|
Dead Reckoning posted:Mach 3+ stores separation testing would have been something to see. Knock yourself out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYKbPPRFE6o I'm not sure if this is the same test mentioned here, but YF-12 did fire AIM-47 at mach 3.2. "sr-71.org posted:YF-12 Timeline:
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 11:52 |
|
|
Random weird question. Wasn't there a SEAD version of one of the Falcon missiles? Did any of those wacky people in SAC get the idea to put a nuke on one?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Random weird question. Wasn't there a SEAD version of one of the Falcon missiles? Did any of those wacky people in SAC get the idea to put a nuke on one? Yep. Also, what is crazier than SR-71 interceptor variant? B-70 Valkyrie interceptor variant! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Wrap it up NATOailures, now it's official. 10 rubles = $0.25
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Yep. 500 I-70s? Are they expecting Russia to send 5,000 bombers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
priznat posted:Wrap it up NATOailures, now it's official. Think I'll wind up on a watch list if I order some?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:500 I-70s? Are they expecting Russia to send 5,000 bombers? At the time, they considered it a distinct possibility.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
Back Hack posted:Or Helicopters for that matter; The Army is pretty committed to replacing the Blackhawk and Apache with a single muti-role helicopter at this point and several companies have already submitted potential designs. Some of them are pretty out there concept wise as far a helicopters go. Isn't that an idea the Soviets tried 40 years ago and then immediately decided was terrible?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Whoops i guess I shouldn't leave tabs open for days(?) at a time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Think I'll wind up on a watch list if I order some? I kind of wanted some too. Think I can fund my NFA trust with commemorative Rubles?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:500 I-70s? Are they expecting Russia to send 5,000 bombers? "Shhhhh! If we order 500 of them we get the free steak knife set!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Outside Dawg posted:At the time, they considered it a distinct possibility. 5000 was only off by a factor of about 2, which is really pretty close as early Cold War intel estimates go
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Does anyone know what the Soviets had planned for their manned bomber force in the pre-ICBM era? Were there really ever plans for swarms of Bulls and Bears and whatnot heading over the pole? Or was all of the USAF/RCAF work on Mach 4 interceptors and nuclear anti-air rockets and DEW Lines based on the erroneous assumption that the Red Air Force was going to try the Curtis LeMay thing because that's what we did?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Does anyone know what the Soviets had planned for their manned bomber force in the pre-ICBM era? Were there really ever plans for swarms of Bulls and Bears and whatnot heading over the pole? Or was all of the USAF/RCAF work on Mach 4 interceptors and nuclear anti-air rockets and DEW Lines based on the erroneous assumption that the Red Air Force was going to try the Curtis LeMay thing because that's what we did? Well, the Soviets couldn't refuel them midair in the 50's and they didn't base them on the Pacific coast so there really wasn't any other direction they were going to fly to bomb the continental US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
simplefish posted:I keep forgetting how gigantic and especially tall the Hind is It's huge and awesome, unfortunately it's also a huge and sort of slow target. That they're actually using them in something of a gunship role shows how hard up they are. Iraqi officers are also promising encircled troops air support and supply drops that never show up and never existed. It's not good. The Iraqi army is going to have to be rebuilt. More Iraqi helicopters.   Mi-171E du Iraq  Mi-8  
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Didn't the Hind break some speed records?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Didn't the Hind break some speed records?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 12:17
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Well, the Soviets couldn't refuel them midair in the 50's and they didn't base them on the Pacific coast so there really wasn't any other direction they were going to fly to bomb the continental US. I meant it more generally, actually. Were the Soviets actually going to try an air offensive against North America prior to their development of ICBMs, or was this something we assumed they would do because it's what we would do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:I meant it more generally, actually. Were the Soviets actually going to try an air offensive against North America prior to their development of ICBMs, or was this something we assumed they would do because it's what we would do? There's a series of posts in the AI Plane thread about Soviet bombers by MrChips which would answer your question somewhat. MrChips posted:MAIN POSTS
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
They also built something on the order of 800 Tu-4's (that B29 knockoff) between 1945 and ~1955 or so. My understanding of that way early period in the Cold War is that they understood they weren't going to be able to hit the US, but that they could sure as gently caress blow the ever loving poo poo out of England and NATO bases in W. Europe. You have to remember that the whole concept of MAD doesn't really solidify as a real way of thinking about war until you get into scenarios where missiles are passing each other in flight. Up until the introduction of missiles you always have at least a theoretical chance of intercepting any incoming bombs, or at the very lest intercepting enough of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:And it's funnily non-jingoistic. We've talked about it before and a few other sister show like "Made in the USSR". They've got a very dry and understated format. That's not true at all! Those Wings Of Russia films are hugely jingoistic. Everyone has a title such as HERO OF THE SOVIET UNION or some hilariously inflated government title. Even the talking head segments go into wonderful detail about the superiority of the Russian jet. Besides that, they're filled with really in-depth engineering and manufacturing talk. The Russians do not have a problem talking about killing dudes in flight testing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
