|
Godholio posted:Edit: The last discussion of an E-3 replacement was actually based on the 767...it was called the E-10 and it would've combined AWACS and JSTARS into one airframe doing both missions simultaneously. That idea was wisely killed off several years ago. Don't forget, it wasn't just supposed to do AWACS and JSTARS simultaneously, it was also originally supposed to do ELINT/SIGINT, taking over from the RJs and all the other RC-135 variants. Because that makes sense. Also if I get bored tonight I might do an effort post on what ails the USAF nuke community. tl;dr - treating a community like poo poo and completely ignoring them for two decades results in said community not giving a gently caress, with predictable results. Also it didn't help splitting the strategic nuke mission in two and putting half of it in the command run by fighter pilots, with the other half of it being put in a bastardized command that never really wanted the nuke mission.
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
In the SSBN community if you don't maintain a high level of proficiency it can kill you and everyone you know. It's still a nuclear warship that submerges, with all the dangers and diligence those entail. You also still theoretically have the threat of hostile submarines attempting to detect and track you to deal with, so you can't let your guard down there either. Boomers also constantly have a flux of people entering / leaving the community, while it sounds like the AF nuke world has a bit of an inbreeding problem. The downside of the SSBN leg is that it is fantastically more expensive on a per warhead on station per hour basis than fixed ground launch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Don't forget, it wasn't just supposed to do AWACS and JSTARS simultaneously, it was also originally supposed to do ELINT/SIGINT, taking over from the RJs and all the other RC-135 variants. Really, EVERYTHING we throw up in the air should have at least some capability in that regard. As a replacement for the RJ, that's a retarded idea, but putting most of the RJ hardware on the E-10 would've been one of the smarter parts of the program. For anyone wondering why it's a dumb idea to combine missions that seem pretty similar (AWACS points the radar at the sky, JSTARS points it at the ground, the controllers share about 75% of their training and learn mostly the same poo poo), the basic answer is that they need to be in different places. AWACS wants to sit a couple hundred miles behind contested airspace, JSTARS wants to sit drat near right above whatever they're looking for on the ground...RJ is completely different based on all kinds of poo poo they don't tell anyone else about. AWACS likes to burn racetrack circles, the others don't. Throw in that you'll have a limited number of aircraft to do three separate but critical missions...good luck scheduling that. Right now there are AWACS deployed for multiple missions in the Middle East, and in South America, and on a permanent basis in the Pacific. RJ is all over the goddamn place, probably mostly Pacific/ME missions. JSTARS is in the ME. With a top number of maybe 35 aircraft, you can't reconcile the variety of missions required with the aircraft and crews available. The system is already stressed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
I've heard that being put in charge of Minot is like being sent to some division of a company with a rampant, habitual issue with being terrible, giving your bosses an excuse to nail you to the wall. That's probably overplayed, but it seems more or less to be the result of late.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Really, EVERYTHING we throw up in the air should have at least some capability in that regard. As a replacement for the RJ, that's a retarded idea, but putting most of the RJ hardware on the E-10 would've been one of the smarter parts of the program.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
I'd like to think those missions could be done on the same platform with only the software and the type/positioning of the buzzy ends being really different, but there's probably loads of problems involved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
I'd also suspect some of that stuff has security concerns that the rest doesn't, and that you wouldn't want to subject the entire fleet to
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
grover posted:Is there an opportunity for enough commonality in the sensors for a common platform to perform all 3 functions and see some overall cost reductions due to economies of scale? Hey McNamara shut up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
grover posted:Is there an opportunity for enough commonality in the sensors for a common platform to perform all 3 functions and see some overall cost reductions due to economies of scale? The larger problem is probably that you may need ELINT where you don't need AWACS or you may need AWACS coverage in a location not optimal for where you need JSTARS coverage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
Koesj posted:I'd like to think those missions could be done on the same platform with only the software and the type/positioning of the buzzy ends being really different, but there's probably loads of problems involved. Though I have to wonder if UAVs with downlinks wouldn't be the better solution. mlmp08 posted:The larger problem is probably that you may need ELINT where you don't need AWACS or you may need AWACS coverage in a location not optimal for where you need JSTARS coverage. 
grover fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
loving double posts
Godholio fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
grover posted:Is there an opportunity for enough commonality in the sensors for a common platform to perform all 3 functions and see some overall cost reductions due to economies of scale? None whatsoever. That said, it makes perfect sense to include ELINT capabilities because you can never gather too much info. AWACS already has some limited capability in this field, but they half-assed it when it could've been a serious asset. grover posted:That's what I was thinking; if the only difference is the mode of operation you bring the consoles up in, you could use the aircraft interchangeably. If you don't need JSTARs functions, the aircraft could potentially be available to fly an ELINT mission, or if a whole lot of ground poo poo was going on, USAF could hand off AWACS to an E-2D and have an extra JSTARS available. No, it's completely different types of hardware, with antennas pointing in completely different directions, with completely different frequency ranges. You'd basically end up with a jet that had a dome on top for aerial radar, and a dong underneath for ground-mapping. As mentioned, over a battlefield they need to be in different places to do the different missions, and on a national level, those missions currently take place in different parts of the world. Also, an E-2 straight up doesn't have the capability to manage the same size AOR as an E-3...same thing with a Wedgetail, which is why I don't see us buying into the E-737. They don't have the hardware or crew to do it...if we went down that road, we'd need a lot more aircraft to make up for it. quote:Though I have to wonder if UAVs with downlinks wouldn't be the better solution. That's what I think's gonna happen, in another 20-30 years. Godholio fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Aug 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
Grover has an innate need to shove multiple systems into one platform.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Grover has an innate need to shove multiple systems into one platform. And then add lasers to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
or insulation
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
right arm posted:or insulation 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
PCjr sidecar posted:also whoops we left live warheads on these cruise missiles on this transport flight gfanikf posted:Yep along with shipping the nuke fuses to Taiwan. I forgot if that was AF or someone else. I imagine that the Russians read about this and are like "this totally cancels out the time we left those missiles and live warheads on that decommissioned SSBN for like a decade."
