Started by Taaroa, June 04, 2017, 09:15:23 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: albrecht on August 03, 2017, 11:50:50 AMCount me as being a bit suspect of buying a used plane, and a Russian one at that, for use by our government officials. But we outsource and/or buy a lot of our electronics, data-mining, and software to China, Amazon, Google, and Israel so, I guess, it is ok.
Quote from: GravitySucks on August 03, 2017, 11:54:23 AMThose planes are in storage at Boeing. I don't think the Russian airline ever took delivery.
Quote from: albrecht on August 03, 2017, 01:24:17 PMOk, better. But aren't much of Boeing planes and parts (at least the Dreamliner) partially made in places like China? I'm all for free trade and even out-sourcing but not for certain mission-critical and strategic things.
Quote from: 21st Century Man on August 03, 2017, 11:46:43 AMOh really? Then why do Russian airlines buy Boeing jets like the two that are soon to be Air Force 1 and Air Force 2. They were originally made for a Russian airline but the company went bankrupt.
Quote from: Hog on August 03, 2017, 04:56:01 AMAnyone have any thoughts on the F-35 program.I'm wondering if the F-18 E/F might be a better candidate for our country. What about for other countries? I realize that engine tech has come a long way, but IMO having redundant propulsion is a big negative for some countries.peaceHog
Quote from: ZaZa on August 03, 2017, 10:48:57 AMjust buy Russian made jets. They are superior in every way to American junk.
Quote from: Uncle Duke on August 03, 2017, 10:42:01 AMSingle engine T-33s were more fuel efficient than twin engine T-38s.
Quote from: Taaroa on August 03, 2017, 04:05:48 AMI would've thought a relatively newer plane like the T38 would have better fuel efficiency than something made towards the beginning of the jet age.
Quote from: Taaroa on August 04, 2017, 03:41:06 AMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar-poc38C84
Quote from: Yorkshire pud on August 04, 2017, 10:17:41 AMOh, do explain how and why... Be specific.
Quote from: ZaZa on August 04, 2017, 10:21:26 AMYork pud, you are the famous RAF pilot, you explained it ........
Quote from: albrecht on August 05, 2017, 10:01:15 AMAnother Osprey crash with most rescued but still 3 Marines missing:http://www.statesman.com/news/marines-missing-after-aircraft-crashes-off-australia/0F2spzMe58Xtr2516q0jZI/Army to stop using Chinese-made drones:http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-army-drones-idUSKBN1AK2C0
Quote from: Yorkshire pud on August 04, 2017, 10:20:49 AMThose were ballsy trials. As far as I recall. the aircraft had to be shunted backwards to the fantail to get maximum take off length. The C130 is a wonderful aeroplane and kept quiet by putting all the noise on the inside.
Quote from: Uncle Duke on August 06, 2017, 06:08:05 PMhttps://youtu.be/xPyCEkHE0coIn the late 40s the USN actually deployed P2V Neptures, twin engine land-based patrol bombers, on WWII vintage carriers to give the service a rudimentary atomic bomb delivery capability. Since the Neptunes could not land aboard ship, they had to be lifted on board the carrier by crane. They had to stay on the deck because they were too large to fit on the ships' elevators to take below to hanger decks. With a full fuel load and an early A bomb, the launch weight of a Neptune exceeded the capability of the then current catapults, so they had to launch with RATO assist. After getting airborne, their only recourse was to ditch at sea or find a place to land.Sorry the YouTube clip is in French, but video is worth seeing.
Quote from: GravitySucks on August 06, 2017, 06:59:04 PMI think I remember reading about similar missions using B-25 and B-26 bombers during world war II
Quote from: Walks_At_Night on August 06, 2017, 07:13:20 PMThey were B-25's launched from the USS Hornet. I would want no part of trying to fly a B-26 of an aircraft carrier. With its stubby wings the B-26 was known as the 'Baltimore Whore' as the joke went that they had no visible means of support.
Quote from: Taaroa on August 06, 2017, 09:56:59 PMUSAF orders two 747-8s for converslllllLockheed Martin also announced that the VH-92A Presidential helicopter (i.e. Marine One) had begun flight tests on the 28th July. The aircraft achieved its first flight, and later that same day completed a second flight at Sikorsky Aircraft in Stratford, Connecticut. Total flight time for the two sorties was one hour and included hover control checks, low speed flight, and a pass of the airfield.
Quote from: Yorkshire pud on August 07, 2017, 10:25:50 AMhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2079836/The-Himalayan-airport-dangerous-pilots-qualified-land-there.htmlOnly eight pilots are certified to land here..https://youtu.be/0_nQ8KazQnE
Quote from: ZaZa on August 07, 2017, 10:37:13 AMYorkshire pud are you one of them ??
Quote from: Yorkshire pud on August 07, 2017, 10:38:38 AMIsn't it time for your meth IV? You've not slept in days.