SchizophrenicMC Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It's my understanding that one of the engines lost power during initial climbout and that the pilot was fighting stall and some problem with the other engine, while trying to maneuver the plane at far too low altitude through Taipei. Crazy that there's dashcam footage of it clipping a taxi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 In happier airliner pics: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickyg Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 What a stunning photo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Japan's ATD-X makes it into kit/toy(?) form: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Very nice! I just wonder if the ATD-X will wind up being just a tech demonstrator or if it'll actually lead to a production aircraft. Also, didn't know it had paddle-vectored thrust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sketchley Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Japan's ATD-X makes it into kit/toy(?) form: 'ATD-X "Shinshin" Tester Colours' [as per the tag: ATD-X "心神" テスターカラー] The fine print is all blurry, so it can't be confirmed if it is a kit or a toy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 It's released by Kaiyodo, so I assume it's a toy (or pre-finished kit...) I have to say it looks more like a modernized T-4 than a next gen fighter. Is the other, larger variant still in development? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Details on the Air Force's FY2016 aircraft cuts. http://www.combataircraft.com/en/News/2015/02/09/Air-Force-details-proposed-aircraft-cuts-state-by-state/ The Air Force's fiscal 2016 budget proposal, like the previous budget, calls for eliminating A-10 units across the service while giving new missions to Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. The service on Friday released details on how those and other changes would affect bases stateside and overseas. "The force structure actions in this budget represent a careful balance between readiness today and tomorrow. World events have increased demand on our Air Force in the near term, but we can't afford to lose sight of tomorrow's threats," Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh said in a news release. "Honoring our commitment to the combatant commanders to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, command and control and close air support requires not only that we provide those capabilities today, but also that we are ready to provide them in the fights of the future." The plan includes changes to these fleets: A-10. The Air Force wants to retire all of its 283 A-10s over four years, beginning in fiscal 2016. Active-duty units that would lose their aircraft with no follow-on mission are at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona; Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada; Moody Air Force Base, Georgia; Eglin Air Force Base, Florida; and in Germany. The Reserve A-10 units at Davis-Monthan and Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, would receive F-16s in fiscal 2019. All Air National Guard A-10 units would receive new missions. The unit at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, would transition to an associated F-15E unit in fiscal 2016. The unit at Martin State Airport in Maryland would receive eight C-130Js in fiscal 2018. Fort Wayne, Indiana, would receive 21 F-16s in fiscal 2019. Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan, would receive eight KC-135s in fiscal 2017. U-2. The Air Force would keep its U-2 unit at Beale Air Force Base, California, flying until 2019 when it expects to receive additional RQ-4 Global Hawks with an enhanced sensor payload. In 2019, the base would lose its 32 U-2s along with 11 associated T-38s used by pilots there in training. The base would also add a Global Hawk Reserve associate unit. E-3. The Air Force would retire seven of its E-3 Sentrys in 2019 at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma. The unit is active with a Reserve association, and the Reserve unit would receive four KC-135s in fiscal 2019. The service is delaying the E-3 retirement to "sustain command and control capacity" through 2019. E-8C. The Air Force would retain five E-8C Joint STARS at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, while the modernization plan for the fleet would be delayed until 2023. EC-130H. The seven active-duty EC-130Hs at Davis-Monthan would be cut in fiscal 2016, while the service would keep eight of the Compass Call aircraft "to continue to provide support to the essential Combatant Command requirements." The service is looking to develop "alternative capabilities to fully replace" the Compass Call fleet, but there is no current timeline for the replacement. C-130s. The service says it has too many C-130s, but has been directed by Congress to keep its Hercules flying. The fiscal 2016 proposal seeks to cut 28 of the aging C-130Hs, mostly flown by the Air National Guard, by 2019 and to keep 300 of the H and J models. However, the locations have not yet been determined. The Air Force is studying recommendations by the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force on how to balance its mobility fleet across the active and reserve components. The service said it will finalize "its mission area and force composition analysis in the coming months." The proposal would cut National Guard C-130s in Puerto Rico, where the unit will transfer to RC-26 Metroliner aircraft transferred from Oklahoma. Two C-130s from Oklahoma will transfer to Missouri, where they will be used for training. The 109th Airlift Wing of the New York Air National Guard would receive two C-130s for training. The unit flies specially equipped C-130s with skis for arctic missions, and would use standard H models for training. F-15Cs. The Air Force wants to cut 31 of its F-15Cs, most from RAF Lakenheath, England. Air National Guard units in Oregon, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Florida and California would also lose F-15Cs, but in fewer numbers than the service planned last year. The Lakenheath F-15s would fly until 2017, to meet requirements under a fiscal 2016 European Reassurance Initiative. RC-26. The fiscal 2015 budget set up an MC-12 Air National Guard unit in Oklahoma, which had been flying RC-26 Metroliners. As a result, nine RC-26s would head to Puerto Rico in 2016 to replace C-130s, and two would go to New Mexico for a formal training unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Saw an article on UK news this evening about NATO operations shadowing Russian aircraft near the current Ukraine dispute. It was interesting to see Italian Typhoons flying alongside their allies, Polish MiG-29s... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegadeleader1 Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 So remember when I posted those clips from anime a page or two back featuring air combat? Well it kinda inspired me to host a panel on Air Combat in Anime and it just got approved yesterday. My question is what anime(aside from Macross and Area 88) should I feature in my panel? What things would you want to see if you attended a panel on this subject? Given I have an hour to talk I plan on basically giving a crash course on air combat manuvers, the most popular aircraft in anime(F-15 eagle, F-4 Phantom, Mitsubishi F-1, A6M Zero, BF-109 etc), and showing clips of dogfights in anime while providing commentary on how realistic or amazing they are. I'm thinking about using that clip from Najica as the opener for laughs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekko Basara Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Amusingly, the Pugachev Cobra was featured by name in the episode of Gundam Build Fighters TRY that aired yesterday. I'm not sure if that would fit your theme, since it was accomplished with a transformed mobile suit rather than a real aircraft, but it gave me a good chuckle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Say what you will about the OVA, but I think the first air strike sequence from Yukikaze is pretty awesome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U48bBWALS-s Sky Crawler should provide some material, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Not as well known but 801 TTS Airbats, and The Cockpit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) It doesn't feature real world aircraft (excepting a dive-bomber that is a Ju-87 Stuka), but "The Pilots Love Song" has some interesting air combat scenes which range from the reasonably plausible to the somewhat ridiculous. "Porco Rosso" also does not exactly reflect reality but there at least three real between-war (or at least, based on) aircraft in there, though one of them is rather obscure and seen only as a fleeting glance. You could mention how virtually every fantasy air combat anime ever made, especially ones featuring open-cockpit designs or floating battleships with massive deckspaces, almost entirely ignore the problem of decreased air temperature or oxygen levels with altitude. As far as air combat manoeuvres go, theres also the "Immelmann turn" in "Last Exile", which you could point out shouldn't be called an "Immelmann turn" in-universe as its named after a real world pilot. Then theres the case of how "Patlabor 2" may be the only movie ever where a major plot point revolves around not just a type of aircraft being identified but a specific variant... I'm trying to think of others but all I've got at the moment is aircraft "guest spots", like the Shinden in "Ah! My Goddess"... Edited February 19, 2015 by F-ZeroOne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Russia apparently is interested in the UKs Strategic Pasty Supply: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekko Basara Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 You could mention how virtually every fantasy air combat anime ever made, especially ones featuring open-cockpit designs or floating battleships with massive deckspaces, almost entirely ignore the problem of decreased air temperature or oxygen levels with altitude. As far as air combat manoeuvres go, theres also the "Immelmann turn" in "Last Exile", which you could point out shouldn't be called an "Immelmann turn" in-universe as its named after a real world pilot. Oh man, that drove me crazy, too! Especially how the crazy Dilandau guy gets so wrapped up in it that he starts referring to the protagonist as "Immelman" all the time. And it wasn't even a proper Immelman turn! An Immelman is really sort of a hammerhead-turn at a lower inclination, but what they were talking about was the reverse of a split-S. Ugh, that show... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) Glad its not just me... Just to elaborate on "The Pilots Love Song", the main aircraft of the protagonists is a largely unarmed training/observation aircraft. The observer defends the aircraft with a bolt action rifle [1]. This is not entirely implausible, as thats pretty much how air combat started; even in World War II aircrews sometimes carried submachine guns with them in the cockpit to aid in their aircrafts defence (in the Fleet Air Arm, pilots of the mediocre Fairey Fulmar used to throw toilet rolls out to confuse enemy pilots!). Attempting to use such weapons against the types of opponent these planes face in the show is perhaps not entirely realistic though (I'm being a little vague to try and avoid spoilers). [1] To be fair, they do fire some remarkably powerful bullets... Edited February 19, 2015 by F-ZeroOne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sildani Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 The Sky Crawlers. Don't forget that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) Russia apparently is interested in the UKs Strategic Pasty Supply: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31530840 They're now providing an airplane spotters guide too. http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-31537705 I'd imagine you'd hear a Bear long before you see it. Edited February 21, 2015 by Shadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 Yeah, good luck identifying a MiG-31 when it's at 50,000ft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M'Kyuun Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 And the Russians can barely afford to fly the Blackjack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekko Basara Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Yeah, good luck identifying a MiG-31 when it's at 50,000ft... That's a gripe I had with the original article. It says RAF jets were scrambled after Russian bombers were "seen" off Cornwall. The headline makes it sound like some geriatric WWII coastwatcher was out there with impossibly huge binoculars and called in to his local aerodrome. I'm guessing a more accurate headline would be something like, "RAF jets scrambled after Russian aircraft approach Cornwall after being tracked on radar for an hour." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 (edited) And the Russians can barely afford to fly the Blackjack. I can only imagine what kind of nightmare one of those are to maintain. They're barely able to afford modernizing half their Su-27 fleet to SMs. Nice shot from an intercept. Edited February 21, 2015 by Shadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Please, in the UK it wasn't "coastwatchers", it was the "Royal Observer Corps"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Observer_Corps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekko Basara Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Hehe, I knew I was borrowing a term from the south Pacific, but I didn't think anybody was gonna call me on it. Thanks for the education! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 No problems, I realise its a bit nit-picky but I just can't help myself sometimes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted February 22, 2015 Author Share Posted February 22, 2015 Mid-air collision, landed safely: 138FW, Tulsa ANG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickyg Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Wow, that pilot is a boss! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 So on that note, can we shut the world up about that time in the 80s that guy in Israel smashed the wing on his F15 and landed? That didn't happen because the F-15 is some standout amazing plane, it happened because fighter design calls for small wings, lifting bodies, and heavy compartmentalization and redundancy of critical systems. All the teen fighters theoretically have enough lift to lose a wing and land, and 3 of the 4 have had this tested at least once. Good on the pilot for sticking to his training enough to save the plane, but not enough to get out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF-19 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Apparently the other pilot ejected, and was ok. Out of curiosity, I know the F-16 is fly by wire, but doesn't it still use hydraulics to move the control surfaces? If it does, does this mean that the pilot got lucky with the damage pinching off the lines (thus allowing him to remain in control of the plane), or is there something I'm missing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renegadeleader1 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 So on that note, can we shut the world up about that time in the 80s that guy in Israel smashed the wing on his F15 and landed? That didn't happen because the F-15 is some standout amazing plane, it happened because fighter design calls for small wings, lifting bodies, and heavy compartmentalization and redundancy of critical systems. All the teen fighters theoretically have enough lift to lose a wing and land, and 3 of the 4 have had this tested at least once. Good on the pilot for sticking to his training enough to save the plane, but not enough to get out of it. The story from the first Gulf War of the A-10 that made it back after losing both an engine and a wing impresses me more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Apparently the other pilot ejected, and was ok. Out of curiosity, I know the F-16 is fly by wire, but doesn't it still use hydraulics to move the control surfaces? If it does, does this mean that the pilot got lucky with the damage pinching off the lines (thus allowing him to remain in control of the plane), or is there something I'm missing? Multiple redundant compartmentalized control systems. In much the same way the F16 carries 4 redundant flight computers, it also has redundant hydraulic systems with compartmentalization. So, if the main hydraulics are damaged, there's a backup system in place, and if both are damaged and leaking, the leaking portion can be closed off from the rest of the system to prevent a total bleed-out. Survivability being the name of the game, combat aircraft are often designed with numerous redundancies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizman Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 The story from the first Gulf War of the A-10 that made it back after losing both an engine and a wing impresses me more. Yup I love that story, I'm sure the F-35 will be able to do the same....oh wait it won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted February 23, 2015 Author Share Posted February 23, 2015 So on that note, can we shut the world up about that time in the 80s that guy in Israel smashed the wing on his F15 and landed? No, because everyone will point out that the F-15 lost the vast majority of its wing, vs "a chunk of it". Anyways---IIRC, an F-18 was tested with a "battle damage" program that allowed control to be transferred to other control surfaces. As in, if an aileron was damaged, the tailplanes would have augmented differential to compensate, and try to retain as normal-feeling flying characteristics as possible to the pilot. I think it even allowed for loss of tailplane pitch control, by using symmetrical aileron movement, to alter the center of lift of the wing. Did anything ever come of this, in common use/frontline fighters? Seems a waste for a successful program not to be implemented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 And F-14s have landed at full sweep, and flown normally with one wing swept and the other at min sweep, and this was before fly by wire was even an idea. I just chalk it up to sensible design requirements for a combat fighter craft. I don't know about any battle damage programming reaching the front lines or not. It seems like it would, but I know for a fact the military is more concerned with bureaucracy when it comes to upgrading aircraft, than with results, a lot of the time. 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.