|
US is sending the Raptors out. Beware North Korea. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-sends-f-22-jets-to-join-south-korea-drills-amid-threats-from-north/article10596315/?cmpid=rss1
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 08:19 |
|
|
14 INCH DETECTIVE posted:So I saw this today out of the blue and thought you guys might like to see. How long have you lived in Seattle and not been down to the museum? It's amazing. You need to go.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:
Digging the Manu Chao in that video. Somehow very fitting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I was expecting this video, which still makes me I was, in turn, expecting this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZRwv_568Y
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 18:41
|
|
every time I watch it:
|
ctishman posted:How long have you lived in Seattle and not been down to the museum? It's amazing. You need to go. Mrs. Slidebite and I went there a couple years ago. I literally spent the entire day there, from open to close. And even then I could have easily spent another day there. It was a pity I only had 1 day to spend there but I probably would have had divorce papers served to me if I asked to stay an extra day for that. Other than Smithsonian/Udvar-Hazy, nothing compares. I desperately want to go to Dayton some day to see the AF museum.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Mrs. Slidebite and I went there a couple years ago. I literally spent the entire day there, from open to close. And even then I could have easily spent another day there. It was a pity I only had 1 day to spend there but I probably would have had divorce papers served to me if I asked to stay an extra day for that. You really should put the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola, Florida on your list as well. The collection is not as large, but they've got more actual war-flown aircraft than anybody and the displays are really nicely set up and not roped off, and at least their share of the last one on earth aircraft. Easier to leave the wife at the beach for a day than it is to tell her "go have fun" in Dayton, Ohio, as well. If you do end up heading to Dayton, say up. I'm nowhere near, but I don't really need a whole lot of excuse or a ton of advanced to weekend roadtrip to an air museum. Other USAF Museum Pro-tip, if you plan months in advance, you can get on the list for the Friday restoration hangar tour, which is awesome. If you can't get on the list, you can show up as the open the doors and hope to get a walk-in slot, but it isn't something to bet on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
Madurai posted:I was, in turn, expecting this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZRwv_568Y Runways? Where we're going, we don't need runways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:You really should put the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola, Florida on your list as well. The collection is not as large, but they've got more actual war-flown aircraft than anybody and the displays are really nicely set up and not roped off, and at least their share of the last one on earth aircraft. Easier to leave the wife at the beach for a day than it is to tell her "go have fun" in Dayton, Ohio, as well. The restoration work at the Naval Aviation museum is absolutely superb, as well, plus there are quite a few more-recent additions to the collection that they literally flew in off the carrier and parked inside, and still have the as-flown feeling about them. (Read: Dirt in all the right places.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:US is sending the Raptors out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvqJ1mTkEuY Regarding the Naval Aviation Museum, here's a repost of a copy+paste I did a while back in the thread: quote:I spent the past week down in Florida visiting a friend...I had some spare time, so I spent a day at the AF Armament Museum outside Eglin and another at the Museum of Naval Aviation on Pensacola NAS. No pictures because I didn't have my camera with me, but I just wanted to point out the historical poo poo at these two museums...both museums were well done and had the standard complement of aircraft you would expect at each museum (the Naval Aviation Museum was packed chock full of aircraft...I was there for 3 hours and probably only saw 2/3rds of their collection). What I really wanted to point out is the history behind the actual airframes that are at each museum...the museum at Eglin has the very first C-130 to roll off the production line that was subsequently converted into the first AC-130 and was in active service from the late '60s until the late '90s, as well as the only "Big Tail" SR-71, a BUFF that flew combat missions during Desert Storm, and a MiG-21 that just showed up at the museum overnight; the curator was told not to ask any questions (it was a "YF-110" that came from the Constant Peg program. quote:Oh yeah, I completely forgot about the whole Cubi Point thing, which is awesome. The Navy generally has their poo poo together when it comes to preserving heritage and the like...light years ahead of the Air Force, anyway, although that isn't saying much. The Cubi Point thing is that the O-Club at Cubi Point NAS in the Philippines had a LOT of history in it due to all the navy flying squadrons that had passed through there in the 40 years it was