Jump to content

Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

David Hingtgen
 Share

Recommended Posts

anime52k8 Super Dimension Member

anime52k8

Posted
Posted

I'm still not sold on the idea that the Asuka II is as small as they say it is. That DEAC carrier only has room for two elevators and two catapults. The Asuka II shouldn't be able to accommodate 4 of each on the same size hull.

Warmaker Pineapple Eater

Warmaker

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is a lilttle off topic but this video shows one of the best damned birds I ever crewed and was my first 1 seater as a Dedicated Crew Chief..........91-0411...aka "Slick Fifty! :D

Thank you for that post and video.

VMFA-314 was my 2nd to last unit before I retired out of the USMC. Looking at the video description and upload date, I was transferred out of there before the command did that very deployment because I didn't have enough time remaining before I hit 20 years. New CO and a great SgtMaj who had just transferred into us before that deployment. I still remember them:

CO was LtCol Wild

SgtMaj was SgtMaj West, coming over from Afghanistan of 3/5 that had been in the ----.

Naturally we had a kick that the command was now led by the "Wild West."

I still remember fondly the good, young Marines we had there. We had gotten back from a deployment in 2013 full of experienced guys but as was typical, after the deployment the unit was gutted (guys getting out, orders elsewhere, etc.) and we were slated for deployment the following year. The senior Corporals and Sergeants that we had running the show were gone, the young Corporals and Lance Corporals that were learning the ropes then were now the ones calling the shots with a whole slew of new guys fresh off of school. There were problems but guys always overcame it. I was hoping to have enough time left to do one more deployment and retire with the same unit, being seen off by people I had been with for several years, but that wasn't the case with the deployment's schedule.

Wish I was younger to do that stuff still but oh well!

Edited by Warmaker
grigolosi Skull Leader's Lackey

grigolosi

Posted
Posted

I am glad you liked the post Warmaker. It brought back some memories for me too, seeing my old jet and the first unit I ever deployed to the sandbox with. Now seeing all the youngsters doing the job makes me wish sometimes i was younger also but....the AF has gone downhill so badly now I realize why i am happy being retired from AD.

Nekko Basara Global's Pipe Holder

Nekko Basara

Posted
Posted

Meet the US Navy's new $13 billion aircraft carrier

The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) is the most technologically-advanced warship ever built.

http://www.cnet.com/pictures/meet-the-navys-new-13-billion-aircraft-carrier/

Made me think of the Prometheus.

Is anyone else weirded-out to see autonomous stealth drones sharing deck space with E-2s? It's likely to be accurate, but it feels so strange.

anime52k8 Super Dimension Member

anime52k8

Posted
Posted

Is anyone else weirded-out to see autonomous stealth drones sharing deck space with E-2s? It's likely to be accurate, but it feels so strange.

Not as strange as seeing a row of F-35's on a carrier deck. :rolleyes:

Nekko Basara Global's Pipe Holder

Nekko Basara

Posted
Posted

JAS-39 Gripen. The Mazda Miata of fighter jets. :p

Hehe, that is a perfect way to characterize it, both the good and the bad.

I was tickled by the video title "Swedish Airforce MOST FEARED military fighter aircraft." No disrespect intended to Sweden's amazingly history of aircraft production, but when the preceding fighter entered service 45 years ago, I'm not sure calling the Gripen the "MOST FEARED" has much impact. It's as if VW had rolled out the New Beetle in 1997 under the heading "our most advanced Beetle ever!"

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just looked up the Ford and was happy to see "CVN-80 Enterprise".

Too big of a gap. It was supposed to be CVN-78 USS America. But then Ford died, so of course he got a carrier named for him. Then the Kennedy was decommissioned, so of course congress made the next carrier the JFK.

So we have no USS America and a long gap with no Enterprise----which are two names that should always be present. (ESPECIALLY Enterprise).

raptormesh Bridge Bunny

raptormesh

Posted
Posted

Too big of a gap. It was supposed to be CVN-78 USS America. But then Ford died, so of course he got a carrier named for him. Then the Kennedy was decommissioned, so of course congress made the next carrier the JFK.

So we have no USS America and a long gap with no Enterprise----which are two names that should always be present. (ESPECIALLY Enterprise).

Yeah, no U.S.S. Enterprise makes me a sad panda. Hopefully by then all the kinks have been sorted out in the new carrier design. She might even have laser CIWS who knows?

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Also, "America-class" is SUCH a much better name than "Ford-class". (personally, I think there should be a rule like "a person must be dead at least 2-3 years before getting a ship named after them". There are way too many "knee-jerk" namings, right after someone dies. Let some time pass. THEN they can get a ship named, if it's appropriate. Not "person X died last Tuesday, what's the next ship coming up?"

NZEOD Pineapple Eater

NZEOD

Posted
Posted (edited)

If this has been up before, I apologize, if not, well worth the watch and always makes my toes curl as I've been on the back deck as some helos tried to land in pitching deck conditions. At one point a trainee pilot ended up flaring his SeaKing too soon and missed the rear, finding himself at our level just above the ships wake looking us in the eye horrified. The Navy pers all freaked. As helpful Army pers we just pointed up...

