|
ctishman posted:Not sure if this has been posted before, but this has popped up: Was this recorded 20 year ago?
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:37 |
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:It's Pierre Sprey, if it's anything heavier than a daytime only fighter with no radar armed with nothing more than two Sidewinders and a Vulcan he's going to proclaim it poo poo and completely worthless. Was pilot survivability ever considered when designing stuff like the "two AIM-9s, one M61, no radar" F-16 or the "one GAU-8, nothing else" SC ARES thing? The only way I see those concepts making sense is in some sort of AI controlled massive swarm thing, where they're cheap and unmanned, and nobody cares if you lose most of them getting close enough to use their weapons. Otherwise they'd just end up getting a bunch of pilots killed or captured by R-27s and Tunguskas and stuff. Davin Valkri fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Jun 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Was pilot survivability ever considered when designing stuff like the "two AIM-9s, one M61, no radar" F-16 or the "one GAU-8, nothing else" SC ARES thing? The only way I see those concepts making sense is in some sort of AI controlled massive swarm thing, where they're cheap and unmanned, and nobody cares if you lose most of them getting close enough to use their weapons. Otherwise they'd just end up getting a bunch of pilots killed or captured by R-27s and Tunguskas and stuff. Well it was the 60s and everyone was being extremist so we got the Missileer, F-111B on one side and the original LWF proposals on the other. edit: I wonder what John Boyd's reaction to seeing a modern export spec F-16 would be. I guess Joe Sutter didn't keel over when he saw the dream lifter so... hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Jun 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
I like how he gets bank because Kanye sampled a tune of his so he can just keep cranking out hobby-jazz  Wikipedia is amazing sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Was pilot survivability ever considered when designing stuff like the "two AIM-9s, one M61, no radar" F-16 or the "one GAU-8, nothing else" SC ARES thing? The only way I see those concepts making sense is in some sort of AI controlled massive swarm thing, where they're cheap and unmanned, and nobody cares if you lose most of them getting close enough to use their weapons. The threat environment of the time was much different as well. The SA-10, MiG-29 and AA-11 didn't start showing up until the 80's, and the SA-14 and SA-6 were just starting to come on line. Early Warsaw Pact tactical SAMs had a poor record against aircraft with countermeasures, (which were in the F-16 from the start,) and scary, mobile strategic SAMs that could reach out and slap planes out of DCA orbits hadn't been fielded yet. Warsaw Pact tactical fighters of the era were the MiG-23, MiG-21 & Su-15. The F-16 could compete against the MiG-23, especially in a DCA role, but the big feature was that it completely outclassed the MiG-21 generation of fighters, and could be bought in sufficient numbers to effectively neutralize them. Even if the F-16 had to be pushed on the offensive, we would do what we did in Vietnam and protect the package with dedicated SEAD and ECM aircraft. No one ever really thought about it in a disposable "lol zergling rush" way. Or at least, no more disposable than literally every other air asset in the NATO European forces. The SC ARES is still retarded though. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Jun 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Was pilot survivability ever considered "Hey, West Germany, look, you'll probably lose fewer pilots flying this than the F-104G, sooooo how about it?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I believe the main consideration when designing the Advanced Day Fighter (that eventually became the F-16) was, "Holy poo poo, the Russians have a lot of aircraft in Europe and even the most optimistic projections about F-X heavy interceptor buys and missile Pk still have leakers getting through." It's not actually true that there was to be no radar; the spec simply didn't emphasize it, (in fact, you'd need a radar for gun ranging), especially in comparison to the F-15, which was built around emerging radar and missile technology. You're right that the original ADF/LWF/ACF program spec always called for a very small ranging radar, but that doesn't mean the fighter mafia was happy about it. The LWF was supposed to be their chance to "get it right" with that daytime only 2xAIM-9 and a Vulcan armed fighter after the USAF had (in their words) "hosed it up" by turning the F-X into a gold plated overweight not maneuverable enough piece of crap (that has just managed to rack up a 105-0 kill ratio and was the most dominant air superiority fighter in the world for a quarter century). Boyd's acolytes and the fighter mafia had some good ideas and did some good things, but jesus christ were they ever capable of missing the forest for the trees. Dead Reckoning posted:Or at least, no more disposable than literally every other air asset in the NATO European forces. Friendly reminder that the USAF's own loss rate predictions in a major theater war in Western Europe had at least 50 A-10s getting shot down a day, with the entire fleet gone within two weeks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Now this may interest the actual military types/pilots in this thread: the Flight Handbook for the B-36. Now you can see how you troubleshoot an aircraft with a small pre-ww2 air force's worth of parts!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Now this may interest the actual military types/pilots in this thread: the Flight Handbook for the B-36. Now you can see how you troubleshoot an aircraft with a small pre-ww2 air force's worth of parts! I'd love to see what the Erection and Maintenance Manuals* for this thing looked like. *yes, they really used to call them this and I have no idea why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:You're right that the original ADF/LWF/ACF program spec always called for a very small ranging radar, but that doesn't mean the fighter mafia was happy about it. The LWF was supposed to be their chance to "get it right" with that daytime only 2xAIM-9 and a Vulcan armed fighter after the USAF had (in their words) "hosed it up" by turning the F-X into a gold plated overweight not maneuverable enough piece of crap (that has just managed to rack up a 105-0 kill ratio and was the most dominant air superiority fighter in the world for a quarter century).  