|
quote:Needs more guns.
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 10:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 10:54
|
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:Needs more guns. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 11:57
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:BONE Is this air museum at Ellsworth? I seem to recall seeing all those nukes on display inside their main building, and the fake B-2 from a 90s car commercial out front.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 12:52
|
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:Needs more  (plus she's got two cheek .50s on the right side) (also a B-26) \/\/\/\/ Yeah, I meant B-25, like the one MagnumHB posted, as opposed to the A-26 at Ellsworth, which was different from the B-26, except after 1948, when it became the same. joat mon fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jul 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 14:24
|
|
|
joat mon posted:
Unless the B-26 grew a twin boom tail that's a B25.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 16:41
|
|
|
Memento1979 posted:Air to air nuclear weapon, huh. Anti massed bomber formations? Because we can? Because we can. Boomerjinks posted:Is this air museum at Ellsworth? I seem to recall seeing all those nukes on display inside their main building, and the fake B-2 from a 90s car commercial out front. That's the right one. The fake B-2's gone though,j it was in horrible condition and wasn't worth restoring (especially since it cleared up space to fit the B-1B there. ) Now they just need to get a B-36 somehow. Here's something they are restoring though, a Delta Dagger http://www.ellsworth.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-070130-141.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
Memento1979 posted:Air to air nuclear weapon, huh. Anti massed bomber formations? Because we can? Mostly because early missiles had very bad guidance systems and planes are tough to hit. If your missile isn't accurate enough to actually hit the target, just make the kill radius bigger. Once guidance systems got good enough to consistently get hits, they stopped using air-to-air nukes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 17:57
|
|
|
gohuskies posted:Mostly because early missiles had very bad guidance systems and planes are tough to hit. If your missile isn't accurate enough to actually hit the target, just make the kill radius bigger. Once guidance systems got good enough to consistently get hits, they stopped using air-to-air nukes. The targeting and guidance system for the AIR-2 was actually the A-4. They made the aircraft as cheap as possible and still big enough to carry the Genie. Nice to note that the early-60s mindset that developing a new manned fighter would be cheaper than developing a guidance system on a nuclear weapon capable of hitting a bomber formation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
Only useful for bombers information, but the sheer size of the warhead (relative to air-to-air conventional rockets, missiles or cannon) provided lots of advantages for hitting bombers in formation - you either scatter the formation very badly, or take out multiple attackers with one shot, or both!
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
The Genie had a 1.5kt warhead and a range of just 6 miles. Wiki has a  story of its safety being "proven" in the one and only test by air force officers standing hatless directly under the blast..
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 04:37
|
|
|
Apparently it was also useful in exercises for making F-16 pilots say "I was killed by a what?" http://www.f-106deltadart.com/thereiwas/DARTS%20vs%20VIPERS-Townsend.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 04:53
|
|
|
Most people don't realize the Genie wasn't a missile. It was an unguided rocket. quote:Targeting, arming, and firing of the weapon were coordinated by the launch aircraft's fire-control system. Detonation was by time-delay fuze, although the fuzing mechanism would not arm the warhead until engine burn-out, to give the launch aircraft sufficient time to turn and escape. Lethal radius of the blast was estimated to be about 300 meters (1,000 ft). Fly to radar intercept point, computer says YUP! This is the spot! and cuts it loose, and you buuuuug out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 06:10
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Now they just need to get a B-36 somehow. Here's something they are restoring though, a Delta Dagger http://www.ellsworth.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-070130-141.pdf Every museum deserves a B-36. A friend on facebook recently posted that we has on a road trip to wyoming and was, at that moment, leaving Omaha en route to Lincoln. I made it my mission to convince him to check out the SAC museum. It really is the next best thing to USAF in Dayton. Apparently I succeeded and he went today. Also, apparently the windscreen of the Delta Dagger/Dart is a direct ancestor of the SR-71 windscreen. I don't know if it's true that they share parts or construction, but I've been unable to unsee it, and now I have to think "you have your mother's eyes" when looking at a Blackbird.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 06:42
