|
Interesting tidbits from this: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/05/eyeing-iran-israel-readies-stealth-strike-fighter/71608464/quote:At some later point — or perhaps nearer term, depending on the level of additional security assistance forthcoming from Washington — Israel may opt for 25 F-35Bs. Short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) capabilities designed for the F-35B version, sources here said, may be more compelling if Israel determines that its runways are vulnerable to enemy missile threats. On reflection, that might actually be a place where the short field capability really makes sense. Also: quote:Similarly, the contractor is assessing Israeli concepts for external wing tanks to augment the 18,000 pounds of fuel carried internally by the F-35. "Double the range" I think puts it in F-111 territory.
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
Mortabis posted:Interesting tidbits from this: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/05/eyeing-iran-israel-readies-stealth-strike-fighter/71608464/ The usual reported combat radius for the F-35A is 590nm* so they're talking 1180nm. For Israel thats an especially huge difference, take a look 1180nm, 590nm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:"Involved in a mishap" is a bit different from "accident/war-related loss" though. Hence me saying "not quite".
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Is this something that's considered when drawing up requirements for a new jet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Flyability with wing tips folded up? I wanna say the story I heard was that it was a happy accident that that didn't spell disaster for the pilot. Much like the Israeli F-15 capable of flight as a one-winged rocket ship was to McDonnell Douglas engineers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Leather Bear posted:Flyability with wing tips folded up? I wanna say the story I heard was that it was a happy accident that that didn't spell disaster for the pilot. Much like the Israeli F-15 capable of flight as a one-winged rocket ship was to McDonnell Douglas engineers. The F-4 has done it before as well, there's pictures out there. From what I understand, the Crusader ended up doing it quite often, though. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
Leather Bear posted:Flyability with wing tips folded up? I wanna say the story I heard was that it was a happy accident that that didn't spell disaster for the pilot. Much like the Israeli F-15 capable of flight as a one-winged rocket ship was to McDonnell Douglas engineers. If the Crusader's Wikipedia entry is to be believed, there was more than one instance of F-8s being flown successfully with the wings folded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
The C has never flown with its wings folded. Checkmate f-35ailures 
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:"Involved in a mishap" is a bit different from "accident/war-related loss" though. While finding the Crusader statistics I found another document about Naval air safety. Apparently in 1954 alone, the Navy/Marines lost 776 aircraft and 535 crew.  I'd hate to see what the final tally was with the Air Force and Army mixed in with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Two things: - Carrier aviation is really, really hard (doubly so when your powerplant is an underpowered non-responsive early jet motor), and when Naval Aviators talk about lessons learned in blood they're being quite literal - It's amazing what the US military has done to drive down accidents related to stupidity/ignorance (both mx and aircrew). I can't imagine how much of an aneurysm I'd have if I walked into your average mx shop c. 1955.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
I just think of everyone in DOD and DOE prior to about 1965 as being Homer, Lenny, and Carl.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Don't forget Earl.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The usual reported combat radius for the F-35A is 590nm* so they're talking 1180nm. Being able to hit inside iran seems like something the Israelis would like to have.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
So Lockheed Martin just protested the JLTV contract, while AM General and took the high road saying "it would ultimately result in a distraction from our current growth business areas." It's so perfect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
So Chinese carriers are going to be a blood bath to their own pilots eh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:So Chinese carriers are going to be a blood bath to their own pilots eh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
I see the F-35 finally managed a flight outside the US: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/09/08/f-35-soars-over-italy-first-time-outside-us/71866044/
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:I see the F-35 finally managed a flight outside the US: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/09/08/f-35-soars-over-italy-first-time-outside-us/71866044/ It was assembled in Italy, it didn't fly to there from the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
I know. Still the first time any F-35 has flown outside the US.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
I'm in the US on holiday at the moment, just wanted to say thanks for the advice on the Midway tour, it was awesome to walk around on a ship that big learning all about it. It was also great to see some iconic planes like the F4U, F-4, F-8 and F/A-18 up close. I even got to sit in the cockpit of a few. As a bonus on the drive back to Anaheim saw an Apache and Osprey flying around near the stretch of road running through Pendleton.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:Looks like one of the Kornet models? correct Phanatic posted:Royal Marines put two Carl Gustav rounds into an Argentinian corvette that was shelling them and drove it off. Did some pretty good damage to it, too. Holy poo poo really? Any more info?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:correct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_South_Georgia#ARA_Guerrico
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
loving metal ..then they surrendered. At least they had their senses to avoid being plastered by the 100mm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The usual reported combat radius for the F-35A is 590nm* so they're talking 1180nm. Yeah, then compare it to their existing F-16s and it's a game-changer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Yeah, then compare it to their existing F-16s and it's a game-changer. I don't know if I've been infected with a terminal case of Grover or something but I've been growing to like the F-35. If I ever try to build my own house, someone please mercy-kill me. Adorable Baltic country news: http://www.postimees.ee/3316791/fotod-ja-video-amaris-maandus-kaks-superhavitajat "These aircraft operate on only a very selected lennubaasides and the F-22, today's landing is a great recognition for the entire Estonian Air Force professionalism to ensure the clock Ämari air base, and the monitoring and management capacity of the functioning of the level that corresponds to the world's strongest air force senior techniques requirements," said the Google Translate version of Air Force Colonel Jaak Tarien. So, okay, it's just some dude fangirling hard over F-22s landing, right? It turns out Colonel Jaak Tarian is the commander of the entire Estonian Air Force. How are these countries even real?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:So, okay, it's just some dude fangirling hard over F-22s landing, right? It turns out Colonel Jaak Tarian is the commander of the entire Estonian Air Force. The entire Estonian Air Force is smaller than your typical hillbilly aeroclub. The Baltic countries' air forces are mostly radar operators, they have some limited light transport/patrol/search and rescue capability but the only reason they've got airfields is to be able to host the rotating NATO presence that does the actual air force work in their skies. Like when you know the Estonian Air Force has a personnel of only about 200 people, then it sheds a different light on this whole "holy poo poo we managed to make our air base good enough for the US stealth fighter to land on it" spiel. Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
The translation is mangling it but he's promoting the deployment of F-22s to Ämäri Air Base because it's a show of force from the US, when regarding a certain eastern neighbour of Estonia, and it's also a demonstration that the base is capable of servicing the top fighter of the USAF. He's jazzed about the base, not the fighter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
It's like winning 'Lawn Of The Month' from your HOA, except the prize is an f-22 coming to hang out with you. And then your fuckhead neighbor gets fined for pulling trashed cars on his lawn, AND THEN YOU BOMB IT WITH AN F-22 You'd plotz too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Bomb all HOAs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
http://gfycat.com/SolidPassionateAmoeba The F-4 seems a bit of a dog compared to the F-16 there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
In every measurable way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Can F-16s fly from carriers? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Can F-16s fly from carriers? It's the landing part that's difficult, they can take off just fine I would assume.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
I dunno, you still need reinforced gear to handle the stress of a catapult launch, not just landing. I don't think the F-16 can get to Vr in a thousand feet unassisted and that assumes they get the whole deck. If they have to take off in the same distance as a catapult launch that's like ... 300 feet maybe? Assuming a Nimitz-class here. it really needs to be emphasized that naval aviation is the triumph of materials engineering over the laws of physics. Landing and takeoff on a carrier are both flatly insane endeavors. insanely cool, that is Psion fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
How many carrier planes can do it without a catapult?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:How many carrier planes can do it without a catapult? Stretching the definition of plane, Ospreys, Harriers, the F-35B I don't know about skijump carriers or anything like that but for a flat-deck with catapults I'm pretty sure everything that isn't capable of vertical takeoff in one form or another uses a cat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
I'd wager the only ones with a prayer of doing it are prop planes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ar-poc38C84
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:I'd wager the only ones with a prayer of doing it are prop planes. With the right plane you don't even need the prayer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvT5LMhvogw Edit: Obviously these aren't military aircraft, still neat to see.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
xthetenth posted:How many carrier planes can do it without a catapult? I hear some crazy sons of bitches did it with B-25s once...
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 22:42
|
|