So the intended armament WAS "two missiles, one gun, no radar"? How well would a countermeasure launcher have worked with no radar warning receiver or similar to track incoming missiles? Would the pilot just have to hope he saw the launch trail before using them manually? Because right now this thing sounds like it would have been a "sci-fi bad guy henchman vehicle" level of deathtrap.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:
This is from the "When you're out of F-8s you're out of fighters" school of thought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Basically Sprey wants to build a fleet of IRL TIE Fighters, even though he would probably scoff at the cost of TIE's two engines and demand a single ion engine instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:This is from the "When you're out of F-8s you're out of fighters" school of thought. But even Crusaders carried 4 missiles, could carry bombs, and had radar! And TIE Fighters were just what I was thinking of...but Star Wars came out after this program started development, so, who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:You're right that the original ADF/LWF/ACF program spec always called for a very small ranging radar, but that doesn't mean the fighter mafia was happy about it. The LWF was supposed to be their chance to "get it right" with that daytime only 2xAIM-9 and a Vulcan armed fighter after the USAF had (in their words) "hosed it up" by turning the F-X into a gold plated overweight not maneuverable enough piece of crap (that has just managed to rack up a 105-0 kill ratio and was the most dominant air superiority fighter in the world for a quarter century). quote:Friendly reminder that the USAF's own loss rate predictions in a major theater war in Western Europe had at least 50 A-10s getting shot down a day, with the entire fleet gone within two weeks. Davin Valkri posted:How well would a countermeasure launcher have worked with no radar warning receiver or similar to track incoming missiles? Would the pilot just have to hope he saw the launch trail before using them manually? Because right now this thing sounds like it would have been a "sci-fi bad guy henchman vehicle" level of deathtrap. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
I immediately started thinking about the TIE fighter, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
You wouldn't think there'd be a wrong way to criticize the F-35, but I'm sure Pierre Sprey managed it somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
The Victoria Mosquito took its first flight yesterday  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM943tPSWZ4 edit: There are now two airworthy Mosquito's in the world and they have both had their first post-restoration flights in the last two years! ehnus fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
On a WW2 related note, is there some really dumb story about military procurement and the US' inability to produce a working 20mm cannon during the war even though the British kept sending them perfectly working designs for them to copy?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
Did American change their livery due to Boeing not being able to offer the 787 in "polished aluminum" in part because it has a composite fuselage?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
Eej posted:On a WW2 related note, is there some really dumb story about military procurement and the US' inability to produce a working 20mm cannon during the war even though the British kept sending them perfectly working designs for them to copy? Its about as dumb as you think, the US got the rights to produce the 20mm the Britsh used but hosed it up the dimensions for some reason. The British were hoping to import these copies to ease their production shortages, but found out the guns were poo poo and not striking the primers hard enough to set off the ammo. The UK then sent the US working guns that they produced, the US looked at them, found the differences and then refused to make changes, like the US Version having the chamber be to long. So later the British made a mk2 version of the 20mm, and the US copied them but still refused to fix the issues that made the gun unreliable. Then when the mk5 version came out, the US updated their version again with the changes the UK made, but stilllllllll didn't fix the basic issues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
That is indeed pretty dumb. Did the US ever give a reason why they wouldn't fix it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 12:26
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:Its about as dumb as you think, the US got the rights to produce the 20mm the Britsh used but hosed it up the dimensions for some reason. The British were hoping to import these copies to ease their production shortages, but found out the guns were poo poo and not striking the primers hard enough to set off the ammo. The UK then sent the US working guns that they produced, the US looked at them, found the differences and then refused to make changes, like the US Version having the chamber be to long. So later the British made a mk2 version of the 20mm, and the US copied them but still refused to fix the issues that made the gun unreliable. Then when the mk5 version came out, the US updated their version again with the changes the UK made, but stilllllllll didn't fix the basic issues. Let me guess, it was Remington building the guns, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:There's a reason we went for the F-16 over the F-20 though: there aren't a lot of reasons not to go for added capability when you're making a big buy. There an F-22/F-35 joke in here somewhere...
