|
Thanks for lovely weather that clouds over on the 60km trip down the freeway. Although 10km out from the airport a Globemaster III looks loving huge in the sky, I want to see a C5. As I arrived after it started I just sat at the end of the runway with like 50 other people and saved myself $60.  RAAF P2 Neptune by drunkill04, on Flickr  F-16 Black Knights by drunkill04, on Flickr  F-16 by drunkill04, on Flickr  B-52H by drunkill04, on Flickr  B-52H by drunkill04, on Flickr At least I got to see a B52 'close (and) up' though drunkill fucked around with this message at 04:50 on Feb 28, 2015 |
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
So this was apparently a thing. Several things, in operational service, in fact.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:So this was apparently a thing. Several things, in operational service, in fact. Going back into 'poo poo I remember my father talking about,' there was a plan to put twin forward-firing .50cals and even racks for Sidewinders on the Navy -46s at one point (because why the gently caress not, I guess), but then people realized that was just a really good way to add extra weight to a helicopter that had no business carrying anything but men and materiel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
That will probably always be a thing. In the natural recirculation of mission needs and equipment availability you'll always fall into the cycle of having a helicopter that can lift stuff, stapling guns on to it to fill a cca need, adding armor and crew protection and crash survivability, redesigning the airframe for the specialized mission (attack), etc. I'd love to beat on a chinook gunship for fun, so much powa! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WttpWwcSjy4 Guns a Go Go! I think the specified engine power in this video for both engines together is about what a single chinook engine puts out now. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Thanks for lovely weather that clouds over on the 60km trip down the freeway. Although 10km out from the airport a Globemaster III looks loving huge in the sky, I want to see a C5. I headed out there today and got mildly sunburnt through the clouds... There was a B52 on the ground too down with the other heavy aircraft, much smaller up close than I was expecting, the Black Knights (Singapore F16s) were one of the best bits I reckon and you could probably see as much of their show as anyone else. I'm dumb and which fighter is this? Looked vaguely like a F4 to me but I knew the intakes weren't big enough.  Here's a couple of the older planes my phone didn't take completely poo poo photos of: Spitfire:  RE8   Assorted WW1 German planes:  See also a F35 assaulted by it's worst enemies, light rain and children: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
VodeAndreas posted:I'm dumb and which fighter is this? Looked vaguely like a F4 to me but I knew the intakes weren't big enough. BAE Hawk/T-45. I just noticed they do kind of look like babby F-4s, but like you said Phantoms are much larger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 09:16
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:BAE Hawk/T-45. I just noticed they do kind of look like babby F-4s, but like you said Phantoms are much larger. Thanks, turns out it's a Hawk 127. I saw your reply and looked up the T-45 first which had a shorter nose, so I looked at my photo again and read A27-20 near the tail which lead me to find out it's a Hawk 127 (or I could have just visited the Hawk wikipedia page too where it's listed as a RAAF aircraft). Seems that the RAAF uses as them as trainers for F/A-18 pilots before they are allowed near the real planes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
Actually it isn't (e: a T-45), and the T-45 isn't really a Hawk any more (though it was developed from the Hawk 50) I was going to say that looked like a Hawk 132, but since it's RAAF, it has to be a Hawk 127 E: beaten, have he world's cutest jet trainer, the Mitten, instead 
simplefish fucked around with this message at 09:44 on Feb 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:So this was apparently a thing. Several things, in operational service, in fact. Pffft, it gets even better.  http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0750150 Those are two 105mm howitzers. Two 105mm autoloaded howitzers that can be fired in flight. Pity it never flew. Gervasius fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Feb 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
VodeAndreas posted:
That's not a spit. If I'm not mistaken that's a P-40 warhawk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
Colonel K posted:That's not a spit. If I'm not mistaken that's a P-40 warhawk. Oops, I have two green planes with teeth so I chose the better shot, looking again the shittier photo is the spitfire with the typical two cannons on it. The spitfire was in the same lineup, might be the plane to the right of that shot. e: I'm not good at identifying aircraft if you weren't able to tell yet  Google finished perving over my backed up photos and made an automatic panorama for me of a Global Hawk and 2x F22s so here:  VodeAndreas fucked around with this message at 12:58 on Feb 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
I just like  tailwheelsI never realised how big the global hawk is..
