|
rossmum posted:
I love cold war stuff, but it usually ends up reminding me of Canada' insistence on marginalizing itself and over-relying on the US, which is still biting us in the rear end to this day. Thanks for nothing Diefenbaker and every subsequent PM. gently caress. As my username will indicate, I have a raging boner for Russian/Soviet aviation. Imagine the entire lifespan of a Russian aircraft, designed, built, maintained and flown by underpaid alcoholics. Held together with chewing gum and ducktape, stored in a shed, and still somehow working. Just loving marvelous!
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2010 23:08
|
|
ARROW 
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:53 |
|
|
Inspired by this thread, I am watching Firefox.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2010 23:36
|
|
|
Pretty Little Rainbow posted:The MiG-25 was extremely capable at its job as an interceptor, it did not have to have its engines replaced everytime it went supersonic, I have no idea where you got that from, and it was made of steel for a good reason. The Mig25R, the recon platform, if the pilot redlined the engines to hit mach 3.2, they'd cook and most of the plane needed to be replaced. It was only done a couple of times to scare the US and impress Guiness or something. They weren't zipping about at Mach 3 all the time. A Mig25 is believed to be the only Iraqi aircraft to score an air to air kill in '91.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2010 17:48
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:CF-18 Hornet 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 04:06
|
|
|
FiendishThingy posted:Daaawwww its a witto Yak38 Forger! Aren't you pwecious? distract him while I put him to sleep
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2011 06:19
|
|
|
I like turtles posted:Someone needs to come with me on this tour: http://www.titanmissilemuseum.org/view.php?pg=10 Should have told me about this in oct/nov dammit
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2011 03:00
|
|
|
Senor Science posted:Why did the East Germans not rebuild their arms industry like the West Germans did? Where were their major plants? Like Mauser and Walther etc? Were any on the east German side? If they started from scratch under the Russians it made sense to just copy their stuff. The Russians also preferred that and weren't thrilled with the Czechs making their own superior small arms designs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2011 06:21
|
|
|
Senor Science posted:This may be a more esoteric question, but how strictly regimented was life in the Soviet army in the Eastern Bloc? I'm sure they didn't go off base as much or had their needs catered as well as the US forces in Europe had it. My two cents: Vast conscript armies aren't well known for being a super awesome party time thing. A conscript army, especially a communist one, would probably be a half step above jail. Maybe not for officers, or specialized trades but for the hundreds of thousands/millions of men pushed into the grunt roles. Morale was probably in the shitter. You had guys pulled in from all over, think of the break away republics that now end in 'stan', the Baltic states, the Polish, none of which are thrilled to wear a sickle and hammer and usually don't even speak Russian. During the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, 80% of their troops came home with awful diseases, (malaria, TB etc). Their second line support services (like medical, immunization) were weak or non existent. The Russians worked hard to present the west is this massive fit, square jawed Iron Bear Man, think of their olmpyians (or Ivan Drago!). And we generally bought it. We probably would have encountered mal nourished conscripts speaking anything but Russian coughing up blood on us.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
Git yer foxbat on UNF http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47g1HhyAy-0&feature=related edit: what the gently caress is foxbot? Flanker fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Feb 12, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 00:08
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Foxbot? Kids, this is what happens when you're browsing the forums at work, and you're malnourished and dehydrated. You type foxbot and go on thinking you typed foxbat. What the gently caress. What is the bird the Su-25 is named after? I can't read Russian
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 05:09
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:And let's face it, if the RN is designing and building a new generation of carriers that can't launch and recover American naval aircraft they're loving morons.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
An EF-111 Raven scored a maneuver kill in Desert Storm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIf4s2_5fks
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
Sunday Punch posted:Okay I will need this but with a semi rigid Zodiak style inflatable boat and a B70 Valkyrie bomber vertically mounted. And the B70 has to do that pitch/toss bomb maneuver when it reaches its target. The genius of my strategic vision is undeniable.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
Flikken posted:I fail to see the issue 70 foot tall radioactive Gtab's would overrun the US and rape all of your pets.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2011 20:41
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:I like to think that the Air Force brass picked the boom because it makes a better penis surrogate If this is the book I read in high school it was awesome. edit hey how about a link to what the gently caress I'm talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thud_Ridge Flanker fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Mar 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2011 05:39
|
|
|
McNally posted:Thud Ridge is good. I remember reading a crazy book about a dude flying an F105 'thud' named Terrible Tina and everything was god awful.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2011 16:48
|
|
|
priznat posted:That thar's a Bomarc! What the Arrow was scrapped in favour of.. I think he knows that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 22:59
|
|
|
Ninjalicious posted:This thread has paid me back my He also made my spiffy new avatar!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2011 21:23
|
|
over and over and then the post about nuclear rockets. Thanks a ton Sunday Punch and all of the other contributors to this amazing thread full of great history about great things.
