|
https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1749578694807736474 biden's special naval operation outdoing putin's special military operation in fumbles
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:45 |
|
|
Periodically I go take a gander at the Air Force's NGAD page on Wikipedia if only for giggles. Lockmart's just straight up building a UFO. Not sure how they think they're going to cram the Air Force's laundry list of 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 05:03
|
|
|
uber_stoat posted:building a bigass ocean going warship on a lake is incredibly funny. it's a nice pithy way to summarize how dysfunctional the USA is. Its also the ship yards they made the last new Staten Island Ferries at so they had to sail them through the great lakes, up the St. Lawrence and down the Atlantic ocean to get to New York City because the only sector of the economy that matters is real estate
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 05:09
|
|
|
quote:During the Second World War, researchers in Nazi Germany discovered the advantages of the swept wing for transonic flight, and also its disadvantages at lower speeds. The Messerschmitt Me P.1101 was an experimental jet fighter which was, in part, developed to investigate the benefits of varying wing sweep.[6] Its sweep angle mechanism, which could only be adjusted on the ground between three separate positions of 30, 40, and 45 degrees, was intended for testing only, and was unsuitable for combat operations.[6] However, by Victory in Europe Day, the sole prototype was only 80 per cent complete.[7][8] okay so wait. the nazis are doing some basic research on which wing angle works best. the USA studied the plane and said "aha! they were clearly doing some genius thing with the movable wings! let's perfect their design!". the plane's design is the result of a game of telephone?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 06:06
|
|
|
how many millions of dollars went into R&D because we thought the Nazis were mega-ultrahyper-geniuses for putting a hinge in the wing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 06:08
|
|
|
SixteenShells posted:okay so wait. the nazis are doing some basic research on which wing angle works best. the USA studied the plane and said "aha! they were clearly doing some genius thing with the movable wings! let's perfect their design!". the plane's design is the result of a game of telephone? What the gently caress lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 06:27
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:there are a lot of different but terrible options on the table. Thread title
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 07:19
|
|
|
Thank you to everyone for carrier airwing chat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 08:10
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1749578694807736474 holy gently caress this idiotic
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 08:19
|
|
|
Eventually China will fix this Yeah. Eventually China will fix this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 08:21
|
|
|
This is hard. Uh, just keep doing whatever. Someone else will fix this probably. Competency crisis is here to stay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 08:28
|
|
|
Danann posted:
loving hell. "It will work, because it must!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 08:42
|
|
|
My favorite part about the line "China, for example" is the author clearly doesn't know what the belt and road is. If they do their mental image is some middle kingdom robed peasant wearing a conical rice hat pushing a cart of spices by hand on a dirt track in a kung fu movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 09:06
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1749578694807736474 Lmao, that's dire
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 09:47
|
|
|
SixteenShells posted:okay so wait. the nazis are doing some basic research on which wing angle works best. the USA studied the plane and said "aha! they were clearly doing some genius thing with the movable wings! let's perfect their design!". the plane's design is the result of a game of telephone? By 1945 Americans were absolutely convinced Nazis had bigger dicks than they did weren't they? Goddamn low self-esteem rear end nation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 10:45
|
|
|
smh what's this badmouthing the F-14 just because john "crackhead" boyd said it's bad? The man hated the F-15 ffs, he was cool but just as brain damaged and wrong about everything as the rest of the air force in the opposite direction. He thought we needed to concentrate on producing day fighters instead of any of that all-weather nonsense, an incredible lack of foresight on par with thinking bayonets are more important than high capacity detachable magazines. The F-14 mopped the floor with the Iraqi's in the Iran Iraq war, they cleaned house in dogfights or at range. It was as dangerous and as good as any of the other 4th gen fighters. The Super Hornet is just loving dogshit in comparison, it's like an F-35 with all of the multirole boondogle poo poo and none of the stealth or power. It's slowest 4.5 gen aircraft in the sky by a wide margin, and I'm not talking about top mach number wankery, but in acceleration in within the mach 0.7 to 1.5 sweet spot where it matters for long range BVR rocket tag where all of it's adversaries will poo poo all over it. And on top of that Iran is still flying the F-14 and it remains a thumb in our eye that they utilized it in a way we never could.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 11:06
