Nied

Iran's new super fighter, lol

Iranian F-5 Knock Off

Looks like a very slightly modified F-5 to me,...a 50 year old airplane design (the F-5 was designed by Northrop in the late '50s and entered production in the 60's). But, the thing I find most interesting it though is the line about "blinding their enemies eyes" makes me think that some rumors I heard a while back about Iran developing a blinding laser for their planes might be true. In which case any close in engagements could end badly for the other side.

Two things I missed on this topic. Blinding Lasers are banned by the latest draft of the Geneva conventions (though I'm not sure if we or Iran are signatories to that draft).

Also F-16.net has a thread with new pictures of the Sageh in new "not the Blue Angels" colors. The poster there mentions the enlarged intakes, implying that the engies need sigifcantly more mass flow (rumour has it the Iranians have crossed the J85 with the TF-30 to make a new more powerful engine), but I'm more interested in the re-shaped nose, and the deletion of one of the 20mm cannons. Maybe the Iranians have put a better radar in thier plane. If they could get something that equivelent to even the APG-66 and goose the J85s enough they could have a decent F-20 analogue. They do seem to be rather averse to BVRAAMs (they don't seem to be in any hurry to develop or buy one beyond reverse engineered Pheonix's and Hawk SAMs on thier F-14s) which gives us a decided advantage over the IRIAF should any conflict occur.

I was DC back in June 1993 (yikes, that was 14 years ago already!) though I didn't get to see the Smithsonian. The one place I would really like to fly to would be Dayton to see the Air Force Museum again. It was on the same trip to DC that was also the last time that I got to be at the Air Force Museum. Would really like to go back there so I can see the Tacit Blue, Bird of Prey, YF-22, and the B-2 structural test bed in person.

I see your B-2 and Raptor and raise you by a Blackbird, Space Shuttle, Concorde and the Enola Gay. I'm telling you the new annex at Dulles airport is worth the price of admission alone. Plus you've got the Naval Air Museum a very short drive away at Pax River.

Also the Constitution.

Iran's new super fighter, lol

Iranian F-5 Knock Off

Looks like a very slightly modified F-5 to me,...a 50 year old airplane design (the F-5 was designed by Northrop in the late '50s and entered production in the 60's). But, the thing I find most interesting it though is the line about "blinding their enemies eyes" makes me think that some rumors I heard a while back about Iran developing a blinding laser for their planes might be true. In which case any close in engagements could end badly for the other side.

I think this particular F-5 knock off has been mentioned before. Someone posted this photo of a different F-5 knock off in the Tomcat Sunset forums however unlike the Sageh I haven't been able to find any further info on it. It certainly doesn't look like a photoshop job.

Note the high wing and enlarged LERX, combine this with the twin tailed Sageh and you have a YF-17! Rumours are the F/B-44 "Iranian Lion" will also be F-5 based. Honestly if the Iranians are so hard up for a modernized F-5 replacement I don't see why they don't just license produce the FC-1/JF-17 in country. Rumour has it they've successfully reverse engineered a smaller all digital version of the AWG-9 so they wouldn't even need to rely on crappy Chinese avionics.

Yeah, yeah... Seriously I'll try to find an excuse to get on an airliner somwehere one of these days.

Might I suggest my old stomping grounds of Washington DC? It's underrated in it's beauty, has plenty of history, and one of the best (if not the best) aviation museums in the country.

Given the small fuselage size and those big CFM-56 engines mated the 737-600 ought to be a pretty hot ride. I've never ridden the -600 specifically but I have been in a few -500 and I can attest that they are pretty quick off the line and are roughly comparable to a 757. It seems like the only things I ride in anymore are members of the 737 or A320 families, with the ocasional 757 thrown in (though since moving to SF the ocasional 767 and even 777 have crept in).

It's just been the case that I've never needed to go anywhere by plane. Last Saturday a guy I know who works for Duncan Aviation in Lincoln gave me a flyer promoting that Trimotor being in Lincoln and giving rides over a four day period. I looked at the site this morning and decided that now was my big chance. I've had some previous opportunities to maybe go flying, but nothing panned out.

Get thee to an airport and take a vacation somwhere far away! It'll expand your horizons in more ways than one.

sets wouldn't be a problem.. everything's green screened these days. Maybe Jim Cameron won't relinquish intellectual rights to the colonial marines (I'm assuming he'd have some say in this besides Fox)

That occurred to me after typing out my last reply. Cameron was intimately involved in every aspect of desgning the Marines, which might help explain why we don't really see much of them in the rest of the Alien sequels.

AFAIK the main reason for the elimination of gold canopies on the F-16 and 18 is the increasing use of night-vision goggles. It interferes with them. You'll note F-16 Block 40's were the first to abandon it, and often just the front half of the canopy. But the F-22 isn't going to be night-bombing much.

Well technically speaking they will be night bombing, but they won't have much use for NVGs at 50,000 ft. Still I doubt the DoD was willing to trade a sizable RCS increase for better NVG capability. I'm willing to bet that they came up with something that was both NVG compatible and still maintained the RCS aspects. It was probably installed in the Raptor for commonality sake, that and you never know when you might need to quickly integrate NVGs on a new airframe.

