcy at some time. Westjet has just been able to put it off for longer because of better cost management (fleets are not a small part of it) and keeping the unions at bay. I think going down the road of expanding which will diversify the fleet will not be a good thing. Air Canada with its freshly negotiated contacts and cut but benefits can probably undercut Westjet in a lot of ways. I actually flew AC from Lethbridge to Ft. McMurray last year for $100. I would have a hard time driving for that. That said, as an investment and the future of the company, I'd never buy stock in an airline.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Can't speak to that, but from the outside looking in, their employees seem a lot happier and it's a much more enjoyable airline to fly on which is all I really care about. Westjet is, if you can believe it, even shadier more anti-competitive than Air Canada has ever been - it's just that they get away with it because they publicly whitewash the company as being the plucky underdog westerner valiantly fighting DEM FRENCHIES AND EASTERN BUMS at Air Canada. Having been on the receiving end of some of Westjet's bullshit tactics, I have no interest in working for them or paying them as a passenger. Even beyond that, Westjet has basically reached the limit of where its current business model can take it, hence starting the regional carrier (Westprop?). As such, the company has gone from the growth phase, where people and pay would advance very quickly, to the mature phase, which brings an end to that, as well as all kinds of problems, both internally and externally. Today, Westjet and Air Canada have largely the same cost structure for existing employees; where AC falls flat on its face is that it has billions of dollars of obligations to former employees and other legacy costs. Ironically, once (OK, if) Air Canada smooths out its labour relations and finally puts Jazz out to pasture (AC Express out of Toronto City Centre, which is operated by Skyservice, is the "camel's nose" for Jazz/Chorus Aviation, IMO), it should actually be in better financial standing than Westjet will be, as they operate a pile of relatively high-yield international routes. Starting an airline is expensive, and starting an airline that uses exclusively small aircraft, as Westjet wants to do, is even more expensive, as the cost per seat-mile of a small aircraft will always be higher than that of a larger aircraft. Even with hiring staff at near-starvation wages (which will happen), and diverting a chunk of the route network from mainline (which will also happen), their yields are still going to be pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 03:15
|
|
|
MrChips posted:
Here's one with a Griffon engine in it (Mark XVIII?): 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 03:17
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Even with hiring staff at near-starvation wages (which will happen), and diverting a chunk of the route network from mainline (which will also happen), their yields are still going to be pathetic. That is also what I foresee. They're going to be suffering the pains that all airlines before it have. I predict that by the end of the decade they'll be going through bankruptcy too (this is easy to do when nobody will remember me in 2020)! For the time being though, I far prefer flying with them than the crap aircraft AC ends up sticking me with on the same route.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Here's one with a Griffon engine in it (Mark XVIII?): That color scheme... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 04:33
|
|
|
Going TDY to Korea, tried to get on Asiana out of SEA, SATO stuck me with United out of SFO.  Need to see if I can get that changed. At least I no longer have a FOUR DAY layover in Seattle  .
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 06:38
|
|
|
MrChips posted:
Some did, some didn't. The Spitfire family tree is exceedingly complicated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 12:56
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Going TDY to Korea, tried to get on Asiana out of SEA, SATO stuck me with United out of SFO.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 13:40
|
|
|
parrhesia posted:Yeah, if you can, change it. From my own experience, I can't recommend Asiana enough, they really are a pleasure to fly with. The seats, entertainment and service in economy are all among the best I've seen so far. Food's decent, too, especially if you take the Korean offes. It is the Air Force's mission to ensure that he suffers, they probably wanted to FedEx him over in a crate at first. Check this out if you've got some free time. A paper from Jean-Claude Hironde the Rafale program manager on "design optimization for a family of multi role combat aircraft." It's a pretty meh scanning job, but that just adds to the 80s-ness of the document.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 15:39
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Isn't that an Il-28? Was Life magazine just making up stuff or was our intel that spotty? That 6-engined bomber is pretty sexy though...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:Isn't that an Il-28? Was Life magazine just making up stuff or was our intel that spotty? Yes. The article was from April 1953, so from a civilian standpoint, not too bad. The Tu-95 is totally sexy. I'll trade 6 engines for 4 with counter-rotating props any day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 17:19
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Going TDY to Korea, tried to get on Asiana out of SEA, SATO stuck me with United out of SFO. Take the loving layover, man. That perdiem would be the bomb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Yes. The article was from April 1953, so from a civilian standpoint, not too bad. Haha, yeah, next time I'll remember to include the date, that will make things clearer. I have no idea if the 6 engined Tu-95 was an actual thing or somebody figured "It's to be a Russian B-36, therefore it will have six engines." Random Tu-95 fact: the contra-rotating engines started as a German design in late WW2. Also, the Wikipedia article for the Bear is a bit...confusing. It says that the props on a Tu-95 spin supersonic, and the Thunderscreech was made to 'counter' it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:02
