Sildani
-
Posts
3076 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by Sildani
-
Thanks for all the advice, Schizo. I wound up buying it. It was in good mechanical shape, needs a bit of cosmetic repair (headliner fabric rests in my head) and a damn good interior cleaning. I'll grab a pic or two later on. I looked and looked, but couldn't see that 0331 stamp. Perhaps it's smaller than I thought, or maybe it doesn't have one. It is a 4X4, but does not have the full-time 4WD position. It was pretty fully equipped, being a Cherokee Classic. If you have the time and inclination, Schizo, a quick treatise on what to watch out for l, and a Cherokee's typical quirks, would be welcome. For instance, I kinda have to hit the brakes pretty hard to get them to bite, and the feel isn't what you call progressive. Still, stopping happens with a good amount of authority. Is that a quirk of Cherokees? Stuff to do: scrub interior, replace headliner, install Weathertech matting, put on seat covers, and eventually replace some black paint. Not bothering with making it more off-road capable since that's not its mission. It'll be a utility vehicle, on-road, with bad weather capabilities. Thanks for the advice!
-
Look at the country. Conflict and "versus" have been a part of the USA for a good few years now. Art imitates life.
-
Exactly.
-
Pity it didn't come with the missiles.
-
Jeez, even these CFs are going for around $200 on eBay. Ridiculous.
-
Going straight to 8K perhaps? -
So, if Ford's killing off his characters, when can we expect Witness 2: Barn Raises You?
-
I think it's AgentONE who has the Alfa 4C. By the way, I've got my eye on a 99 Jeep Cherokee with 204K miles on it. One owner, who really took care of it. Anything I should look out for when I look it over?
-
Interesting stuff. I still don't know why the USAF doesn't do one of the best things Brown advocated: replace the wing spars with composites. The greater strength should allow for the deletion of the outrigger landing gears. Then, my other suggestion would be to replace those eight old turbofans with four newer ones, perhaps off the shelf from airliners. They'd be more efficient, reduce maintenance, and possibly lighten the wing further. As for the Megafortress... yeah. It was also given a butterfly tail as I recall, a pointy, Concorde-ish nose and a Stinger missile launcher in the tail. Still, the idea is there...
-
I still don't have a 171, so I'd get one.
-
The head on 03 is kinda reminiscent of the YF-25 Prophecy. As for the random, I wonder if it folds down to form fins that hang underneath the fuselage, like the huge fins underneath the RVFs we've seen. The difference would be that 03's fins are arranged horizontally rather than vertically.
-
Dunno. I've been in a few BMWs and none of them feel particularly well made, or crafted of luxurious, long-lasting materials. They drive wonderfully well, and their inline sixes are legendary, but overall I'm not too impressed.
-
Which might explain the four-bladed prop on the Würger.
-
Watched a show and did some research on that a while back. Boeing was having a bear of a time just building the two 32 prototypes because of a lack of experience with large sheets of composites and carbon fiber. The upper fuselage and upper wing skins were basically built as one piece, and that led to massive problems with applying and curing sheet after sheet of material - bubbles, extreme slow cure times, and so on. Then, when it came time to do the flight tests, it did pretty well. However, when the V/STOVL tests were done, it was found the gaping air intake allowed too much hot exhaust to re-enter the engine, which sapped power. Boeing couldn't redesign it, so they saved weight by removing the hinged intake, the streamlined exhaust nozzle covers, and even the landing gear doors. So lightened, it could stagger into the air, vertically. The 35 could just go. Finally, Boeing said that if the 32 was chosen, the production model would be substantially redesigned. The new 32 would ditch the delta wing in favor of swept wings of remarkable chord, in part to simplify production, and would have a conventional empennage. With all those problems, I think we'd be in much the same boat. Besides, I think I remember reading somewhere that most of the 35's problems are in its code for the flight control computer - some 9 million lines worth. We're firmly in the age where, if the computer flying the plane is faulty, it doesn't matter how "right" the design is.
-
That... would actually be pretty dang cool.
-
Super parts look great on the 27. I'm kinda surprised Bandai hasn't reissued them as a standalone set.
-
They're trying too. Damn. Hard. Don't care about the cast of women, but I do think, so far, that this movie is too earnest about being funny. Dunno about proton pistols, or a proton knuckle buster either. That said, I laughed out loud at "The power of pain compels you!" I also like the new Ecto 1, but it doesn't hold a candle to the original. I'm keeping an open mind, but the trailer hasn't made me make this movie a "must see."
-
The Chinese are quite busy with their J-10s and J-20s. And their modernization of their ADF system. I don't think the F-35 is worth the money. But it's what we have to work with, and I believe that in the end it will work rather well. I'd love it if some of the gold-plated crap on it could be deleted, though.
-
I liked SPECTRE. Better than Quantum, not as good as Casino, not nearly as good as Skyfall.
-
Not air. Hydrogen slush. Basically something combustible that can expand and drive forward motion. It's not necessary to make the nuclear engine work, but it's necessary in order to actually GO.
-
Not air. Hydrogen slush. Basically something combustible that can expand and drive forward motion. It's not necessary to make the nuclear engine work, but it's necessary in order to actually GO.
-
I concur with Duke's analysis.
-
Neither do I. Why the hell does his voice go up an octave, unnecessarily?
-
I liked "You Know My Name", the theme of Casino Royale. "Thunderball" and "Goldfinger" are, of course, up there.
-
They learned a lot from the F-16 and 18, and that F-15 demonstrator whose name temporarily escapes me. That F/B-23 looks very, very nice. It also looks like a completely different aircraft, internally, only superficially similar to the YF-23. It might have been able to do the job though. The 15 and 16 have been updated because, in part, they have already been built in their hundreds and thousands. It was more cost effective to modify them to new technology than for their operators to buy new aircraft. And let us not forget that those aircraft weren't unchanged when they were done - witness the difference between the F-16A and one of the current blocks, with its CFTs, blisters, enlarged spines, and other various protrusions. You can't expand "outward" like that on a stealth aircraft.