VF-19 Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 Re: F-35 load. Man, and I thought the Super Hornet had funky pylons. Middle one pitches up, outer one pitches down? PS---F-22s are loud. Heh. Reminds me of when I was at the Battle of Britain ceremony at my aviation museum last year (going to go this year too). We had a pair of F-18s fly by, and they were very loud. Still think that the Lancaster did it better. You felt it before you heard it.
F-ZeroOne Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 That would be the world's only remaining flying Sea Harrier. Ah, I'd heard that there was a private collector somewhere who had one, but I'd always assumed it was the earlier FRS1 version - it was the radome on this one that threw me for a loop, it appears to be one of the later variants with the Blue Vixen radar. Also, David, you must be tired - otherwise you'd have remembered the Indian Navys Sea Harriers...
Vifam7 Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 Re: F-35 load. Man, and I thought the Super Hornet had funky pylons. Middle one pitches up, outer one pitches down? I wonder how they affect stealthiness... PS---F-22s are loud. Louder than Tomcats? The loudest aircraft I've ever experienced is the Concorde. 4 Rolls-Royce Olympus turbojets in full reheat at take-off.
David Hingtgen Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 Re: FRS-1. There are no FRS-1's at all now AFAIK. All were converted to FA.2's. The one in the fleet air museum is a crashed FRS-1's nose grafted onto a GR.3 fuselage, so it looks like an FRS-1. And yes, I was quite tired from the show and long drive home. Re: F-22 noise. Hmmn. Louder than a Tomcat? Don't know about that, but I certainly felt the F-22 more. Regular Hornets are rather quiet IMHO, as fighters go. Super Hornets are notably louder than normal ones, and certainly "rip" the air much more. No fighter has as much a "ripping" sound as a Super Hornet. F-22 has a distinctive "whoop" sound at low power when it blips the throttle a bit. I honestly thought the AV-8B was louder than the Sea Harrier, opposite of what I expected.
Bowen Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 Love the B-1B pics, David One of the most sexy bombers around
F-ZeroOne Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 (edited) Re: FRS-1. There are no FRS-1's at all now AFAIK. All were converted to FA.2's. The one in the fleet air museum is a crashed FRS-1's nose grafted onto a GR.3 fuselage, so it looks like an FRS-1. And yes, I was quite tired from the show and long drive home. I should have known you'd know better! Edited August 24, 2009 by F-ZeroOne
David Hingtgen Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 The line to get in the B-1's cockpit was insane. I stood there for about 20 mins, and moved maybe 6 feet. I literally estimated 2+ hours for the wait, maybe 3. Once in a lifetime chance pretty much, but not worth it. (and I was especially annoyed by all the people in line who didn't even know what it WAS---they said stuff like "this must be a really neat plane, because there's so many people in line"----they were in line only because other people were---I wish they would have charged for it---that would cut it down to "true enthusiasts who actually know what plane that is and drove hours and hours to see it") I could at least walk around it as much as I wanted. Did I mention the line was LONG? I couldn't back up nor zoom out enough to get it all. (I'm standing right in front of an E-6 TACAMO for this shot) The Shar brought pyro:
Beltane70 Posted August 24, 2009 Posted August 24, 2009 There was no such line the last time that I saw a B-1B at an airshow. People seemed much more interested in the C-17! Go figure.
F-ZeroOne Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 I see the US Navy finally found an affordable replacement for the Hornet... and those aren't explosives, its people ears detonating from those who stood too close to the Harrier...!
Evil Porkchop Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 Holy poo!!!, I think that KC-135 you got a pic of is from my unit.
David Hingtgen Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 I've got more 135 pics, there were several there---IL ANG, and Grissom AFB.
Beltane70 Posted August 26, 2009 Posted August 26, 2009 I was treated to a nice little surprise earlier this evening. While I was down at the beach, I had the pleasure of seing a B-17 flying over the ocean. Sadly, I wasn't able to get my phone out in time to get a picture of it. Still, it was a very impressive sight.
Evil Porkchop Posted August 26, 2009 Posted August 26, 2009 I've got more 135 pics, there were several there---IL ANG, and Grissom AFB. Yep, if it's from ILANG then it's one of mine.
David Hingtgen Posted August 27, 2009 Posted August 27, 2009 Yeah, Russia's now #1 in "making new CGI fighter planes".
miles316 Posted August 29, 2009 Posted August 29, 2009 New fake PAK FA pics anyone? That is not a Fake photo of a Russian PAK FA it is a Chines Fan boy interpretation of the PRC Peoples Liberation Army Air force Advanced Tactical Fighter designated J-13 and J-14. It is a theoretical Stealth Fighter that might be in development in china, by two of their Aircraft companies it sort of a Design competition. If you Goggle J-13, J-14, or Jian-13, Jian-14 and you will eventualy find that same picture and others like it.
