AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›25 »

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Warbadger posted:

The XM-25's projectiles explode after a programmed number of rotations. Basically the projectile spins at a pretty uniform rate (same type of ammo, same gun) so they can reliably judge distance traveled with that metric. The primary benefit is simply that the fuse/projectile are cheaper and relatively uncomplicated.

Edit: So the question is who's gonna stick a stinger and FCS package on one of amazon's delivery quad-copters to make the first drone-killer-drone.

overstock.com

# ¿ Feb 3, 2014 18:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 21, 2024 13:06

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

On that 1st F16 photo what's the ordinance hanging on the left most (not wingtip) pylon?

# ¿ Feb 14, 2014 17:02

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Godholio posted:

AIM-9

With no rear fins?

# ¿ Feb 14, 2014 17:20

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Blistex posted:

They're used to ferry the injured and dead crewmen to the hospital ship.

Hahahahah

# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 23:40

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

This is an interesting discussion. I remember as a kid seeing a Burt Rutan design for a small subsonic jet with a 20mm Vulcan and maybe 2 aim9 hard points. Was pitched as a 'numerical superiority' home defense plane to be flown in mass numbers in place of ANG units etc. anyone remember that?

# ¿ Feb 20, 2014 03:20

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Can't imagine that type of design being good with an engine failure.

# ¿ Feb 21, 2014 00:30

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Speaking of the A-10

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/military-spending-cuts/pentagon-wants-cut-troops-1940-levels-ditch-10-u-2-n37086

# ¿ Feb 24, 2014 15:29

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Cyrano4747 posted:

Back when I was an undergrad I went to hear Lech Walesa give a talk. Dude was an amazing speaker and really goddamned funny - he was talking about some seriously heavy poo poo but sprinkled these just awful, hilarious jokes in with it.

One of the ones that I remember really distinctly was when he was talking about how Poland, historically, has always kind of been stuck between Europe and Russia. I'm paraphrasing the hell out of it, but it went something like this:

"Poland is a beautiful country. We have beautiful rolling hills, thick beautiful forests, beautiful coastlines, it is a wonderful place. The problem is that the Germans and the Russians both know this and they keep wanting to come and visit. In theory we are OK with this. Come! Drive through! Maybe spend some money! But please, leave eventually."

If you're an American cold war planner the answer to this is always "Germans."

I remember reading his autobiography years back and it was pretty humorous. He mentioned his fondness for drinking and I remember at some point said "You kind of have to find out where the limit is sometimes to reset things." or something like that.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2014 19:38

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Another video of the helicopters in this story.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10666893/Ukraine-crisis-live-Russia-admits-its-troops-are-moving-in-Crimea.html

Some enterprising person overlayed "Hell March" though :laffo:

# ¿ Feb 28, 2014 20:06

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Slo-Tek posted:

Ran across this in a tumblr today, said "what the poo poo" out loud.

Reckon that is a Sukhoi T-4 with one of their enormous anti-shipping missiles on it? It looks small to be a Valkyrie.

Yep. You can especially tell by the rear landing gear wheel configuration, definitely a T-4.

Maybe an AS-6 missile? Can't really tell.

That Works fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Mar 4, 2014

# ¿ Mar 4, 2014 02:01

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Seeing the prop reminds me of a story from when I was a kid. I guess it was around 1986 or so. My dad wouldn't buy a VCR from Toshiba because I guess they helped the US design some propeller design that they later sold to "those ruskie bastards." Was that a real thing or was my dad just a loonie?

# ¿ Mar 4, 2014 02:26

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Hah! Thanks guys, never bothered to look into that ever before. Blast from the past there.

# ¿ Mar 4, 2014 03:07

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

VikingSkull posted:

Really if anything the last decade and a half has shown that if you're a shitheel leader of a backwater fuckhole and you don't wanna be invaded by a world power, you better get crackin' them atoms.

Syria has a nuclear program?

# ¿ Mar 6, 2014 13:15

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Snowdens Secret posted:

They did until the Israelis bombed it flat a few years ago.

They're cheating six ways from Sunday on the chemweapons stuff, which has a similar diplomatic effect.

I was being facetious but you're right. It's just... bothersome to see what we trumped up to go to war with Iraq over just kinda being not even talked about much now despite real incidents of Assad gassing his own populace. Anyway, probably best for another thread.

# ¿ Mar 6, 2014 13:34

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

darnon posted:

Would a parachute deploy fast enough after you just ejected out of the bottom of a plane at something like 100 ft?

Unless the plane was standing still it probably doesn't matter as you'd have considerable forward velocity too.