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong Americans and the west in general was just as wrong and pie-in-the-sky about the cold war as we are about anything else today, and I think every major player got air power wrong, and attempted to rely on it too much, every step of the way. The Soviet's rather famously kept making hard to fly, specific performance envelope reliant aircraft for conscript armies which never once turned out to be a good idea, and for the most part they fell into nearly all of the same traps the Americans did with less budget and predictable results. Air power doctrine and eventually (and especially) Desert Storm just melted the brains of everyone involved in the industrial warfighting effort, and now everyone is paying for that overinvestment on boondogles over bodies. What's interesting is that reality seems to be shocking that stupid out of the rest of the worlds militaries while the West continues to double down on hyper expensive grift solutions with zero signs of changing course. Would a military disaster even shake that process now? It sure doesn't seem like it is anywhere on the table yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 11:18
|
|
|
Admittedly, the F-14 during the Iran-Iraq War was mostly fighting 3rd generation fighters and it had a considerable advantage in terms of its radar (which was significantly better), usually if you are comparing it to other 4th generation aircraft (Su-27/F-16 etc) it is fairly lumbering and its advantages start to rapidly fade away. Basically, it was a top notch fighter/interceptor during the late 70s/early 80s when the Soviets didn't really have anything directly comparable to it but it really isn't anything to write home about it is going up against Mig-29s and Su-27s. For the Iranians though, at least having some type of 4th generation fighter under heavy sanctions was clearly worth it. That said, if they had get access to more Su-35s (or simply more modern fighters), I wouldn't be surprised if the F-14 is finally put in reserve. The Mig-23 had a somewhat of mixed record (it did actually fairly well in Syrian service), but it doesn't seem the variable swing was the real issue but a set of teething issues and/or it going into situations/match ups that weren't really where it would be competitive (against F-14s during the Iran-Iraq War and then the Persian Gulf). It is very much 3rd generation aircraft, and Western 4th generation aircraft in many ways were designed to take it out. That said, there are a bunch of other variable wing Soviet aircraft and the concept itself didn't seem the problem considering the era they were designed in. The Tu-140 is still a formidable strategic bomber that has shown it can do a ton of damage. As for the size of Airwings, I don't know if the US is actually out of F-18s at this point but if you want efficient carrier operations there is only so many aircraft you are going to be able to cram in a carrier's hanger. The fact that much of the USN is vastly understaffed including the Ford is probably also a serious issue. Also, there is certainly is plenty of salt in the West that the Russians are turning around the Su-57 program and honestly the F-35 is going to be a sitting duck if it ends up in Russian controlled airspace. The Su-57 isn't there for export, but to minimize any advantage the West has in the air and to allow Russian ground forces (now the most experienced in the world, and the second largest standing army after China) to do their job. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 11:25 on Jan 23, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 11:20
|
|
|
I think we can at least all agree that all F-18 variants suck and are bad, and look bad, and smell bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 11:21
|
|
|
Cookie Cutter posted:I think we can at least all agree that all F-18 variants suck and are bad, and look bad, and smell bad aye F-14 if you need to shoot down a plane, A-6 if you need to move mud
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 11:24
|
|
|
Me sitting in a camping chair on the flight deck of the newest multi trillion dollar super carrier, regrettably permanently landlocked in a lake because of where the shipyard who won the contract was, as the nation visible to the horizon cracks and crumbles: Well at least some of the planes we had over the years were nice I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 12:43
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:Me sitting in a camping chair on the flight deck of the newest multi trillion dollar super carrier, regrettably permanently landlocked in a lake because of where the shipyard who won the contract was, as the nation visible to the horizon cracks and crumbles: Look on the bright side : it'll make an iconic post-apocalyptic settlement
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 13:02
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:F-111 was a fantastic tactical bomber and interdiction aircraft but it was also one of the largest program and procurement blunders in history. It caused the TSR.2 to get shitcanned. I can’t sanction that buffoonery. And for variable wing poo poo, Tornado or GTFO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 13:36
|
|
|
Cookie Cutter posted:I think we can at least all agree that all F-18 variants suck and are bad, and look bad, and smell bad Wrong.  For fast, doddering interceptors, we also have the MiG-25 which is also badass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 13:43
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:They should invent a plane that can take off vertically 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:04
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:They should invent a plane that can take off vertically 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:11
|
|
|
^^^ That's the most metal gear thing that has not been in a metal gear game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:13
|
|
|
the early vtol planes were so wild too 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:14
|
|
|
This thread's reductive reasoning with regards to "oh the nazis sort of had a swept wing prototype and we all just jumped on it because we assumed they were geniuses" seems a little silly to me. It was a big step up for aerodynamics at high speed, I don't think you need to make more of it than that. If you want another, real example of "the nazis were doing something that the allies were technologically behind in so we played a huge game of cold war catch-up", this might be of interest to the thread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpgK51w6uhk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Press_Program
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:21
|
|
|
I guess to be fair to the F-14, against its contemporary peer competitor swing wing fighter, the MiG-23, the Tomcat was clearly superior, whether being flown by Americans or by Iran. The MiG-23 got beat in-house by a Soviet test pilot flying a captured F-5, and didn’t do well vs MiG-21s in combat. There’s a reason it was retired early. MiG-23s had a poor record against F-5s, F-4s, and F-14s in the Iran-Iraq war, though some argue that’s not the MiG-23’s fault, maybe Iraq was just bad at air tactics. But it also had a poor record vs Israeli F-4s, so at some point if everyone who buys the MiG-23 is blamed for being bad at plane, maybe the plane is just not good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:29
|
|
|
F-14 makes sense as a platform for the radar and missiles it was designed around. I don't see any problems with that as its goal was to protect carrier groups by detecting and engaging Soviet bombers with anti-ship missiles, which even then had incredible ranges, before they could get a shot off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:31
|
|
|
Yeah the design as a fast fighter vs bombers and big anti-ship missiles makes sense. It just got super lionized based on propaganda / top gun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:33
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:maybe Iraq was just bad at air tactics from Armies of Sand:   ...  ... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:39
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1749578694807736474 There is a systemic and terminal lack of competence at all levels of US government. Until a couple of years, I knew that government agencies and offices had been systematically stripped for parts and privatized but assumed the security state - military, intelligence, state department etc- was the one exception Boy was I wrong, turns out those were all stripped away too. Even the vaunted regime change operations have been outsourced in major part to NGOs. All of this is to say: the US will lose WW3
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:46
|
|
|
VoicesCanBe posted:There is a systemic and terminal lack of competence at all levels of US government. Those are by far the most lucrative. By comparison, the stuff stripped for parts before was small potatoes. There used to be something  overriding the capitalist imperative and true-believer free market bullshit, to open these up, but it's been gone since 1991.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:50
|
|
|
The Mig 23 also had its kills versus F-4 and F-5s, and in terms of raw numbers, a lot of it comes down to conflicting claims in Syria and the early years of the Iran-Iraq war. However, the Iranians usually did well later against the Mig-23 because they used the radars on the F-14s which gave them a decisive advantage in the air even when using equipment of the same generation. The Mig-23 just didn't have a radar that could compete with the F-14. Also, some initial complaints with the Mig-23 were addressed later in revisions; it wasn't a good dogfighter even so, but it was fast and was better as an interceptor, especially at low altitudes. In addition, it was the first BVR Soviet jet and was, in many ways, necessary to at least contest air superiority against newer NATO jets. The Soviets did have a issue where, between 1970 and the early 1980s when the Mig-29 came fully into service that the West was rapidly expanding their lead (F-14/15/16) and by the mid-1980s the Mig-23 was near obsolescence. That said, both the Mig 29 and Su-27 could much better compete with NATO jets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:53
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/alexbward/status/1749578694807736474 Smashcut to China: ... China: *shuffles papers* China: ...
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 14:57
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Smashcut to what do you mean they could just sail past by asking the yemenis nicely
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:00
|
|
|
I seem to recall that the MiG-27 turned out pretty well, so it might just be that the aircraft's performance was better suited for that. The Russian Federation retired single engine aircraft after 1991 as a budgetary measure, and the greatly reduced size of the Air Force meant they could equip it entirely with MiG-29s and Su-27s, but iirc prior to that the MiG-27 was considered a budget efficient way to augment Su-24s and Su-25s. Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 15:04 on Jan 23, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:45 |
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I seem to recall that the MiG-27 turned out pretty well, so it might just be that the aircraft's performance was better suited for that. The Soviets also needed a BVR air superiority fighter and the Mig-23 was created during an era when dogfights were thought to be of the past. The problem is obviously that they weren't (at least not then) and so the emphasis on the Mig-23 was a powerful radar, engines, and a variable wing with a bunch of other compromises. The Soviets did get generally what they wanted: a fighter to complement the Mig-25, but it wasn't a dogfighter. The Mig-27 didn't have to worry about dogfights, though, and the variable swing arguably allows it some survivability since it can hit a target and then climb away with a swept wing. It was also going to be able to be more aggressive than a su-25 in the air. (Also, it usually comes up but the Mig-23's given to Syria, Iraq, and other "semi-friendly" nations were heavily compromised export versions.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2024 15:10
|
|