|
hobbesmaster posted:I believe harriers literally cannot? Not without mattresses.
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I believe harriers literally cannot? They even have to dump some or most of their fuel iirc
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
The Pope posted:An F/A-18 can't land back on a carrier with it's ordnance? Depends on the payload. Remember that they don't have the room to do a soft landing, they have to slam down on the deck in what is often called a controlled crash. The heavier you are when you do that, the riskier the maneuver. Between jettisoning a bomb and breaking a wing, the choice is quickly made. I know that in the French navy the heaviest configuration used corresponds to a take off weight of 21.5 tons. three tons less than the official MTOW. That's not a limitation of the catapults, that's so that nothing needs to be jettisoned in case the aircraft has got to cancel the mission and return to the deck immediately after take off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
More illegal salvaging of WWII wrecks off Malaysia. Chinese ship caught in the act, ostensibly 'authorized' by a Malaysian university.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:Chinese ship caught in the act, ostensibly 'authorized' by a Malaysian university. Trump University portfolio diversification looking good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Does anyone know which PATRIOT unit had an F-16 shoot a HARM through one of its radars in 2003? I've been trying to find this out but coming up blank.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Does anyone know which PATRIOT unit had an F-16 shoot a HARM through one of its radars in 2003? I've been trying to find this out but coming up blank. Echo Battery, 5th BN, 52nd ADA, 11th ADA BDE. Edit: if you get weird results from that, it was later reflagged as an Avenger battery, then later as the maintenance company. mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Feb 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Echo Battery, 5th BN, 52nd ADA, 11th ADA BDE. Thanks!  (unfortunately I couldn't find pictures of F-18 or Tornado crashes that look as sadly pathetic as that F-16) Mortabis fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Feb 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-slaughters-competition-red-flag-2017-2
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I believe harriers literally cannot? They can barely even take off with any ordnance, still better than the yak though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
pthighs posted:I have finally caught up to this thread after several months of reading. WRT #3, AMRAAMS, sure but I am still unconvinced that a helical magazine containing 777 filled with cruise missiles of varying types isn't a practical weapon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
More on Russia's SkyNet https://sputniknews.com/videoclub/201612311049159075-nerekhta-soratnik-drills-video/
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7488/lets-talk-about-those-f-35-kill-ratio-reports-from-red-flag Other questions about it, but until the conclusion I doubt we'll have much more information (if ever)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:More on Russia's SkyNet This is more like 1960s USA. Who cares about robotic anything any more? Cutting edge is autonomous, we'll just jam the robots control datalink.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:we'll just Make the Rooskies think Maximum Overdrive is happening.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:More on Russia's SkyNet An armed ground based drone, that's about the size of a BTR, that's capable of blowing up enemy fortifications by driving up to them and self-destructing but also pulls double duty as IFV meant to support friendly mechanized infantry. Can't wait to read the friendly-fire incident reports. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
They will provide some sweet sweet dashcam footage at least
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Back Hack posted:An armed ground based drone, that's about the size of a BTR, that's capable of blowing up enemy fortifications by driving up to them and self-destructing but also pulls double duty as IFV meant to support friendly mechanized infantry. The Russian military has solved mine protection issues by simply turning their IFVs into VBIEDs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
The Pope posted:An F/A-18 can't land back on a carrier with it's ordnance? I know that they do jettison ordnance, I don't know if they do it all the time or not. I suspect so, but oddly enough I've never thought to ask.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7488/lets-talk-about-those-f-35-kill-ratio-reports-from-red-flag I have a lot of questions myself, but a reputable source told me the F-35 loving won Red Flag like the Raptors showing up in 2005.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I have a lot of questions myself, but a reputable source told me the F-35 loving won Red Flag like the Raptors showing up in 2005. It wouldn't surprise me in the least - the F-35 is a massively expensive, way behind schedule boondoggle. But if it delivers on what everyone expects/hopes to get from it, it will be a helluva plane. The lesson to be learned with the F-35 is really "don't try to do everything at once and be optimistic about the development cycle simultaneously"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
I just hope the F-35's ~epic victory~ wasn't due to 'classified' factors that allowed it to go 15:1 against OPFOR. "For today's engagement, all planes are carrying simulated A-model AMRAAMs and rear-aspect Sidewinders!" BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 04:42
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I just hope the F-35's ~epic victory~ wasn't due to 'classified' factors that allowed it to go 15:1 against OPFOR. That reminds me what was that one exercise where a Marine General just went gently caress the rules and did some super gamey poo poo to troll the other side and the brass? EDIT: It was Millennium Challenge 2002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I just hope the F-35's ~epic victory~ wasn't due to 'classified' factors that allowed it to go 15:1 against OPFOR. By classified factors do you mean some not plane related thing? It seems highly probable that there are functions/capabilities of the plane that are classified. But yea if the F-35 had the benefit of a Link 16 data link to an AWACS/E-2/etc. from some box that isnt on the aggressor squadron that'd be BS. CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:By classified factors do you mean some not plane related thing? It seems highly probable that there are functions/capabilities of the plane that are classified. But yea if the F-35 had the benefit of a Link 16 data link to an AWACS/E-2/etc. from some box that isnt on the aggressor squadron that'd be BS. Yeah - I'm referring to 'hijinks,' not actual classified equipment on the plane itself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