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 13:09
|
|
|
To be fair, the F-15/F-16 combo IS due for replacement. So naturally we nixed the one that performs as advertised, and put all the eggs in the shittier, less capable, more expensive basket and tricked our best friends into doing the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Godholio posted:To be fair, the F-15/F-16 combo IS due for replacement. So naturally we nixed the one that performs as advertised, and put all the eggs in the shittier, less capable, more expensive basket and tricked our best friends into doing the same. Good news though, guess what are still in production for export!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 14:30
|
|
|
I think LockMart isn't going to stop F-16 production until it hits a total of 5,196
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Did American change their livery due to Boeing not being able to offer the 787 in "polished aluminum" in part because it has a composite fuselage? Yeah, but the 773, not 787. http://hub.aa.com/en/nr/features/american-airlines-debuts-new-modern-look
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
So what do you think reflects more light? A white finish on a airliner, or a aluminum one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Did American change their livery due to Boeing not being able to offer the 787 in "polished aluminum" in part because it has a composite fuselage? At the Boeing factory tour, they mentioned that one of the primary purposes of the paintjob on 787s is to protect the composite materials against UV.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
movax posted:At the Boeing factory tour, they mentioned that one of the primary purposes of the paintjob on 787s is to protect the composite materials against UV. Yep, for all the composite stuff we machine we have to keep a record of how long it's exposed to light for each process step.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:Its about as dumb as you think, the US got the rights to produce the 20mm the Britsh used but hosed it up the dimensions for some reason. To get back to airplanes, the Packard Merlins were never quite as good as the Rolls-Royce original, for the same reasons. I was going through my news photos for another thread, and balloons count for this one, right?   
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 18:43
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Delivery McGee posted:Similarly, the much-maligned Chauchat LMG of WWI was at least of middlin' quality in the original French-made version (by no means great, but it could be made to work most of the time, sort of like the first-gen M16), it was the US .30-06 license build (more powerful round, hosed-up chamber dimensions) that really gave it its reputation for being a massive piece of poo poo. Actually aviation related, because the Chauchat was designed to be used as an aircraft MG, which is why it had that cutaway magazine, so the pilot could actually see how many rounds he had left. Then they hosed it up by fielding it in the trenches, where mud would get into the magazines, jam the weapon, etc. etc. It was still a lovely gun put into a lovely mess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Similarly, the much-maligned Chauchat LMG of WWI was at least of middlin' quality in the original French-made version (by no means great, but it could be made to work most of the time, sort of like the first-gen M16), it was the US .30-06 license build (more powerful round, hosed-up chamber dimensions) that really gave it its reputation for being a massive piece of poo poo. The US also managed to gently caress up copying the MG42 in .30-06. The gun turned out to be a quarter inch too short and was such a failure they didn't even try to fix it. Apparently Japan's stealth fighter prototype has been photographed. http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/does-grainy-image-show-japans-first-stealth-fighter 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:The US also managed to gently caress up copying the MG42 in .30-06. The gun turned out to be a quarter inch too short and was such a failure they didn't even try to fix it. Where are the arms and legs?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:Apparently Japan's stealth fighter prototype has been photographed. drat, I graduated High School 12 years ago. I guess that means I'm too old by at least 14 years to have a shot at flying that thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Where are the arms and legs? uh folded into the fuselage, it's OBVIOUSLY not in gerwalk mode geez 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:drat, I graduated High School 12 years ago. I guess that means I'm too old by at least 14 years to have a shot at flying that thing. I, too, am sad that I cannot fly that plane-shaped fuzzy blob. they should call the project Have Blur
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:The US also managed to gently caress up copying the MG42 in .30-06. The gun turned out to be a quarter inch too short and was such a failure they didn't even try to fix it. Ah, more from big foot and lochness monster school of photography
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Ah, more from big foot and lochness monster school of photography Just going to say I've seen sasquatch and UFO photos better than that. I had no idea that was even a thing in Japan. What's the justification? Crazy N.K.?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:37 |
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:they should call the project Have Blur 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 03:13
|
|
