|
slidebite posted:Well, the poo poo is really hitting the fan in Canada over the F35 today. So I don't follow the Canadian politics thread becuase it's just a bunch of Toronto babbies whining about Toronto bullshit that doesn't concern me, but why is the conservative government being nailed here when it was the liberals who got us on the wagon? I'm for the NDP so it's nice that the cons are getting held to the fire but whats happened here
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So I don't follow the Canadian politics thread becuase it's just a bunch of Toronto babbies whining about Toronto bullshit that doesn't concern me, but why is the conservative government being nailed here when it was the liberals who got us on the wagon? I'm for the NDP so it's nice that the cons are getting held to the fire but whats happened here Not a Canadian, but isn't it Politics 101? Doesn't matter who started it, the fact that's it blowing up now means the current government takes the heat. If previous government did something that pays off well now, that means current government reaps the accolades.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
movax posted:Not a Canadian, but isn't it Politics 101? Doesn't matter who started it, the fact that's it blowing up now means the current government takes the heat. If previous government did something that pays off well now, that means current government reaps the accolades. See why Bush's economic meltdown became Obama's economic meltdown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Well, the poo poo is really hitting the fan in Canada over the F35 today. I read the good news before going off to work today. As far as making sure Canada doesn't screw up this procurement, it all seems like solid, positive developments. Maybe now we will get answers to questions like "what kind of requirements do we have for a fighter?" And "what fighter fits these needs best?" As I was doing the dishes, I was thinking about this some more, and it occurred to me that while the Conservatives made some big mistakes with this program (just having the assist. DM respond with three talking points to all questions and concerns, lying about the price) I can at least understand why they would do these things. Some of these hypothetical ideas and motives, sure, are cynical, but some of them are not. The people I really don't understand in all this is the DND/Military. I mean, if chumps like me can see how bad the program was turning out, surely they could, too. So why no change? Why this completely delusional insistence everything was fine? Did they expect Lockheed to suddenly reverse a decade of incompetence and vindicate their decision? Were a few key players so rabidly pro-F35 that they squashed any hint of doubt or dissent? Why such insistence on the F-35? Because they wanted to demonstrate what good Americans they were? And assuming they are aware of the risks, what the hell did they think would happen with all the optimism melted on them like a F-35 going supersonic? "Oh well, Canada can fly ten fighters at a time because the rest of them are needed for spares/ are under repair in Texas, at least I got my pension?" It'd be like the Brits who wildly overspent on the Eurofighter, and then just kept insisting the program was still perfect and fine despite the obvious falsity of that? Honestly, getting the DND/Military away from this decision seems to be a *huge* positive development. I don't see how the new guys could be any worse than the old ones.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So I don't follow the Canadian politics thread becuase it's just a bunch of Toronto babbies whining about Toronto bullshit that doesn't concern me, but why is the conservative government being nailed here when it was the liberals who got us on the wagon? I'm for the NDP so it's nice that the cons are getting held to the fire but whats happened here Good question...I think the answer to that is not so much that the Conservatives also accepted the decision, it's that they accepted it and then bypassed the normal, sane way of doing these sorts of decisions, while at the same time stonewalling/ignoring anybody who said "hey, there are some risks here." So, the conservatives are making probably the single largest purchase of their administration while making sure there's only one thing to buy, and nobody's done the due diligence if this *very big purchase* is gonna work out or not. Just from a straight "government buying stuff" standpoint, it looks bad. Yeah, the Liberals got us on this train, but the Conservatives kept us on this train up until this point. That said, if they admit they made mistakes and honestly try to get things right, I won't hold it against them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Can we get a 'no F-35 or F-22 political discussions' rule or something, my brain hurts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Strapping a Go Pro to the co-pilot window was the best idea I've had in a long while. The high-pitched whine of the TF-33's is outstanding. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O4J_M0T5hhs
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:57
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:Strapping a Go Pro to the co-pilot window was the best idea I've had in a long while. The high-pitched whine of the TF-33's is outstanding. That is an awesome video! One thing I've always been curious of...what is official USAF/USN policy when it comes to this type of thing? I figure it can't be hard for them to track down who was responsible for filming something. Is it just kind of tolerated under-the-table for non-classified, peacetime/training sorties?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:06
|
|
|
movax posted:That is an awesome video! One thing I've always been curious of...what is official USAF/USN policy when it comes to this type of thing? I figure it can't be hard for them to track down who was responsible for filming something. Is it just kind of tolerated under-the-table for non-classified, peacetime/training sorties? You just gott know what to film and what not to. On a deployment back in 2010, a crew had a shitload of external HDD's, laptops, and memory cards wiped because some idiot took a photo of some people with a piece of sensitive equipment just behind them. For stuff like that it's more of an 'ask for forgiveness, not permission' type deal. More often than not it's no big deal. It's not uncommon at all to see people snapping away out the windows during flights. Expect more Go Pro footage in the future unless someone smacks me for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:13
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I mean, if chumps like me can see how bad the program was turning out, surely they could, too. So why no change? Why this completely delusional insistence everything was fine? Did they expect Lockheed to suddenly reverse a decade of incompetence and vindicate their decision? Were a few key players so rabidly pro-F35 that they squashed any hint of doubt or dissent? Why such insistence on the F-35? Because they wanted to demonstrate what good Americans they were? iyaayas01 has made some great posts on this in the TFR airpower thread. Basically, Lockheed's marketing department has done an incredible job convincing a good chunk of the world's militaries that "fifth generation" is a clearly defined thing, only the F-22 and F-35 qualify, and the only thing "fourth generation" stuff is good for anymore is making the enemy laugh themselves to death. If you accept all that as true, then it's the F-35 or nothing, even if the F-35 has problems of its own. Throw in a healthy chunk of confirmation bias and organizational inertia, and it's no wonder that they didn't stop to think "hey, these cost increases and capability problems really suck, maybe we should be checking out other options."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:19
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:So I don't follow the Canadian politics thread becuase it's just a bunch of Toronto babbies whining about Toronto bullshit that doesn't concern me, but why is the conservative government being nailed here when it was the liberals who got us on the wagon? I'm for the NDP so it's nice that the cons are getting held to the fire but whats happened here I think the argument is they should have caught wind of the spiraling costs and issues plaguing development that everyone was saying instead of seemingly putting on the blinders and saying "all is well, full speed ahead" until a couple weeks ago. And I say that as a Conservative. I agree with Nebakenezzer, taking the military out of the drivers seat is probably a good thing. Of course, they have to have input for sure but not complete control as it seems it was. I did find it interesting that the Auditors report is slamming the DnD and really isn't saying much about the government itself. Of course, the opposition is putting it squarely on the government but that is to be expected I guess. slidebite fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Apr 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:33
|
|
|
Elderly US woman lands plane after pilot-husband dies http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17605770 And she did it on one/two engine! Impressive. Is it anyone else's fantasy that you'll be flying coach one day and the stewardess comes out sweating and asking if anyone can fly and then you say yes even though all you've done is land airplanes in MS Flight Simulator, but you land the plane and everyone cheers and you make national news?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:41
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:You just gott know what to film and what not to. On a deployment back in 2010, a crew had a shitload of external HDD's, laptops, and memory cards wiped because some idiot took a photo of some people with a piece of sensitive equipment just behind them. It's also really base-dependent, at least for the Army. At Campbell, I can't even bring a cellphone camera back through the 160th's gate, at Redstone I can just whip out a camera on the flight line and start taking pictures of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
movax posted:That is an awesome video! One thing I've always been curious of...what is official USAF/USN policy when it comes to this type of thing? I figure it can't be hard for them to track down who was responsible for filming something. Is it just kind of tolerated under-the-table for non-classified, peacetime/training sorties? Don't record video of a barrel roll in a military King Air and leave the camera on board for MX to find.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:It's also really base-dependent, at least for the Army. At Campbell, I can't even bring a cellphone camera back through the 160th's gate, at Redstone I can just whip out a camera on the flight line and start taking pictures of poo poo. Yeah, it really is. Also can be dependent on the aircraft...no one really cares if I'm up here snapping pictures of C-17s or C-12s, but start taking unofficial pictures of the Raptor and I'd probably get some unwanted attention. Of course, all that is contingent on looking at least somewhat official/having access to the area...if you're just sitting at the flightline fence in a t-shirt snapping pictures, you can probably expect a visit from the cops. manic mike posted:Don't record video of a barrel roll in a military King Air and leave the camera on board for MX to find.  From the outside looking in that entire story was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:40
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:From the outside looking in that entire story was hilarious. Which story is that? I googled "king air barrel roll" but got mostly forums and videos.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 04:00
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTb5vFUVxTg Yeah that's not gonna do wonders for that plane. Over 100 planes got damaged in DFW today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 04:14
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Which story is that? I googled "king air barrel roll" but got mostly forums and videos. The first several pages of this thread address it in some detail. In other news, the 4,500th Viper was delivered yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 09:31
|
|
|
Mobius1B7R posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTb5vFUVxTg Someone in the comments called the 757 "beautiful" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 13:08
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Someone in the comments called the 757 "beautiful" It's long, skinny, most of the ones still flying have tasteful (AA, DL) liveries, and isn't weird enough to read as anything but airplane.jpg to most people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 14:08
