AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›1991 »

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Frozen Horse posted:

Unlike certain novelists, we are at least nominally against child soldiers.

Ringo was against child soldiers, just not child lovers.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 01:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 21:01

Phanatic: Mar 13, 2007; Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.

McNally posted:

I believe the gravel could get to orbital altitude this way, but I'm not convinced it would get to orbital velocity.

http://savvyparanoia.com/the-fastest-man-made-object-ever-a-nuclear-powered-manhole-cover-true/

quote:

At 10:35pm on August 27, 1957 in Area U3d of the New Mexico Nuclear Test Site, the bomb was detonated. But instead of the expected small yield the bomb detonated with a yield approximately five orders of magnitude greater than expected (that�s about 100 000 times greater). The blast instantly vaporized the entire multi-ton concrete collimator and shot it up the tube as a multi-ton wave of vaporized matter at extremely high temperature, pressure, and velocity. The shaft had, in effect, become a enormous 500-foot long, four-foot wide gun barrel with the energy of billions of pounds of TNT released at one end and, at the other end, the now insignificantly small metal cap, about the equivalent of a bottle cap on the end of a naval gun.

As it happens, a very high speed film camera was recording the event and was expected to capture in slow motion the path and speed of any ejecta from the hole. Unfortunately, the camera, which had quite a wide view of top of the hole and and the area around and above, recorded the �manhole cover� on only one frame. There was no malfunction of the camera, it�s just that the �manhole cover� blasted out of sight so fast that the camera only saw it for one frame. Later calculations showed that the heretofore mundane four-foot metal disk had been launched at six times Earth�s escape velocity.

Granted, air resistance is a bitch.

(Also granted, he's overstating the yield enormously. Actual yield of Pascalb-B was only around 300 tons. Not kilotons. So certainly not "billions of pounds."

# ? Jan 8, 2015 01:37

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

Phanatic posted:

http://savvyparanoia.com/the-fastest-man-made-object-ever-a-nuclear-powered-manhole-cover-true/

Granted, air resistance is a bitch.

(Also granted, he's overstating the yield enormously. Actual yield of Pascalb-B was only around 300 tons. Not kilotons. So certainly not "billions of pounds."

Oh Christ, *this* is what Karl Pilkington was talking about the one time. Of course, in his version it was "scientists took a manhole cover and put it on top of a nuclear bomb, and then set the bomb off to see what would happen."

Psion posted:

Also just in general, we're firmly in the realm of counterfactual hypothetical here, but the entire "bribe them to stop" argument is predicated on a fundamental assumption that money is enough of a driving force to change someone's behavior.

This is a very good point. If Hitler was fundamentally rational in any sense, he never would have invaded the Soviet Union.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 02:50

LostCosmonaut: Feb 15, 2014

Nebakenezzer posted:

This is a very good point. If Hitler was fundamentally rational in any sense, he never would have invaded the Soviet Union.

Hitler need the Soviet Union's resources to build up his military for the fight with his ultimate enemy; the United Kingdom.

(actually saw somebody say this unironically once)

# ? Jan 8, 2015 03:03

B4Ctom1: Oct 5, 2003; OVERWORKED COCK; Slippery Tilde

I want to see the A-10's go to the Coast Guard.

Reasons:

An A-10 can and has a good record of finding a single man walking through miles of desert. As a matter of fact, if you are an enemy combatant, the last thing you want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for you.

An A-10 can use its same search assets which have been improved and as a legacy of spending and repurposed to find a man bobbing in miles of sea. As a matter of fact, if I was a sailor from a sunken boat or who fell overboard, the very first thing I would want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for me.

Once the A-10 found me, it could use it's same accurate bombing sight assets to drop a survival package to me in the sea. Even missing could continue to drop them with precision until I received what I needed to survive. Or just hang out on station until a Jayhawk could fly straight to me without having to search for me.

The engines it uses are the General Electric TF34. Originally designed for the Navy Viking aircraft, this turbofan engine can ingest massive amounts of storm water without a performance issue that could affect such a small aircraft especially since it has two to make up the difference. The government agrees with me and either already has or is planning to fly A-10's into a hurricane.

An A-10 can fly home with one engine. This is important when flying over vast open water.