Maybe there is a newer transparency for the F-22's canopy that's being tested out. The gold tinting is a RCS reducing measure to prevent radar from bouncing around the cockpit; the cockpit on most aircraft tends to be one of the biggest RCS sources. Maybe a new tinting is being put to use. But then again the combination of material and that the shape of the canopy is designed for a lower RCS to begin with, even the slightest change in position could effect the visual appearance and transparency of the cockpit.

That was my assumption as well. Gold isn't exactly inexpensive (it is gold after all) even in the extremely thin layers they use for aircraft canopies. I've noticed that the same is happening for other aircraft that used to have gold tinted canopies (F-16s, Super Hornet) it's likely we have just found a cheaper/more effective/easier to maintain canopy coating than frigging gilding our fighter canopies.

First, this is a REALLY cool picture---darn watermark ruins it for wallpaper though. (And the shape's hard to fit)

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1265696/L/

But--look at the F-22's. Do they actually have different canopies, or is the slightly different angle enough to totally change how they look? They're almost exactly the same position in relation to the camera.

You're not going crazy. I noticed the same thing in this image from the USAF article on the 100th Raptor being delivered.

Space sets are expensive. Its probably set in a normal every day middle america town because its cheaper...

That's why you set it in a remote colony world that looks just like Earth (either through terraforming or "just because"). Then it's just a matter making a few prop/wardrobe changes. Maybe change the color of the fake blood squirting out of one of the characters in their death scene to white for the big "ZOMG THEY WERE TEH ANDROID!!!!!!11!!one" reveal. You can do all of that without an appreciable effect on the budget.

You know looking at this trailer I'm struck by how easily they could have put the colonial Marines into it. Just change "isolated town in the middle of nowhere" to "Isolated Colony in the middle of space (one that was terraformed to/coincedentally does look like Earth)" change "US military Rolling in to lock the town down" to "US Colonial Marines dropping in to lock the colony down", and change the "Neeto special effects shot of an F-22 Raptor getting ready to nuke the town from the air" to "Neeto special effects shot of a Sulaco clone getting ready to nuke the colony from orbit (it's the only way to be sure)" and bang you have almost what most people wanted out of an Aliens vs Predator movie. I'm willing to bet that 90% of us would even forgive the whole teen slasher aspect of it if they just set in in space.

Meh. Call me when they get this past the greenlight stage. Frankly I'm a little hopeful that this might help actually break the legal impasse we've had all these years. It's one thing for Big west to snub some small import company for some (in the grand scale of things) minor merch rights. It's quite another to snub one of the biggest studios and miss out on the next Transformers (I know I know but you know that's what every one involved is hoping it will be) and all the profits that come with it. Hopefully the combined legal muscle of WB and BW (heh) can work something out, and we can get legally sold Macross merch right here in the states as part of the deal.

True enough, the fastener problem was known, but the problem is that Boeing stalled until the last minute practically to tell people of a two to three months delay. Had they put it in front of the world about a month ago, it becomes less of an issue. This is exactly the kind of image problem that got Airbus into trouble. They kept stalling until the last minute to break bad news.

I agree that Boeing isn't where Airbus is half a year ago. But it's a slippery slope they're on. Even after the flight, the key question is whether they can make the ANA delivery dates.

Yeah, I saw the sacrifice goat story too... it was hilarious.

The fastener shortage isn't the only problem they're having, it's just the one they've admitted to (and even then it sounds like they're downplaying it significantly). If the people I've talked to within Boeing are correct I'd be mighty surprised if they make the ANA delivery before the end of 2008. I probably shouldn't say more than that.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/boei...62B8EE9CD961%7D

And so it begins.... how much will Boeing end up like Airbus.

Well, they still have a couple of months, but if they have delays like Airbus, it will really hurt.

Like I said before: Tip of the iceburg.

I think I'll pass on this one. The plane in question is the CAF's B-24, and I looked around the inside today. It's an older model that is missing the turrets, one of the waist guns, and the bomb bay doors aren't on it right now. The inside is neat, don't get me wrong, but I'd rather fly on a B-17G or a B-29. I guess Fifi (the B-29) usually travels with the B-24, but it is having its engines replaced right now. Damn.

Edit: Well, I guess they don't give rides on the B-29, but damnit I want to see that beast.

An old warbird is an old warbird. Sure a B-17 or B-29 would be cooler but a ride in a B-24 is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe I'm missing something here but what you're doing sounds like winning a million dollars in the lottery but turning it down because sometimes the jackpot gets up to four or five million and you'd much rather get that.

I have an opportunity to ride in a B-24. Dunno if I want to, though.

Oh you do.

I always thought the Quitra Queleual LST would make a good supplementary (or even primary) colonization ship. A landing ship wouldn't be of much use as a fleet escort, but they've got plenty of internal space to use for colonists and supplies. I could see a flotilla of them being sent out with a couple of Zent cruisers and Human carriers for support being a splendid little colonization fleet.