|
|
|
When I divorce myself from the actual experience of flying in a DL 757, they're actually not bad looking on the outside, I guess. DL's eurowhite livery is boring as poo poo much like every other eurowhite livery.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 14:17
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Someone in the comments called the 757 "beautiful" It is  Granted, last time I rode one it was a United 757 in the 90s, but it was more comfortable than their 777-cattlewagon or 767. But yeah, slender, pretty, sounds nice, and great looking in freighter config. The C32-A is a beautiful version of it too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
757 is a generic cigar tube you pack humans in. Also, it has a derpy face.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
Yeah I don't like the narrow bodies, either. Give me a robust, well proportioned, meaty plane. "I like my planes like a like my women...."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
SybilVimes posted:It is The only time I've been on a 777 I was in  AA Flagship Business Class MIA-LAX, and it was still 2-3-2 seating. Is it something ridiculous like 3-5-3 back in steerage?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
The last beautiful airliner was the MD80.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
Sorry guys the 757 has a butterface and the bod isn't that much better. That lanky landing gear, stubby wings and engines too big for it's body.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
Speaking of engines too big for body: 737 NG
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 20:30
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:The only time I've been on a 777 I was in I can't remember if it was 3-5-3 or 3-4-3 on United's. SeatGuru says 2-5-2 but that doesn't sound right, because I'm pretty sure I was stuck in an aisle side seat with 2 people between me and the window once. Thankfully, I only ever flew United when my employer was paying, and prefer BA for the most part, it's not MUCH more comfortable, but at least they treat you with dignity - ie, come and change the hay every few hours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
Most 777s are 9 seats across, either 2-5-2 or 3-3-3. The Air New Zealand 777-300s are 3-4-3 though, god knowns how they fit that in (although I haven't actually heard any complaints) Probably the worst experience I've had was on the window seats of a Singapore 380 - due to how the fuselage curves you end up with no where to put your feet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
SybilVimes posted:I can't remember if it was 3-5-3 or 3-4-3 on United's. SeatGuru says 2-5-2 but that doesn't sound right, because I'm pretty sure I was stuck in an aisle side seat with 2 people between me and the window once. I've flown United's 777 in coach (thankfully only once) on the Dulles to Kuwait route, it was 2-5-2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Speaking of engines too big for body: 737 NG Get used to it. Huge, high-bypass twinjets are simply the most economical commercial airliner you can build right now (source: 777, 787, 737, A320, A350, E-170/190). dissss posted:Probably the worst experience I've had was on the window seats of a Singapore 380 - due to how the fuselage curves you end up with no where to put your feet. Never be a tall person in a Canadair Regional Jet; I don't have anywhere to put my head and shoulders if I'm in a window seat, and if I'm standing up, I have to stoop over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 02:31
|
|
|
AT-6 at Millville (NJ) airport
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 03:45
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:AT-6 at Millville (NJ) airport TA-134? He used to park that thing at Summit all the time when I was down there working. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
Best seat I ever had (besides being bumped to Business Class) was in a Korean Air 747 going back to Toronto. I was in the second last row, on the left hand side, window seat (60B in the diagram). Due to the thinning of the fuselage aft, the was a big gap between the bulkhead and the window seat in front of me that I could stretch my legs out full length. What made this even sweeter is that the seat to my right was empty, so I could really stretch my arms without hitting anyone. Got a good 8 hours sleep (out of 13) on that flight, and would have had more if the one stewardess didn't keep making small talk (free English lessons) after every meal. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 04:42
|
|
|
Passenger Lottery is a very stressful game. I've won it several times in a row lately. Best passenger I sat next to was a very accomplished camera operator in Hollywood. Dude has some great stories about the industry and how his uncle was all dudebro with Kelly Johnson back in the day. Last decent win was an Alaska Airlines pilot. We discussed rudder feedback and crazy runway slopes that cause illusions during approaches which were thrilling conversations for us two but not anybody else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 04:55
|
|
|
http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/snake-on-a-plane-scare-like-hollywood-movie/story-e6frfq80-1226319662847quote:A PILOT in the Northern Territory has been forced to turn his plane around after a snake appeared slithering from his dashboard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 05:55
|
|
|
Shimrod posted:http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/snake-on-a-plane-scare-like-hollywood-movie/story-e6frfq80-1226319662847 Australian wildlife I also admire your restraint in not making a very obvious joke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 06:03
|
|
|
movax posted:Australian wildlife I was so so so tempted 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 06:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
movax posted:Australian wildlife The writer of that article certainly made it. I actually was really confused, because I misread "Northern Territory" as "Northwest Territory," because I mean "flying freight to a remote town" is something that would happen in the Northwest Territory, but then the snake thing confused me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2012 07:02
|
|