Even though the Coast Guard has retired is Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The F-16 and the A-10 share a few weapons computer systems. This is important because some F-16's flown by other countries carry the Harpoon. So an A-10 could theoretically be fitted with them if a war time need came about. They already Carry the AGM-65 which is a pretty awesome ship/boat/whatever destroyer. Plus there is a maritime version of the JDAM which is basically overkill for anything that floats. A-10's can already be fitted with air-to-air weapons.

I don't thin it would be a problem to fit an A-10 with a mechanism to drop sonobuoys. It would be able to do the job well I think.

There are no speed boats or light smuggling aircraft that could outrun or outmaneuver an A-10 enough to lose it.

There are already variants of the A-10 which have been modified to two seats if the mandate ever arose.

In absence of carrying bombs all over the place, the external ferry tanks could be installed and left on the planes for the remainder of their existence. Their ferry range, or as we could call it, "search range" for this purpose is according to Wikipedia, "2,240 nmi (2,580 mi, 4,150 km) with 50 knot (55 mph, 90 km/h) headwinds, 20 minutes reserve".

The 30mm gun. Well, I am not going to suggest that it is replaced with ballast or special instruments. Nothing says, "heave to and prepare to be boarded" (or whatever the gently caress maritime authorities say) like an A-10 putting a half second burst of rounds across the water in front of you. Your, "we never even saw you" isn't going to pass muster. Even without firing the gun, nobody likes being stalked by A-10's. Not even OPFOR guys in exercises.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 03:18

babyeatingpsychopath: Oct 28, 2000; Forum Veteran

Phanatic posted:

http://savvyparanoia.com/the-fastest-man-made-object-ever-a-nuclear-powered-manhole-cover-true/

Granted, air resistance is a bitch.

(Also granted, he's overstating the yield enormously. Actual yield of Pascalb-B was only around 300 tons. Not kilotons. So certainly not "billions of pounds."

It was also in Nevada, and that whole article is sadly terrible.

Try this one: http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Plumbob.html#PascalA

Scroll down to Pascal-B after you read the great stuff about Pascal-A.

quote:

The guys had been working trying to get it ready, but there had been a number of troubles. They finally got it down the hole, by my recollection, about ten o'clock or so at night. There wasn't much time to go back to Mercury, go to bed, and get up the next morning to shoot it, so somebody said, "Why don't we just shoot it now, and then go in?" And it was the world's finest Roman candle, because at night it was all visible. Blue fire shot hundreds of feet in the air. Everybody was down in the area, and they all jumped in their cars and drove like crazy, not even counting who was there and who came out of the area.

The cold war was AWESOME.

edit: I just want to emphasize that the pascal tests were safety verification tests. What would happen to one of our bombs if something bad happened. These were initiated with single detonators instead of symmetric. One would hope (and current safety standards dictate) nothing except a loud bang. What the test guys expected was a nuclear yield in the 1-5lb range. Actual yield was in tens to hundreds of tons. That's a hell of an oops.

babyeatingpsychopath fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Jan 8, 2015

# ? Jan 8, 2015 03:39

Tremblay: Oct 8, 2002; More dog whistles than a Petco

B4Ctom1 posted:

I want to see the A-10's go to the Coast Guard.

Reasons:

An A-10 can and has a good record of finding a single man walking through miles of desert. As a matter of fact, if you are an enemy combatant, the last thing you want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for you.

An A-10 can use its same search assets which have been improved and as a legacy of spending and repurposed to find a man bobbing in miles of sea. As a matter of fact, if I was a sailor from a sunken boat or who fell overboard, the very first thing I would want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for me.

Once the A-10 found me, it could use it's same accurate bombing sight assets to drop a survival package to me in the sea. Even missing could continue to drop them with precision until I received what I needed to survive. Or just hang out on station until a Jayhawk could fly straight to me without having to search for me.

The engines it uses are the General Electric TF34. Originally designed for the Navy Viking aircraft, this turbofan engine can ingest massive amounts of storm water without a performance issue that could affect such a small aircraft especially since it has two to make up the difference. The government agrees with me and either already has or is planning to fly A-10's into a hurricane.

An A-10 can fly home with one engine. This is important when flying over vast open water.