Here's an idea of mine every other week or a famous feud will be selected and you vote for the side you would take.

I have been thinking about Star Wars recently. If given a choice I sided with the Empire. Sure they are the bad guys but is the other choice that great?

Star Wars is basically a fairy tale. The wars took place a long time ago. In the opening crawl it makes clear that the Galactic Empire is an Evil One. Didn't the Rebels win? Isn't it just natural for the victor's version of the story to be passed along? If the Empire won then the Rebels would be labeled as Evil. Here is one of the evil acts of the Rebels that just makes me want to side with the Empire.

The Republic/Rebel Alliance make friends are primative aliens. The Empire does not and for good reason. Take a look at some of these "friends".

Ewoks. Christ sake the Ewoks are friends with Wilford Brimley. If he's their friend than the Ewoks are or friend of mine.

And by blowing up the Death Star the Rebel Alliance wiped their scourge from the face of the universe. See here.

Gungans. The Republic's Senate allowed them in it and with Jar Jar as their representative. Excuse me? The day Jar Jar is allowed to have a say in how my galaxy is the day I move to another one.

Hey the Empire is just the republic with a stronger executive. And who made their executive stronger? Why Jar Jar Binks! Ergo the Empire is the creation of Jar Jar. The day the galaxy is ruled by an organization created by Jar Jar Binks is the day I move to another one.

Wookies. Common traits, prone to violence and oh yeah they wear no pants. You just know Chewbacca here is walking around with poo stuck on his fur rubbing his ass up on everything. Even worst has got to be those giant boners. Pardon me but couldn't the wookie wear pants in the company of others?

Would you rather have Storm Troopers enforcing the iron will of the Emperor over you or Chewbacca dragging his ass on your carpet?

Sure you say that here on your safe message board in a Galaxy far far away, but dude they can rip your arms out of their sockets! Who's going to tell them to put some pants on to their face? You?

Do you want to work for Jar Jar and save the Ewoks while you've got no arms?

The Royal what now...?

Uh oh. Did I screw up an organization name again?

Modern guns deal a fair amount of damage to the aircraft that fire them these days too. I remember reading on F-16.net that they try to limit the gun use to a few short bursts during training sorties while in peacetime. The reason being that the vibration and recoil can reduce the airframe life by quite a large amount. One of the more legitimate knocks against all models of the Hornet is that it mounts its gun literally around the radar, and the vibration from firing can cause some serious problems. I think the UK thought that even if they used the gun itself as ballast but never fired it they'd still save themselves millions of pounds a year in maintenance costs, and keep their shiny new Typhoons flying for years longer than they otherwise would have. The thing that really made them change their minds was several instances where guns have come in handy saving the Royal Army and Marines during CAS missions in Iraq and Afghanistan (and several instances where guns would have come in handy but weren't mounted).

Thanks, though I'm not sure about the intake ramps. I wouldn't be able to get too close anyways since a couple of hornets flew out of it.

Hornets nesting in a Tomcat intake... I'm sure there's a metaphor there.

Aside from the higher maximum storage capacity, I don't believe that Blu-ray was ever the "consumer's choice." I was under the impression that the movie studios all jumped on the Blu-ray bandwagon because BR supposedly offered better copy protection. Copy protection that, as far as I recall, was already cracked anyway. Blu-ray really didn't take of until the PS3 was launched, and PS3 owners snagging the Blu-ray versions of films helps explain why when the same movie is available in both formats, the BR outsells the HD-DVD (hell, I've contributed myself to that with TMNT and 300). And overall sales of BR discs are likely higher due to having Sony Pictures shoveling out pretty much every movie they release now on BR exclusively. Oh, and let's not forget about corporations like Target and Blockbuster trying to make up our minds in the format war for us.

Despite owning a PS3 and no HD-DVD player, despite having bought a handful of Blu-rays, I've always thought HD-DVD the better format. HD-DVDs (including 300) have interactive bonuses that Blu-rays don't. Many HD-DVDs can be flipped over and played in regular DVD players, which is a nice bonus when you only want to buy one disc to watch on the home theater at home, or take over to your HD-less friend's house to watch. And yeah, Blu-ray has more titles to pick from, but for every one Pirates of the Carribean, you get four Are We Done Yets. HD-DVD may not have quantity, but it's got quality, with stuff like Serenity, the Matrix Trilogy (okay, maybe we only want the first one, but still), and now Star Trek, Transformers, and Battlestar Galactica.

I haven't jumped into the HD war yet, but you just listed why I'm more inclined to want HD-DVD to come out on top. Both have overly onerous DRM but Blu-Ray is definitely is worse.

How is Paramount's exemption of Spielberg's movies affected by the fact that Dreamworks is also moving to HD-DVD exclusivity?

Star Trek

Beat me to it.

Paramount means only one thing to me: Indiana Jones.

And Star Trek, don't forget Star Trek. Hell they're already releasing the first seaons of TOS remastered as an HD-DVD exclusive (although at a price that means I'll only rent it).