|
The conformal fuel tanks make me sad though, because they ruin the lines for me.
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
 F-16s are god drat pretty airplanes. Something about that iconic Cold War NATO fighter profile, but more compact than F-15/14 silhouettes. And single engine single tail supremacy. F-16 porn is the best fighter porn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Warmachine posted:F-16 porn is the best fighter porn. No, it isn't: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:No, it isn't: fat
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
A couple weeks ago I looked up during my smoke break and saw a C17 taking mid-air refueling about 100 mi north of Charleston AFB. Is there any reason they would ever need to do that so close to the base other than training for the hell of it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Let's be friends  
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
If I wasn't on my phone I'd be counter-posting some Flankers  I just finished that red eagles book linked earlier and hoooly poo poo the MiG23 was the lovely jet I always thought it was. Does anyone have any other cheap kindle book recommendations of similar? My work is so boring without something to read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
The Proc posted:A couple weeks ago I looked up during my smoke break and saw a C17 taking mid-air refueling about 100 mi north of Charleston AFB. Is there any reason they would ever need to do that so close to the base other than training for the hell of it? Don't they refuel planes which are going to make a long flight right after takeoff because takeoff eats up so much fuel?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
I have a friend whose father flew B-52s; he said that they would gas up right after takeoff when they were carrying so much ordnance that they couldn't take off with a full fuel load. I imagine it'd be similar for a cargo plane, but replace ordnance with cargo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
mikerock posted:Don't they refuel planes which are going to make a long flight right after takeoff because takeoff eats up so much fuel? I thought it was that they don't takeoff with a full load of fuel so they could get as much cargo as possible on, and refuel in the air before continuing on their way. e: f;b
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
The Proc posted:A couple weeks ago I looked up during my smoke break and saw a C17 taking mid-air refueling about 100 mi north of Charleston AFB. Is there any reason they would ever need to do that so close to the base other than training for the hell of it? There are specific refueling track airspaces across the country. I have no idea where my chart is that shows them or I'd take a look and see if there's one there. Even if there's not, ATC is generally pretty accommodating with a request to do one ad-hoc as long as you're not stupid about where you want to do it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Warmachine posted:
The best thing the F-16 has going for it is how much it visibly borrows from its predecessor in the arsenal, the F-104 Starfighter (the hottest single-engine jet ever)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 00:06
|
|
 The last F-14 flown by the USN.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Godholio posted:There are specific refueling track airspaces across the country. I have no idea where my chart is that shows them or I'd take a look and see if there's one there. Even if there's not, ATC is generally pretty accommodating with a request to do one ad-hoc as long as you're not stupid about where you want to do it. I looked this up and it turns out I do live directly under AR207. This is the second time in about 20 years I've seen one in progress, I'm going to have to keep staring up all the time now that I know it's a regular event here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
underpowered Xerxes17 posted:I just finished that red eagles book linked earlier and hoooly poo poo the MiG23 was the lovely jet I always thought it was. I didn't like America's Secret MiG Squadron though at least iyaayas got some interesting MX stuff out of it. Also there's a page on testpilot.ru IIRC about the ex-VNAF F-5 that ended up in the Soviet Union, but it doesn't read all that great through Google Translate. Back when the Keypub forums weren't infested by fanboys there was a ex-HuAF maintainer (I think) who was kinda prickly about his jet being slagged off in Davies' book, going all out on how the US was stupid for trying to fly it without spare parts or proper documentation. I guess in his experience the -23 wasn't that problematic of a plane, and there's something to be said for the Egyptian monkey model not being representative of later versions anyway, but this dude didn't seem to grasp the concept behind the 4477th TES. Snowdens Secret posted:The best thing the F-16 has going for it is how much it visibly borrows from its predecessor in the arsenal, the F-104 Starfighter (the hottest single-engine jet ever) How?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:The best thing the F-16 has going for it is how much it visibly borrows from its predecessor in the arsenal, the F-104 Starfighter (the hottest single-engine jet ever) I guess... if you think single-engine jets are hot v  v 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
    
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
F-16s and F-14s are p cool but F-15 will forever be the best:    
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
^ this man gets it  Hunterhr posted:They're just happy to be here man. And not plowing into the ground as they are wont to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
About how often do we lose F-16s anyway? And are they replaced by newly built ones, or are we just slowly bleeding fighters?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/advanced-search/ search for status: w/o (write-off) 334 losses so far for the USAF. e: don't know anything about attrition replacements but I imagine those don't come in off the factory floor anymore Koesj fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Feb 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