Even though the Coast Guard has retired is Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The F-16 and the A-10 share a few weapons computer systems. This is important because some F-16's flown by other countries carry the Harpoon. So an A-10 could theoretically be fitted with them if a war time need came about. They already Carry the AGM-65 which is a pretty awesome ship/boat/whatever destroyer. Plus there is a maritime version of the JDAM which is basically overkill for anything that floats. A-10's can already be fitted with air-to-air weapons.

I don't thin it would be a problem to fit an A-10 with a mechanism to drop sonobuoys. It would be able to do the job well I think.

There are no speed boats or light smuggling aircraft that could outrun or outmaneuver an A-10 enough to lose it.

There are already variants of the A-10 which have been modified to two seats if the mandate ever arose.

In absence of carrying bombs all over the place, the external ferry tanks could be installed and left on the planes for the remainder of their existence. Their ferry range, or as we could call it, "search range" for this purpose is according to Wikipedia, "2,240 nmi (2,580 mi, 4,150 km) with 50 knot (55 mph, 90 km/h) headwinds, 20 minutes reserve".

The 30mm gun. Well, I am not going to suggest that it is replaced with ballast or special instruments. Nothing says, "heave to and prepare to be boarded" (or whatever the gently caress maritime authorities say) like an A-10 putting a half second burst of rounds across the water in front of you. Your, "we never even saw you" isn't going to pass muster. Even without firing the gun, nobody likes being stalked by A-10's. Not even OPFOR guys in exercises.

If by variants you mean one was converted. I don't get the feeling that was a straight forward retrofit. Not sure how far along the storm chasers are. I guess NPS has one, and another college. I'm sure the school with less funding and ties to the military is further along if my experience with NPS is anything to go by.

Don't get me wrong its a crazy assed, kinda cool idea.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 03:56

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Or, instead of incurring the costs of standing up an entire new model of aircraft, the Coast Guard can keep on keeping on with C-130s, which actually have niceties like FLIR and weather/surface search radar on board, and a range that shames the Hawg. Too bad they don't have a 30mm gun, maybe if we add one people will go gay for the HC-130 too.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:42

bloops: Dec 31, 2010; Thanks Ape Pussy!

A two seat A-10 does not exist. Prove me wrong.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:45

simplefish: Mar 28, 2011; So long, and thanks for all the ~~fish~~ gallbladdΣrs!

Dead Reckoning posted:

Or, instead of incurring the costs of standing up an entire new model of aircraft, the Coast Guard can keep on keeping on with C-130s, which actually have niceties like FLIR and weather/surface search radar on board, and a range that shames the Hawg. Too bad they don't have a 30mm gun, maybe if we add one people will go gay for the HC-130 too.

The AC-130W Stinger II / AC-130J Ghostrider has a 30mm GAU 23/A Bushmaster chaingun

Lots of other AC130s have the 20mm M61 if you need something that rotates, or the 40mm Bofors if you can take a size upgrade to compensate for the lack of spinny barrels

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:48

Plinkey: Aug 4, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

holocaust bloopers posted:

A two seat A-10 does not exist. Prove me wrong.

Granted it's in a museum at Edwards, but it's there.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:48

Tremblay: Oct 8, 2002; More dog whistles than a Petco

holocaust bloopers posted:

A two seat A-10 does not exist. Prove me wrong.

Well it doesn't in that it was never put into production. Didn't know it was at Edwards though, thats pretty cool.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:52

bloops: Dec 31, 2010; Thanks Ape Pussy!

Well. I'm blown away. Never knew that.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:53

Plinkey: Aug 4, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

holocaust bloopers posted:

Well. I'm blown away. Never knew that.

I drove past the drat thing every day for almost a year going in the main gate. Always had a 'something doesn't look right about that' feeling until I actually looked it up and figured out what it was.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 04:59

Baloogan: Dec 5, 2004; Fun Shoe

The A-10 is not suitable as a maritime patrol aircraft.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:09

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

B4Ctom1 posted:

I want to see the A-10's go to the Coast Guard.

Reasons:

An A-10 can and has a good record of finding a single man walking through miles of desert. As a matter of fact, if you are an enemy combatant, the last thing you want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for you.

