Aircraft Vs Thread 3

[Coota0]

I'd like to point out that Eisenhower never would have had a ship named after him if he had not been the President. The Navy does not name ships after soldiers, Shugart and Gordon were rare exceptions, and they were Medal of Honor winners as well as soldiers.

417520[/snapback]

U.S. Navy would disagree with you as Ike is a very important U.S. hero, patriot and leader long before becoming president making him more then eligible for a ship to be name after him. Whether a carrier and not something else would have been after named him had he not been president is a logical question.

417525[/snapback]

Really? Are you the Navy's new spokesman?

[Mislovrit]

I'd like to point out that Eisenhower never would have had a ship named after him if he had not been the President. The Navy does not name ships after soldiers, Shugart and Gordon were rare exceptions, and they were Medal of Honor winners as well as soldiers.

417520[/snapback]

U.S. Navy would disagree with you as Ike is a very important U.S. hero, patriot and leader long before becoming president making him more then eligible for a ship to be name after him. Whether a carrier and not something else would have been after named him had he not been president is a logical question.

417525[/snapback]

Really? Are you the Navy's new spokesman?

417534[/snapback]

No, check the link I had posted earlier in post #66.

[kalvasflam]

  Ike would've had a ship name not due to politics, but due to his distinguished military record. 

417353[/snapback]

I'd like to point out that Eisenhower never would have had a ship named after him if he had not been the President. The Navy does not name ships after soldiers, Shugart and Gordon were rare exceptions, and they were Medal of Honor winners as well as soldiers.

417520[/snapback]

Hmmm, Nimitz was a soldier if I recall correctly, sailor if you really want to nitpick. Spruance, another sailor, Halsey, King, etc. None of those were politicians. I'm going to hold my peace on this subject at this point. Since this is becoming a pointless debate.

Personally, my preference is still for historical battles, and names of outstanding military men to be names for ships. Followed by states, and cities... although I can't help but like the British naming tradition, Broadsword, Battleaxe... now those were good names.

[Coota0]

I'd like to point out that Eisenhower never would have had a ship named after him if he had not been the President. The Navy does not name ships after soldiers, Shugart and Gordon were rare exceptions, and they were Medal of Honor winners as well as soldiers.

417520[/snapback]

U.S. Navy would disagree with you as Ike is a very important U.S. hero, patriot and leader long before becoming president making him more then eligible for a ship to be name after him. Whether a carrier and not something else would have been after named him had he not been president is a logical question.

417525[/snapback]

Really? Are you the Navy's new spokesman?

417534[/snapback]

No, check the link I had posted earlier in post #66.

417540[/snapback]

You're going to have to quote it for me, I saw one vague, at best, reference to a soldier being used as a ship's name. He was also a Medal of Honor recipient as were Shugart and Gordon, which i have already said were exceptions, rare does not mean just those two names. The Navy has named ships after Medal of Honor recipients that were not sailors or Marines, Eisenhower however does not qualify under that criteria, so there is no reason for the Navy to have named a ship after the man if he had not been president. The Army probably would have named something after him (perhaps even one of their ships) but the Navy would not have.

Edited July 20, 2006 by Coota0

[Coota0]

Hmmm, Nimitz was a soldier if I recall correctly, sailor if you really want to nitpick. 

417543[/snapback]

You lost me here. Can you explain, please?

Edited July 20, 2006 by Coota0

[Mislovrit]

Hmmm, Nimitz was a soldier if I recall correctly, sailor if you really want to nitpick. 

Brief from his bio pretaining to him and his Army ambition.

Nimitiz bio[/url]]Chester William Nimitz was born on 24 February 1885, near a quaint hotel in Fredericksburg, Texas built by his grandfather, Charles Nimitz, a retired sea captain. Young Chester, however, had his sights set on an Army career and while a student at Tivy High School, Kerrville, Texas, he tried for an appointment to West Point. When none was available, he took a competitive examination for Annapolis and was selected and appointed from the Twelfth Congressional District of Texas in 1901.

Spruance, another sailor, Halsey, King, etc.  None of those were politicians.  I'm going to hold my peace on this subject at this point.  Since this is becoming a pointless debate.

Pointless cause nobody here bothers to do any research on any individual to learn why the Navy would honored them by naming a ship after them.

[David Hingtgen]

Sigh, the one day I don't check MW until 9PM, "my" thread goes to hell and another mod has to step in. Yeesh people.