FYI Hero of the Soviet Union is an actual award that's been around since the 1930s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:FYI Hero of the Soviet Union is an actual award that's been around since the 1930s. Yes and it's loving amazing. I love it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Unlike Medal of Honor, which is totally chill. Edit: I was under the impression the post-WWII/pre-ICBM Soviets were more interested in Europe and Asia than going directly up against the US. A one-on-one fight was clearly only going to end one way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Unlike Medal of Honor, which is totally chill. The Soviets in the post-WW2 period weren't any more interested in getting into a real shooting war than the US was, for basically the same reasons - WW2 loving sucked and they needed time to recover. That said, there was never a time where they were going to be able to do anything outside of what the Red Army physically controlled at the end of WW2 without running up against the US. Truman made that crystal loving clear all through the late 40s and early 50s. Moscow also wasn't particularly interested in Asia to be honest, Asia just kind of happened to be where all the serious post-war revolutions happened. China is the biggie, of course, but the long and the short of it is that colonialism predicated upon the cultural and racial superiority of a bunch of guys from another continent really takes it in the balls when the entire region gets conquered for ~5 years by a competing local imperial power. Even the areas where they did have a direct say in how things went down (e.g. Korea) it was the local guys straining at the leash to go blow poo poo up with Moscow trying to get them to calm the gently caress down because they didn't want the stress. On a related note: if you ever want a dark laugh, read the Vietnamese declaration of independence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
Airpower collection called, "Lower Than A Snakes Belly In a Wagon Rut - And Other Stories Of Low Flying" http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/325/Lower-than-a-Snakes-Belly-in-a-Wagon-R.aspx
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Airpower collection called, "Lower Than A Snakes Belly In a Wagon Rut - And Other Stories Of Low Flying" Pfft, dude in the Loadstar dipped his wing on take off and caught the ground, newb. This is how it's done: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnBr3enzW1I
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Today I learned that the US Army operated a Hind that we took in the Gulf War. It's now (or was) used for OPFOR training. Huh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Russian film prop?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:25
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Today I learned that the US Army operated a Hind that we took in the Gulf War. It's now (or was) used for OPFOR training. Huh. We had one before the gulf war 
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Isn't there one parked at Nellis?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Unlike Medal of Honor, which is totally chill. Keep in mind that post-WWII we had a frenzy of trashing almost all of the wartime equipment and downsizing the fighting force tremendously, which had wonderful and necessary domestic effects, but meant that we were notably caught with our pants down by the tussle in Korea. Bomber Gap buildup doesn't come until the mid-late '50s. The Soviets also went right up directly against us over Berlin pretty much from V-E on. Picture semi-related: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Keep in mind that post-WWII we had a frenzy of trashing almost all of the wartime equipment and downsizing the fighting force tremendously, which had wonderful and necessary domestic effects, but meant that we were notably caught with our pants down by the tussle in Korea. Bomber Gap buildup doesn't come until the mid-late '50s. Whoa, they actually built one of those? Thought it was just a paper project.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Whoa, they actually built one of those? Thought it was just a paper project. Worth looking up more pictures, the wing chord is awesome. Every bit as thick as the straight B-36 wing. I've put this one up before, but never get tired of it. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
What I love is that the endgame of WWII turned into "The enemy of my enemy is... well gently caress it, still my enemy."
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
simplefish posted:What I love is that the endgame of WWII turned into "The enemy of my enemy is... well gently caress it, still my enemy." "The enemy of my enemy is my friend, but not for a single goddamn minute after I beat the other enemy."
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Just thank your lucky stars Wallace got dumped for Truman
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 11:52 |
|
|
Igor Strelkov posted:It's huge and awesome, unfortunately it's also a huge and sort of slow target. That they're actually using them in something of a gunship role shows how hard up they are. Iraqi officers are also promising encircled troops air support and supply drops that never show up and never existed. It's not good. The Iraqi army is going to have to be rebuilt. The funny thing about that being just how many people think that the Hind is is a purebred gunship, without even knowing that it has a transport capability. Also the Mi-28 reminded me (until I looked at them side by side) of the B-17G with that step up squarish cockpit and the chin turret thing
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 06:34
|
|