|
|
|
Oh look who's back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
grover posted:The Genie had a 1.5kt warhead and a range of just 6 miles. Wiki has a They didn't look too upset about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ovb7F_r0XHo&t=362s
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 09:07
|
|
|
The Proc posted:They didn't look too upset about it. Grandpa, did I ever tell you you're about the dumbest motherfucker that I know?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 21:36
|
|
|
So how many of them got cancer? That PDF of the F-106 driver calling a training kill on two F-16s with the Genie is friggin hilarious though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
Probably old news but the F-22 is trying to kill its pilot again/still http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/hypoxia/
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
priznat posted:Probably old news but the F-22 is trying to kill its pilot again/still Good lord, another one? Edit: The random, uninformed speculation in the Wired comments is both hilarious and terrifying. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
I think it's the software is becoming sentient and is offended by having a human sitting in its head.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
Oxford Comma posted:Good lord, another one? wired posted:This was the 23rd unexplained “hypoxic incident” since the Raptor was introduced in 2005. "F-22 is the whole idea." e:f;b
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
priznat posted:I think it's the software is becoming sentient and is offended by having a human sitting in its head. It's just pissed that it wasn't selected for the new Top Gun movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
Psion posted:So how many of them got cancer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
Really not the cold war, but about 1/3 of the way through The Admirals which covers Halsey, Nimitz, King, and Leahy, the four Five Star/Fleet Admirals in WWII. It's as much a book about the rise of modern naval power and the transition from Battleship force projection to submarine and aircraft ruling the day as about the people and the war so far. Pretty enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
grover posted:an aircrew that flew an instrumented aircraft through the fireball immediately after detonation The coolest pilots in history.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2012 01:30
|
|
|
I was trawling Ebay for YF-23 kits, when I found this interesting piece of literature. http://www.ebay.com.my/itm/YF-22-and-YF-23-Advanced-Tactical-Fighters-/160699564409?pt=Non_Fiction&hash=item256a70c179 Has anyone read this before? Although it looks dated it sounds interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2012 06:40
|
|
|
This happened at the Londown airshow
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2012 22:37
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:This happened at the Londown airshow Goddamn that Vulcan is so loving sexy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 01:11
|
|
|
Oxford Comma posted:Goddamn that Vulcan is so loving sexy. It sure is pretty for being a harbinger of doom and all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 02:23
|
|
|
I find all the V-bombers pretty cool and also scary looking: Vickers Valiant:  Avro Vulcan:  Handley Page Victor:  (Teasin' Tina  )https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xQiiTCrixk priznat fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Jul 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 03:12
|
|
|
That last one looks like a loving Ace Combat series boss. Goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 03:24
|
|
|
Yeah the Victor is friggin nuts. I think it's my favorite of the V-bombers just because of how out of this world it looks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 04:53
|
|
|
It's like the British were working on a completely different engineering book than the rest of the world at the time. Russia and the US had a lot of planes that pretty much the same rough shape with the fine details changed. A lot of the random Euro delta wings were of similar designs. Then Britain has all these funky rear end V bombers that look like nothing else in the air.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 07:15
|
|
|
British aircraft are usually my favourite looking planes, I cannot explain it. English Electric Lightning (sponsored by Shell), my fav  Gloster Javelin, the plane with badonkadonk   dat azz Blackburn Buccaneer, seen showing off its bomb bay (2000lb nuke goes here!) and split tail airbraking doodad  Bonus: this video is freakin' cool. Hawker Siddeley Nimrod, a modified version of the de Havilland Comet.  Also I really like the look of the much-revilled Harrier, specifically the Hawker Siddeley GR.3 (with the funky nose)  It may be a dangerous piece of crap but it looks like some crazy space vulture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 07:55
|
|
|
Counterpoint - the Nimrod AEW3:   All those other aircraft are pretty cool, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 09:19
|
|
|