An A-10 can use its same search assets which have been improved and as a legacy of spending and repurposed to find a man bobbing in miles of sea. As a matter of fact, if I was a sailor from a sunken boat or who fell overboard, the very first thing I would want is an A-10 or two flying a search pattern looking for me.

Once the A-10 found me, it could use it's same accurate bombing sight assets to drop a survival package to me in the sea. Even missing could continue to drop them with precision until I received what I needed to survive. Or just hang out on station until a Jayhawk could fly straight to me without having to search for me.

The engines it uses are the General Electric TF34. Originally designed for the Navy Viking aircraft, this turbofan engine can ingest massive amounts of storm water without a performance issue that could affect such a small aircraft especially since it has two to make up the difference. The government agrees with me and either already has or is planning to fly A-10's into a hurricane.

An A-10 can fly home with one engine. This is important when flying over vast open water.

Even though the Coast Guard has retired is Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The F-16 and the A-10 share a few weapons computer systems. This is important because some F-16's flown by other countries carry the Harpoon. So an A-10 could theoretically be fitted with them if a war time need came about. They already Carry the AGM-65 which is a pretty awesome ship/boat/whatever destroyer. Plus there is a maritime version of the JDAM which is basically overkill for anything that floats. A-10's can already be fitted with air-to-air weapons.

I don't thin it would be a problem to fit an A-10 with a mechanism to drop sonobuoys. It would be able to do the job well I think.

There are no speed boats or light smuggling aircraft that could outrun or outmaneuver an A-10 enough to lose it.

There are already variants of the A-10 which have been modified to two seats if the mandate ever arose.

In absence of carrying bombs all over the place, the external ferry tanks could be installed and left on the planes for the remainder of their existence. Their ferry range, or as we could call it, "search range" for this purpose is according to Wikipedia, "2,240 nmi (2,580 mi, 4,150 km) with 50 knot (55 mph, 90 km/h) headwinds, 20 minutes reserve".

The 30mm gun. Well, I am not going to suggest that it is replaced with ballast or special instruments. Nothing says, "heave to and prepare to be boarded" (or whatever the gently caress maritime authorities say) like an A-10 putting a half second burst of rounds across the water in front of you. Your, "we never even saw you" isn't going to pass muster. Even without firing the gun, nobody likes being stalked by A-10's. Not even OPFOR guys in exercises.

Why not just use an S-3 or even a P-3 then?

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:27

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

Baloogan posted:

The A-10 is not suitable as a maritime patrol aircraft.

As a maritime strike aircraft however...

e: To me, that will forever be one of the funniest things the US military has ever done. Also pretty much perfectly sums up the Libya air war.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:29

priznat: Jul 7, 2009; Let's get drunk and kiss each other all night.

A-10 vs a hurricane, who would win?!

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:35

Suspect Bucket: Jan 15, 2012; SHRIMPDOR WAS A MAN
I mean, HE WAS A SHRIMP MAN
er, maybe also A DRAGON
or possibly
A MINOR LEAGUE BASEBALL TEAM
BUT HE WAS STILL
SHRIMPDOR

Baloogan posted:

The A-10 is not suitable as a maritime patrol aircraft.

But it would look bad rear end in orange and blue. And it could have a sharkmouth! Or just paint 'NO WAKE MOTHERFUCKER' on it.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:37

RandomPauI: Nov 24, 2006; Grimey Drawer

In a round about way that reminds me of The Final Countdown. How would an A-10 fare against WWII fighter craft?

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:40

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Suspect Bucket posted:

But it would look bad rear end in orange and blue. And it could have a sharkmouth! Or just paint 'NO WAKE MOTHERFUCKER' on it.

gently caress yes

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:41

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

iyaayas01 posted:

As a maritime strike aircraft however...

e: To me, that will forever be one of the funniest things the US military has ever done. Also pretty much perfectly sums up the Libya air war.

Even more so than when we let an AC-130 gunship use the 105mm to sink a bunch of Libyan Navy patrol craft tied up at the pier, because why not when you're in the air warfare equivalent of the home run derby?