electric indigo Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 (edited) You are right, of course, but nowadays these J-XX fakes making their rounds again as PAK-FAs Btw, this could be the origin of this rather popular scene; but the article doesn't give a source of the illustration and even states it's a full-scale mockup, in a weird way all the elements from the other pic are in the scene, but it's clearly a different perspective and a worse rendering/shop-job. edit: ok after further checking it seems the illustrations were originally made for a chinese magazine, and Mr. Coniglio didn't do his homework. Edited August 30, 2009 by electric indigo
Nied Posted August 31, 2009 Posted August 31, 2009 RE: F-14 vs F-22 noise: In 2001 the Andrews Airforce base show had both a Super Hornet and a Tomcat performing (unfortunately it was an ugly day so all we got was a few high speed passes from each) and I remember both planes being roughly as loud as each other. The Tomcat definitely had a deeper throatier note, while as David mentioned the Rhino makes a higher pitched ripping sound. Having said that the Raptor beats the Super Hornet (and by extension the F-14) in terms decibels hands down. I'd say it's near the B-1 in terms of noise. As for the whooping noise David described, it's most noticeable when it's on the ground taxiing. The F-104 makes the same exact whooping sound when blipping the throttles, though the sound they make in the air is unlike any plane I've heard (the closest thing I can compare it to are the Alien fighters from Independence Day).
Pat S Posted August 31, 2009 Posted August 31, 2009 RE: F-14 vs F-22 noise: In 2001 the Andrews Airforce base show had both a Super Hornet and a Tomcat performing (unfortunately it was an ugly day so all we got was a few high speed passes from each) and I remember both planes being roughly as loud as each other. The Tomcat definitely had a deeper throatier note, while as David mentioned the Rhino makes a higher pitched ripping sound. Having said that the Raptor beats the Super Hornet (and by extension the F-14) in terms decibels hands down. I'd say it's near the B-1 in terms of noise. As for the whooping noise David described, it's most noticeable when it's on the ground taxiing. The F-104 makes the same exact whooping sound when blipping the throttles, though the sound they make in the air is unlike any plane I've heard (the closest thing I can compare it to are the Alien fighters from Independence Day). Yeah, the F-104s do make an interesting sound...
David Hingtgen Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Awesome footage: 747 firefighting in southern Cali: http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/local/Stat..._Video_20090831
Bowen Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Wow, I didn't even know they had 747's like that, pretty amazing
David Hingtgen Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 F-35B still a year late since production started, #1 still hasn't left the ground in many months due to tech issues, much less hover. But Sec. Gates says "we can't afford not to have the F-35" so they're gonna spend another dozen billion or whatever to continue fixing/developing it... Should have just bought more F-22s---they work! At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the F-35B is abandoned (especially with the UK cancelling), and we only have the A and C variants, and the Marines just have to lose their VTOL jets, and settle for a fleet of Ospreys and Hornets...
Knight26 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) Uh, DH the F-35B is still flying, at least BF-02 is, as for the issue that has ground BF-01, well I can't go into too much on that here, so it is being used for ground and load testing. Anyways, BF-02 recently began inflight refueling tests, and has been performing quite well, let me talk to the JSF CTF guys and find out what is going on with hover tests, I know that they are not suppossed to be long in coming. Edited September 2, 2009 by Knight26
Noyhauser Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Uh, DH the F-35B is still flying, at least BF-02 is, as for the issue that has ground BF-01, well I can't go into too much on that here, so it is being used for ground and load testing. Anyways, BF-02 recently began inflight refueling tests, and has been performing quite well, let me talk to the JSF CTF guys and find out what is going on with hover tests, I know that they are not suppossed to be long in coming. Its also doubtful it would be canned as there are just so many export opportunities. The Thai, Spanish, Italian, Indian and Japanese Navies all operate VTOL carriers and they need replacements for the Harrier over the next two decades. Thats not even including the British, which make 200 firm orders if not more.
David Hingtgen Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 I doubt all those countries will continue to operate carriers in the future, and many of those that do will switch to choppers I bet, especially with the cost of new planes. As for UK---every other report out of there is either "carrier/JSF program threatened" or "RR abandoning development". If the UK switches to the CTOL version, the VTOL version will be threatened.