Anyways:

The Senate has *passed* amendment 4211 to Senate bill 2766 "The 2007 Defense Appropriation Act" to name the CVN78 the Gerald Ford. It's very likely it will be. A few weeks ago it was merely "introduced" but now it's one step away from being so. I wasn't using Ford's name as a random example...

USS America.org still trying to stop it. http://www.ussamerica.org/

Edited July 20, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Mislovrit]

This board needs a head slamming into wall smily right about now.

Back to aircraft for the moment, anyone got more info on this?

US to sell 66 F-16s to Taiwan

Edited July 20, 2006 by Mislovrit

[Coota0]

Alright, Mislovrit I sort of get it now, but just because Nimitz wanted to attend West Point doesn't make him a soldier. If he had joined the Army he probably wouldn't have had a ship named after him nor have had a class of carrier named after him.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

To my knowledge the Super Hornet was chosen out of necessity. Since the Tomcat 21 program was axed and F-14D cut from full production, NATF being too expensive, the Navy had to either use the Super Hornet for its own air defense or multirole, or rely on the Air Force for air superiority and all that. Its another case of the eggs in a basket battle that they have been waging since the 50's.

Welp better than nothing!

Thing that impresses me most about the super bug is its growth potential.

[Nied]

Sigh, the one day I don't check MW until 9PM, "my" thread goes to hell and another mod has to step in.  Yeesh people. 

Anyways:

The Senate has *passed* amendment 4211 to Senate bill 2766 "The 2007 Defense Appropriation Act" to name the CVN78 the Gerald Ford.  It's very likely it will be.  A few weeks ago it was merely "introduced" but now it's one step away from being so.  I wasn't using Ford's name as a random example... 

USS America.org still trying to stop it.  http://www.ussamerica.org/

417553[/snapback]

You know what's been bugging me: I don't know the position of the Super Hornet's Control surfaces when it's shut down. Does anyone know what they are?

[David Hingtgen]

Depends on how long it was shut down. (We are now in deep, deep, in-joke territory)

[Mislovrit]

Latest F-14 news

Museum's fighter called back to duty

Published: July 18, 2006

By LAURENT L.N. BONCZIJK

Of The News Register

The Evergreen Aviation Museum was poised today to take the first step toward addition of a choice piece to its collection - an F-14D Super Tomcat, the fighter plane Tom Cruise flew in the hit film "Top Gun."

But the flareup of violence between the Israeli army and Hezbollah and Hamas militias in Lebanon and Gaza led to a change in plans. The Navy, which had been planning to replace the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt's F-14 Tomcats with newer, more multi-dimensional F-18 Hornets, has decided to instead dispatch the carrier to the Middle East with its current squadron of F-14s - including the one promised to the museum.

According to Colin Powers, Evergreen's director of air restoration, the museum is still in line for the plane, which will be flown into Portland, dismantled there and trucked down to McMinnville for reassembly. But not until its new unscheduled tour ends, and no one yet knows when that will be.

The Navy had originally planned to fly the plane directly into town. It would have been the largest and most powerful jet fighter ever to touch down at the McMinnville Airport.

However, officers eventually concluded that the airport lacked sufficient runway length, and that setting up the cable-hooking mechanism used for F-14 carrier landings wasn't feasible. They decided they would have to fly it into Portland instead.

The plane had been scheduled to make the cross-country flight from Virginia's Naval Air Station Oceana to Oregon's Portland International Airport today, then undergo dismantling in preparation for shipment on to McMinnville by truck - a process expected to take about two weeks.

A four-member crew from the Titan Corporation had already been dispatched from Norfolk, Va., with all of the necessary equipment. But that mission will have to be rescheduled, in light of the developments.

When the plane joins the collection, it will be on permanent loan from the National Museum of Naval Aviation. It will join the HK-1 Flying Boat seaplane, SR-71 Blackbird spy plane and Titan II missile among top museum showpieces.

Last used in the bombing of targets in Iraq in October, the plane destined for the museum runs 62 feet in length, 16 feet in height and 38 to 64 feet in width, depending on whether it has its wings fully extended or in swept-back position.

Crews will have to remove its wings, horizontal stabilizer and vertical fins for manageable truck transport and its engines, armaments and ejection seat mechanism for safe museum display. The disassembly in Portland is expected to take about two weeks and the partially reassembly for display is expected to take a like period once it reaches McMinnville.

The plane is part of fighter squadron VF-31, whose insignia features the cartoon character Felix the Cat. The squadron has long been assigned to the Roosevelt, which had been supporting U.S. military operations in Iraq prior to being called home for re-outfitting with F-18 hornets.

The F-14 was designed to provide air superiority over Soviet fighters in dogfights staged in defense of U.S. aircraft carriers. Thus, it did not transition well to other roles, such as the precision bombing called for in Iraq.

VF-31 is one of only two squadrons in the U.S. Navy still flying Tomcats. The Navy, which began taking delivery on them in the early 1970s, has been steadily swapping them out of its carrier-based squadrons in favor of the more versatile Hornets.

[Warmaker]

Hmm. One more whirl in the Real World for the Tomcat, eh?

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Latest F-14 news

Museum's fighter called back to duty

Published: July 18, 2006

By LAURENT L.N. BONCZIJK

Of The News Register

The Evergreen Aviation Museum was poised today to take the first step toward addition of a choice piece to its collection - an F-14D Super Tomcat, the fighter plane Tom Cruise flew in the hit film "Top Gun."

But the flareup of violence between the Israeli army and Hezbollah and Hamas militias in Lebanon and Gaza led to a change in plans. The Navy, which had been planning to replace the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt's F-14 Tomcats with newer, more multi-dimensional F-18 Hornets, has decided to instead dispatch the carrier to the Middle East with its current squadron of F-14s - including the one promised to the museum.

According to Colin Powers, Evergreen's director of air restoration, the museum is still in line for the plane, which will be flown into Portland, dismantled there and trucked down to McMinnville for reassembly. But not until its new unscheduled tour ends, and no one yet knows when that will be.

The Navy had originally planned to fly the plane directly into town. It would have been the largest and most powerful jet fighter ever to touch down at the McMinnville Airport.

However, officers eventually concluded that the airport lacked sufficient runway length, and that setting up the cable-hooking mechanism used for F-14 carrier landings wasn't feasible. They decided they would have to fly it into Portland instead.

The plane had been scheduled to make the cross-country flight from Virginia's Naval Air Station Oceana to Oregon's Portland International Airport today, then undergo dismantling in preparation for shipment on to McMinnville by truck - a process expected to take about two weeks.

A four-member crew from the Titan Corporation had already been dispatched from Norfolk, Va., with all of the necessary equipment. But that mission will have to be rescheduled, in light of the developments.

When the plane joins the collection, it will be on permanent loan from the National Museum of Naval Aviation. It will join the HK-1 Flying Boat seaplane, SR-71 Blackbird spy plane and Titan II missile among top museum showpieces.

Last used in the bombing of targets in Iraq in October, the plane destined for the museum runs 62 feet in length, 16 feet in height and 38 to 64 feet in width, depending on whether it has its wings fully extended or in swept-back position.

Crews will have to remove its wings, horizontal stabilizer and vertical fins for manageable truck transport and its engines, armaments and ejection seat mechanism for safe museum display. The disassembly in Portland is expected to take about two weeks and the partially reassembly for display is expected to take a like period once it reaches McMinnville.

The plane is part of fighter squadron VF-31, whose insignia features the cartoon character Felix the Cat. The squadron has long been assigned to the Roosevelt, which had been supporting U.S. military operations in Iraq prior to being called home for re-outfitting with F-18 hornets.

The F-14 was designed to provide air superiority over Soviet fighters in dogfights staged in defense of U.S. aircraft carriers. Thus, it did not transition well to other roles, such as the precision bombing called for in Iraq.

VF-31 is one of only two squadrons in the U.S. Navy still flying Tomcats. The Navy, which began taking delivery on them in the early 1970s, has been steadily swapping them out of its carrier-based squadrons in favor of the more versatile Hornets.

417631[/snapback]

Did not transition well my ass. Damn uninformed reporters.

[Warmaker]

Kind of funny, I do recall F-14's and F-15's being the few fighters that could fly such long distances into Afghanistan and conduct sorties there, all the way until an airfield was secured as a foothold by a MEU.

But you do have to admit... the Navy kind of let the Tomcats shoot themselves in the foot. For most of its history, the Tomcats weren't even dreaming of moving mud, not until much later in its service life.

[Nied]

Latest F-14 news

Museum's fighter called back to duty

Published: July 18, 2006

By LAURENT L.N. BONCZIJK

Of The News Register

The Evergreen Aviation Museum was poised today to take the first step toward addition of a choice piece to its collection - an F-14D Super Tomcat, the fighter plane Tom Cruise flew in the hit film "Top Gun."

But the flareup of violence between the Israeli army and Hezbollah and Hamas militias in Lebanon and Gaza led to a change in plans. The Navy, which had been planning to replace the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt's F-14 Tomcats with newer, more multi-dimensional F-18 Hornets, has decided to instead dispatch the carrier to the Middle East with its current squadron of F-14s - including the one promised to the museum.

According to Colin Powers, Evergreen's director of air restoration, the museum is still in line for the plane, which will be flown into Portland, dismantled there and trucked down to McMinnville for reassembly. But not until its new unscheduled tour ends, and no one yet knows when that will be.

The Navy had originally planned to fly the plane directly into town. It would have been the largest and most powerful jet fighter ever to touch down at the McMinnville Airport.

However, officers eventually concluded that the airport lacked sufficient runway length, and that setting up the cable-hooking mechanism used for F-14 carrier landings wasn't feasible. They decided they would have to fly it into Portland instead.

The plane had been scheduled to make the cross-country flight from Virginia's Naval Air Station Oceana to Oregon's Portland International Airport today, then undergo dismantling in preparation for shipment on to McMinnville by truck - a process expected to take about two weeks.

A four-member crew from the Titan Corporation had already been dispatched from Norfolk, Va., with all of the necessary equipment. But that mission will have to be rescheduled, in light of the developments.

When the plane joins the collection, it will be on permanent loan from the National Museum of Naval Aviation. It will join the HK-1 Flying Boat seaplane, SR-71 Blackbird spy plane and Titan II missile among top museum showpieces.

Last used in the bombing of targets in Iraq in October, the plane destined for the museum runs 62 feet in length, 16 feet in height and 38 to 64 feet in width, depending on whether it has its wings fully extended or in swept-back position.

Crews will have to remove its wings, horizontal stabilizer and vertical fins for manageable truck transport and its engines, armaments and ejection seat mechanism for safe museum display. The disassembly in Portland is expected to take about two weeks and the partially reassembly for display is expected to take a like period once it reaches McMinnville.

The plane is part of fighter squadron VF-31, whose insignia features the cartoon character Felix the Cat. The squadron has long been assigned to the Roosevelt, which had been supporting U.S. military operations in Iraq prior to being called home for re-outfitting with F-18 hornets.

The F-14 was designed to provide air superiority over Soviet fighters in dogfights staged in defense of U.S. aircraft carriers. Thus, it did not transition well to other roles, such as the precision bombing called for in Iraq.

VF-31 is one of only two squadrons in the U.S. Navy still flying Tomcats. The Navy, which began taking delivery on them in the early 1970s, has been steadily swapping them out of its carrier-based squadrons in favor of the more versatile Hornets.

417631[/snapback]

If only it were true...

[David Hingtgen]

Nied got to it first. And even without any other commentary, the "did not transition well to precision bombing" tells you all you need to know about the accuracy of that article. Hey, I bet other large interceptors like the F-15 also can't be made to do precision bombing well...

Edited July 20, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Warmaker]

Those "Strike Eagles" can't carry much ordnance, much less carry any at a long distance.

(Sarcastic Joke, above, just to cover my rear)

[Nied]

Polecat!

Well now we know what the famous skunk works has been up to. Love the inscrutable photo they chose for it. Is it a flying wing? Is it big? Is it small? The DoD certainly doesn't seem willing to tell.

[David Hingtgen]

Got my "Milia red" F-15 today. VERY nice, I'll have to say it's better than Dragon's. Witty's F-15 mold has a working airbrake (flush when closed), working canopy (flush when closed), moving stabs and rudders, fixed gear. Wing armament and drop tanks are fixed, but AIM-7's are easily put on and off.

Got it here: http://www.flyingmule.com/products/WT-WTW72005-08

And the "Max blue" one is coming soon: http://www.flyingmule.com/products/WT-WTW72005-09

Edited July 25, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[Knight26]

I still think it is funny that the JASDF actually painted up two planes like that, I know it is for some official reason, but you have to wonder if some JASDF general is secretly a macross fan. "I order that the pilots who fly these fighters, paint their hair blue or green"

[Nied]

I love how many stencils the JASDF paints on their fighters, they practically cover up the camo work on their F-4EJs! Incidentally does any one know what those blue and red schemes are meant to commemorate? Were they for the 50th anniversary of the JASDF?

Edited July 27, 2006 by Nied

[BigDMacross2]

Polecat!

Well now we know what the famous skunk works has been up to.  Love the inscrutable photo they chose for it.  Is it a flying wing?  Is it big? Is it small?  The DoD certainly doesn't seem willing to tell.

419016[/snapback]

More Polecat News

It is indeed a flying wing, but not a very big one.

[Fatalist]

I love how many stencils the JASDF paints on their fighters, they practically cover up the camo work on their F-4EJs!    Incidentally does any one know what those blue and red schemes are meant to commemorate?  Were they for the 50th anniversary of the JASDF?

420157[/snapback]

According to the link for the blue F-15, yes, its for the 50th anniversary.

[David Hingtgen]

Yup. EVERY JASDF squadron painted up a plane for the anniversary, but these were the most colorful (though not the most intricate by any means). Red and blue were for the 304 and 306 squadrons.

[Graham]

Latest F-14 news

The Navy, which had been planning to replace the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt's F-14 Tomcats with newer, more multi-dimensional F-18 Hornets.

417631[/snapback]

'Multi-dimensional Hornets'.....? That's one ability I didnt know they had! The US navy been installing Fold Boosters on them or something?

Graham

[Apollo Leader]

'Multi-dimensional Hornets'.....? That's one ability I didnt know they had! The US navy been installing Fold Boosters on them or something?

Graham

420362[/snapback]

I think that's "Super Dimensional", Graham.

[Knight26]

Those Wacky Isrealis are at it again, check out the first concept on there, very interesting but way too dangerous and impractical.

http://www.fartechnologies.com/

Oops, we dropped it.

[kalvasflam]

Those Wacky Isrealis are at it again, check out the first concept on there, very interesting but way too dangerous and impractical. 

http://www.fartechnologies.com/

Oops, we dropped it.

420387[/snapback]

Some of those ideas are not so far fetched. The aerial rearming though...

But the drop tank idea is not a bad one. Just have to fit it with some small amount of explosives. After all, the tanks are likely going to be lost anyway. So, put it to some good use.

[KingNor]

Those Wacky Isrealis are at it again, check out the first concept on there, very interesting but way too dangerous and impractical. 

http://www.fartechnologies.com/

Oops, we dropped it.

420387[/snapback]

Some of those ideas are not so far fetched. The aerial rearming though...

But the drop tank idea is not a bad one. Just have to fit it with some small amount of explosives. After all, the tanks are likely going to be lost anyway. So, put it to some good use.

420397[/snapback]

a plane with explosives INSIDE the fuel tanks? I'll let you fly it.

[KingNor]

I had a question for you guys. Quite some time ago, I saw an image of an F-14 someplace on this board that I really liked, but I never saved the image.

It was an F-14, seen from above. It's coming up an Aircraft Carrier's elevator. The top of the plane looked quite dirty, yellowish like it had some baked dirt on top of it.

I scoured google but couldn't find the image, hopefully someone here will remember it!

thanks!!!

[Apollo Leader]

Those Wacky Isrealis are at it again, check out the first concept on there, very interesting but way too dangerous and impractical. 

http://www.fartechnologies.com/

Oops, we dropped it.

420387[/snapback]

Far Technologies... I wonder if whoever put together their website realized that running both words together in their URL now makes it look like their company is Fart Technologies?

I watched the in air rearming sequence. I got to ask, what stablizes the F-16 while the rearming is taking place? What pilot in his right mind would fly right about 20 feet behind a C-130 while simultaneously have a steel rail from said aircraft just floating a matter of a few feet below one of your wings?

But if anyone could make it work, it would be Israel. This would probably be good for CAS missions and some long range strike scenarios.

[Apollo Leader]

a plane with explosives INSIDE the fuel tanks?  I'll let you fly it.

420417[/snapback]

The B-58 Hustler used two different model nuclear warhead tipped fuel tanks. It's been done before and with nuclear weapons.

[Nied]

Those Wacky Isrealis are at it again, check out the first concept on there, very interesting but way too dangerous and impractical. 

http://www.fartechnologies.com/

Oops, we dropped it.

420387[/snapback]

Far Technologies... I wonder if whoever put together their website realized that running both words together in their URL now makes it look like their company is Fart Technologies?

I watched the in air rearming sequence. I got to ask, what stablizes the F-16 while the rearming is taking place? What pilot in his right mind would fly right about 20 feet behind a C-130 while simultaneously have a steel rail from said aircraft just floating a matter of a few feet below one of your wings?

But if anyone could make it work, it would be Israel. This would probably be good for CAS missions and some long range strike scenarios.

420422[/snapback]

Not just a steel rail, but a steel rail with several hundred pounds of armed high explosives at the end of it. A good bump would pretty much leave nothing left of your plane (or you). I've seen video of planes trying to keep up behind a C-130 with it's cargo door open and they never look very stable (that picture of the F-15 trailing the C-130 in a pretty nose high attitude tells on their site you why).