# ¿ Mar 7, 2014 23:01

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

I keep some in the kit bag for rugby games. Great for a busted nose

# ¿ Mar 8, 2014 22:32

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Plan Z posted:

Spent the last few days trying to catch up on the thread, and have something to contribute:

An ANZAC Officer's recalling of Centurion tanks in Korea. It's pretty funny and offers a neat picture on a pretty rad Cold War tank. The rest of the blog is great, but that article is one of my favorites.

Hahahah this article is awesome.

quote:

Let me state that the 20 pr is the best tk gun we have had so far once my tp spent a week sniping individual CHINAMEN at a range of 3,600 yds with a most satisfactory degree of success. (One morning we got two before breakfast)

quote:

During the Apr battle the need for a second MG was felt, as angry little men climbed on the top of the tks and beat on the hatches with fists and rifle butts. One answer was to charge through a mud house, but this was NOT thought to be the real answer, as it increased the shortage of houses already made obvious by zealous gunners.

That Works fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Mar 18, 2014

# ¿ Mar 18, 2014 18:47

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

DrAlexanderTobacco posted:

Someone sent me this: https://medium.com/war-is-boring/715bb9297261

If poo poo were to hit the fan, surely that would get stomped incredibly hard? The chap who sent it to me is claiming it'll be fantastic because they could "Zerg rush" because they're so cheap. But, that seems ludicrous to me.

Edit: He's specifically comparing it against the F-35. I'm arguing that he's comparing the wrong planes (Assuming that they would be the sole air assets) - Wouldn't the US be using F16s, F22s etc?

Wouldn't anything that had decent radar (awacs or ground) support and the ability to fire medium+ range missiles essentially be a significant threat?

# ¿ Mar 21, 2014 23:40

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Party Plane Jones posted:

30 years ago the Mig-21 was still a world class plane. Now in an era of BVR missiles and AWACS they're sort of screwed facing anything post F-16. They're maneuverable as all hell but have a tiny gas tank so there is maybe 30 minutes of flight time before they have to pull back. They can't easily stick a giant amount of missiles on them like US fighters can, the radar is hampered by their tiny nosecone space, and the missiles they can carry are about the equivalent of 1980s US inventory. The 21 is good if you're facing the Air Force of Costa Rica or Liberia but not for much else thee days.

That was the point though, new nose design for bigger radar, newer russian engines etc. No clue if that increased their fuel efficiency enough to matter, but the other points stand.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2014 23:54

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

I grew up in the sticks outside of NAS - New Orleans and got to see a lot of cool poo poo. We were right on the end of the Mississippi river so we got to occasionally see the ANG A-10's doing low level stuff right over the river now and then, I guess maybe lining up on some of the ships or something? Also the local ANG F-15's were always around and occasionally we'd see some F-18's now and then along with a bunch of different Marine rotary stuff.

# ¿ Mar 27, 2014 13:44

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Doctor Grape Ape posted:

Like a 737 landing dead stick on a levee?

(it landed on the longer portion running perpendicular to where it's pointing in that picture)

Story for those that don't know because it's pretty cool:

A TACA (now Avianica) 737-300 was flying from Belize to New Orleans in May 1988, this particular plane was literally brand new with less than 100 flight hours, TACA had only operated the plan for a couple weeks. On approach into New Orleans there were heavy thunderstorms, they tried to avoid the worst of them by following their weather radar but they still had to fly threw some very heavy storms. While decending through 16,000 both engines flame out and would overheat when they attempted to restart. Due to the weather their glide ratio was crap, had the weather been normal they probably could have made the airport. The pilot sees the canal adjacent to that levee and assumes he's going to ditch in the water. At the last moment he sees that levee on the right side of the canal and decides to put it down there instead, landing without further damaging the aircraft and everyone got off the plane safely. But the story doesn't stop there, the recovery is just as awesome as the landing. Boeing first thought they'd have to dismantle the plane and float it out on barges. Instead, they just changed out the damaged engines, and then took off using Saturn Blvd (which had been where an old runway was located).

Google map of the area:
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.0189201,-89.9190468,2049m/data=!3m1!1e3

The cause of the accident was due to insufficient testing of water and hail ingestion in the engines, after this incident the testing was revised. The plane is now owned and is still being operated by Southwest Airlines.

Thanks for this. I remember that being on the news when I was a kid!

I wanted to get my dad to drive us over there to check it out but he wouldn't. The airshow at NAS-New Orleans was always really good. Since we were close, the Confederate Air Force out of Harlingen, TX always did a huge flying and static display and also the Blue Angels came every other year. Lots of other national ANG units flew stuff. All in all it was always a good show.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2014 01:49

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

MrYenko posted:

The spaceflight thread has a no-Buranchat clause for a reason.