This one features VFA-14 Tophatters and VFA-41 Black Aces

Edited by NZEOD
grigolosi Skull Leader's Lackey

grigolosi

Posted
Posted (edited)

Unfortunately we won't see the USS America as a full size carrier. One of the new LHA class was named USS America to make people shut up. They need to go back to naming them after either famous warships in naval history or naming them after famous battles from our history. I would rather see one named Intrepid, Hornet, or Saratoga instead of named after a politician.

My dad served on the Intrepid back in 54' and 55. He told me during normal weather you could feel the ship moving but when the ship would pitch like that he saw guys that had been in for nearly 20yrs getting sea sick. That is the one thing most people forget also when it comes to carrier aviation. The runway moves depending on the weather. It takes balls to try to land an airplane on such a small space when the sea is calm but the ante goes up 110% when the sea decides to be non cooperative.

Edited by grigolosi
NZEOD Pineapple Eater

NZEOD

Posted
Posted

I love how the image show it with a squadron of Lemon F-35s aboard. THAT wont be happening...

Shadow Global's Pipe Holder

Shadow

Posted
Posted

Good video. I realize that it doesn't matter what kind of aircraft your flying, landing a pitching deck is very hard. I can't imagine what it was like in the 50s and early 60s with aircraft like the F3 Demon and F-8 Crusader.

spanner Super Dimension Member

spanner

Posted
Posted

If this has been up before, I apologize, if not, well worth the watch and always makes my toes curl as I've been on the back deck as some helos tried to land in pitching deck conditions. At one point a trainee pilot ended up flaring his SeaKing too soon and missed the rear, finding himself at our level just above the ships wake looking us in the eye horrified. The Navy pers all freaked. As helpful Army pers we just pointed up...

This one features VFA-14 Tophatters and VFA-41 Black Aces

that was an excellent bit of footage! B))

grigolosi Skull Leader's Lackey

grigolosi

Posted
Posted

I was just looking closely at the pic Nazareno posted. It looks like they placed Rafale's on the stern portion of the deck. I think that is a model of the Charles De Gaulle. It only has 1 cat on the bow.

Nazareno2012 Sharon Apple Concert Attendee

Nazareno2012

Posted
Posted

I was just looking closely at the pic Nazareno posted. It looks like they placed Rafale's on the stern portion of the deck. I think that is a model of the Charles De Gaulle. It only has 1 cat on the bow.

Actually, it is apparently a stretched, conventionally-powered version of the Charles De Gaulle as it is around 170 m long while the CDG is around 160 m long.

raptormesh Bridge Bunny

raptormesh

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is an interesting interview with an Italian test pilot who ferried the first F-35 built outside the US across the Atlantic: http://www.sldinfo.com/ninja-discusses-his-f-35-flight-across-the-atlantic-the-right-stuff-italian-style/

Of particular note is the way he described the helmet, which reminded me of Macross Plus, naturally.

"I was able to see the aircraft surrounding me through the clouds, such as keeping distance with my tankers, by using my helmet and the Distributed Aperture System and see the C-130s below me below the clouds."

and

"Question: What is it like to cross the Atlantic with DAS?

Answer: It is IR so much of its functionality is used during the night not the day, although you do look through your legs and could see buildings, intersections, and various landmarks while flying."

Very cool I thought.

Edited by raptormesh
grigolosi Skull Leader's Lackey

grigolosi

Posted
Posted (edited)

The sad thing about it is that congress was scared out of further requisition of F-22's originally by that idiot Gates. Gates was obsessed with drones, one of the main reasons for the falling out between him and then AF Chief of Staff Meyers was over the drone debate. Gates wanted the USAF to acquire from what I read mainly drones to use instead of manned aircraft. He cited the cost per unit of the F-22 as ammunition even though as production numbers get higher the costs per unit would come down. Well nobody won in that debate. Meyers was forced to resign and retire and Gates remained an idiot when it came to dealing with the AF and aircraft technology. Now that the F-22 has proven its capability there aren't enough of them. Now we are scrambling to come up with something as a stop gap until this "6th gen fighter program" produces something.

Definitely awesome footage Spanner! As small as the Gripen is, it is a beautiful and graceful design in flight.

Edited by grigolosi
Shadow Global's Pipe Holder

Shadow

Posted
Posted

It's not as if they threw away the parts and moldings for building more Raptor's. Hopefully Congress can take its head out of its 'you know where' for once on this matter but that's the tricky part.

SchizophrenicMC SMS Squadron Leader

SchizophrenicMC

Posted
Posted

Storing toolings is expensive. Scrapping them is cost effective. Even if they do have all the toolings, reconfiguring an assembly line to manufacture something that's been retired from production, costs a lot of money.

SchizophrenicMC SMS Squadron Leader

SchizophrenicMC

Posted
Posted

It's not the tooling for the airframe, it's the systems. Good luck finding avionics and landing gear.

These things also have production tooling, which is also expensive to store and maintain, and is also likely to be junked after EOP. (Though avionics toolings are somewhat less likely to be junked, since demand for those continues after the airframe is no longer in demand)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...