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Colonel K posted:I just like Not , either.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk There's one at my airport. Bastard also has a texan, a beech staggerwing, and several RVs in the hangar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
If we're going to be technical, it is probably most accurate to refer to it as a Kittyhawk
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Fun fact about that Global Hawk, it was the first time in the world to land outside of a military airport for this weeks airshow, it also landed with civilian ATC. Avalon is a civilian airport although used by only one (budget) airline. Point Cook airbase is ~20km up the road and is the oldest continously operating military airfield in the world. http://app.pddnet.com/news/2015/02/af-marks-first-rq-4-non-military-base-landing
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Pffft, it gets even better. "Vibratory" just makes me think they wanted to strap two giant dildos to it. Which I guess was kinda true, really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
simplefish posted:E: beaten, have he world's cutest jet trainer, the Mitten, instead That's... that's actually pretty cool looking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
charliemonster42 posted:Not The spit is, which is what I was referring to. Sounds like a lucky chap, if I had silly money I'd have a staggerwing for touring around in, A P51 for warbird fun and a husky for off field. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Ambihelical Hexnut posted:As far as the deploying thing goes: Major systems like aircraft don't necessarily rotate in and out with every unit, they stay in the fight for as long as the engineers determined they can be ridden hard before needing a reset at a higher level maintenance facility back in the states. Every time I've deployed we've either given all of our aircraft and major support equipment to another unit before leaving, or taken our stuff down range and left it there for the next guy. Huh, I've heard from multiple people who should know that with RPAs specifically (Grey Eagle, Shadow, etc) the equipment rotates out with the unit. Interesting. Colonel K posted:I never realised how big the global hawk is.. Wingspan is just a bit longer than a 757.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
It probably depends on the system, location, and rotation schedule.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Huh, I've heard from multiple people who should know that with RPAs specifically (Grey Eagle, Shadow, etc) the equipment rotates out with the unit. Interesting. Global hawk is basically an unmanned U-2 so it's a similar size. Hard to get scale on something from pictures if it doesn't have a cockpit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Fun fact about that Global Hawk, it was the first time in the world to land outside of a military airport for this weeks airshow, it also landed with civilian ATC. Did they say this explicitly? I was at the Melbourne Air Show last year (Melbourne, Fl, that is) and they had one at Melbourne International where the show was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
Godholio posted:It probably depends on the system, location, and rotation schedule. Correct answer. And especially with UAS where the primary operators of the system might not be the property owners, it's more complicated than might be immediately apparent. I've seen examples like an aviation brigade at a FOB with an airfield housing, maintaining, and doing the launch/recover cycle on tail numbers that they don't own. When an aircraft has 24 hours of endurance a larger, non-owning unit can gas it up, launch it, fly it toward the owning unit who will take over operation in the air, they'll fly it for half a day, then give it back to the unit with the airfield to land and maintain it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Colonel K posted:I just like Yeah, the first time you see one in person it's pretty impressive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Bedded down in the Norfolk area for some training this weekend. gave some tours where we could. Here is a section of our aircraft departing out of an airport here. I'll have some solid gopro footage from some low level routes here in a few days when I get some time to upload them! MV22B departure: http://youtu.be/dlSJL2nMZcA This link should work. I'm doing this all from my phone so I hope it works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
That prop is mesmerizing. Would love to see it slowly rotating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Ambihelical Hexnut posted:That will probably always be a thing. In the natural recirculation of mission needs and equipment availability you'll always fall into the cycle of having a helicopter that can lift stuff, stapling guns on to it to fill a cca need, adding armor and crew protection and crash survivability, redesigning the airframe for the specialized mission (attack), etc. I'd love to beat on a chinook gunship for fun, so much powa!     As I recall the armament for the H-34 Pirates varied, but tended to generally be a 20mm MG-151 cannon firing out the cargo door, two .50 cal machine guns behind it, sometimes a .30 on the starboard side, various amounts of 37mm or 68mm rocket pods, plus Bazookas on a mount that could be rotated for in-flight reloading. Some also had racks for light aircraft bombs and fixed-forwards guns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 10:11