in existence (each squadron was commission a plaque type thing to hang up in the bar every time they came through on a WestPac tour). When the base shut down in the early '90s they shipped back all the plaques and some other assorted things from the O-Club and recreated the O-Club in the snack bar/cafeteria area of the Naval Aviation Museum. But yeah, the aircraft collection is loving amazing...that SBD still makes me  when I think about it. Also here's a video of that O-1 I was talking about (lovely music alert):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so9XRUbBGj8 If you get down there the Armament Museum at Eglin is worth a trip over if you have time...it's a relatively short drive from the Pensacola area to Eglin and you could probably cover the Armament Museum in an afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:You really should put the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola, Florida on your list as well. The collection is not as large, but they've got more actual war-flown aircraft than anybody and the displays are really nicely set up and not roped off, and at least their share of the last one on earth aircraft. Easier to leave the wife at the beach for a day than it is to tell her "go have fun" in Dayton, Ohio, as well. Thanks for the info. If I ever find myself able to do Pensacola I'll remember that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 02:24
|
|
|
Seconded. The Naval Aviation Museum is bananas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
More "Hypothetical aircraft from 1950s" Life:  e: more    
Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Apr 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:Seconded. The Naval Aviation Museum is bananas. Yeah. Go soon too, check the Blue Angel's schedule, and get in while they are still practicing. There has been talk of them getting hours/shows cut. Even the practices they do are phenomenal and are easily on par with their airshow performances. While I was stationed there I'd try to get to one of their practices every week. And the museum is loving awesome as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:More "Hypothetical aircraft from 1950s" Life:
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
Aerial refueling aircraft manage well enough. I'm sure there's an art to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
Oh yeah for sure, but there is some wiggle room there. Flying between the rudders and landing on a "runway" hardly wider than the aircraft you're piloting.  as gently caress on a whole other level
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Oh yeah for sure, but there is some wiggle room there. Flying between the rudders and landing on a "runway" hardly wider than the aircraft you're piloting. Well to be fair, I'd imagine the carrier plane could probably match speeds so the approaching craft is only landing at a few miles per hour relative speed. Practically a VTOL landing, really.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Well to be fair, I'd imagine the carrier plane could probably match speeds so the approaching craft is only landing at a few miles per hour relative speed. Practically a VTOL landing, really. Now imagine how they'd handle actually securing the aircraft once it landed. Would you have wing-walkers running out there in harnesses to tie down planes that still had the engines running? Nets?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
ctishman posted:Now imagine how they'd handle actually securing the aircraft once it landed. Would you have wing-walkers running out there in harnesses to tie down planes that still had the engines running? Nets? A hook, just like you use on a carrier but in reverse. It even says in the article that it was hooking in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
Life, Sept. 26, 1955 at 22 posted:..To take off, a fighter plane would be lifted to the top deck hooked to a huge hinged ramp. Buy unhooking itself, it would become immediately airborne at 500 mph. A plane coming into land would simply set down at 500 mph and hook up. Then it would be lowered, as the drawing shows, on the ramp. Designer Loening believes that turbulence troubles would be negligible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Negligible turbulance, at nearly mach 2. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Negligible turbulance, at nearly mach 2. Where are you getting mach 2 from? All I'm seeing is 500 MPH, the only mention of supersonic speeds is one reference to it carrying supersonic planes. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 06:49
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Where are you getting mach 2 from? All I'm seeing is 500 MPH, the only mention of supersonic speeds is one reference to it carrying supersonic planes. Whups, looked up the wrong number when I was checking where mach 1 was, so slightly under. It's still an oversized Bell X-1, complete with ruler straight wings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 07:32
|
|
|
Here is my concept for a futuristic airplane, I gave it butterfly wings because butterflies are pretty, I don't know why airplanes don't have butterfly wings. Also I gave it a proboscis so it can do in-flight refuelling from flowers. It's just a concept at the moment but I'd like your input on its technical merit please. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 11:24
|
|
|
where are the guns