Really, there are a lot of stores that far better sum up what a bizarre show Odyssey Dawn was, but those will have to wait until the reports get declassified.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 05:59

Psion: Dec 13, 2002; eVeN I KnOw wHaT CoRnEr gAs iS

iyaayas01 posted:

As a maritime strike aircraft however...

e: To me, that will forever be one of the funniest things the US military has ever done. Also pretty much perfectly sums up the Libya air war.

I knew someone who was either in that squadron or on that P-3, and either way they neeeeeeeeeeeever shut up about it. Probably still hasn't shut up about it.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 07:18

iyaayas01: Feb 19, 2010; Perry'd

Psion posted:

I knew someone who was either in that squadron or on that P-3, and either way they neeeeeeeeeeeever shut up about it. Probably still hasn't shut up about it.

There was a milgoon (haven't seen him post in a while) who supposedly was on the P-3 when it took the shot.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 07:24

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

RandomPauI posted:

In a round about way that reminds me of The Final Countdown. How would an A-10 fare against WWII fighter craft?

Well it carries AIM-9s, so it'll at least do well against the first two.

Edit: The only USAF unit to still run the shark mouth is the descendant unit(s) of the 23rd Fighter Group, the Flying Tigers.

Godholio fucked around with this message at 07:44 on Jan 8, 2015

# ? Jan 8, 2015 07:38

mustard_tiger: Nov 8, 2010

B4Ctom1 posted:

I want to see the A-10's go to the Coast Guard.

Was it this thread where there was a mock-up of an A-10 firing life boats of its guns? One that would inflate when they hit the water.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 11:29

Back Hack: Jan 17, 2010

mustard_tiger posted:

Was it this thread where there was a mock-up of an A-10 firing life boats of its guns? One that would inflate when they hit the water.

There's an even better market for it in the civilian sector, they could convert the cannon to shoot T-shirts and do fly-by at games. :v:

# ? Jan 8, 2015 12:14

goatsestretchgoals: Jun 4, 2011

Back Hack posted:

There's an even better market for it in the civilian sector, they could convert the cannon to shoot T-shirts and do fly-by at games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MzbvRFUpDk

esta bien

# ? Jan 8, 2015 12:33

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

MrYenko posted:

I was speaking of FCS and GCV particularly. They've spent really a lot of money on really a lot of aborted projects to absolutely no result since the end of the Cold War.

Conversely, I would certainly agree that they can at least see a money pit when it bites them in the face, unlike the other branches.

I still wish we had bought some Comanches.

Still better than FRES.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 14:25

thetechnoloser: Feb 11, 2003; Say hello to post-apocalyptic fun!; Grimey Drawer

priznat posted:

A-10 vs a hurricane, who would win?!

Bill Brasky.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 17:56

Groda: Mar 17, 2005; Hair Elf

thetechnoloser posted:

Bill Brasky.

Bill Brasky is the father of two of my children!

# ? Jan 8, 2015 18:02

Psion: Dec 13, 2002; eVeN I KnOw wHaT CoRnEr gAs iS

iyaayas01 posted:

There was a milgoon (haven't seen him post in a while) who supposedly was on the P-3 when it took the shot.

we're probably talking about the same person. I just met him in person a few times.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 18:18

Phanatic: Mar 13, 2007; Please don't forget that I am an extremely racist idiot who also has terrible opinions about the Culture series.

iyaayas01 posted:

As a maritime strike aircraft however...

e: To me, that will forever be one of the funniest things the US military has ever done. Also pretty much perfectly sums up the Libya air war.

Didn't Clancy have A-10s attacking the Kirov in RSR?

# ? Jan 8, 2015 18:57

Alaan: May 24, 2005

There were definitely A-10s in there but I don't remember them doing any Naval strikes off the top of my head.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 18:59

Psion: Dec 13, 2002; eVeN I KnOw wHaT CoRnEr gAs iS

It was some NY ANG guys doing a showoff "box it with flares" show of force before the shooting started.

might've been in HFRO instead though, I don't remember.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 19:10

Flikken: Oct 23, 2009; 10,363 snaps and not a playoff win to show for it

Psion posted:

It was some NY ANG guys doing a showoff "box it with flares" show of force before the shooting started.

might've been in HFRO instead though, I don't remember.

It was hfro.

# ? Jan 8, 2015 19:14