You can talk about it just within reason. In the past discussions of Buran always seemed to lead to a Buran > Shuttle argument over and over. Basically it can be discussed if you don't start dickwaving over either one.

# ¿ Apr 1, 2014 00:13

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Propagandalf posted:

Low-observable?

# ¿ Apr 2, 2014 21:15

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

FrozenVent posted:

So how much of the Buran was a copy / paste of the STS?

Goood bit in the aerodynamics because why not. The previous design was already proven.

Big big difference is that Buran doesn't flyback with 3 massive booster engines every time so theoretically it would be superior for lift capacity.

Shuttle was designed to fly back the engines to save costs but the extensive refitting needed for the shuttle ended up being a huge waste of money in the end compared to continuing with what we were doing before. Spaceflight thread has a lot talking about this, the (not always) consensus is that the shuttle was a huge boondoggle that set back spaceflight in the USA for 20 years.

# ¿ Apr 4, 2014 23:18

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Cyrano4747 posted:

You're not thinking like a politician.

Operation Useless Dirt only matters if there is an army base in my district. If so then I demand that the USAF be dedicated 110% to SUPPORTING OUR BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN ON THE GROUND because no American combat casualty is an acceptable casualty. Unless of course there is an airforce base in my district, in which case we need to spend every dime of national treasure on stealth to make sure none of our brave airmen are ever put in harms way.

If there isn't a military base in my district than I don't give a gently caress either way. Look, is Lockheed going to give me some money if I vote for this poo poo? If so, sure, whatever. Wait, is there a factory in my district that we can make sure gets the contract to produce the left-hand threaded, proprietary nut for rear-right wheel of the bomb gurney required to load internal munitions? If so I might give a poo poo again.

What the gently caress are you even blabbering about with this 2030 poo poo? Major theater what? Why the gently caress do I care, I'm going to be on K Street by then. Wait, do you think you can get me a job with Boeing instead? Because if that's the case I'm pretty sure we need to look at their 60 year plan to future proof our military into the next century^TM via cloud networked autonomous drones socially integrated into the new future battelspace.

edit: Oh poo poo, am I a congressman from Virginia or Maine? In that case forget everything up there, the answer is to build as many loving boats as we can. Have you seen my proposal to re-commission the USS Missouri as a modern bombardment platform? She fought in World War 2 don't you know p.s. buy more subs

Thanks for the blood pressure points from reading this...

# ¿ Apr 16, 2014 23:11

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Concordat posted:

When was the last time the air force, navy, and marines all operated the same fighter craft anyway, the F-4?

A-7 also right?

# ¿ Apr 17, 2014 12:50

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

iyaayas01 posted:

Marines never flew the SLUF, they replaced their A-4s with Harriers.

And really the USAF didn't fly it for all that long, at least on active duty...the -D entered service in 1970 and by the end of the decade AD had dumped them all off on the Guard.

Ahh ok. I knew they had the F-8, just assumed they got the A-7 as well.

# ¿ Apr 17, 2014 13:30

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Cyrano4747 posted:

If there are abused minorities in a neighboring country that happen to speak the same language as you and broadly speaking be the same ethnicity as you, the solution isn't to encourage them to break away and join the motherland for protection.

Seriously, we settled this poo poo with the Volksdeutsche back in the 30s.

There's a (bad) joke in there about Canada helping out WASP americans but I don't really want to make it.

# ¿ Apr 17, 2014 18:58

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

This is from the spaceflight thread but I thought it was apt here. Press conference on this is going on live right now with SpaceX founder Elon Musk.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 18:06

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

They just announced that SpaceX is suing over the 30-rocket noncompetitive block buy from ULA by the Government.

Hahah Elon now pointing out that ULA-s rockets cost about 4x more than SpaceX, also that their rocket uses Russian engines and that the guy they buy them through is on the USA sanction list.

Pork Barrel spending to ULA that also dumps into the Russians pockets. Will be interesting to see how the lawsuit plays out given the current political climate.

That Works fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Apr 25, 2014

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 18:22

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Back Hack posted:

Think of savings! We can buy two of the worst boondoggles ever in limited quantity, or a fleet of choppers already in wide circulation that the military has expressed strong interest in replacing.

It also mentions it as a way to keep the A-10 fleet.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 18:29

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Cyrano4747 posted:

Those are all hot-button issues with voters, though. The LCS projects might be pointless pork barrel spending of another kind, but it's the kind that provides lots of jobs in some key districts. Same for a lot of the other things he mentions, plus the whole A-10 issue just has a bunch of people who want to keep them on board for reasons that range from to

The savings are savings, it's not being proposed what they should spend the money on in lieu of paying ULA (Boeing-Lockheed launch merger) just that they could.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 18:37

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

The F4E and F4J are that different?

