|
Scratch Monkey posted:How did he fit? Was it just tight or did he actually have a real difficulty being in the jet? It was a tight fit, but the biggest problem he had was just crash dieting to hit the weight requirement. He was in pretty good shape, but again -- defensive linesman. He went from being 6'2" and something like 230lbs of muscle to under 180 lbs in flight school. I believe he once mentioned that a flight surgeon made him sign a waiver saying that he knew that he'd probably break both his legs in the event of an ejection, but other than that he seemed to fit alright. Then again, an F-4/F-14 is not a Hornet.
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:59 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:When I was in OKC, I was amazed at how often you'd see heavy jets, E-6s, E-3s, KC-135s, C-17s, etc, just doing touch and goes and pattern work at Tinker and Will Rogers. Apparently the Air Force has never heard of simulators. Sims are required but do not provide anywhere near the quality of training as a live flight. Sims also don't provide training for an entire AWACS crew. Basically every flight includes the full 2 hours of transition allowed by regulation, unless there's an emergency.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
In the civilian world, you need to do actual landings to complete your type rating, even if you trained on the very best simulators available.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
A look at the weekend warriors fighting Russia's deniable war in Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Results of the Small Surface Combatant are in Just like I thought, they're opting for an incremental upgrade that doesn't solve any of the fundamental flaws. Admittedly the addition of towed array sonar to all variants is a good idea, but it still lacks anything more than point air defense - and even at that, a SeaRAM battery only has 11 shots. Frankly, if I were Chinese or Iranian, I'd happily fire 12 missiles at less than $1 million each to sink a $500 million ship. Admittedly, SSC will have improved ECM, but still - that calculus looks good to me even if I fire 30 missiles for a single kill. Oh, and to top it off, we'll finish out the 32 "Flight 0" LCS types without these upgrades.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 14:30
|
|
|
In legible size: And the other one: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
Are the 25mm/30mm guns integrated into anything? They'd seem like the ideal searam complement for terminal intercept, especially since you're only packing one launcher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Are the 25mm/30mm guns integrated into anything? They'd seem like the ideal searam complement for terminal intercept, especially since you're only packing one launcher. Against a modern ASM threat guns like that are about as useful as the stream of urine you're emitting because there's a modern ASM flying at your ship and all you have to deal with it is SeaRAM.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Right, but a million hulls are still using CIWS, and you don't need 11 munitions to overload that. e: and not everyone is shooting sunburns and brahmos'es at you. Mortabis posted:I was expecting the Navy to go with something with VLS. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Dec 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
A Vulcan gun fires a million billion times faster than a Bushmaster. I was expecting the Navy to go with something with VLS.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
I don't know if people have been following the Sony Pictures hacking scandal, but it is now official: North Korea can stop the release of a Seth Rogen movie. e: oh and America wants to normalize relations with Cuba etc etc
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I don't know if people have been following the Sony Pictures hacking scandal, but it is now official: North Korea can stop the release of a Seth Rogen movie. It's the beauty of the free market. The press is free to make a ton of money scaring the poo poo out of people because some jackass halfway across the world made an idle threat. The theaters are free to not show the movie because they're pretty sure that either their theater is going to get attacked or that people aren't going to show up to see the movie anyway. Sony pictures is free to not release the movie because they can't get enough people to show up. It's almost like the decade of hyping terrorist threats is coming back to bite us in the rear end or something. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Right, but a million hulls are still using CIWS, and you don't need 11 munitions to overload that. CIWS is worthless against modern threats, they don't even put it on newer Burkes. If the point of the LCS is a $650,000,000 boat that's just *great* against someone who can only flip Exocets or Silkworms at you, then yeah, okay, go nuts, but that's no way to build a Navy. evil_bunnY posted:
Or ESSM, 2 or 4 per cell. And you don't need to be an Aegis cruiser for those to actually be useful. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Dec 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
Just more proof that Little Big Un is an insecure fuckstick. I heard his dad thought Team America was funny. Congrats on making your dad look cooler than you, jackass.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:But what do you put in VLS'es? Quad pack ESSM, good luck with the fire control system though. e;f;b on an open tab
