spanner Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 I'm surprised the XL still hasn't found a way into production even now considering they still building the F-16. If I recall the XL fuel capacity would be greater than an F-16 fitted with conformal tanks. Also the cranked arrow delta layout had a better RCS value than the standard layout. In fact it had many improvements and wouldn't have been much more expensive to built over the original design. It could give the F-16 a production life extension another 15 to 20 years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZEOD Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 Anyone else think the one in the air looks kind of like a VF-11 from this angle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 Yeah kinda does.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 I'm surprised the XL still hasn't found a way into production even now considering they still building the F-16. If I recall the XL fuel capacity would be greater than an F-16 fitted with conformal tanks. Also the cranked arrow delta layout had a better RCS value than the standard layout. In fact it had many improvements and wouldn't have been much more expensive to built over the original design. It could give the F-16 a production life extension another 15 to 20 years! While I doubt it would do it in operation even with the latest GE F110 -129 engine, I believe NASA also got the XL to supercruise. Like the YF-23, I think it's one of those aircraft that should have gotten another look for filling certain gaps. I thought the Su-35 (early Super Flanker) directly inspired the VF-11 design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 some beautiful footage of Russian aircraft doing their thing! Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Meh, Su-24 could never match the curves of the F-111. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derex3592 Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 AWESOME video of the Russkies Spanner! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, Shadow said: Meh, Su-24 could never match the curves of the F-111.  the F-111 definitely is a sleek & slender good looking bird! similar age planes but at least the Sukhoi is still flying for us to enjoy! Edited December 27, 2016 by spanner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 some great footage of Super Hornets & Growlers!  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 16 hours ago, spanner said:  the F-111 definitely is a sleek & slender good looking bird! similar age planes but at least the Sukhoi is still flying for us to enjoy! True. I miss the Vark. It was a unique mission aircraft with a troublesome early life. By the time the F-111F and G came around though, it was a formidable bunker buster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 always was quite fond of the F-111.. they use to fly over my place (along with F/A-18) fairly regularly which was great! things are a bit quieter now unless I wonder up near the RAAF base at Williamtown. Too lazy for that now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrie Driver Posted December 31, 2016 Share Posted December 31, 2016 The F-111 was much maligned in my house as a kid. Dad hated it, because the USAF got stuck with it (and it couldn't do what it was advertised to do). He would acknowledge, though, that it was a pretty good medium bomber, and when equipped with and EW suite, it was a good platform to have around. For the record, my dad flew, and also hated, the F4. As we all know the F4 is probably one of the most celebrated American fighters of the cold war period. Dad did fly it's USAF predecessor in the Form of the RF-101 Voodoo. Compared to that and the F-106, he felt that the F-4 was a patchwork of aerodynamic fixes. So that should give you some insight into his thought process. I'm very much convinced that the loss of the F-111 did indeed leave the USAF with a gap in capability (one not adequately filled by the A-10, F-15E, or B-1B). We lack a good Medium Bomber with supersonic capability. The B-1B is too big to fill that role, and the F-15E lacks the load carriage (By 8,500lbs) that the F-111 had. The B-2 is also not an adequate successor, since the B-2 along with the B-52 both belong to global strike command, leaving Air Combat Command without a medium bomber, for conventional in theater operations (Which the B-1B and B-2 are not). The Results of the F-111 project were mostly positive, the Air Force got a capable medium bomber (after they figured out what to do with it), and the Navy got the F-14 (which was the VFX program that resulted from the F-111's failure to meet Navy requirements). Sorry for rambling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted December 31, 2016 Share Posted December 31, 2016 Not at all mate! I enjoy reading a good rambling every now and then!  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 On 12/31/2016 at 4:32 PM, Valkyrie Driver said: The F-111 was much maligned in my house as a kid. Dad hated it, because the USAF got stuck with it (and it couldn't do what it was advertised to do). He would acknowledge, though, that it was a pretty good medium bomber, and when equipped with and EW suite, it was a good platform to have around. My dad was pretty much the opposite. When he completed flight training, the F-111 was his top preference. He didn't get it but it was an aircraft he long admired. I agree with you that the USAF is lacking a good medium bomber. The Mud Hen doesn't quite have the payload capacity and the B-1 is too large. There may have been potential with the FB-22 and FB-23 if either of those had become reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 I meant to post this a while ago, but then Xmas, forum being down, photobucket becoming utterly unusable due to their ad-scripts, etc.  So anyways: Tucked out of the way at the Kennedy Space Center, unadvertised (AFAIK) and only there if you seek it out---is IMHO the most important display of all of them.  Guaranteed to be utterly silent in this little room, even with thousands of screaming kids and tourists just around the corner. It's basically "go under the staircase and zig-zag around as far as you can go".  (I wonder if it's intentionally "hidden"). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 Wow, so poignant. Sad that it is not even addressed as being there, I get you don't want to advertise to profit off of tragedy, but still. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 Actually, that's the best tribute they could have done. If you explore, go off the tour routes and away from what is known, and venture into "what's over there? I want to find out!" you come into silence, and a simple and powerful memory of two crews who absolutely had "the right stuff". You are richly rewarded for your curiosity, and simultaneously reminded of the terrible price that must someday come due for that curiosity. Well done curator! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vifam7 Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Looks like real life is not too far from the multi-drones seen in Delta? http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38569027 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerli Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 No way! That's magic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizman Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 All we need now are clothes with boosters built into them and we are all set to start up Walkure! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley424 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Not sure if this has been posted before, I stumbled across this awesome video of JASDF F-4s in their awesome blue paint scheme. https://vimeo.com/199142621?ref=fb-share&1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobber Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Man the Phantom II's looks are timeless. Thanks for sharing Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 That is some GOOD Phantom phootage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, Smiley424 said: Not sure if this has been posted before, I stumbled across this awesome video of JASDF F-4s in their awesome blue paint scheme. https://vimeo.com/199142621?ref=fb-share&1 what a stunningly beautiful bit of footage! such a gorgeous aircraft! sadly time is running out for these lovely birds but god bless those who are still operating them and keeping them in the skies! here's another link to that video!  Edited January 16, 2017 by spanner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derex3592 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 On 1/15/2017 at 10:13 AM, David Hingtgen said: That is some GOOD Phantom phootage! QFT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 (edited) Commercial for the F-15 2040C. http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/boeing-unveils-commercial-for-eagle-2040c  SPAMRAAM came to my mind when I saw the payload. Edited February 24, 2017 by Shadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanner Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 well I can't see why they couldn't continue with the F-15 platform as it still a perfectly capable fighter and could do with some upgrades to keep it at the forefront. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizman Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 16 minutes ago, spanner said: well I can't see why they couldn't continue with the F-15 platform as it still a perfectly capable fighter and could do with some upgrades to keep it at the forefront. People have been saying that for 20 years now (maybe more). Maybe it will actually happen one of these days, but everyone likes new expensive toys...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 When air defenses become so advanced that stealth is rendered near obsolete, atleast in the deep strike mission role, in favor of shear firepower and likely powerful ECM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazareno2012 Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 On 24/02/2017 at 9:01 AM, Shadow said: SPAMRAAM came to my mind when I saw the payload. For a future upgrade for the F-15 I think it will be better to replace AMRAAM with Meteor, which has higher performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 I see some designer at Boeing/MCD is a Macross fan.  Although, the idea of having an F-15 missile truck for the under armed F-35 sounds very appealing.  By my count, there were  16 AMRAAMs  on that one F-15, an F-35  couldn't even get off the ground with that kind of payload.   I don't even think it has enough hard point to carry those numbers. They would just need to increase the range of the AMRAAM.  The nice  thing about Russian fighters, is that they don't give a damn about stealth. So their airplanes always tend to look prettier than the boxes that we end up getting with the F-22 and F-23.    Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 25, 2017 Share Posted February 25, 2017 1 hour ago, kalvasflam said: I see some designer at Boeing/MCD is a Macross fan.  Although, the idea of having an F-15 missile truck for the under armed F-35 sounds very appealing.  By my count, there were  16 AMRAAMs  on that one F-15, an F-35  couldn't even get off the ground with that kind of payload.   I don't even think it has enough hard point to carry those numbers. They would just need to increase the range of the AMRAAM.  The nice  thing about Russian fighters, is that they don't give a damn about stealth. So their airplanes always tend to look prettier than the boxes that we end up getting with the F-22 and F-23.     I wouldn't say they don't give a damn about stealth, or else they wouldn't have developed the PAK FA. I attribute it more to lack of technical innovation and budget. Plus old Soviet doctrine emphasizing quantity over quality. I thought the YF-23 was more of an elegant design, even compared to the F-15.  Also, the US isn't going to adopt the Meteor. I'd rather see a dedicated interceptor missile be developed like the AIM-152 AAAM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Shadow said: Plus old Soviet doctrine emphasizing quantity over quality. I think that's only part of it. Some of the more recent fighters have extremely high manoeuvrability (calling it superior may be a bit of a stretch), and the Soviets/Russian designs have always had a higher level of ruggedness to them (E.g.: able to takeoff or land in a farmers field). So, they have quality, it's just measured on a different scale. Edited February 26, 2017 by sketchley clarification Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 12 hours ago, sketchley said: I think that's only part of it. Some of the more recent fighters have extremely high manoeuvrability (calling it superior may be a bit of a stretch), and the Soviets/Russian designs have always had a higher level of ruggedness to them (E.g.: able to takeoff or land in a farmers field). So, they have quality, it's just measured on a different scale. Good point. Better durability but less sophisticated vs. more advanced technology but more maintenance care needed. The Swedes went a route that took the best of both worlds in a way with the Draken and Viggen. Â Also, new footage of the Lockheed T-50A trainer. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.