Noyhauser Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) I doubt all those countries will continue to operate carriers in the future, and many of those that do will switch to choppers I bet, especially with the cost of new planes. As for UK---every other report out of there is either "carrier/JSF program threatened" or "RR abandoning development". If the UK switches to the CTOL version, the VTOL version will be threatened. Well Japan and Korea just introduced their "helicopter destroyers", with the Ise being commissioned in two years time. I'd be surprised if they didn't upgrade these vessels to carry JSFs in the next decade. The only reason why Japan hasn't was it was needlessly provocative and there was no suitable aircraft to equip them with until now. The Koreans may well do the same in response. The Indians bought the Admiral Gorshkov from the Russians a few years ago, and are planning to build the Vikraant class in the next decade. While they operate Russian aircraft, given the political drift between them and Moscow and the new level of political cooperation between them and Washington, its not outside the realm of possibility. Italy and Spain have formed an amphibious EU battlegroup and have organized their procurement to suit that task. The Italians design the Cavour with the JSF in mind, its doubtful they would commission a ship last year only to pull out now. The Spanish are about to launch the Juan Carlos I next year, and while its more of a helicopter carrier, it does have a ski-jump installed. Really the only country that might give up carriers is Thailand. It might not be able to buy the JSF, but it doesn't need an anti-sub carrier either. Edited September 3, 2009 by Noyhauser
Nied Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Well Japan and Korea just introduced their "helicopter destroyers", with the Ise being commissioned in two years time. I'd be surprised if they didn't upgrade these vessels to carry JSFs in the next decade. The only reason why Japan hasn't was it was needlessly provocative and there was no suitable aircraft to equip them with until now. The Koreans may well do the same in response. The Indians bought the Admiral Gorshkov from the Russians a few years ago, and are planning to build the Vikraant class in the next decade. While they operate Russian aircraft, given the political drift between them and Moscow and the new level of political cooperation between them and Washington, its not outside the realm of possibility. Italy and Spain have formed an amphibious EU battlegroup and have organized their procurement to suit that task. The Italians design the Cavour with the JSF in mind, its doubtful they would commission a ship last year only to pull out now. The Spanish are about to launch the Juan Carlos I next year, and while its more of a helicopter carrier, it does have a ski-jump installed. Really the only country that might give up carriers is Thailand. It might not be able to buy the JSF, but it doesn't need an anti-sub carrier either. In addition to the five you mentioned the Australian Canberra class LHDs are going to have a ski ramp to support VTOL aircraft and the RAN has put in a (currently unfunded) request for a small number of F-35Bs for those ships. Given that they have a pretty firm order for 100 F-35As already it seems like a no-brainer to me. India isn't as likely a customer for the F-35B though, they seem to want to move to STOBAR or CTOL aircraft for their carriers, I would think the C model or Super Hornets would be more likely purchases for their carrier air groups if they were looking to buy American.
David Hingtgen Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 India wants to go STOBAR? I'd assume only because of the Russian carrier connection?
Nied Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 India wants to go STOBAR? I'd assume only because of the Russian carrier connection? The Vikrant is STOBAR too.
Noyhauser Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 In addition to the five you mentioned the Australian Canberra class LHDs are going to have a ski ramp to support VTOL aircraft and the RAN has put in a (currently unfunded) request for a small number of F-35Bs for those ships. Given that they have a pretty firm order for 100 F-35As already it seems like a no-brainer to me. India isn't as likely a customer for the F-35B though, they seem to want to move to STOBAR or CTOL aircraft for their carriers, I would think the C model or Super Hornets would be more likely purchases for their carrier air groups if they were looking to buy American. Can the C operate in that role? I completely discounted that. And India was probably the longest shot of them all, but the dynamics of the Indo-American relationship and India's regional environment makes a shift not out of the realm of possibility.
Nied Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Can the C operate in that role? I completely discounted that. And India was probably the longest shot of them all, but the dynamics of the Indo-American relationship and India's regional environment makes a shift not out of the realm of possibility. I heard that the US successfully tested both the F-14 and Baby Hornet on ski ramps (the E-2 as well) and the F-35 has a more favorable thrust to weight ratio, so I don't see why it shouldn't be possible. I'm fairly certain the UK is looking at doing the same thing if they purchase the F-35C.
eugimon Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 some nice photos from an airline pilot over in the genmay forums http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=819648
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 I asked this question back on the old thread that got locked due to political 'debates'. 1. Are NATO reporting names classifed? I thought there were not. (and if so, how come the J-10 hasn't got one yet?) 2. Are NATO reporting names for Soviet-Bloc/Russian Aircraft and their derivatives only? e.g. Non NATO fighters like the Viggen or Kfir did not get a NATO reporting name AFAIK. But Soviet-Bloc derivatives like the 'Fantan' got one. Or is it some 'Good guys/Bad guys' kinda thing?
Phyrox Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 I asked this question back on the old thread that got locked due to political 'debates'. 1. Are NATO reporting names classifed? I thought there were not. (and if so, how come the J-10 hasn't got one yet?) 2. Are NATO reporting names for Soviet-Bloc/Russian Aircraft and their derivatives only? e.g. Non NATO fighters like the Viggen or Kfir did not get a NATO reporting name AFAIK. But Soviet-Bloc derivatives like the 'Fantan' got one. Or is it some 'Good guys/Bad guys' kinda thing? I'm was under the impression that Nato names for warsaw pact machines had gone into disuse with the fall of the iron curtain. Their main purpose was to give clear names to aircraft, ships, missiles, etc that could not otherwise be gotten due to intelligence restrictions. Now that we pretty much KNOW all the proper designations for everything, there isn't a clear need. Most aviation and naval writers avoid using the old, outdated names for equipment now. And yeah, Nato names were only for the equipment of the Soviets and similarly allied nations (china, north korea). No need to give the Western allies reporting names...we KNEW the real ones. Of course, over time, we learned the proper designations for most soviet equipment as well, but the handy and informative nato names remained standard usage until the mid-90s, as far as I remember.
Recommended Posts