|
Iron Squid posted:The F111 had an escape capsule instead of ejection seats. Why did the designers go this route and what are the pros and cons of this? I believe it was because people weren't sure about what ejection at mach 2+ at insane altitudes would do, so you got happy-time fun pod!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2011 02:56
|
|
|
MJP posted:Other than the engines being some miracle of engineering, why do Canadians care so much about the Avro Arrow? It seems to me like caring about the XF-108. Short answer: controversy. Long answer: Complex mix of your average Canadian's innate inferiority complex or little brother syndrome towards the US, and the lasting impacts of the cancellation that still affect us today. Some people think that the Arrow was canceled due to pressure from the US who didn't want another competitor supplying high end jets to NATO allies. It's a fact however, that a lot of talented engineers packed up and moved south to work for companies like Lockheed and Northrop Grumman, helping the US put together some awesome poo poo like the SR71 and Apollo lunar missions. To this day, many students complete various degrees here in Canada with the express intent to move south and make more money, we call this the 'Brain Drain'. The Arrow wasn't just canceled, the company was shut down, along with the bulk of our domestic aviation industry. The Arrow cancellation also launched the massive downward spiral of military neglect in Canada from which we are only recovering from in the last several years. While we're back on the Arrow, I don't hold the individual jet in the same light as many Canadian aviation enthusiasts. It was made to be a dedicated high speed high altitude interceptor, not an air dominance fighter or anything else for that matter. Vietnam demonstrated that high speed, radar missle only 'fighters' were getting slaughtered in dogfights with cheaper made Russian MiGs. But what may have followed the Arrow will forever remain a mystery and masturbatory speculative fiction orgy for Canadian aviation junkies. TLDR: the Avro Arrow was our one shot at fame and Simon Cowel/Diefenbaker spit in our mouth halfway through our audition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
The X20/DynaSoar will live on forever in the episode where Homer went into space. Sunday Punch I want to have your gaybies!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2011 17:58
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:Then it would have been a new race to send a man to Mars. I heard some scientists in the 80's pitched a joint mission to Mars, that would have cost less than the Apollo program. The Russians were onboard with it but Reagan shot it down because 'gently caress dem commies'. Someone find me some proof of this, I heard it from my brother, he may have been high on cosmoline...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 17:17
|
|
|
daskrolator posted:Could we get some talk about B-1Bs and their use of sonic dash in Afghanistan? If by talk you mean me making orgasm noises? Then yes. in 06 I saw a B1B hit an IED facility with two 1000 pounder duds, then a 2000 pounder. Well, I mostly heard it on the radio, and heard the aircraft, it was at night. I definitely saw the explosion though, some Jerry Bruckheimer poo poo a few kms to my right.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2011 16:02
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Sure it was a 1000 pounder Mk 83 bomb body? No. I can't confirm exact bomb types and weights. This was all second hand over the radio. Two duds were dropped, and then a heavier bomb dropped on top of those.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2011 03:58
|
|
|
_firehawk posted:Did you know that you can land a C-130 on an aircraft carrier? Unassisted in 1963. I would literally scream the entire flight.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2011 02:36
|
|
|
Flikken posted:We have a south African tfr goon? Cool. Since 2005 dude.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2011 19:02
|
|
|
Are there still A10's stationed in Battle Creek MI? I'm there a lot to hang out with Gewehr43, I didn't know there was an airbase there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2011 18:28
|
|
|
The Casualty posted:Super Hornets You make me feel validated in arguing against the Super Hornet being Canada's next fighter. We're on board with the F35, but some people bitch that we should have gone with the Super Hornet. I thought the USN was scrapping it soon, no?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 03:40
|
|
|
I wouldn't consider the F35 risky since most of western Europe, the US and Australia are adopting the same platform. The F35 isn't perfect, or a perfect answer to every tactical aviation concern Canada has this week or last week. It's the best shot at covering all the bases for the next 20+ years before it's replaced, since we have no idea what those are going to be. Most of the resistance against the F35 is largely political. The Liberals bought into the program and the Conservatives simply carried on with the contract, they didn't ask for more fighters or change anything to my knowledge. I don't know if the Gripen, Typhoon or Rafale are good choices, or if they even count as Gen 5 fighters. I get a laugh when people ponder aloud why we we aren't simply building our own fighters. If we're going to do that, we should have started 20 years ago. Or start on the F35's replacement now. edited for typos Flanker fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Jun 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
