|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Cold War Thread, I have a request: does anyone have a picture of an ICBM launch console, where the arming or launch key has two positions labeled "War" and "Peace"? I swear I've seen it before, but I'm striking out hard on Google. I could be misremembering it and it's a switch or something other than an ICBM console. I'm developing a lecture on command and control systems and I really want to include that picture. I've seen real war/peace switches in Swedish Cold War installations, but not for nuclear launch consoles obviously. Usually they are just for switching electrical power over to a different grid.  
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
I'm trying and failing to catch up with the thread - I'm currently on Feb 8, 2012 - and I just want to know if it's still OK to make fun of F-35, or is it finally a Good Plane now sorry for bringing about F-35 chat again
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'm trying and failing to catch up with the thread - I'm currently on Feb 8, 2012 - and I just want to know if it's still OK to make fun of F-35, or is it finally a Good Plane now The F-35 will be okay to make fun of until all three versions have become combat-proven, so you still have easily a decade of guffaws at its expense. Here, let's have some F-35 news: People pining about the F-22 production and trying to convince themselves they can't ask for it to be reopened USAF slepping up more F-16 RAF extends life for Tornado squadrons Oh wait, those aren't F-35 news directly. Here are news that directly concerns the F-35: All F-35 in the fleet need to get their fuel tanks changed UK abandons plans to integrate Storm Shadow on F-35 Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Jan 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:Gin and Juche! loving hell it was right there the whole time
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'm trying and failing to catch up with the thread - I'm currently on Feb 8, 2012 - and I just want to know if it's still OK to make fun of F-35, or is it finally a Good Plane now VTOL is always funny.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
double post
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Guffaws secured, thank you all
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'm trying and failing to catch up with the thread - I'm currently on Feb 8, 2012 - and I just want to know if it's still OK to make fun of F-35, or is it finally a Good Plane now 'Sup archives buddy. I think this was the best post so far: Cyrano4747 posted:I was about to say. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
[quote="TasogareNoKagi" post="""] [/quote] Hahaha oh MoD 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:The F-35 will be okay to make fun of until all three versions have become combat-proven, so you still have easily a decade of guffaws at its expense. My favorite part of this is that you get to mix :lockheed: with some classic British Procurement: Jane's posted:The original plan was for all three threshold weapons to be qualified for internal carriage on the F-35B. However, the 2010 decision to switch to the F-35C variant - subsequently reversed in 2012 - had repercussions for this plan according to Barker. the article's tl;dr is that they were integrating on the 35B, then switched to the 35C, then changed their minds and went back to the 35B, therefore loving themselves over the f-35a and f-35c have been good planes for like a year now
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
I would argue the F-35C isn't a great plane yet because the Navy is still just buying more of everything else instead of it the last I saw. The 35A is coming along well enough though, and will be better at the strike role than the F-16 really ever could be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Well yes, it would hopefully be better than a lightweight interceptor at strike missions. The real problem is that the F-35A is going to have to do everything because there aren't enough air frames. Oh and also the procurement process is still a clusterfuck even if the plane is good so hopefully congress doesn't freak out after 300 airframes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Well yes, it would hopefully be better than a lightweight interceptor at strike missions. Well yes but people still think we're getting a plane worse then the F-16 for 200 million each because of g limits or whatever the gently caress. It's a better plane than the F-16 at most of the roles an F-16 performs, theres really no question about that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Mazz posted:It's a better plane than the F-16 at most of the roles an F-16 performs, theres really no question about that. So is the F-15E and it can be bought at a flyaway under $200mil right now...