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 11:39
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Wake turbulence on approach probably would have made that pretty sporty. Wake turbulence wouldn't be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 14:38
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Here is my concept for a futuristic airplane, I gave it butterfly wings because butterflies are pretty, I don't know why airplanes don't have butterfly wings. Also I gave it a proboscis so it can do in-flight refuelling from flowers. It's just a concept at the moment but I'd like your input on its technical merit please. not 5th generation
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
But good enough nonetheless. Report to Fort Worth next monday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Aerial refueling aircraft manage well enough. I'm sure there's an art to it. The ride can be a bit rough in a refueling aircraft. Like "oh that dude with a thousand hours just puked in his glove" rough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
Godholio posted:The ride can be a bit rough in a refueling aircraft. Like "oh that dude with a thousand hours just puked in his glove" rough. This is a great turn of phrase.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Here is my concept for a futuristic airplane, I gave it butterfly wings because butterflies are pretty, I don't know why airplanes don't have butterfly wings. Also I gave it a proboscis so it can do in-flight refuelling from flowers. It's just a concept at the moment but I'd like your input on its technical merit please. Finally a concept that will close the pollen gap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 16:05
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Here is my concept for a futuristic airplane, I gave it butterfly wings because butterflies are pretty, I don't know why airplanes don't have butterfly wings. Also I gave it a proboscis so it can do in-flight refuelling from flowers. It's just a concept at the moment but I'd like your input on its technical merit please. Silly man. Everyone knows that butterflys and bees cannot actually fly due to the laws of physics. Your design must incorporate hummingbird wings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
BA are hoping everyone has forgotten about the Dreamliner battery problems and issuing statements that tl;dr to "we don't give a gently caress"quote:UK-BRITISH AIRWAYS 787 (O) Edit Number: 4131BO / Revision 1| 04/04/13 17:43:51 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Anyone planning a trip to the Naval Aviation museum let me know and I would be happy to take you out on the flight line to look at our airplanes. I just can't let you get too close to the Blue Angels. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:BA are hoping everyone has forgotten about the Dreamliner battery problems and issuing statements that tl;dr to "we don't give a gently caress" …and they're right. The only difference here is, as has been made amply clear, the 24-hour news cycle. Battery issues are a minimal concern, and BA's vote of confidence will pay off in the long run, especially with the number of huge long runs they make to international destinations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:Anyone planning a trip to the Naval Aviation museum let me know and I would be happy to take you out on the flight line to look at our airplanes. I just can't let you get too close to the Blue Angels. If I can get change of station leave in June (I'm scheduled to finish TDY in OKC on a Wednesday, and report for work in Miami, Friday morning,  ) I'm stopping on my way back home and taking you up on this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
ctishman posted:…and they're right. The only difference here is, as has been made amply clear, the 24-hour news cycle. Battery issues are a minimal concern, and BA's vote of confidence will pay off in the long run, especially with the number of huge long runs they make to international destinations. Regardless of the issue, it will certainly be fixed by the time BA takes delivery on those incremental orders.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
ctishman posted:…and they're right. The only difference here is, as has been made amply clear, the 24-hour news cycle. Battery issues are a minimal concern, and BA's vote of confidence will pay off in the long run, especially with the number of huge long runs they make to international destinations. Precisely. In the grand scheme of things, the 787's battery problem is, while serious, not as dire as the media would have you believe, nor is the fix overly complicated. We're not talking about something the magnitude of the DeHavilland Comet I after all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Godholio posted:The ride can be a bit rough in a refueling aircraft. Like "oh that dude with a thousand hours just puked in his glove" rough. H. T. F. U.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 08:19 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Never thought I'd say this non-sarcastically, but here we are:  Yeah, that'll help.It's rarely that bad, I'll admit. Transition training (2 hours of low approaches/touch n goes) is much worse. I've been airsick twice, never puked Godholio fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Apr 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 02:29
|
|