|
|
|
So how about the Russian B-47/Vickers Valiant, the TU-16? The Chinese have just restarted production of Tu-16s in 2009.  Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:16
|
|
|
joat mon posted:The Tu-95 is totally sexy. I'll trade 6 engines for 4 with counter-rotating props any day. You'll be spotted by radar a "little bit" sooner by radar. Tu-95s are laughably detectable, even compared to a B-52.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You'll be spotted by radar a "little bit" sooner by radar. Tu-95s are laughably detectable, even compared to a B-52. Which will win the contest of longest serving with original operator? The B-52 has a seven-month lead. e: poo poo, I guess that's first flight. Make that eleven month lead. movax fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
Speaking of Tu-95s and their Russian brethren, the JASDF intercepted 5 Russian planes today, including 2 Tu-95s, 2 Su-24s and an A-50 AEW. Per Baseleg: http://thebaseleg.blogspot.com/2012/02/russian-50-intercepted-off-japan-for.html  quote:Japan's Defense Ministry has said that a total of 5 Russian military aircraft were intercepted by the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) off Japan on Wednesday, including the appearance of an Ilyushin/Beriev A-50 Airborne Early Warning aircraft for the first time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 02:52
|
|
|
Wow, they're actually employing their A-50s? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
gently caress, that's an ugly bird.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 07:46
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:I might be the only guy in the world that never thought the F-16 was cool. In New Zealand we're still using the UH-1Hs delivered back in 66 - we've just had the first of the NH-90s delivered (in an AN-124 no less) but they won't enter service until next year. Going to miss the distinctive sound of the Iroquois but they were well due for an upgrade.  http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6398548/New-air-force-helicopters-set-to-soar (Antonov in the video too) Now we just need to think about the Hercules and Orions both of which were also purchased in the mid 60s (and must have taken a massive beating since then) dissss fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 08:59
|
|
|
parrhesia posted:Yeah, if you can, change it. From my own experience, I can't recommend Asiana enough, they really are a pleasure to fly with. The seats, entertainment and service in economy are all among the best I've seen so far. Food's decent, too, especially if you take the Korean offes. I flew over and back on Asiana last time (direct flights to/from SEA too, this time I have to connect from SEA to SFO outbound and have a 3 hour layover at Narita on the way back  ) which was why I requested it in the first place. I agree, even back in steerage the seats were great, the entertainment was great, and the service was friendly and with a cute smile...I ate the Korean meals every time, and they were legitimately good food. Not like "pretty good for an airplane" food, more like "I would be okay with eating this in a restaurant" quality. Not four star restaurant or anything, but for airplane food that's pretty drat good praise I think. There's a reason they're only one of 7 five-star airlines and have won a shitload of "best airline in the world" awards.front wing flexing posted:Take the loving layover, man. That perdiem would be the bomb. Yeah, it would, although probably not that much since they've been cutting per diem...and in any case I have a bunch of poo poo to do next week (PT test, get my PHA done since I'm like 18 months overdue so I can medically outprocess, get my CED orders, etc.) before I can leave so it would've just been a huge pain in the dick for no real reason. Apparently the four day layover thing was a mistake that they knew about that somehow slipped through (SATO make a mistake??? No way!!) Nebakenezzer posted:Random Tu-95 fact: the contra-rotating engines started as a German design in late WW2. Also, the Wikipedia article for the Bear is a bit...confusing. It says that the props on a Tu-95 spin supersonic, and the Thunderscreech was made to 'counter' it. I dunno  with that wiki article, because the props on a Tu-95 definitely don't spin supersonic...which is the whole reason why the Thunderscreech was so loving loud and an abysmal failure. The trick to speed with turboprops is gigantic contra-rotating props staying subsonic, not one tiny prop going BBBBBBBXXXXXZZZZZZAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWRRRRRRR loud enough to knock people unconscious and induce seizures because it's rotating well past the speed of sound. The Tu-114 (passenger derivative of the Tu-95) is in fact the fastest propeller driven plane in the world. FWIW my reading of the wiki article is that the Thunderscreech would rival the Bear for the loudest airplane in the world title, not necessarily that the Thunderscreech was designed to "counter" it like an interceptor or something.co199 posted:Speaking of Tu-95s and their Russian brethren, the JASDF intercepted 5 Russian planes today, including 2 Tu-95s, 2 Su-24s and an A-50 AEW. Per Baseleg: The real story with Japanese air defense isn't with the Russians (who have been more active as of late, just like they have near Alaska and Western Europe) but with the Chinese, who have become a LOT more active over the past couple of years. I saw a really good article on it a while back, but now I can't find it...we'll see if I can dig it up. Godholio posted:Wow, they're actually employing their A-50s? Employing all sorts of wacky poo poo these days...Blackjacks have been doing the perimeter flights up here and cruising past Western Europe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 09:51
|
|
|
50 years of progress:   
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 11:16