# ¿ Apr 25, 2014 19:03

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Cyrano4747 posted:

OK, serious question: How many times has the US adopted foreign <whatever> for something that was going to see major, high profile use? I'm not talking the HSLD go fast guys being able to have a dozen whatever the fucks on the books because they're special and want them, I'm talking about the sort of things you see bought in big numbers and used by whatever passes as rank and file in that service. Random components kind of count (example: British engines in P51s) , but kind of not.

I THINK the most recent one is the Harrier. Then there's the Beretta M9 of course. Frankly I can't think of any others (without resorting to component shenanigans) until we get back to the m1917. The Krag, if you reach back a few years earlier. . .

edit: let's stick to post-ww1. WW1 introduces an entire cluster gently caress of us using French equipment. Nieuports and SPADs and all sorts of poo poo, both good and bad, due mostly to us trying to get people into the fight ASAP.

Canberra was one too.

# ¿ Apr 27, 2014 21:04

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Craptacular posted:

Is there a realistic scenario where two nuclear powers (one of which is the USA) have an extended conventional war and neither side goes nuclear pretty quickly? I was always under the impression that potential wars were pretty much either:

1. Regional war against a non-peer adversary (Gulf War, OIF, OEF) where USA-based production capacity isn't particularly strained because losses aren't that bad, relatively speaking.
2. Holy gently caress the world is exploding, nukes are going off everywhere. Production capacity doesn't matter because everyone's dead.

If there's not something between those two, then does domestic production capacity matter nearly as much?

That was the plot of Red Storm Rising right? I have no clue if that scenario was realistic or not.

# ¿ Apr 28, 2014 01:25

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

PhotoKirk posted:

The decision to build the Canberra over the XB-51 was political. Glenn Martin picked the USN in the Revolt of the Admirals, and that was pretty much the end of Martin and the USAF.

I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

The Canberra was a good plane, the B51 looked cool as gently caress and seemed to be good also except had shorter legs.

# ¿ Apr 28, 2014 11:56

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Taerkar posted:

I think at this point it would take some sort of extra-special leadership for there to be a nuclear exchange. I can't imagine anyone with anything close to sanity can believe that there is a 'winner' to a nuclear war.

I mean sure, there's something a bit wrong with someone who starts a regular war to begin with, but there's a big gap between conventional/proxy/whatever and 'Mushroom Clouds for Everyone!'

I hope you're right.

Looking at someone like Assad though I just don't know. Dude's trying to run for 're-election' less than a year after gassing his own people. Would be scary if someone like that had a nuke.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2014 14:15

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Thwomp posted:

It's really easy to see that in hindsight but high-level military commanders have had really difficult times adapting to major shifts in military technology throughout history.

The Hardcore History podcast is going through World War 1 right now and the senior leadership of France, Germany, and Britain knew fuckall about how exactly all this new artillery weaponry would impact the battlefield. So their plans just incorporated them without any thought that they may be game-changing.

This goes doubly-so for the use of chemical weapons. The Germans first experiments with Chlorine gas were in early-1915 on the battlefield (and they just opened some tanks on the lines and let the gas flow with the winds to the allied trenches ). They had no idea the gas would kill the numbers it did early on because they couldn't put 2 and 2 together (one being the sheer concentration of soldiers on the front lines and the other being how seriously hosed you were in a trench as gas came pouring down on top of you).

So when Alamos developed the atom bomb, the top brass has no clue, despite any and all warnings the scientists could provide, what exactly this new weapon would do to warfare. So then you get these statements about 10 nuclear weapons to every major and it sounds ridiculous now. But then, I bet he knew fuckall about what putting that many weapons in the field (or in an arsenal, period) would do. Just like the loving Germans fifty years prior.

I think a lot of it is that humans as a whole have a hard time grasping exponential increases.

It's hard for people to intuitively understand the difference between 1 ton, 1,000 (kiloton) and 1,000,000 (megaton) worth of explosives (or anything really). Add in a whole different animal ie radiation, on top of that and it's pretty complex compared to TNT.

# ¿ Apr 30, 2014 18:35

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Doctor Grape Ape posted:

Father of the Year.

# ¿ May 4, 2014 01:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 21, 2024 13:06

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Snowdens Secret posted:

I've wondered how a left-handed pilot copes with any kind of modern fighter cockpit. Just deal with it? Go fly a bigger plane?

I'd imagine. I'm left handed but use a mouse / joystick right handed as it was taught to me that way from day 1 and it feels natural enough. Writing and throwing are the only real instinctive things I'd do with my left.

# ¿ May 13, 2014 13:47

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > AIRPOWER/Cold War - Its literally the first two lines of their hymn

«‹›25 »