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
To step away from AWACSchat for a moment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcPTnsAP9wU&t=278s GoPro on the barrel of a B-24 ball turret. Just plain awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
God I bet the view inside that thing is just loving insane, especially when it's rotated so that the fifties are pointing nearly straight down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:God I bet the view inside that thing is just loving insane, especially when it's rotated so that the fifties are pointing nearly straight down. When I flew in the B-25, the view from the nose was breathtaking. I'm saving my pennies to ride in the B-17.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:When I flew in the B-25, the view from the nose was breathtaking. I'm saving my pennies to ride in the B-17. The view out the nose of a B-17 is fantastic. You can look left and right to see all four engines and have a brilliant look down and around from the bombardier's seat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 00:49
|
|
|
For those of you who've done these, assuming ~6 people or whatever pay for a flight they don't just let you hog the nav/bombardier station the whole time, right? Is there a rotation or is it kinda ad hoc?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 01:55
|
|
|
Psion posted:For those of you who've done these, assuming ~6 people or whatever pay for a flight they don't just let you hog the nav/bombardier station the whole time, right? Is there a rotation or is it kinda ad hoc? When Fifi (B-29) visited Palm Springs, I think they sold different seats at different prices. Waist gunner was cheapest, navigator and bombardier more expensive. Not sure if it's always done that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
Psion posted:For those of you who've done these, assuming ~6 people or whatever pay for a flight they don't just let you hog the nav/bombardier station the whole time, right? Is there a rotation or is it kinda ad hoc? The B-25 at the Lone Star Flight Museum lets you move to every position in the plane. They encourage everyone to spend a couple minutes at each station. We had five people (in addition to the crew) onboard when I flew. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzUeM1ppoAY If you get the nose seat in the B-17, you are stuck there for the entire flight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:When Fifi (B-29) visited Palm Springs, I think they sold different seats at different prices. Waist gunner was cheapest, navigator and bombardier more expensive. Not sure if it's always done that way. maam.org posted:There are several places to sit in the B-24. They include the bomb bay, radio operator’s area and the waist gunner’s area. There are no reserved seats on the B-24. This is because as soon as the aircraft is airborne you can get up and move throughout the aircraft… from the cockpit to the tail gunner’s position. You will be able to stand behind the pilots and see the controls and instruments. From there you can move back through the bomb bay and see replicas of the 500 lbs. bombs used throughout the war. Next you will stand in the open waist gunner’s position behind a 50 caliber machine gun and imagine the freezing air pouring in as the Messerschmitts bear down with guns ablaze. Furthest back is the tail gunner’s position with a panoramic view. I got a ride in the back seat of an AT-6 at MAAM when I was a teen; was really loving cool. Obviously no moving between positions. grover fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:The B-25 at the Lone Star Flight Museum lets you move to every position in the plane. They encourage everyone to spend a couple minutes at each station. We had five people (in addition to the crew) onboard when I flew. Psion posted:For those of you who've done these, assuming ~6 people or whatever pay for a flight they don't just let you hog the nav/bombardier station the whole time, right? Is there a rotation or is it kinda ad hoc? PhotoKirk posted:If you get the nose seat in the B-17, you are stuck there for the entire flight. In the B17 I went on, everybody rotated around. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxnhI2M-NHg
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 02:22
|
|
|
When I flew on a B-25 when I was a kid, I got to sit in the Bombardier's seat for the whole flight. This was probably because to get from the nose to the rest of the plane requires crawling through a fairly narrow tunnel that goes underneath the cockpit, something I'm sure the crew doesn't want people doing while they're still airborne. Can't say what the policy was for the rest of the aircraft, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
Psion posted:For those of you who've done these, assuming ~6 people or whatever pay for a flight they don't just let you hog the nav/bombardier station the whole time, right? Is there a rotation or is it kinda ad hoc? As Craptacular posted, in Aluminum Overcast, you move around the cabin, and they make sure if someone is hogging the nose compartment, they'll kick them out to get others in. It's very, very easy to lose a sense of time in that nose compartment. They had us up and out of our seats less than 90 seconds after wheels off the ground, IIRC. They seem to do their best to maximize your ability to move around the aircraft. mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Aug 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
 B-17 Raid Over Damascus!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 12:29
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:
gently caress that noise, I want the free sandwich!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:gently caress that noise, I want the free sandwich! Eh it's not like its Wawa.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
IRONY: that photo was taken inside a Wawa!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 15:05
|
|
|
Wawa sandwiches suck
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Any free sandwich is a good sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Insane Totoro posted:Wawa sandwiches suck You shut your whore mouth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Insane Totoro posted:Wawa sandwiches suck Truth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
Insane Totoro posted:Wawa sandwiches suck Any sandwich tastes pretty good when you pull in off the road after about ten hours of driving. I've only eaten Wawa sandwiches when I was hungry enough to eat my own fist, so they'll always be delicious to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
WaWa sandwiches are decent even here in Philly where we know what a great sandwich is. They kick the poo poo out of Subway, Schlotzky's, Quizno's, Blimpie, Jimmie John's, Firehouse, etc. They're not as good as Primo but Primo's about as good as a chain gets. NASA crash-tested a CH-46 today. Good riddance: http://www.livescience.com/39262-nasa-drops-chopper-in-crash-test.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
NightGyr posted:You shut your whore mouth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2013 22:10
|
|