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Quad pack ESSM, good luck with the fire control system though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
This thread might know the answer to this: does the USN have any airborne platforms that are used to detect surface targets?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
bewbies posted:This thread might know the answer to this: does the USN have any airborne platforms that are used to detect surface targets? P-8. Used to have some blimps for drug interdiction too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:But they were found to be ungainly, hated by the pilots, and interfered with flight operations. And before we took the 'invent a pen that writes in space' approach, they simply flew with one eye covered. Now, supposedly, the glass of the cockpit is treated that it becomes opaque in the event of a flash. I don't know any glass that responds more quickly than the speed of light, so it wouldn't shock me if they don't still wear boring anti-flash goggles as well: The glass doesn't have to block the leading edge of the flash, it just has to respond fast enough to go dark early enough during the flash so that the total dose of photons that get through is tolerable. There are welding masks that work this way where the window is an LCD panel attached to a light sensor so that within a few hundred nanoseconds from starting the arc it goes dark.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:P-8. Used to have some blimps for drug interdiction too. Also E-2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
priznat posted:Just more proof that Little Big Un is an insecure fuckstick. Seriously? Wow, if that is true, that is pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Yeah it's totally heresay of course. But it would be amusing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
I'm really disappointed. I wanted to see that movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
this reminds me someone has an av where a plane is doing that with the subtitle JUST TAKE OFF ALREADY. I think it's a Valkryie from Macross. e: yes Psion fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Dec 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:I'm really disappointed. I wanted to see that movie. You know there's going to be some other hackers out there who'll see it as a challenge to try and hack Sony themselves and release the film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:00
|
|
Psion posted:this reminds me someone has an av where a plane is doing that with the subtitle JUST TAKE OFF ALREADY. I think it's a Valkryie from Macross. Haha I was thinking of exactly the same thing.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
bewbies posted:This thread might know the answer to this: does the USN have any airborne platforms that are used to detect surface targets? Phanatic posted:P-8. Used to have some blimps for drug interdiction too. Godholio posted:Also E-2. In addition to the P-8s you've got the remaining P-3s. Also MQ-4C/BAMS (lol). And then their surface attack strike fighters (Bugs/Super Bugs) obviously have some form of surface detection capability but I assume you were asking more about patrol/search assets and less about strike assets. \/ Key word: "will" \/ iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Dec 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Also E-2. The 68+ MQ-4 BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance) will have significant abilities for this as well, with a volume search radar that can flip into a synthetic aperture radar for type identification. evil_bunnY posted:That's what I was wondering as well. I'm trying not to be argumentative, but what kind of use do you get out of VLS'es without a decent radar? I don't know what system they mean with "upgraded 3d". It really depends. You need a volume search radar and then a target illuminator function to use a semi-active missile like ESSM. However, ESSM Block II, slated for IOC around 2021, will have an active seeker. e: lol beaten
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
The MH-60R also has a pretty good surface surveillance radar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Not sure if there are any Harpoon grognards around, you might want to know about this. http://store.steampowered.com/app/321410 This is the new Harpoon...only everything works and it has a development team behind it that actually CARES this time. It's *never* been discounted before and normally retails for $80 for the download version. It's also 49.99 at the publisher's site, but this is slightly cheaper. Only downside is there's no real time multiplayer...yet (just a turn-based mod). But they did finally fix nukes. The sale ends 1/2/15.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
There's been a number of C:MANO posts in this thread IIRC and Baloogan's stepped up to become the number one community source on the game - not to mention he recently joined in as one of its developer as well. Check out his posts at the least! Still, it looks more like H2 than classic in a number of ways, and even at 38% off I'm a bit anxious to take the plunge.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