I just found out that Open Skies Observation aircraft (which let's be honest are spy planes) squawk 7007 and I love it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 06:11
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I just hope the F-35's ~epic victory~ wasn't due to 'classified' factors that allowed it to go 15:1 against OPFOR. That seems likely to me, based on what Lt. Col. Anker Steen Sørensen says. Anyway exercises are not competition. Knowing the score is useless without knowing the exact terms of the engagements, and they're not divulging those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:04
|
|
|
I'm really curious to know how well the sensor fusion worked out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
MazelTovCocktail posted:That reminds me what was that one exercise where a Marine General just went gently caress the rules and did some super gamey poo poo to troll the other side and the brass? Interesting longer read below. https://warontherocks.com/2015/11/millennium-challenge-the-real-story-of-a-corrupted-military-exercise-and-its-legacy/
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:I'm really curious to know how well the sensor fusion worked out. Hopefully better than when the pilots had to turn off all their sensors but one in order to avoid track multiplication.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
I was surprised the Aggressor guys were still in old Block 32s!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 12:43
|
|
|
simplefish posted:I just found out that Open Skies Observation aircraft (which let's be honest are spy planes) squawk 7007 and I love it They're absolutely not. Each plane is inspected to ensure all equipment on board meets treaty requirements, can be bought by any treaty partner, and all data is freely available to everyone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:They're absolutely not. Each plane is inspected to ensure all equipment on board meets treaty requirements, can be bought by any treaty partner, and all data is freely available to everyone. It's one of the reasons Republicans trying to get Obama gently caress with the Open Skies treaty with the Russians was so dumb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Army drone lost in Arizona found in the mountains of Colorado http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/02/09/missing-army-drone-from-arizona-likely-found-in-colorado/
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Hopefully better than when the pilots had to turn off all their sensors but one in order to avoid track multiplication. Given the types of people I met in silicon valley and in engineering school elsewhere I have a feeling its hard for the defense industry to hire a huge number of really good software engineers. They tended to be either 1) liberal/anti violence and/or 2) have family still living overseas that would likely preclude them from that sort of work. Couple that with the high wages they can earn elsewhere and you've got a lot of challenges with who you can get to do something that hasn't really been done before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Given the types of people I met in silicon valley and in engineering school elsewhere I have a feeling its hard for the defense industry to hire a huge number of really good software engineers. They tended to be either 1) liberal/anti violence and/or 2) have family still living overseas that would likely preclude them from that sort of work. Couple that with the high wages they can earn elsewhere and you've got a lot of challenges with who you can get to do something that hasn't really been done before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
david_a posted:Defense stuff tends to be extremely process heavy and uses a lot of obscure/obsolete technology as well. Programming in Ada and sitting through 20 meetings a week isn't super appealing. Yea this is a fantastic point. Who learns Ada in school unless youre at a feeder for the local defense contractor? EDIT: I could make an app that helps people for $100,000/yr + $50k stock options in a company seeking an IPO or I could experience the joys of making DO-178 certified software that runs on a PowerPC and the 20 hours a week of reviews dealing with that process for $120k/yr. CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
Speaking of programming, Army looking at Cyber direct commissioning program with a rank cap of Colonel http://taskandpurpose.com/army-want...m_medium=social
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea this is a fantastic point. Who learns Ada in school unless youre at a feeder for the local defense contractor? I'd take the defence job, gently caress being paid in lottery tickets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:By classified factors do you mean some not plane related thing? It seems highly probable that there are functions/capabilities of the plane that are classified. But yea if the F-35 had the benefit of a Link 16 data link to an AWACS/E-2/etc. from some box that isnt on the aggressor squadron that'd be BS. No, that would be normal and exactly how it should've been. I guarantee there was an E-3 present, provided it didn't suffer a mechanical failure. Red Flag isn't a test program, it's a training event. The millions of dollars being turned into inebriation and jet exhaust aren't so it can prove that it does everything on it's own, it's to prove that it integrates with existing technology, doctrine, and tactics, and that it's crews can do the same. Particularly the last piece. Getting an AWACS feed doesn't immediately equal victory. You have to know what to do with it...if your system's even working. I watched an F-15 squadron commander, a guy who'd flown against enemy fighters, lock up a friendly because his MIDS terminal was malfunctioning so he didn't know who it was and the target failed the IFF test (due to a malfunction on the targeted jet). Fog of war's a very loving thing and it gets both better and worse the more complicated everything gets. For the record, I got called out in the mass debrief by that guy for saving him from causing a frat and directive targeting him to an actual adversary. The first and only time an Eagle driver was ever happy about directive targeting from C2. Dandywalken posted:I was surprised the Aggressor guys were still in old Block 32s! Navy aggressors fly 10/15. And F-5s. Godholio fucked around with this message at 16:20 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 16:11
|
|