|
Because that's exactly what it was trying to do? What's your point? The USAF puts out the same armament showcase for our airframes.
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:No: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522 Not what I meant. They had been given extra laminated checklists just for this exercise, meant be carried in the cockpit. And... well... war is boring posted:The unintended trim knob movements were most likely caused by an object moving between a trim knob safety guard and the yaw trim knob on the manual trim panel, such as a TLP checklist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Because that's exactly what it was trying to do? What's your point? It just seemed like it was casting their new 'wonder plane' into the shadows. vOv Guess I'm just more of a fan of spreads like this:  Gotta love the "SECRET" banner draped over the B61, B57, and B43s. I'm only assuming another one of them is a Weteye. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Jul 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Not related, but is there any evidence to support claims that Egyptian F-16's arent able to operate over Israel? Or is it just a "Well if you attack israel, the US will shut down your F-16's from afar!" claim? http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises...-du-rafale.html "Need we recall that the source code F16 Egyptians are locked by Washington. These devices "can not fly when they approach the Israeli border," says one observer. "
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
That's an entirely new one to me. Never heard of a region locked airframe!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
bitcoin bastard posted:Well, if its on AWACS duty it can just home in on the radar until they cut and run, which is what you wanted anyway. Not sure about how it would work on tankers. Radar can be turned off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Not related, but is there any evidence to support claims that Egyptian F-16's arent able to operate over Israel? Or is it just a "Well if you attack israel, the US will shut down your F-16's from afar!" claim? That sounds suspiciously like the Egyptian military making a convenient excuse for why they aren't heroically flying over and destroying the zionist scum. "Oh, well, we totally would... but those crafty Jews and their American lackeys have made it so our airplanes won't work if we try that!" Because it's not like you can just turn off the GPS and finger-gently caress the wrong coordinates into your nav system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
Alaan posted:That's an entirely new one to me. Never heard of a region locked airframe! http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-by-the-international-date-line-03087/
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Radar can be turned off. But then the communists win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:It just seemed like it was casting their new 'wonder plane' into the shadows. vOv 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:badass PAK FA infographc I wonder, how many of those missiles actually exist as anything other than CAD models or prototypes? Let's see: -BrahMos-NG: proposed variant, first test 2017-18? -K-100: In development hell since the 1990s, looking for Indian money to finish project -KAB-250, -500, -1500: In service -K-74M2: proposed variant, not in service or testing, intended solely for PAK-FA -K-77M: proposed variant, not in service or testing, intended solely for PAK-FA -Kh-38M: Entered limited service in 2012-13 -Kh-58UShKE: Kh-58 in widespread service; UShKE variant not tested or in service, "E" implies variant intended solely for PAK-FA export customers(?) -Kh-35UE: Export version of Kh-35 (Russian equivalent to AGM-84 Harpoon). Would be made obsolete by BrahMos. -Izdeliye 810: Vympel R-37M. Not in production; kind of the same thing as K-100? MrChips fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Jul 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-squadron-shot-down-by-the-international-date-line-03087/ The thing that always mystified me about this is how they managed to miss it in simulated testing. Presumably the F-22 has a GPS receiver in it, which means it's really easy to fake what time it is. When we were demoing some stuff for Eglin AFB they were flying it across the equator, dateline, prime meridian, changing the position by thousands of meters instantly. All for something that was going to operate on-base.  Relevant cross-post from the Spaceflight Thread, on how to write software properly: http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:19
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Relevant cross-post from the Spaceflight Thread, on how to write software properly: http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff Always nice to see this posted, my mom worked for that group for decades (though she isn't in the article)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Whoops.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-PwzNArd2M
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:But then the communists win. Radar can be turned on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
http://youtubedoubler.com/g6sH
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Not related, but is there any evidence to support claims that Egyptian F-16's arent able to operate over Israel? Or is it just a "Well if you attack israel, the US will shut down your F-16's from afar!" claim? This is very, very doubtful. Consider: Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel. The government of Egypt is, de facto, allied with Israel and shares its interests (containing/eliminating Hamas, stopping terrorism in the Sinai, bottling up Gaza, stopping Iran from getting nukes). Many people in Egypt are anti-semitic and hate Israel. The government has to balance its interests with the prejudices of its people. There's a similar situation with Saudi Arabia, which is officially at war with Israel, but effectively allied. It's an odd situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
