|
mlmp08 posted:Also also, it is shocking to me how often pilots across all branches get surprised by American SAM capabilities. It really highlights how we have been bombing out old-rear end IADS and not modern ones.
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:24 |
|
|
Godholio posted:Oh, and no real replacement for the Pave Low in the rescue mission (kind of important in a real air war) Forgive my ignorance, but on paper Osprey has longer range and is almost twice as fast as Pave Low, making it better at SAR, no?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
This discussion is fascinating and all, but y'all need to post more insanity. Example: giving new meanings to the concept of "bush flying":  You're looking at a Viggen below treetop level, somewhere up north. Possibly at the Vidsel Test Range, but who knows, the regulations weren't all that strict up there. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 09:32 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:This discussion is fascinating and all, but y'all need to post more insanity. "And what was the reason for your loss of aircraft, Löjtnant Norgren? I see from your report that you ingested some sort of animal into your engine intake...was it a bird of some kind?" "No, Major...a very fat squirrel." "The Department of Agriculture will be pleased to hear the squirrels are so fat. Go on, find yourself another plane." ----- "Our missile troops practice once or twice a year, firing at target drones that plod along in a straight line up where everyone can see them. The NATO fighters fly between the trees. If the antiaircraft missiles on either side worked as well as their makers said, every airplane in the world would have been shot down twice over by now." You can usually tell the skill of an air force by what they allow their pilots to do with their aircraft. And yes, by that metric, the USAF got some 'splainin' to do*. * dudes like Bud Holland notwithstanding. -_o BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 10:45 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Örlogskapten  Örlogskapten is only used in the navy; the equivalent in the air force is simply a major (same spelling in Swedish). "Örlog" is an old Norse/old Germanic term for "oathbreaker" or something like that, but it's come to mean "naval warfare" in modern Swedish.Also, aircraft and pilot loss rates were absolutely appalling in the Swedish air force in the 50's/60's. Out of 661 Saab J 29 Tunnans built, 242 were written off after accidents of various kinds, in which 99 pilots died. Safety thinking and regulations steadily improved during the Cold War but extreme low flying with the Viggen remained a part of the doctrine well into the 90's, even though regulations during the 80's and 90's formally restricted altitude minimums to 30 meters AGL over land (20 meters over water), up from an earlier 20/10 meters. This was as eyeballed by the pilot though, so there some (or, well, a lot) of wriggle room, especially up north where there weren't a lot of people to complain about it. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 10:30 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:
Is it bad that I not only know what book that quote is from, but even roughly where in the book it appears?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 10:24
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:
Fixed. I just Wiki'ed 'Swedish Military Ranks' and c/p'ed the one that sounded the most Swedish that didn't have 'General' in it. azflyboy posted:Is it bad that I not only know what book that quote is from, but even roughly where in the book it appears? Considering I had a dogeared paperback copy of RSR that I eventually broke in half along its spine, no. What worries me is that I had something like 80% of the passage locked in memory, only using a Google search to get it to 100% accuracy by selectively bracketing parts I knew verbatim in quotation marks. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 10:54 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
"Sweet, now stealth THESE up and include an internal weapons bay and we'll talk! ...yes, internal. No, not the wing device!" -how my personal DoD would operate.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:"Sweet, now stealth THESE up and include an internal weapons bay and we'll talk! ...yes, internal. No, not the wing device!" -how my personal DoD would operate. Pfft, not wanting wing-mounted stealth air-torpedo tubes for your 'missile bay'
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
Yes. Yes, this is insane.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
 That pilot is insane.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
God that downwards lurch after he touches it
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Something about old pilots and bold pilots...