B1s have s ship detection radar mode. I don't think they've ever really used it though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Not sure if there are any Harpoon grognards around, you might want to know about this. I tried reading Red Storm Rising in 5th grade and just could not plow through it. Many years later I kind of got into computer wargaming and fiddled around with Harpoon, and then I gave RSR another shot. "Holy crap, this is just a transcript of a wargaming session." And then it dawned on me that Larry Bond was heavily involved in both. I was crap at Harpoon, but it seems like the kind of game that could benefit from better tutorials and an active online community for learning, which probably exist now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
What's the general consensus of Pakistan's ROSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_ROSE) program? They bought a bunch of old airframes in the 90s and upgraded them. I feel the parts commonality is definitely a good thing, but the varied condition of used aircraft probably leads to a lot of difficulties, and upgrading everything to modern standard has got to be expensive. Are old airframes with good avionics perfectly fine compared to something like F-16s for a military like Pakistan's?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
Alright, here's something I've been mulling over for awhile: At a very high level, can someone describe what percentage of parts in a modern system (avionics, radar, missile guidance - whatever) are off the shelf vs. bespoke? I understand everything has to be certified for use (hence why the shuttle never got any major computer upgrades) especially on man-rated systems, but is there actual value in using customer Lockmart CPUs vs. off the shelf Intel CPUs? Again I can see it being a supply chain/logistics issue, and for certain components I can see it being a national security issue but I have a hard time believing that we can't use a lot of off the shelf CPUs for some of the more basic functions rather than whatever custom solution Raytheon or whoever wants to install. Even without going with top end Intel chips, sticking with simpler but more numerous ARM chips seem like it would be more cost effective, but I could easily be wrong. I guess to put it simply: How much value is there in using custom one off gear rather than buying something off the shelf when commodity hardware is available? And even if the commodity hardware doesn't necessarily meet every single requirement up front, how much of that is because the requirements are written in such a way that subcontractors can own the entire supply chain rather than including other parties (Intel, IBM, whatever)? I'm using computers as an example here but this seems like it could be applicable to more than just technology.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Hubis posted:It was a tight fit, but the biggest problem he had was just crash dieting to hit the weight requirement. He was in pretty good shape, but again -- defensive linesman. He went from being 6'2" and something like 230lbs of muscle to under 180 lbs in flight school. I believe he once mentioned that a flight surgeon made him sign a waiver saying that he knew that he'd probably break both his legs in the event of an ejection, but other than that he seemed to fit alright. My dad had a similar problem, 6' and similar weight. He talks about having to run around in the beach in a rubber suit similarly to wrestlers just to make weight for flight school. That was for F-8/A-7 though, dunno if they're bigger or not. I have seen photos of him standing next to planes with his fellow pilots and he's clearly the tallest, it's kinda funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Alright, here's something I've been mulling over for awhile: In the specific instance of Intel CPUs, for the most part, they are consumer products designed for consumer lifecycles; Intel doesn't give a poo poo about the parts a few years after they are released. Fabs are repurposed, new projects are active, about the only thing that is left is software support, and even that's pretty lightweight as the parts are still all x86 and a lot of the low-level updates are released to vendors when the part comes out. There's a lot of value in being able to purchase a 100% compatible IC for a period of 20 years or so. Sometimes it makes sense for an ASIC; tightly coupled processing needs + DSP blocks + custom interface blocks to various data busses. Tack on the various MIL-STD requirements, plus resiliency against SEUs/SETs/radiation/etc and ASIC/ASSPs begin looking really appealing. Honeywell, etc have standard cell libraries for these exact purposes (look at Honeywell HX2000, 3000, 5000, etc). Now I think it makes a ton of sense to be using commodity parts whenever possible on the ground for infrastructure support or similar needs, software permitting. Throwing slightly ruggedized Dell/HP/etc servers to run IT backbone is perfectly logical and I think it's currently done, except usually L3 or someone marks up the price by like 500%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
If you google for COTS DoD you'll get some decent write-ups about procedures, risks, and opportunities. COTS stands for commercial off the shelf.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:59 |
|
|
There seems to be a popular misconception that all mil equipment used mil standard ICs which is definitely NOT the case. Often a system will be built and characterized with the mil spec testing and if it fails then go in and try to fix it up upgrading parts to higher thermal tolerances. It's still marked up big time even with commercial grade ICs in there, of course.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 21:56
|
|