    Double delta is the best delta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:The conformal fuel tanks make me sad though, because they ruin the lines for me. I agree with you, Mortabis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:
Drakens are cool planes, yeah. Does anybody still fly them, as, I dunno, trainers, airshow craft, something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Drakens are cool planes, yeah. Does anybody still fly them, as, I dunno, trainers, airshow craft, something? There are a couple in the US in private hands that make it to occasional west coast airshows and are often for sale with spares for pretty cheap. Not a cheap plane to own/maintain. Nobody flies them in active service anymore, Austrians got rid of the last of them in the 2005, says Wiki. Not sure how up-to-date this list is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_surviving_Saab_35_Drakens
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
Totally TWISTED posted:I agree with you, Mortabis. I was always surprised how little the conformals do bother me, since they do break the line as you said.  For some reason that looks completely fine to me. It just fits. This was always a picture I liked, really highlights just how state of the art the F-22 looks: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 07:44
|
|
|
Koesj posted:http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/advanced-search/ search for status: w/o (write-off) The Proc posted:A couple weeks ago I looked up during my smoke break and saw a C17 taking mid-air refueling about 100 mi north of Charleston AFB. Is there any reason they would ever need to do that so close to the base other than training for the hell of it? Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Feb 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
I'm aware of the fact that it's still being produced, hell there was the kinda mysterious 'block 61' UAE deal referenced last week or so. Must have had people bawling their eyes out in Paris, London, and Toulouse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
Gotta say the Egyptian army has quite the interesting mix of US/Soviet cold war stuff. I keep wanting to take some photos of the dudes in the streets here, but then logic and reason prevail on me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
Don't kinkshame, bro. Though, I am partial to the Redhead(ed stepchildren) myself. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
I wonder what the difference in sticker price plus maintenance is when comparing something like an F-16 and a Gripen. They both seem like good choices for smaller air forces, but since the F-16 is so widely used I wonder if there's more service life in them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 13:06
|
|
|
So are attack helicopters still a thing nowadays or has the proliferation of cheap air defenses kind of made them too vulnerable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 13:19
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So are attack helicopters still a thing nowadays or has the proliferation of cheap air defenses kind of made them too vulnerable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So are attack helicopters still a thing nowadays or has the proliferation of cheap air defenses kind of made them too vulnerable? Yes, they are. China built an attack helicopter which went into service just a few years ago, Iraq ordered a pile of AH-64s a few days ago, and we continue to upgrade weapons and systems on US attack helicopters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Serious answer: like everyone else, they're forced to use more stand-off in areas that haven't been sanitized of short range air defenses. They're still very much a thing though. I don't think armies have ever considered attack helos survivable in heavily contested airspace, but they're still really good at providing integrated air support to maneuver forces, scouting, counter-scouting, harassing undefended enemy assets, and generally acting as a way to put heavy firepower anywhere in the battle in a hurry. It sucks when the other guy has them and you don't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Actually last time I checked the F-16 line is still open due to the huge number of export customers. Countries are still buying new build Block 50/60 airframes. The USAF isn't, and I don't think we replace losses. The idea is that the fleet will be replaced before the law of averages gets to them. Depends on the airframe big-time. We had to get gas almost every flight because we were 3 hrs away from the fighters we worked with, in almost every direction. Especially with F-16s, if there's not a tanker involved you're only getting 2 or 3 intercepts before they start to bingo out. I'd agree with the 95% if we're including the dry hookups and that (at least on AWACS) every pilot on board has to do a couple for currency. We'd end up connecting 5 times or more when in a real op it would usually be one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So are attack helicopters still a thing nowadays or has the proliferation of cheap air defenses kind of made them too vulnerable? This is getting pretty far in the out-years but we're predicting that helicopters are going to have a pretty big role as "tactical DCA" or something to that effect in the counter-UAS fight. Needless to say army aviators are extremely excited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Warmachine posted:
  And a couple old favorites as a bonus:  
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
bewbies posted:This is getting pretty far in the out-years but we're predicting that helicopters are going to have a pretty big role as "tactical DCA" or something to that effect in the counter-UAS fight. Needless to say army aviators are extremely excited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I can't wait to see that idea literally go down in flames. What's the plan, snipe them with the chin gun? I think it's possible for attack helicopters to mount air-to-air missiles. The only place I've heard of helicopter-versus-helicopter combat was the Iran-Iraq war though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 16:32
|
|