Caconym posted:Not what I meant. They had been given extra laminated checklists just for this exercise, meant be carried in the cockpit. And... well... Hahaha gently caress, I misread that. I was too busy looking at the multiple cockups in doing the checklists and not the fact that the physical checklist was the culprit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
MrChips posted:I wonder, how many of those missiles actually exist as anything other than CAD models or prototypes? K-100 is pretty much Not A Thing any more; Izd. 810 is the vague "well maybe someday you'll be able to FIRE THIS AT CAPITALIST PIG-DOGS" hope for now. The Russians actually never even really built R-77s (a few hundred at most), much less any of the proposed upgraded variants. They had serious problems with the seeker head and to this day you still don't see them beyond airshows/expos. If you look at video of those Su-27s intercepting dudes, you'll see that they're still carting around R-27 variants in TYOOL 2015.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
The seldom seen group mating dance of modern combat aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
For a second I thought a DCS server had wigged out
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 08:46
|
|
|
Marines declared IOC with the -B yesterday. "Operational"
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Marines declared IOC with the -B yesterday. Can it be flown of Marine ships yet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Can it be flown for more than 2 hours yet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Can it be flown of Marine ships yet? All the Marine ships stationed in Arizona. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Henderson Field wasn't a boat debbil dog oorah *motoboner touches control panel, F-35 falls out of the sky quicker than usual*
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Can it be flown of Marine ships yet? Yeah, more or less. They're still hammering out the details of the upkeep for the deck (overhaul/repair intervals, stuff like that) but prior to declaring IOC they flew them off of the Wasp for a couple weeks back in May. Granted they were operating in an "operational" manner that basically involved taking off, doing a couple laps around the That said their MC rate was apparently abysmal according to DOT&E.....so yeah, again, "operational." Also they aren't Marine ships, they most definitely belong to the Navy. USMC: the nation's premier expeditionary force.....that has to hitch a ride to get anywhere. But don't worry, the MAGTF is completely self sufficient (minus that pesky logistics stuff)! fake edit: That Jane's story contains a doozy of a statement by a USMC PAO: "Although some of the report is factually accurate, the marine corps does not agree with all of the conclusions and opinions"  "We don't dispute your facts, we just prefer to draw a different conclusion"real edit: Also just a reminder that the USMC is declaring IOC with the 2B OFP...which is hopelessly flawed and never should have seen the light of day outside of a pure test environment, also it isn't going to be fixed because thanks to concurrency/limited test assets the program has to choose between fixing 2B or continuing development on 3i and 3F with rolling the 2B fixes into those later OFPs. It's a no-brainer choice that in a normal program wouldn't even be a choice because 2B would be a pure T&E OFP. But USMC Aviation is (as usual) full steam ahead retard on declaring IOC with an immature system, so now the 2B deficiencies are an operational problem. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Aug 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:fake edit: That Jane's story contains a doozy of a statement by a USMC PAO: "Although some of the report is factually accurate, the marine corps does not agree with all of the conclusions and opinions"
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:oh my god I'm dying I reject your reality and substitute my own. We've gotten inside the facts' OODA loop and have them on the horns of a dilemma.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
I mean this is why we don't give the Marines nice things right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:I mean this is why we don't give the Marines nice things right? Literally at least 85% of the problems with the F-35 are, either solely or at least partially, tied to the ridiculous requirement to include the -B in the program with all the attendant baggage that STOVL brought. We've made compromises that will cripple US TACAIR for the next century, but hey, at least the Marines will have their stupid STOVL jet to do party tricks at airshows with and pretend to be relevant when they throw 6 of them on a LHD. e: With the whopping 420 that they're buying (plus another ~130 for the RN and a couple dozen for the Italians)...compared to the over 2,000 airframes of the other variants. That was a smart logical decision that was not at all driven by the USMC's outsized influence in DoD policy decision-making. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Aug 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Countdown to the first F-35 dropped into the ocean starts now, I guess. I'm guessing less than six months.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Literally at least 85% of the problems with the F-35 are, either solely or at least partially, tied to the ridiculous requirement to include the -B in the program with all the attendant baggage that STOVL brought. henderson field, ohhrah debil dawg
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Countdown to the first F-35 dropped into the ocean starts now, I guess. Jokes on you, they're not going to be deployed on board a ship or forward deployed until sometime in 2017 when some go to Iwakuni. As someone referenced a couple posts ago, "Initial Operational Capability" really means "Operational in/around the vicinity of Yuma and nowhere else." Now, countdown to first F-35 dropped into the desert on the other hand...