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Westjet is, if you can believe it, even shadier more anti-competitive than Air Canada has ever been - it's just that they get away with it because they publicly whitewash the company as being the plucky underdog westerner valiantly fighting DEM FRENCHIES AND EASTERN BUMS at Air Canada. Having been on the receiving end of some of Westjet's bullshit tactics, I have no interest in working for them or paying them as a passenger. Even beyond that, Westjet has basically reached the limit of where its current business model can take it, hence starting the regional carrier (Westprop?). As such, the company has gone from the growth phase, where people and pay would advance very quickly, to the mature phase, which brings an end to that, as well as all kinds of problems, both internally and externally. This is probably the clearest most concise description of the Canadian airline industry that I've read. There's usually such a massive level of uninformed noise about airlines (based mainly on "I had a lovely/good flight last month", or "The National Post said..."), your post is surprisingly refreshing. You're absolutely right about the legacy costs of AC... I think any large company that has been around for sort of half a century is facing crippling pension costs as a generation on old sweetheart deals retires. As for labour relations, that really is the achilles heel of AC. They have such an ingrained adversarial culture between management and labour that at this point even the finest family councillors and divorce court couldn't bridge the gap between the "if it weren't for the fact that you're paying my mortgage, I'd happily torch the place" employees and the "you scum aren't worthy of licking the dirt off my boots for sustenance" management. I don't know what the answer there is. I know there's changes afoot, mainly generational ones, as people who started in the old system are starting to fill senior management positions and have the power to change what was so glaringly hosed up with the old system they started under. How effective they might be, and whether what comes to pass is ultimately positive remains to be seen. It's still years from fruition though. Maybe by the time WestJet files for bankruptcy, AC will have sorted itself and the colossus can stuff another airline down it's gaping maw 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 12:02
|
|
|
Yeah, the article definitely says the Thunderscreech would rival it for noisiest aircraft, not that it was made as a countermove. The source for the supersonic tip speed is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiX26JkbtLk Journalists usually get things wrong, but it seemed pretty accurate and for all I know it might be right. But even though I can't gauge the loudness through youtube, it sounded like a regular turboprop - but obviously just taxiing, not cruising at 400 knots. Supersonic tips have a very particular note, if you've been to an airshow you might have seen a T-6 Harvard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nImtHmv8tbA Just as it passes you, the shockwave hits as an annoying, buzzing note. Sounds and feels like someone is farting hard at your skull, making it resonate. But since it's a relatively small engine, the prop doesn't displace a lot of air and the note is only slightly annoying, not incapacitating. Mid-post google update: http://www.pprune.org/questions/87146-supersonic-prop-aircraft.html quote:The Tupolev Bear certainly had supersonic tips - intercepting Lightning pilots could hear it miles away as a result. It had to have them go supersonic because there would be no way that it could go fast, have the props go round fast enough to generate thrust and still have a vector sum which was subsonic. The snag is that in addition to the noise the prop is generating wave drag and hence operating less efficiently, just as a supersonic aircraft generates wave drag and hence needs more fuel to get from A to B. quote:What? Somebody sitting in a Lightning could hear it? Bl**dy H*ll! quote:Been there, done it, heard it! Impressive noise, too, Not, I must say, from 'miles' away, more like yards, but the unmistakable noise certainly came through into the pressurised cockpit - and through the bone-dome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 12:04
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Employing all sorts of wacky poo poo these days...Blackjacks have been doing the perimeter flights up here and cruising past Western Europe. They started using the Blackjacks regularly a couple of years ago. They even took them to South America in 08 I believe. I'm still really surprised to see the A-50 actually moving around and tracking foreign aircraft across a border like this. That might be a first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 16:45
|
|
|
Most of Russia's A-50s are about 25 years old, but they just had a new A-50U delivered a few months ago. Any indication as to whether this was an old A-50, or the new A-50U on a shakedown flight?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
grover posted:Most of Russia's A-50s are about 25 years old, but they just had a new A-50U delivered a few months ago. Any indication as to whether this was an old A-50, or the new A-50U on a shakedown flight? If that picture is of the actual aircraft and not a file photo, it's an original A-50.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
grover posted:Most of Russia's A-50s are about 25 years old, but they just had a new A-50U delivered a few months ago. Any indication as to whether this was an old A-50, or the new A-50U on a shakedown flight? Baseleg's article doesn't specify, and they list the photo as source unknown.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
So a 787 went on a looong test flight today. They spelt out 787 and the Boeing logo!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
Awesome!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
monkeytennis posted:So a 787 went on a looong test flight today. They spelt out 787 and the Boeing logo! http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE236/history/20120209/2100Z/KBFI/KBFI Duration : 19:12. Egad. Didn't realize they could go that long without refueling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 18:44
|
|
