|
I used to play a sim in the 90s (F/A-18 Korea? Maybe?) that would let you lob a B61. It was a ton of fun, probably because it was the only sim I played at the time that modeled a nuke.
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
F-22 Lightning III had tac nukes too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2022 22:31
|
|
|
Friends don't let friends play Novalgic 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
I'd suggest World of Warplanes, mostly prop aircraft and every target is a military target.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I'd suggest World of Warplanes, mostly prop aircraft and every target is a military target. Wargaming is a Belarusian company that owns a large chunk of a bank in Cyprus. If you're going to play their games avoid giving them *any* money since it's probably benefiting a laundering front for Belarus and/or Russia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 00:13
|
|
|
NightGyr posted:If you thought lofted bombing was crazy, check out over the shoulder. I've wondered and wondered about this picture over the years, and can't come up with an explanation besides "the artist didn't understand the maneuver." If the airplane completes a loop as shown, it'll pull out at the bottom right where it started, right in the vicinity of the impact point. It makes no loving sense! Someone please correct me if they have more knowledge of this.  Here's a slightly more sensible one, where after a half-loop, the airplane does a half-roll (aka Immelman, or when combined with a descent as shown, aka half-Cuban 8) which horizontally leaves the area. But there's still the problem that the bomb release is slightly after the vertical point, so it goes backward compared to the original flight path... so as the airplane leaves the area, the bomb is still following it. Y tho?  These are the most like any textual description I've ever read, where the bomb leaves on the upward trajectory before the vertical point, at about a 45 degree angle, which is the release point where it will fly the furthest (for maximum non-self-nuclear-annihilation).  After some more looking around, it seems the "over the shoulder" method (i.e., bomb goes a bit backwards) was a method used, but note that the airplane does a half-roll and GTFO's horizontally and does not complete a loop!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 00:52
|
|
|
Any way I think the idea is that the bomb gets enough airtime for the plane to GTFO. Flying over the target would help accuracy since the bombs horizontal track wouldn’t be as much
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 01:00
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:Any way I think the idea is that the bomb gets enough airtime for the plane to GTFO. Flying over the target would help accuracy since the bombs horizontal track wouldn’t be as much Flying over the target could be necessary under some circumstances, I can see that. This post describes why, and though I have no idea of the poster's credentials, but it all seems to make sense. quote:It was the least desirable from a separation standpoint but sometimes necessary, for example when there was no readily identifiable Initial Point (IP) far enough away from the target to be usable for the low or high angle loft. The IP (a prominent geographic or manmade feature whose location relative to the target was accurately known) was where the final approach to the beginning of the pull-up began using the LABS. Prominent meant that it had to be discernible from 100 feet or less and 500 knots far enough away to get aligned with and overfly it. (And there had to be enough checkpoints on the way to it so it was likely that the pilot would be flying toward it at that point.) If there were no handy IP (e.g. if the best approach to a target on the shoreline was coming in from the sea) or the usable IPs involved flying through heavily defended or mountainous areas, then the target itself had to become the IP. The over-the-shoulder delivery was also the most accurate. But after releasing the bomb after flying over the target, any way I consider it, the plane can get more separation by flying away horizontally rather than completing the second half of a loop, during the whole time of which, the horizontal position essentially stays the same.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
There is a technique where the maneuver is timed so that the plane is vertical when it's directly over the target, and it releases the bomb at that point. The bomb basically goes straight up in the air, slows, and falls back down on the target, while the plane completes half a cuban eight and leaves at high speed and lower altitude back the way it came. just a modified version of the LABS profile:  I suppose they could also just keep the loop going, but it's faster to just roll out, dive, and boot it back. I suspect you're right that the illustrator just didn't quite understand the maneuver. It wouldn't be the first time. Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 01:28
|
|
|
From an anti-air defenses sense I probably wouldn't want to fly straight up over the bombing target, I think I would be providing too easy target. But I also probably wouldn't want to fly away high right over the place I had just overflown at low level. I think those pictures give too two-dimensional view of the maneuvers. To bomb successfully you would need to fly in a specific way, but after the bomb has been released you can do what ever you want. I would probably turn 90+ degrees to either side and then get low.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 02:32
|
|
|
The over-the-shoulder method makes sense because all you have to do is start the pull when you overfly the target, and the computer does the rest. No need to pre-calculate your initial point or figure out where it is on the fly. The straight up and down method makes sense because it isn't reliant on flying a specific profile or having a bombing computer. You just get over the target and point up and press the button. Loft bombing seems like it would be super inaccurate and I guess it makes sense that it's only used with nuclear weapons (or today PGMs)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