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Chinook ain't got nothing on the K-Max While intermeshing rotors are always a bit 'wtf' worthy, the K-max pales to the Kellett XR-10, the only intermeshing rotor helicopter that bothered to try having more than 2 blades per rotor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl9IiVf4Vs0 C.M. Kruger posted:As I recall the armament for the H-34 Pirates varied, but tended to generally be a 20mm MG-151 cannon firing out the cargo door, two .50 cal machine guns behind it, sometimes a .30 on the starboard side, various amounts of 37mm or 68mm rocket pods, plus Bazookas on a mount that could be rotated for in-flight reloading. Some also had racks for light aircraft bombs and fixed-forwards guns. Of course, the problem with the H-34 was that it was let down by it's engine. The UK licensed version - the Westland Wessex, was a much longer lasting helicopter (only retired in 2003) since it's turboshafts gave it range and speed comparable with the UH-1. We never tried fitting it into a gunship afaik though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Is there some sort of advantage with meshing rotors or did the engineering team just want to see if they could pull it off?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
Splode posted:Is there some sort of advantage with meshing rotors or did the engineering team just want to see if they could pull it off? Not my forte, but I would gander to say the advantages of having a dual rotor system (ala Chinook) but on a smaller air frame. Basically, more lift, and counter rotating cancels out the torque effects so you don't need a tail rotor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Another thing that the synchrotor avoids is this issue:Phanatic posted:The blade that's moving forward has a higher airspeed than the blade that's moving backwards. So the advancing blade generates more lift. At some point, as the helicopter's forward speed increases, you reach a point where the retreating blade has an airspeed of zero and thus generates zero lift. In unrelated news, here's something cool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzYb68qXpD0 It looks more plausible than the Moller skycar because it doesn't try to be VTOL with ducted fans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Another thing that the synchrotor avoids is this issue: I always wonder how much insurance would cost on a flying car. It's not like a regular car where someone rear ending, or dinging, it can cause a control surface and engine failure plus the cost of re-certifying the airplane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Bedded down in the Norfolk area for some training this weekend. gave some tours where we could. Here is a section of our aircraft departing out of an airport here. I'll have some solid gopro footage from some low level routes here in a few days when I get some time to upload them! I heard two of these fly by overhead ~10 miles away from Moffett Field a few weeks ago. I didn't even look up at the first one, they sounded a lot like a normal light aircraft when flying in airplane mode. They're a lot bigger than I thought, I always mentally compared the pictures to normal helicopters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Ospreys IRL are like B2 bombers. Never what you'd expect, much more of a sci-fi vibe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
I always find it weird that the Ka-50 which is a relatively tamer co-axial rotor system has more problems with rotors smacking each other than the K-Max.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Not entirely sure but it looked like an AN 124 was flying into SEATAC just now. Where do you guys normally look to find out what just came in?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
https://www.flightaware.com EDIT: Here's your guy: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ADB2996/history/20150301/2000Z/KLCK/KSEA
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:https://www.flightaware.com Yep, that's him. We were headed back into the city from alkai beach and I know the approach for seatac from ground level pretty well from Boeing field's and just saw this big rear end, high wing, multi-engine thing lumbering in from up north. My poor girlfriend had to suffer through the "is that a.... I'll be damned, I think is! Wonder what he's doing here?" external internal monologue for a good 5-10 mins.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:Not entirely sure but it looked like an AN 124 was flying into SEATAC just now. Where do you guys normally look to find out what just came in? There's been AN-124's showing up at SEATAC for a few weeks now (they usually stay for a day or two before leaving), but I've never seen anything explaining why they're coming into Seattle. I know that Boeing has hired AN-124's to carry parts for the 747-8 and 787 before, but I'd think that would mean flying into BFI or Paine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
Eej posted:I always find it weird that the Ka-50 which is a relatively tamer co-axial rotor system has more problems with rotors smacking each other than the K-Max. Price you pay for being one of the few rw pilots with an ejection seat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 03:02
|
|