|
Terrible Robot posted:Yeah, I'm gonna need a picture of this for...reasons  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AulW-14iyyE The video is before my friend was the driver. The team has 3 cars. Two train-themed jet dragsters and a train-themed V8-powered wheelie car. EDIT: better video of both cars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3joLfb9700 EDIT 2: Just talked to friend. I guess they are J-34's and not J-79's. Akion fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Jul 28, 2016 |
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 04:42 |
|
|
Akion posted:
This might be the first post I've ever seen that deserves crossposting in the Aviation, Automotive, AND Locomotive insanity threads. Also, I'd love to pick your friend's brain. I have so many questions about jet cars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:This might be the first post I've ever seen that deserves crossposting in the Aviation, Automotive, AND Locomotive insanity threads. My friend actually just drives and helps maintain (he's a Jet Engine mechanic that's been racing since he could walk. Both his parents raced, too). I think the cars were originally built when we were both still in diapers. I only see him every few years anymore just because he lives in FL and I am in CO. I went and saw him race last time I was back home and it was a trip for sure. I'd seen jet dragsters before, but not up close like that. I used to race piston stuff, but Jet is a whole different ballgame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
That's awesome as hell, thanks for sharing 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Yep! I feel like if I was disgustingly rich, I'd definitely want my own jet dragster if for nothing else than to piss off my neighbors. I'd be like the guy with the street-legal F1 car, only worse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
MrChips posted:War is Boring is having a broken clock moment right now and published this interesting article about the attack on the USS Stark back in 1987: Ah yes, that time Iraq attacked a US warship and Reagan blamed Iran.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Akion posted:
your posting makes me hard e- also, about that Stark article quote:While not entirely trusting this version, the U.S. government never punished Iraq for the attack this may be factually incorrect, in hindsight Seizure Meat fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Jul 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Akion posted:I'm guessing all the F-4's are privately owned now? The USAF still has a handful (including the one pictured, which operates out of Tyndall AFB, FL), but it looks like they're going away now that the QF-16 target drones have taken over from the depleted QF-4 supply.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
China and Russia to hold joint military exercises in South China Sea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Ah yes, that time Iraq attacked a US warship and Reagan blamed Iran. It's what the ~stars~ told him. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
The NL is buying two A330 MRTTs to replace our two KDC-10 tankers from 2020 onwards. This will be done together with Luxemburg to provide for the kernel of a potential NATO tanker fleet based in Eindhoven (though not like the NATO AWACS fleet where they have Lux registration). The problem is that even with the likes of Germany and Poland possibly joining up, eventual fleet size is projected to be... 8 aircraft 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
The handjob of aerial refueling commitment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:loving lol As someone mentioned E-2Ds are new build airframes (and a significant redesign) it stands a decent chance of the only aircraft in production for 100 years. ALso, dont quote me because I can't remember the source, but I think most vikings are at either Max # of landing or max flight hours and thus, unless you want a major depot/wing repair effort are a no go. (Yay Wikipedia quality, shame on me for linking) Also the C-2, E-2's fat cousin, which recently got killed in favor of the V-22 Osprey for COD, could probably be the sort of "low risk" tanker the navy dreams of. Its not like the Navy needs a low RCS tanker next to a ship that sets off every MAD made since 1951. CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Jul 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
When I made this picture with the description, "New Lockheed Martin "pod" to improve the F35's CAS capabilities" I was just kidding. then I saw this video of the 25mm pod for the F35 to let it replace the A-10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUcln7StaEw I know what you are thinking. "wtf? the F-35 already has a 25mm gun" Me too. Do they both get to fire at the same time? I guess one gun is air to air ammo and the other in the pod is corroded polonium nuggets or something just as stupid to kill tanks, people, wildlife, vegetation, aretroops? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFoJ93Kb5z0 I mean why not just put another one on the other engine inlet on the starboard side? With zero convergence. Since there is already a 25mm gun on the plane getting the 25mm pod, I will henceforth call it the "yodawg pod".
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Also the C-2, E-2's fat cousin, which recently got killed in favor of the V-22 Osprey for COD, could probably be the sort of "low risk" tanker the navy dreams of. Its not like the Navy needs a low RCS tanker next to a ship that sets off every MAD made since 1951. But if you appropriate older airframes to do a job instead of new sexy Batwing drone tankers, the GAO might be tempted to think you're being sensible with your funds and therefore give you less of them. That's why we can't bring C-2s and S-3s back as tankers and/or augmented/upgraded COD, even though they'd be great at it. Always do less with new stuff than more with older stuff. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
McNally posted:No, just the one. Like Godholio said, that's not the one, although one slight correction that one is out of Holloman, there are no more QF-4s at Tyndall. The Collings Foundation one doesn't fly very often because '70s era jet fighters are loving expensive, both to operate as well as maintain. I did a post about the USAF ones in the AI thread: iyaayas01 posted:This will likely be the last airshow season for them. They're done at Tyndall as they've gone fully to QF-16s, but there's still 20-something QF-4s at Holloman. The plan is to stop test support with them in Jan '17, with them fully phased out later in 2017. Not sure if they'll do a "final farewell" tour next summer but once they stop paying the contractors to maintain them for test support I don't see them continuing to spend money on them for heritage flights. B4Ctom1 posted:When I made this picture with the description, "New Lockheed Martin "pod" to improve the F35's CAS capabilities" I was just kidding. different variants. -A model has the internal gun, -B and -C models have the external pod. I assume this was done due to rejiggering of internal components...presumably due to the lift fan on the -B and internal fuel requirements on the -C. FWIW I was more just laughing at the tone of that wikipedia sentence (also the fact that it said the Osprey would somehow be marginally better at buddy tanking than the F-35)
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:different variants. -A model has the internal gun, -B and -C models have the external pod. I assume this was done due to rejiggering of internal components...presumably due to the lift fan on the -B and internal fuel requirements on the -C. Ahhh makes much better sense that way edit: seriouspost, can we fit like 4 of these onto the wings of an F-15? How about onto an A-10? 
B4Ctom1 fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Jul 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
A B-25 could carry a 75mm tank gun and still have room for quad .50s. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Ahhh makes much better sense that way Somebody thought of that before. Also not-as-good pictures of an F-4 mounting 15 minigun pods in three-racks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:But if you appropriate older airframes to do a job instead of new sexy Batwing drone tankers, the GAO might be tempted to think you're being sensible with your funds and therefore give you less of them. That's why we can't bring C-2s and S-3s back as tankers and/or augmented/upgraded COD, even though they'd be great at it. Always do less with new stuff than more with older stuff. They don't even have to bring C2s back or modify airframe....they could prob use the same production line as E2s. NG bid the fuckin COD plane like last year and won (then lost under protest) the big tanker not long before that. No doubt theres people that could do that no problem.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:The handjob of aerial refueling commitment. Much like a handjob it's mostly the promise of the potential of something to come. Then keeping even a handful of active tankers maintains training continuity and keeps that skill alive in their end. If there is a future need for tins of euro tanking capacity those guys become a training core. If they jus said gently caress it and abandoned that capacity THEN we could talk s out them having zero commitment to nato or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Go on, tell us more about the restriction of free speech Autism trap sprung
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Somebody thought of that before. You mean this one: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
wkarma posted:You mean this one: That's got to be the most exhilarating quarter second mag dump ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:A B-25 could carry a 75mm tank gun and still have room for quad .50s. The standard B‐17G carried thirteen .50s.  Göring: “Yup, that’s a lot of guns.”
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The standard B-17G carried thirteen .50s. B-25J got eighteen. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 07:18
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:B-25J got eighteen. 14 forward firing 
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:B-25J got eighteen. The A-26 could mount eight in the nose, eight under the wings, and lock the dorsal turret in the forward-firing position.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
And yet somehow in War Thunder with all those guns nothing seems to die Nerf red team.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
If WT gave destroyers and carriers even half their historical MG and cannon armament, attacking naval targets would cease to be a thing.* Well, except, for higher altitude divebombing like at Midway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Doctor Grape Ape posted:That's got to be the most exhilarating quarter second mag dump ever. hobbesmaster posted:And yet somehow in War Thunder with all those guns nothing seems to die pod.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:And yet somehow in War Thunder with all those guns nothing seems to die “Doesn’t have HE inside or ‘cannon’ in the name. Let’s give it the power of spitwads.”
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
OC-135B flying over Russia under Open Skies treaty makes an emergency landing at Khabarovsk: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/07/28/dod-monitoring-plane-makes-emergency-landing-russia/87669188/
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:If WT gave destroyers and carriers even half their historical MG and cannon armament, attacking naval targets would cease to be a thing.* Just pretend it's early war Italian ships.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Wait when I posted that I actually thought I was in the WT thread. Anyway, the Army has a solution for SHORAD. SLEP avengers out to like 2042 or so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Wait when I posted that I actually thought I was in the WT thread. i forget, were you one of the posters mocking the marines for treating "guy with a stinger" as suitable bote aa defense
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
They shoulda held out for a twenty five pounder
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
The caliber of journalism in Britain is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 04:42 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The caliber of journalism in Britain is terrible. BOOOO! Is the article saying that "the new 5-inch gun performs no better than pre-existing US or Italian models at an elevated price point", or is it more...simplistic in what it's trying to say?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 18:13
|
|