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Gibfender posted:God that downwards lurch after he touches it That was commanded, you can see the elevator tilted after it comes into view.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Oh yeah, saw this flying out of LaGuardia yesterday: I couldn't help but laugh at the fact that he's got his name painted in big loving letters on his jet. What an egomaniac. edit: if you can't read the lettering in my terrible cell phone pic, that's Donald Trump's plane. Mortabis fucked around with this message at 22:04 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Oh yeah, saw this flying out of LaGuardia yesterday: There's an episode of Mighty Planes that aired on Smithsonian Channel that will make you hate him even more. http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/shows/mighty-planes/trump-757/1003002/3398551 The way that everyone just walks on eggshells around him the whole drat time is infuriating.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Oh yeah, saw this flying out of LaGuardia yesterday: His dinky 727-100 was sexier:  The 757 used to belong to Paul Allen (the MS one), but trump bought it for $100M. To be kind of 'fair' to Trump, the livery is that of 'Trump Shuttle' his defunct airline that was supposed to compete with PanAm Shuttle, he kind of bought most of the planes and airline facilities from Eastern as a job lot.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Listen, if I had the wealth afford a jet, I'd paint all sorts of dumb poo poo on it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Wow I just realized, that plane wasn't taxiing--that's where he parks it. Half the passengers leaving LaGuardia get an eyeful of it. That's fantastic.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
If the interior of the plane follows the standard Trump School of Interior Design, it would be far uglier then anything you could paint on the exterior. That man's love of gold leaf is horrifying.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Oh yeah, saw this flying out of LaGuardia yesterday: Everyone knows that in  , "Trump" means "fart", right? Right?Just, y'know, checking...
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
I found some photos of the interior, it's ... surprisingly restrained, for something that's got gold-plated everything. http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-plane-2011-8?op=1 best caption is "This long table is great for mile-high board meetings"  holocaust bloopers posted:Listen, if I had the wealth afford a jet, I'd paint all sorts of dumb poo poo on it. Three Wolf Moon-style or enormous penis-style? This is important! Psion fucked around with this message at 23:48 on May 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Listen, if I had the wealth afford a jet, I'd paint all sorts of dumb poo poo on it. I'd totally get that fancyass Deus Ex-esque paintjob on mine
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
I'd just leave it chromate green, my favorite.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
The answer is always polished aluminum.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Psion posted:Three Wolf Moon-style or enormous penis-style? This is important! Three Wolf Moon with enormous penis. Just because I can
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
SybilVimes posted:His dinky 727-100 was sexier: Paul Allen has so many cool airplanes he just started charging admission for his hangar. Note to Jay Leno: please do this.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The answer is always polished aluminum. Well if American doesn't want it anymore...
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
Classic racing liveries; dicks.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Classic racing liveries; dicks. 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
It's important to get your D-ICKS wet from time to time.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Martini livery looks great on everything.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Psion posted:Three Wolf Moon-style or enormous penis-style? This is important! Reaper with a giant penis chalked on it is still on my scale model to do list.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
azazello posted:Forgive my ignorance, but on paper Osprey has longer range and is almost twice as fast as Pave Low, making it better at SAR, no? I have some doubts over how well it'll perform in certain situations. But yes, those are definitely huge advantages. Part of my concern was over its size, but it's actually a bit smaller than I thought now that I've actually looked up the specs. "Only" about 12 feet wider than a Pave Low.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Reaper with a giant penis chalked on it is still on my scale model to do list. This has happened multiple times, albeit more often in dust than with actual chalk. I'm just disappointed I never got a chance to grab a picture of it
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
A400M crash on test flight may have been caused by software error  
azazello fucked around with this message at 17:43 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I have some doubts over how well it'll perform in certain situations. But yes, those are definitely huge advantages. It would seem to me that, yeah - range and top speed are important. But wouldn't the rate at which it can transition from forward flight to land/take off transition back to forward flight be, maybe, more important? There's trade offs in everything. How does a Osprey compare? Maybe they should put some JATO rockets on the Osprey to find out Tide fucked around with this message at 17:49 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Tide posted:It would seem to me that, yeah - range and top speed are important. But wouldn't the rate at which it can transition from forward flight to land/take off transition back to forward flight be, maybe, more important? There's trade offs in everything. It's pretty seamless. I've watched HMX-1 V-22s take off from a parking lot next to Soldier Field in Chicago and many people wouldn't even be aware the transition is happening until the thing was already in level flight. You also have to remember that the H-53s in question were/are loving massive helicopters (the MH-53M could carry up to 38 combat troops). If there is a difference, it's probably pretty negligible. Mazz fucked around with this message at 18:39 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:24 |
|
|
One of my big questions is how well it actually performs in a hover. Like say, above trees or water, where you can't actually land to pick someone up. I've heard "not great" but I've never seen it or really seen anything I'd consider credible.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 18:49
|
|