|
Goddamn. That's probably never happened. Blue Angel Thunderbird
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
The Blue Angel isn't in as good of shape judging by pictures of a massive fireball. Hope the pilot made it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Maybe I won't go practice spin and spiral dive recovery this evening, everything comes in threes and I don't want the third guy today to pancake his plane while trying to do something fancy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Could this F-16 look any more pathetic?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Could this F-16 look any more pathetic? Well, it could be a fireball like the F-18. F-16 wins again!
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Well, it could be a fireball like the F-18. I feel bad for laughing at this. I don't think the Hornet driver got out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
^^^ I fear that too, I'd think that someone would have seen the parachute and posted it on twitter like the fireball :/ For whatever reason this made me check avherald; someone is having fun with the entries today: quote:Incident: United B763 at Newark on May 31st 2016, ceiling panel refuses go-around
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
One dead in the Blue Angels mishap. We can only assume it's the pilot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:One dead in the Blue Angels mishap. We can only assume it's the pilot. Yeah, there'd be pictures of a parachute, or we'd have been told of his condition otherwise.  Family notification ATT.Edit: https://twitter.com/TSNSports/status/738474250764423169 Edit2:  Yeesh. Godholio fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jun 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Could this F-16 look any more pathetic? Well it's not flying so... lovely about the Navy pilot though 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Godholio posted:
goddamn what a photo
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Frinkahedron posted:goddamn what a photo There's video of some of them circling the wreckage that's pretty
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
I've already heard some speculation that the pilot stayed with it to make sure it didn't hit the nearby apartment complex. I'm pretty sure I know who the pilot is but the official announcement will be out before long I'd imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:I've already heard some speculation that the pilot stayed with it to make sure it didn't hit the nearby apartment complex. I'm pretty sure I know who the pilot is but the official announcement will be out before long I'd imagine. They've already announced that it was Capt. Jeff Kuss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
fknlo posted:They've already announced that it was Capt. Jeff Kuss. Yeah I just saw that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
That's the second Marine Corps Blue Angel and second plane #6 lost in a row. e: do they always put the USMC pilot in #6? Duke Chin fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:That's the second Marine Corps Blue Angel and second plane #6 lost in a row. Usually the two newest members of the team are the solos if I remember correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:^^^ I fear that too, I'd think that someone would have seen the parachute and posted it on twitter like the fireball :/ Avherald often has chuckle-worthy headlines for their entries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVuI_S-CmaI Vive la France!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 10:30
|
|
|
Are GoPros in Europe still stuck to PAL framerates?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
The cockpit recorders from Eastern Air Lines Flight 980 (crashed New Year’s Day, 1985) have been found. Level of difficulty: they look like this:  Discoverers’ blog post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Went to a small airshow, saw an Invader, a Mustang, a Vampire and a bunch of other things fly as well as got to see a Viggen on the ground with all kinds of interesting hatches open. Only brought phone camera though, sadly, so I only took photos of things I thought were really hard to find photos of on the internet, so, uh, have some pics of the inside of a Viggen. Well, got one photo of the outside. This individual has been sitting around for a long time outside and the paintjob is badly faded. Still, they got a dummy Sidewinder to hang on it.  Main gear well, right side, looking from the front towards the rear and center of the aircraft.  Refueling control panel, located in the right main gear well. Yep, that's cobwebs.  Technicians "tattle-tale" accelerometer, also in the right main gear well. If the pilot pulled more G's than he's supposed to, he won't get away with it even though he can reset his own max G measurement in the cockpit, because this thing measures the same thing and can't be reset from the cockpit. You done got busted, son.  Nose wheel well looking forwards.  
TheFluff fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Jun 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The cockpit recorders from Eastern Air Lines Flight 980 (crashed New Year’s Day, 1985) have been found. I'm curious if anything will be recoverable. I know I wouldn't normally trust something that's been out in the elements for almost as long as I've been alive, but it's also been spending that time at a very high altitude. Though seeing that recorder smashed to bits, definitely a hell of an impact. I'll bet the pilots probably didn't know they were flying into a mountain until they hit it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
There was a plane back in the 1980s that had a fatal crash (primarily because the pilot caused the plane to stall multiple times but also because the altitude was too high for the engine to begin with); they ended up finding a videotape that had been running in the cabin just hanging from trees when the crash was located several years later. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=316_1249535759
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
You'd think that after seeing hundreds of Spitfire photos I'd recognize that tail flash but NOOOOPE, it really confused me for a bit, more so than seeing a P-51 with a RAF roundel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:You'd think that after seeing hundreds of Spitfire photos I'd recognize that tail flash but NOOOOPE, it really confused me for a bit, more so than seeing a P-51 with a RAF roundel. I looked at the tail first and did not recognize it, everything up to the cockpit though recognizable, behind that? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
If you want a very well written account of a Boeing 314 Clipper flying across the Atlantic in wartime, here you go.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Not sure how I never noticed that the P-51 tailwheel is actually ahead of the tail before.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
The better to ground loop with!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Speaking of Disney, they made this: Victory Through Air Power. It's pretty much a hour long movie on the Strategic Bombing Thesis, hosted by a Russian-American guy who was definitely aeronautically insane. Disney funded the whole project out of his own pocket he thought this guy's ideas were so important. If somebody can take my hand and show me how to make some .gifs (it is really .gif-able) I can do a synopsis. I did a synopsis! I also maek gifs for it:   
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
A few pages late butGodholio posted:The AF is in a perpetual stop-go-wait-whatarewedoing-go-repeat process of figuring out what they want to use as a replacement. If they're going to replace it. Or if they should combine it into a multirole something. No, let's replace it. Or maybe just upgrade it. Or combine it with AWACS or RJ or something. Or... I've read the 707s are rapidly at "wings falling off" levels of hours due to the whole ground tracking of moving stuff being important in a war with insurgants with no air force so getting a JSTARS replacement is fully funded in the next budget. Lightbulb Out posted:A lot of the MTBF numbers are basically made up from a small amount of data. This, forever and ever. I can think of many electronic subsystems I've seen where the spec'd MTBF was the life of the plane and the real world MTBF was still less than 500 hours after 5 years in service. The harder it is to remove the electronics, the more likely this is true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure we could just throw money at Boeing and say 'build us some of those snazzy E-767s, but add the refueling capability you had to leave out for the Japs,' but that still requires lead time, unless we buy up 767s airlines are looking to sunset and modify them...anything would be an upgrade over the 707s at this point. The 'add the refueling capability' would be the kicker they'd charge out the rear end for, though. To say nothing of the modification to old airliners option. Also, for the AWACS guys in the thread - why not Wedgetails? BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:I've read the 707s are rapidly at "wings falling off" levels of hours due to the whole ground tracking of moving stuff being important in a war with insurgants with no air force so getting a JSTARS replacement is fully funded in the next budget. They still can't even decide how big of an airplane to use. BIG HEADLINE posted:I'm pretty sure we could just throw money at Boeing and say 'build us some of those snazzy E-767s, but add the refueling capability you had to leave out for the Japs,' but that still requires lead time, unless we buy up 767s airlines are looking to sunset and modify them...anything would be an upgrade over the 707s at this point. Those E-767s use exactly the same mission hardware as the 707. And really, the 707 airframe is beefy as gently caress and lives a pretty tame life in the USAF. I don't doubt the JSTARS airframes are more worn out than the AWACS jets, just from their previous lives. quote:Also, for the AWACS guys in the thread - why not Wedgetails? Fundamentally a different mission. There is a lot of overlap between USAF-style wide area and deep look surveillance/C2/battle management and USN/RAAF AEW&C, but significant differences. The Wedgetail is more analogous to the E-2 or EC-121 (mission-wise) than the E-3. As an AWACS controller I can manage the volume that would take 2+ Wedgetails or E-2s to handle, I can do it for a much longer duration, and I can do a lot more from a control/battle management standpoint. That said, the Wedgetail definitely has strengths over the E-3 (so does the E-2D), but replacing the fleet of ~30 E-3s would take at least 50 of the smaller platforms and honestly probably more. Every commitment would require more jets and crews to fill. Instead of 2 E-3s doing counter drug ops, we'd need probably 5. Instead of 5 E-3s supporting OEF, that bumps up to 10-12. You have to make up for mission duration and smaller areas of coverage, simultaneously. That means a lot more maintenance personnel to keep all those extra jets flying, and a lot more crews. I'm confident that at this very moment, there aren't enough CMR pilots at Tinker to man a fleet like that; probably the same for all the 1-deep positions: senior director, mission crew commander, air surveillance officer, flight engineer, etc. There already aren't enough electronic combat officers to fill every mission. You could probably min-man the mission crew and scrape together enough controllers, though. The Wedgetail radar grew out of the E-10A program, which was supposed to combine AWACS and JSTARS onto a single platform, so a variant of that would be a good place to start for an eventual E-3 replacement. Using the E-7 itself as a starting point wouldn't be a bad idea if you can physically fit the equipment on that aircraft, which I'm really not sure about. Godholio fucked around with this message at 07:08 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
Doesn't the air force have some kind of engineering department that can draw up an in house mod for an in air refuelling system based on existing components to retrofit whatever airframe needs that capability? Or do they just outsource engineering to the manufacturer? Like, if they want to mount a top secret death ray to the bottom of the KC-46, do they arrange to cut a hole in the bottom, mount the confabulator array, and wire it into the AC bus themselves, or do they go directly to Boeing and say "we want you to mount this top secret death ray to the bottom of the KC-46 somehow" and Boeing just bills them (in)appropriately?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
The latter. Operators like Airlines and Air Forces have engineers that track paperwork and schedule/certify maintenance, not design engineers. Those work at the manufacturers. Anything more complex than a cup holder would go back to the manufacturer
Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
Last week I flew from Houston to Heathrow on a 787 red eye flight. It was the most comfortable flight I've ever taken with the exception of the couple of times I got bumped up to those personal wank pods they use in business and first.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:The latter. Operators like Airlines and Air Forces have engineers that track paperwork and schedule/certify maintenance, not design engineers. Those work at the manufacturers. Anything more complex than a cup holder would go back to the manufacturer Big Safari would like a word with you... E: Big Safari is actually in between the two, more of a USAF: "WE NEED THIS CAPABILITY RIGHT NOW!" Big Safari: "We know just the team to make that happen." spookykid fucked around with this message at 12:41 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Big Safari would like a word with you...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 13:20
|
|
