F-ZeroOne Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 We all knew from watching GI Joe, that someday, this would actually exist for the troops:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770 405855[/snapback] When I saw that - and my apologies to those MWers whose childhood did not include UK SF comic 2000AD - my first thought was "Unleash the Sun Legions!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddhafabio Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 We all knew from watching GI Joe, that someday, this would actually exist for the troops:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770 405855[/snapback] i think i saw it on one of those discovery like channels last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 I think that was the non-military version. It's one thing for a lone guy to do something like that as an extreme sport or something, and another to make it standard-issue equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nied Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 I'm going to add some specificity to Lightning 06's match up. Who would win in a 1v1 engagement: F-4F ICE vs Mig-21-93? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightning Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I'm going to add some specificity to Lightning 06's match up. Who would win in a 1v1 engagement: F-4F ICE vs Mig-21-93? 405918[/snapback] that's what i was meaning, i just forgot where they were to on the upgrades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Could somebody please explain to me what is the difference between instananeous turn and sustained turn rates. I thought a turn is a turn? Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Could somebody please explain to me what is the difference between instananeous turn and sustained turn rates.I thought a turn is a turn? Graham 406337[/snapback] Something like this. When you yank the stick back, the 'turn rate' measured in degrees/sec at the point where you yank the stick is the instantaneous rate. If you continue to hold the stick back, you continue turning, but usually at a reduced (in terms of deg/sec) rate. Thats the sustained rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Another way is to compare it to pitching up (which is basically the same, since a bank is just rolling THEN pitching "up"): Watch an F-18 or something transition from level flight to vertical at an airshow---it can RAPIDLY pitch up to 80 degrees----but it cannot do a full 360 loop at the same rate. It can instantaneously pitch up to 80 degrees in well under a second, but cannot maintain that rate of change. But turning involves G's, bank angle, etc, so it's more complex, but it's the same basic idea: A plane can quickly move a little bit, but cannot keep it up. Instantaneous turn is generally the "missile avoidance" capability---wait until the last second, and turn as hard as you can, dumping all your energy in one desperate, severe, quick move. (or, your ability to snap-shoot) Move 50 yards over as quick as you can. Sustained turn is your dogfighting ability--how quickly can you come around in a circle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Do they usually pull max g during instantaneous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Max G is where your are most likely to peg the G-meter, but you can also do it in a sustained turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted June 8, 2006 Share Posted June 8, 2006 Hey guys another question, if an F-4F were to tango with an F-15C, theF-15's got the turning and speed advantage, should the F-4 do a max g turn at the merge? Or dive and zoom? I keep hearing about the "make it or break it" turn@the merge which signifies how aggressive the pilot is. Or for example if a tomcat were to tango with a hornet, turn at merge, or dive/climb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted June 9, 2006 Share Posted June 9, 2006 Hey guys another question, if an F-4F were to tango with an F-15C, theF-15's got the turning and speed advantage, should the F-4 do a max g turn at the merge? Or dive and zoom? I keep hearing about the "make it or break it" turn@the merge which signifies how aggressive the pilot is. Or for example if a tomcat were to tango with a hornet, turn at merge, or dive/climb? 406433[/snapback] If a phantom (ANY variant) tried to turn against an F-15C, he might as well punch out and save himself the grief of getting his ride shot out from under him. Phantoms are horrible turning jets (as discovered to our dismay in 'nam). His power is in the vertical with the ability to maintain a higher rate of speed through a climb. That said, I'm pretty sure (without looking at any stats, just off the top of my head) that an F-15 could still outclimb a phantom. His best bet would be to crank to 100%mil and just keep on going. Outclimbed AND outturned? Not a fight I'd care to be on the losing side of. The Tomcat would probably be much better in the dive/climb than the Hornet. While it's VG wings give it pretty impressive maneuverability in a turn (especially at slow speeds), I'm pretty sure the wing design of the Hornet would allow it to turn better than the Tomcat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted June 9, 2006 Share Posted June 9, 2006 Oh i meant at the merge though skull leader. Like the onset/beginning of a dogfight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nied Posted June 9, 2006 Author Share Posted June 9, 2006 More second lives of the old classics! We've already done F-4F ICE vs Mig-21-93 (battle of the BVR re-fits), but what about these: The Israeli connection: F-4E Kurnas 2000 vs Mig-21-2000 Lancer Battle of licensed built upgrades: F-4EJ Kai vs F-7P Super 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightning Posted June 10, 2006 Share Posted June 10, 2006 Japan's remaking F-4's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nied Posted June 10, 2006 Author Share Posted June 10, 2006 Japan's remaking F-4's? 406767[/snapback] Re-made. They modified their F-4EJs by putting a new radar in (APG-66 same as in early model F-16s), new HUD, new computer and provisions to carry new anti ship missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 10, 2006 Share Posted June 10, 2006 Hey, anybody got their Saab book yet? Wonder if it'll really come. Been like 9 months? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 10, 2006 Share Posted June 10, 2006 Took me so long I TOTALLY forgot about it. Still, I don't think it took THIS long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 10, 2006 Share Posted June 10, 2006 (edited) Just some quick news: First F-15K lost on Wednesday. CFIT (controlled flight into terrain). Both crewmembers killed. 2007 Thunderbird team already selected, adds another female pilot (also another female F-15 pilot), #6 slot. Indian Prime Minister got a ride in an Su-30MKI. And it was carrying a LITENING pod. I would never have imagined to see the US's newest designator pod (well, maybe the Sniper's newer) on a Flanker... Edited June 10, 2006 by David Hingtgen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF-19 Posted June 10, 2006 Share Posted June 10, 2006 Hey, anybody got their Saab book yet? Wonder if it'll really come. Been like 9 months? 406802[/snapback] Still waiting... I really want to finish the Gripen model someday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nied Posted June 13, 2006 Author Share Posted June 13, 2006 Tell me again why we need to cut Raptors so that we can afford the "cheaper" JSF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 The final, actual cost/value is irrelevant. The JSF was designed to deliver most of the performance of the Raptor at half the cost. Therefore, congress will fund a zillion of them, even if it delivers 1/2 the performance at 90% to 120% of the cost. Congress tends to listen to and base all future decisions on the initial spiel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Just read from Jane's newsletter, that the F-35B engine is having overheating issues.....heh! And what's this Saab book you guys are referring to. I'm a big fan of Saab's planes. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Should have gone with the F120 engine. A decade ago. Far more growth potential, and likely more easily adapted to the JSF's lift-fan, due to having so many sections of it already split up and independent. SAAB book: SAAB was offering free books about the Gripen on their website. And it's a BOOK, not a pamphlet. I filled out the form and got one, then passed on the link here. However, no one from here has gotten one yet, even though it's been longer than I had to wait for mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 SAAB book: SAAB was offering free books about the Gripen on their website. And it's a BOOK, not a pamphlet. I filled out the form and got one, then passed on the link here. However, no one from here has gotten one yet, even though it's been longer than I had to wait for mine. 407394[/snapback] Do you still have the link? Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 http://www.saab.se/node4466.asp But it doesn't seem to work any more---keeps kicking me to the US SAAB page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 The final, actual cost/value is irrelevant. The JSF was designed to deliver most of the performance of the Raptor at half the cost. Therefore, congress will fund a zillion of them, even if it delivers 1/2 the performance at 90% to 120% of the cost. Congress tends to listen to and base all future decisions on the initial spiel. 407385[/snapback] I think words like 'Joint' (hey we can use it for the Navy/Marines, its not just some fancy air-force toy) and 'Strike Fighter' (multi-purpose, cheap! effective!) tends to sound nicer to the politicians. The should have named the YF-23 the Tri-Service Anti Submarine Close Support Air Dominance Strike Fighter Bomber Strategic Reconaissance Interceptor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Can you let me know the title and ISBN number and I'll see if I can order it from somewhere. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Title: "Gripen The first fourth generation fighter" ISBN: 91-972803-8-0 Be sure to get the English version. (unless you know Swedish) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF-19 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 I think it's possible I might have to hunt it down and actually buy it... Saab does have it for sale on the official Gripen site (and probably in Swedish), but it's really expensive. And amazon.ca and .com don't recognize the title or code... Well, I'm still crossing my fingers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddhafabio Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 http://www.saab.se/node4466.aspBut it doesn't seem to work any more---keeps kicking me to the US SAAB page. 407397[/snapback] probably because tooo many english people had asked for that book (i know i did) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 A380 delayed by at least half a year. Cites 'Industrial' problems. Must be the European workers getting too pre-occupied with the World Cup! http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060614/3/41i3f.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 (edited) An even bigger problem is that in addition to the delay, the NEXT YEAR of deliveries will only be for 9 planes. 9 planes. For the 5 airlines that were expecting deliveries in 06/07. 2 planes does not a fleet make. (The original service date was this month FYI, but the end of this year was the "delayed" date--now it's been delayed again, and slowed down for next year) Here's to hoping someone orders some Advanced 747's... (they look 100x better, if nothing else) Edited June 15, 2006 by David Hingtgen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Saab does have it for sale on the official Gripen site (and probably in Swedish) 407413[/snapback] I emailed the Saab online shop about the book and they just replied that it is in English. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 15, 2006 Share Posted June 15, 2006 Here's to hoping someone orders some Advanced 747's... (they look 100x better, if nothing else) 408051[/snapback] David, aside from fancier lightweight materials, new engines and winglets, what makes the 747 Advanced so 'advanced'? Aerodynamically, what is majorly new about the plane? Do you think Boeing's claims about 17-19% savings per passenger over the A380 are anywhere accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts