Lynx7725 Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 I'm with WDC. Seriously. I know what you guys mean, and I agree.... though I don't think "artistic talent" is exactly a big recruiting point when these guys are hired. The Marine who did the chopper art do have some talent there, though.
F-ZeroOne Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 IIRC, the aircraft fuselage will block some of the radar signal, particlularly immediately underneath the body. This blind spot prompted the RAF to go with a bulbous nose and tail Nimrod AEW prototype, but they never got it to work right and almost as an afterthought created one of the ugliest looking aeroplanes of recent times. They ended up buying Sentries instead. It might be possible to get round this now, or at least mitigate the effects. Not sure what effect rudders etc might have. Not all AWACs aircraft have dishes - Australia has gone for a design dubbed a "fantail" which is more of a wedge shape.
Warmaker Posted June 23, 2007 Posted June 23, 2007 maybe they put a stop to it because the artwork on those noses really, really sucks... When you're deployed out in the desert or some remote region for 6 months, 1 year, or whatever, it doesn't matter if it's professional quality
David Hingtgen Posted June 24, 2007 Posted June 24, 2007 Merged E-2 thread into this one. Anyways, the simple reason the E-2 and E-3 have circular radar dishes is because they rotate. Any other shape would constantly affect the plane's balance as it rotated. Only a narrow part of the dish is actually the radar itself, the rest is just structural/balance to complete the circle. You can easily see the radar part on an E-3--it's the black part in the middle.
Apollo Leader Posted June 25, 2007 Author Posted June 25, 2007 (edited) Merged E-2 thread into this one. Anyways, the simple reason the E-2 and E-3 have circular radar dishes is because they rotate. Any other shape would constantly affect the plane's balance as it rotated. Only a narrow part of the dish is actually the radar itself, the rest is just structural/balance to complete the circle. You can easily see the radar part on an E-3--it's the black part in the middle. Here's how to make an AWACS aircaft using the wings and tail to layout out your radar array! http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/inde...pic,2024.0.html Edited June 25, 2007 by Apollo Leader
RFT Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 There was also concern that they could cause offence in a muslim country where until 2001 all women were forced to wear the head-to-toe burkha in public. One would have thought that perhaps the thing more likely to cause offence is that the aircraft are dropping bombs on said country, not what's painted on them... still, most recent RAF nose-art has been rubbish.
kalvasflam Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On the RAF paintjobs... If it offends people, so be it, everyone is offended by something in this world, be it the oil sheiks in the mid east or the fat kid next door. Who cares if the paintjob is offensive, the thing it's painted on is meant to be a weapon, and weapons in general are offensive. If the paintjob in question happens to offend your enemy, so much the better I say.
Lynx7725 Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Who cares if the paintjob is offensive, the thing it's painted on is meant to be a weapon, and weapons in general are offensive. If the paintjob in question happens to offend your enemy, so much the better I say. Heh, I think the concern is that it may offend the allies, not that it offends the enemy. If the enemy is more offended by a nose-art rather than the 1000-lb iron bomb just delivered to his backyard, well, the enemy's sense of priority is a bit screwed up.
Apollo Leader Posted June 25, 2007 Author Posted June 25, 2007 This one seems relevant under the circumstances: Yep, political correctness is a b*tch. If today's environment was back in WWII, one half of the world would be flying the Nazi Swaztika and the other half would be flying the flag of Imperial Japan.
Apollo Leader Posted June 25, 2007 Author Posted June 25, 2007 But unfortunately, it's not a bad plane, but just poorly managed, and of course, if they actually bought 200 planes, the cost might have been better. The problem of the B-2 was not the management of either the Air Force or Northrop, but of a military cut-and-slash happy Congress after the fall of the Berlin Wall and of the Soviet Union. It took 15 years to develop an aircraft that was designed to be implemented for 30-40 years, and Congress decided its whole fate based on a few world events that happened over just a matter of months. The decision to scale the B-2 production run to 20 aircraft was extremely short sighted. What has happened in the world in recent years (not just the Middle East, but also North Korea, China, and Russia possibly falling back into communism) has been proof of this. Back in 1993 for an English class at the community college I was going to, I wrote a research paper making these arguments. History has proven me right.
kalvasflam Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Heh, I think the concern is that it may offend the allies, not that it offends the enemy. If the enemy is more offended by a nose-art rather than the 1000-lb iron bomb just delivered to his backyard, well, the enemy's sense of priority is a bit screwed up. Oh I know what they meant, but let's face it; if a minor thing like this is getting under the allies skin; then may be they aren't allies at all. Same difference right? You got a guy that is an enemy to both, why the hell would something silly like nose art take precedence over the death of the enemy in the mind of the ally? Sorry, delving too much into a philosophical argument on this. Apollo Leader, In terms of the B-2; the peace dividend that came out of the end of the cold war has been in many cases a disaster. Look at the armed forces today, it's a farcry from what it was at the end of the 80s. And I beg to differ, it is management that caused the problem, in this case, management is at a higher level, called the politicians in Congress and the White House. Somebody once said the price of peace is eternal vigilance, to the politicians eternal means about the time it takes a sound byte to get out to cable news.
Lynx7725 Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Oh I know what they meant, but let's face it; if a minor thing like this is getting under the allies skin; then may be they aren't allies at all. Same difference right? You got a guy that is an enemy to both, why the hell would something silly like nose art take precedence over the death of the enemy in the mind of the ally? The answer I want to write would have been way too political, so I'd not write it as such. I think it suffice to say that in certain regions, there are no allies, just temporary truces. In such cases, the "allies" are just as happy to gank you as to help you -- and you need them more than they need you in some instances. Do I think it's a tad over-the-top to ban nose art? Sure.. but somebody on the ground must have said something that eventually made its way up the channels. I think it's likely to be a case of weighing the (relatively) trivial cost of banning nose art vs. the potential of offending an "ally". OTOH, the part about offending the female members of the military does hold true to a certain extent. I mean, fun is fun, but people do tend to go overboard. Banning might be an overreaction though.
Fatalist Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Here's a sampling of the Gillespie Field air show that I went to a couple weeks ago. Man O' War Lady Alice
HoveringCheesecake Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 I just wish there were more 109s and 190s out there. EVERYONE has a freaking P-51. Maybe my dream will come true now that Flugwerk is building new 190s.
Fatalist Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 I just wish there were more 109s and 190s out there. EVERYONE has a freaking P-51. Maybe my dream will come true now that Flugwerk is building new 190s. Ya, I didnt run the whole row of prop craft. After the P40, it kinda went downhill, for me at least. They listed having an F-14 there, but I didnt see it anywhere. Oh well.
David Hingtgen Posted June 26, 2007 Posted June 26, 2007 Looks like the 787 will make its 7/8/07 roll-out date: Photographed presumably heading to the paint barn.
kalvasflam Posted June 26, 2007 Posted June 26, 2007 Looks like the 787 will make its 7/8/07 roll-out date: Photographed presumably heading to the paint barn. Rolling out is one thing... how hard could that be... but flying in late August, now that's a totally different story, remember, the A380 flew too, and then what happened, they discovered some minor errors which didn't really compromise the flight characteristics of the plane but forced it to wait two more years anyway.
David Hingtgen Posted June 26, 2007 Posted June 26, 2007 Oh, I don't expect it to fly on-time at all. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed and replaced the entire h.stab before it flies. But it'll look fine for photos as-is. I believe it was the Gripen that was missing a wing at roll-out. Looked fine, they just draped a curtain over one side and used smoke machines----people thought it was for effect, not to hide that part of the plane wasn't finished.
kalvasflam Posted June 26, 2007 Posted June 26, 2007 Oh, I don't expect it to fly on-time at all. I wouldn't be surprised if they removed and replaced the entire h.stab before it flies. But it'll look fine for photos as-is. I believe it was the Gripen that was missing a wing at roll-out. Looked fine, they just draped a curtain over one side and used smoke machines----people thought it was for effect, not to hide that part of the plane wasn't finished. Well, the 787 is really going to make or break Boeing in a lot of ways. If they execute well, a lot of the airlines still sitting on the sidelines are going to jump in on their bandwagon. If they screw it up, Airbus gets a huge breather.
VF-19 Posted June 27, 2007 Posted June 27, 2007 I just wish there were more 109s and 190s out there. EVERYONE has a freaking P-51. Maybe my dream will come true now that Flugwerk is building new 190s. Well, it doesn't help that 109s and 190s were shot down in large quantities... But my local aviation museum has a 109, a Mustang, a Hurricane, a Spitfire, a Me-163, and TWO He-162. Also in the area are a flying Spitfire and Mustang. I love Ottawa!
HoveringCheesecake Posted June 27, 2007 Posted June 27, 2007 Well, it doesn't help that 109s and 190s were shot down in large quantities... But my local aviation museum has a 109, a Mustang, a Hurricane, a Spitfire, a Me-163, and TWO He-162. Also in the area are a flying Spitfire and Mustang. I love Ottawa! No kidding? That's why I mentioned Flugwerk.
joseph Posted June 27, 2007 Posted June 27, 2007 First image of boeing 787 Abl-1. 747 with laser canon
VF-19 Posted June 27, 2007 Posted June 27, 2007 No kidding? That's why I mentioned Flugwerk. Personally, I'd like the museum to have a 190, but what I REALLY want them to do is to put together the he-162 and display them. I mean, a Me-163 is pretty neat and all, but a He-162 will be really impressive.