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
I don't really blame the Marines for their play, they understood that if they didn't get VTOL on the F-35 that the odds of a dedicated Harrier replacement getting funded were loving Zero, and once the last Harriers fell out of the air, the whole justification for the ACE would start to fall apart, and once they no longer have an "independent" source of air support, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Still, gently caress them for being the worst service by far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:henderson field, ohhrah debil dawg Equip the Marines with repro F4Fs problem solved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
So Dr. Gilmore (head of DOT&E) gave some F-35 testimony in front of the HASC Tactical Air and Land Forces Sub-committee back in March that talked about Block 2B OFP and the decision to declare IOC with it. It has some pretty  portions.Here's the bumper-sticker takeaway: quote:In general, using Block 2B F-35 aircraft, pilots Block 2B: Just as good as a Block 5 1970s Viper! Other highlights include: - There still aren't any dedicated OT&E aircraft loaded with the full version of Block 2B. This is because the USMC operational aircraft had priority on depot to get the mods required. So we are literally declaring an aircraft "operational" when that version of the aircraft has not been flown in an OT&E environment. There isn't a  big enough. This is where the road of concurrency leads you. It is utter madness.- Operational/non-test aircrew are restricted from using the current night vision camera associated with DAS/the helmet. This also means operational aircrew are restricted from flying in night IMC conditions. So the USMC declared IOC....but really it's only effective during daylight because you can't use night vision. - Weapons load is restricted to 2xA2A missiles and 2xA2G munitions of the same type, no mixed loads. Of course this is a bit of a moot point since the only A2A missile cleared for use with 2B is the AIM-120 and its only air to ground munition is the GBU-12. - Potential unspecified G limits for operational/non-test aircraft, related to a fuel siphon tank overpressure problem, as well as additional restrictions while carrying munitions. A little birdie told me the munitions restrictions for the -B were somewhere on the order of a 4.5 instantaneous g limit, which if true is absolutely absurd for an "operational" aircraft. - Sensor performance and fusion sounds like a complete shitshow, to the point where it sounds like the only way a 2B aircraft is going to conduct CAS is if the JTAC performs a dedicated voice talk-on. - Higher fuel burn than even a F-16 (much less an A-10)...hope the CAOC has a bunch of tanker orbits to dedicate to any notional F-35 CAS stacks! Most of this stuff isn't so much a slam on the program (since most of it will be fixed in later OFP releases), but it is a damning indictment of the USMC's decision to go ahead and declare IOC with 2B.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:- Operational/non-test aircrew are restricted from - Potential unspecified G limits for operational/non-test aircraft, related to a fuel siphon tank overpressure problem, as well as additional restrictions while carrying munitions. A little birdie told me the munitions restrictions for the -B were somewhere on the order of a 4.5 instantaneous g limit, which if true is absolutely absurd for an "operational" aircraft. F-35B: Rated to the same G loading as a KC-135.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:Countdown to the first F-35 dropped into the ocean starts now, I guess. A very irate Gunnery Sergeant picks up an F-35 and breaks it in half over the head of a POW so they can be given a new plane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 01:38
|
|