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:So is the F-15E and it can be bought at a flyaway under $200mil right now... But the Mud Hen doesn't incorporate buzzword-worthy technobabble technologies that make Congress horny because it potentially means systems integration and/or manufacturing jerbs in their state/district. Better to have a brand new airframe that needs a brand new pipeline of labor and manufacturing than something already established. Geez, it's like you hate Freedom or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
If it doesn't allow 1080p60 streaming video and audio to the CAOC complete with equipped and compulsory voice chat between the pilot and the CAOC director then the Air Force doesn't want it what, you didn't think we meant systems integration with other airborne assets, did you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Making movies in Best Korea. Apparently the C96 is still cool with revolutionary muralists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Man its a small internet. Unless there are multiple B4Ctom1s, you posted comments on one of my imgur posts and I think you used to be on another car forum I was on like turbo mustangs. I am a disease. Google me, nobody else would ever use my name, it is too stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Being a Lockheed engineer on the F-35A has to be cushy as hell. Throw wadded up paper balls at all the jags working on the B variant on your way to a liquid lunch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Being a Lockheed engineer on the F-35A has to be cushy as hell. Throw wadded up paper balls at all the jags working on the B variant on your way to a liquid lunch. It could be the opposite. The B team saying "And we need this" and then the A and C guys just groaining and saying to themselves "welp, goodbye kludge solution #4..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:It could be the opposite. The B team saying "And we need this" and then the A and C guys just groaining and saying to themselves "welp, goodbye kludge solution #4..." I guarantee you it's this. "Hey guys, that 6oz widget that neatly solves the fuel issue puts us too close to our weight budget. Sorry."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
If you give the F-35B team an ounce, they'll ask for a...
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:If you give the F-35B team an ounce, they'll ask for a... another one, because they collectively smoke that much by lunch
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
You can't really blame the engineers; they didn't decide the requirements.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:another one, because they collectively smoke that much by lunch 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Those are both me too. The thickness of the mullet you must posses for a modded V6 camaro...I bet is magical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:You can't really blame the engineers; they didn't decide the requirements. I'm gonna go ahead and say there are plenty at fault including engineers. I've had so many "what the gently caress, engineers" moments on systems far simpler than a jet fighter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:07
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:The thickness of the mullet you must posses for a modded V6 camaro...I bet is magical. Sometimes you're 19 and your friends 88' V6 is all you can afford... I loved that car though. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I'm gonna go ahead and say there are plenty at fault including engineers. As an engineer on mil planes, can confirm its probably the fault of someone who at least possesses an engineering degree even if theyre now a manager or systems person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
     
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
I've had many "what loving idiot designed this" moments on stuff I designed! Well, specified and then agreed the CAD model looked fine. Mechanical engineers and their excuses like "tolerance stack up". That connector had plenty of clearance on the CAD model! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
Feel free to narrate this one. I know the one in the foreground but I have no idea what the others are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
e: middle is F3H Demon, top is F2H Banshee ^^^^ gaaaaaAAAAAHHHHHHhhhhhh  hobbesmaster posted:I've had many "what loving idiot designed this" moments on stuff I designed! Well, specified and then agreed the CAD model looked fine. One design that comes to mind for me was a box with a panel cover that, when actually installed in the aircraft with cables connected, could not be closed due to the cables getting in the way. Wingnut Ninja fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
I have a family member who basically has his entire job as this: Make sure the latest poo poo they crammed onto the plane doesn't break all the other poo poo on the plane or violate various safety regulations and still lets maintenance be possible around it. He's rather overworked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I have a family member who basically has his entire job as this: I hope he works in a one story building.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:Feel free to narrate this one. I know the one in the foreground but I have no idea what the others are. Farthest to Nearest: F2H Banshee, F3H Demon, F4H Phantom II. It's a formation flight of McDonnell Aircraft fighters built for the USN.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Farthest to Nearest: F2H Banshee, F3H Demon, F4H Phantom II. It's a formation flight of McDonnell Aircraft fighters built for the USN. tyvm. I don't know anything about the two that aren't Phantoms, so reading time for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:One design that comes to mind for me was a box with a panel cover that, when actually installed in the aircraft with cables connected, could not be closed due to the cables getting in the way. I er uh that sounds familiar... Thankfully I do not work on aircraft, these were little prototype inspection robots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:tyvm. I don't know anything about the two that aren't Phantoms, so reading time for me. The Phantom II was initially designed and pitched as an F3H-G Super Demon. The initial mockups didn't have all the origami-folded dihedral/anhedral wings and tail that they ended up needing to get the double-ugly to have any yaw authority.  
Slo-Tek fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:The Phantom II was initially designed and pitched as an F3H-G Super Demon. oh loly crap that's like an entirely different plane. I wouldn't even have identified it as a Phantom II except for the engines. It doesn't even have the droopy snout, much less the angled elevators and bendy wings. e: hey, why are there Boeing barricades behind it? hogmartin fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 04:56
|
|