a big consideration is probably making sure your cowboy hat fits snugly and doesn't come down and obscure your vision during the 4g pull up
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 06:19
|
|
|
Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Dallas with all that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 06:35
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff. fixed 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
buttcrackmenace posted:fixed They dubbed Vegas in after certain events in Dallas made it a bit dark even for Kubrick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 16:27
|
|
|
I’m also skeptical of the possibility of a good weekend in Dallas in general.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:I’m also skeptical of the possibility of a good weekend in Dallas in general. As you should be. It is a lovely place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 21:21
|
|
|
One of those "Mobile Lounges" at Dulles struck a jersey wall. No one seriously hurt. https://wjla.com/news/local/2-injur...erling-virginia BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:15 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 23:11
|
|
|
I hate those things so much.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 23:41
|
|
|
wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:48
|
|
|
slidebite posted:wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?" A thing that makes the news if it slightly bumps a barrier, as far as I can tell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:50
|
|
|
slidebite posted:wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_lounge They're redundant things now but on occasion they could offload passengers directly onto a glorified bus to take them to the terminal. Then someone realized it was really dumb to trust about a hundred people's lives to a pneumatic lift.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
I had to google it. I've never had the pleasure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_lounge Been on several buses out to the apron though. I guess it's something I missed out on flying to Reagan when went to DC. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
slidebite posted:wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
slidebite posted:wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?" The best way ever created to get around an airport 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
I mean, seriously - nothing wrong with these two massive points of failure: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/rampside-classic/rampside-classic-the-mobile-lounges-of-dulles-airport/ That YouTube video is certainly...something. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
my favorite part is that all planes hold the same number of passengers so it works really well in that respect
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:28
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I had to google it. I've never had the pleasure. No mobile lounges AND they closed gate 35X. Why even bother with Reagan now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:33
|
|
|
slidebite posted:wtf is a "Mobile Lounge?" They're the worst goddamn thing about that shithole airport.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
Salami Surgeon posted:they closed gate 35X.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
Was that a covid thing? Could it reopen? I don’t want to celebrate prematurely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:40
|
|
|
I think it's gone for good*. I was surprised I didn't have to go through it last time I connected through Reagan, but apparently it's been closed for almost a year. AA has a new concourse now to replace it. *Until they need more gates again
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
They built a new terminal wing with gates all over the apron where 35x planes parked so it’s dead. Rest in piss indeed
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:13
|
|
|
Did the planes not fit into where the gate was or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:30
|
|
|
35X was the “gate” for all the planes parked on the tarmac so you have to drag everything downstairs, walk to a bus and then walk to the plane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:Did the planes not fit into where the gate was or something? It was a bus gate I believe. So crowded as poo poo while you waited to get called to get on a bus to go to your plane. gently caress the old rear end mobile lounges. It's the worst parts of a bus but larger. And not just a bus for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
FunOne posted:It was a bus gate I believe. So crowded as poo poo while you waited to get called to get on a bus to go to your plane. They made a little sense when there were like 50 flights a day out of Dulles and you took the ~*MoBiLe LoUnGe*~ from the swoopy roof terminal building directly onto the plane but as soon as the concourses were built that should have been the end of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
The mobile lounges were a product of that bygone age when you could show up for a flight like 7 minutes before it took off and just get on that bitch. See also Kansas City's airport which is the worst airport I've ever been to. When it was built in the 60s or whatever I'm sure it owned; get out of car, walk 50 feet, get on plane and leave.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Reminds me of when my Dad was trying to get home (to Zurich) from a business trip in the USSR around 1972. The Moscow airport apparently had some kind of scheduling issue; he wound up on a bus with the rest of his flight, while the driver stopped a each plane on the ramp to ask, "You going to Helsinki?" He travelled the world for thirty years, from DC-6s and Globemasters to DC-10s & 747s, went in & out of Kai-Tak in the 60s, and the singular worst experiences were always, always Aeroflot. Only time he ever nearly hurled on a flight..
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
I went through KC once before 9/11. Not quite the 60s experience of stepping out of a car and into a plane, but the closest I'll ever experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:57
|
|