Apollo Leader Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 Due to inclimate weather in Florida over the last few days, Space Shuttle Atlantis made a stop over here in Nebraska at Offutt during Sunday and the first part of Sunday. ...and I got on base to see it! Here's a few pictures I took on Sunday evening. This is at least the second time that one of the Space Shuttles stopped here at Offutt while enroute back to the Kennedy Space Center; the only other time I think was when Columbia stopped here in 1985 over 21 years ago! At least I can finally say that I've seen one of the Shuttles while they were in service along with the special 747 they use for ferrying them around.
David Hingtgen Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 It's still amazing that they go into space AND COME BACK.
Cruel Angel's Thesis Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Well it seems there is some black project stuff going on. Some buildings have been expanded at Area 51 and a new hanger is almost complete. It is the largest yet and there is a big mound of dirt in front of it (to hide whats going in or just dsiplaced dirt from pouring concrete). Some think it may have to due with the report of a new black project from Lockheed being called the SR-72. Of course both the air force and Lockheed aren't saying a thing about it. http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/06/...ce_sr72_070617/ Dreamland Resort has photos of the expanded buildings and pics of the new hanger. http://www.dreamlandresort.com/index_en.html Cruel Angel's Thesis
Apollo Leader Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 It's still amazing that they go into space AND COME BACK. AND each shuttle has done the trip a few dozen times each (except for Challenger) over 25+ years.
Apollo Leader Posted July 3, 2007 Author Posted July 3, 2007 (edited) Well it seems there is some black project stuff going on. Some buildings have been expanded at Area 51 and a new hanger is almost complete. It is the largest yet and there is a big mound of dirt in front of it (to hide whats going in or just dsiplaced dirt from pouring concrete). Some think it may have to due with the report of a new black project from Lockheed being called the SR-72. Of course both the air force and Lockheed aren't saying a thing about it. http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/06/...ce_sr72_070617/ Dreamland Resort has photos of the expanded buildings and pics of the new hanger. http://www.dreamlandresort.com/index_en.html Cruel Angel's Thesis Considering this hangar is the biggest building that's ever been built at Groom Lake, I think there's little doubt that this continues to be THE place to be for testing out the hottest and most secretive of military aircraft. I'd also check out the Roadrunners Internationale website, too. Lots of great stuff on the A-12 and early programs out of Area 51/Groom Lake... and this by some of the guys who were involved with the A-12 Oxcart/Blackbird, YF-12, U-2, and other early programs that flew out there. One of the interesting articles on the site has to do with how during the late 50's and a good chunk of the 60's, Area 51 was not a secret. Phone numbers for the base and acknowledgement that Area 51/Groom Lake employees were involved with playing baseball/softball games with other government employess were in government newsletters and other public documentation. Edited July 3, 2007 by Apollo Leader
David Hingtgen Posted July 9, 2007 Posted July 9, 2007 Anyone else watch the 787 rollout? I thought it was ironic that I was watching the live feed from Boeing.com, yet while flipping through channels Fox News had footage of it taxiing up to the hangar, and actually got a better look at it there! http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1233546/L/ First pic. (Though people including myself are wondering why it's labled as a 787-831 which would indicate a TWA order---which is impossible---it should be either a 787-820 or 787-881)
kalvasflam Posted July 9, 2007 Posted July 9, 2007 Anyone else watch the 787 rollout? I thought it was ironic that I was watching the live feed from Boeing.com, yet while flipping through channels Fox News had footage of it taxiing up to the hangar, and actually got a better look at it there! http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1233546/L/ First pic. (Though people including myself are wondering why it's labled as a 787-831 which would indicate a TWA order---which is impossible---it should be either a 787-820 or 787-881) Well, Boeing has just had its A380 moment; the show off. They better do a good job, and not emulate the next A380 moment, the DELAY, if they do, it really is gonna hurt the company like they wouldn't believe. Supposedly, Qatar airlines has put in an order with the 787 as well. It's the rumor at least, although no solid confirmations from anyone yet. It's really bad that the A350XWB launch customer decided to go with the competitor as an interim.
Nied Posted July 9, 2007 Posted July 9, 2007 Anyone else watch the 787 rollout? I thought it was ironic that I was watching the live feed from Boeing.com, yet while flipping through channels Fox News had footage of it taxiing up to the hangar, and actually got a better look at it there! http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1233546/L/ First pic. (Though people including myself are wondering why it's labled as a 787-831 which would indicate a TWA order---which is impossible---it should be either a 787-820 or 787-881) My god that is a pretty plane. I for one can not wait to fly in one, my wife hates to fly bt the Dreamliner corrects just about every problem she has with the experience.
David Hingtgen Posted July 9, 2007 Posted July 9, 2007 More pics: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.sear...inct_entry=true
David Hingtgen Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 F-35 (not X-35) footage: http://www.jsf.mil/video/f35test/AA-1%20Montage_high.wmv
Recommended Posts