Looks like an airliner and a Space Shuttle fuel tank had a teleporter accident.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 09:31
|
|
|
I have to say the Vulcan is my favourite V-bomber, because goddamn, that howl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU1VSCph-G8 The Lightning is a really awesome plane, and doesn't get enough credit. Also, the twin-boom jets - the Vampire, Venom, and Sea Vixen - have always really appealed to me. Glad I got to see the former two flying as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 10:09
|
|
|
Yeah, British Cold War era stuff is almost like a sci-fi version of what the US and USSR were doing. The inboard engines, strange wing styles....it looks off somehow but also looks totally right at the same time. Were the bombers designed for nuclear weapons of British design, too? Or were they set up for American weapons. I know nowadays it's all pretty much American weapons, but what was the British nuclear program of the 50's and 60's like?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 12:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:29 |
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Yeah, British Cold War era stuff is almost like a sci-fi version of what the US and USSR were doing. The inboard engines, strange wing styles....it looks off somehow but also looks totally right at the same time. Ernest Bevin posted:"We've got to have this thing. I don't mind it for myself, but I don't want any other Foreign Secretary of this country to be talked at or to by the Secretary of State of the US as I have just been... We've got to have this thing over here, whatever it costs ... We've got to have the bloody Union Jack on top of it." Immediately after WWII the co-operation between the US and UK over nuclear weapons fell apart (McMahon act pretty much cut out any co-operation) so the british government decided to ensure their own capacity. By the early 50's the british had developed enough to be producing their own fissile materials, and the US thawed a bit (the first soviet test helped) and started co-operating again- the british would supply scientists and fissile materials, and the US would supply nuclear devices. At this time, the UK was very concerned that the US would not risk her own cities in the event of a European only war, and not deploy nuclear weapons. In 1952 the UK had it's first test, hurricane which was pretty much a direct copy of "fat man". This was then quickly adapted into a freefall bomb with a yield of around 15-20 kilotons, the "blue danube" which was ready to be carried by Valiant bombers by the end of 1953 (although around a hundred devices were made, apparently only around a dozen were ready for use at any one time due to excessive servicing requirements). By this time, thermonuclear devices were starting to be tested, and despite objections from parliament over the cost, a british fusion device was developed and culminated in the grapple tests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Grapple) which initially were failures in terms of yield, but ended up working ok. While the problems were ironed out, a very large (400 Kt) fission only device, "green grass" was fielded but never tested (some versions used direct copies of US Mk-28 bombs). "Blue Danube" was shrunk into "Red Beard", which could be used with a much wider range of aircraft, including carrier based assets of the Royal Navy. By the early 60's the UK was developing it's own MRBM system, "blue streak" as part of the space program, but political pressure (and rumoured bribes) led to the eventual cancellation of the UK's own space efforts (the only nation to develop a native and working satellite launch system then abandon it  ) and it was announced that the UK would pursue the US's "Skybolt" system for use with british warheads, which in turn was cancelled due to poor test performance and the emergence of SLBMs, which led to the UK purchasing the Polaris system after quite major political arguments (the UK had intended to put almost all of the deterrent force on Skybolts and wanted to have the same deterrent as the US, some US politicians wanted to keep the knowledge US only). It was around this time that soviet air defences were getting massively upgraded, and the predicted chances of V Bombers managing to penetrate and deploy nuclear weapons deep into Russia was slipping by the year, so the main strategic deterrent was switched over to Polaris (in service around 1968), with the RAF and Royal Navy keeping tactical weapons (air dropped bombs, torpedoes and depth charges based around the WE177 device), and the Army was equipped with US designed and owned nuclear artillery and rockets in Germany. The V bombers were largely retasked with targeting warsaw pact forces in the result of an invasion, with conventional and nuclear weapons. The TSR2 was developed, and then cancelled around this time, pretty much ending the RAF's strategic nuclear role. I can strongly recommend "The Secret State" by Peter Hennessy for a look at the UK's preparations (or lack thereof) for nuclear war during the cold war, it's really quite chilling. *edit* realising that my pre-coffee brain forgot a few bits, will write some more later DesperateDan fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Jul 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 14:30
|
|