priznat posted:I have to laugh about some people expressing we should be looking at the PAK FA aka Su-50, though. Yeah, that's gonna happen! I've said in the past that Russian designed aircraft license built in Canada to our specs would serve us incredibly well, but that's an insanely unrealistic idea.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Someone give me a list of Gen 5 fighters. I suspect the only one on that list available to Canada will be the F35 Airpower: Can someone find me a resource tracking the no fly enforcement over Libya? Like how many sorties by country, which airframes are in action, results, etc? edit: wiki page if anyone is interested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya_no_fly_zone Flanker fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Jun 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2011 16:25
|
|
|
Cold War question: Did any communist satellite states supply combat troops to Afghanistan in the 80's? Especially Czech or Slovak?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 17:10
|
|
|
agadhahab posted:You find Vz.58's over there or something? Yes actually, they are in service with the ANP and ANA. I met a Czech guy today who had seen some poo poo but didn't want to talk about it. Not sure if he was there in the 80's or more recently, he was older but also very fit. Plausibly he served recently since CZ forces are a part of ISAF/Op Enduring Freedom. edited for spelling Flanker fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Jun 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm just trying to figure out what issues the Afghans might have with a short stroke gas piston system versus a long stroke one. A lot of people there grow up around AK47s. The VZ58s were probably provided with training materials or anything. And yeah, it's barely more complex than an AK, but the parts that come off are way smaller, that could freak out an illiterate cave dweller trying to clean his rifle in a sandstorm while covered in camel spiders.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2011 04:06
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:If you are interested in the types of weapons that said illiterate cave dweller has been using to attack U.S./ISAF troops, check out some of Chivers' dispatches for the NYT's "At War" blog. Some amazing ingenuity right next to some incredible I was one of those ISAF troops so I am very aware of what they're using. I meant illiterate cave dweller in a literal, non sarcastic sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2011 18:59
|
|
and some 
.
|
SIGSEGV posted:What were the missions fighters were supposed to fulfill if the USSR or NATO decided to attack? To prevent as much ordinance as possible from touching your home nation (Interceptor), to gently caress up your opponent's fighter ability (Air Dominance) and to disrupt your enemies supply lines (Interdiction). Also specialized fighters have lots of other roles, although 'fighter' gets blurry when you have fighter jet airframes performing SEAD, EW, CAS, Recon and other attack/bomber missions. In your post apocalyptic road warrior scenario, whomever can scrape together a functioning squadron of tough, easily serviced multi-role jets can easily dominate their region.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 22:49
|
|
|
SIGSEGV posted:My post apocalyptic road warrior scenario is that infrastructure aircraft depend on would be hosed up pretty early in the war and that it would limit their relevance. Of course I am not dissing the amount of damage an aircraft can inflict, just that it might be pretty hard to it set up and that the way they were planned to be used might be slightly optimistic about this. Cold War going hot would either be a nuke exchange and be over in a matter of hours, or a prolonged conventional campaign. Beyond Cold War planning, you still want flexible, tough aircraft that can operate from hastily prepared airfields because you never know where the next mission will be or when your parts and tool supply will dry up/get cut off. Air superiority is a huge game changer, even with limited resources. In an all out war, some aircraft would need a pump truck to get fuel in it, and a basic scissor lift to attach ordnance (smaller missles can be done by hand on some airframes). That's it. SIGSEGV posted:Another thing, when supercruising, wouldn't the air around an aircraft heat up a whole loving lot and make them pretty visible to IR detection? (I also seem to remember something about hot air reflecting radar waves pretty well, so...) The SR71 got hot because it was doing Mach 3.5+, an F22 is just doing supersonic for a prolonged period. I don't think it gets as hot as the Blackbird did.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 23:49
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Like Flanker said.. what Flanker mentioned.. as Flanker alluded to.. This made my day! I'm not even airforce! 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
SIGSEGV posted:Thanks for the infodump everyone. The Americans can't even contemplate conducting an operation without total air supremacy so mounting AAA and SAMs on Humvees starts to look crazy. The Russians on the other hand, never assume supremacy in a given theater so they roll with those badass self propelled SAM/AAA combo things like the Tunguska aka SA19 Grison and shitloads of MANPADS. Both of these mentalities were developed in WW2
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:53 |
|
|
Not to my knowledge. Both Iraq wars the Iraqis got assets in the air but I don't think they managed to threaten coalition ground troops.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 20:45
|
|