User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:49:37 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ok situational awareness is a thing. How about this "the other pilot is dead before they know what happened" I have read that multiple times from different F35 pilots. Is that propaganda or what? As I said earlier, I am a civilian. I don't have any sort of clearances. But I do know people who know people who have fought F35s and yes that does happen. In short, the F35s sensors are so much better than a typical 4th generation aircraft that the 4th gen pilot is picked up and declared dead before they even know what's going on. In one case it may have reduced a very strong man to tears... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:51:46 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: BVR prowess is real. That being said, in the fog of war, merges happen. There is no such thing as global-prismatic-4D-rotating situational awareness that sees all, tracks all, and engages all before getting close to allied aircraft. Yeah, but I'd think its less and less common. The Indo/Paki air exchange had an AWACS directed BVR lob fest, then a merge from a different fighter that one group never saw coming, guy bulled in, got a kill, and got shot down on the way back out. And really, the better SA/Sensors you have the better off you are. At least thats what I would think. And if you are that raptor pilot, or F35 pilot, having that SA advantage (and for the F22 the kinematic advantage) basically lets you dictate the fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:52:45 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ok situational awareness is a thing. How about this "the other pilot is dead before they know what happened" I have read that multiple times from different F35 pilots. Is that propaganda or what? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The F35 does not "dogfight" The fight is over before you know it even started. Sure it does. There isn't a BVR technology in existence that will preclude a merge and a subsequent turning fight. F-35, despite the desk-jockeys being butthurt about published G numbers, does a fine job in a turning fight. Nobody who knows the Lightning's actual E-M numbers is actually going to talk about it in an unclassified publication, nor do those raw numbers actually dictate how WVR engagements turn out. Ok situational awareness is a thing. How about this "the other pilot is dead before they know what happened" I have read that multiple times from different F35 pilots. Is that propaganda or what? https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs-f-16-15-18-lost-beaten-flatley-comeback-2017-4 https://sofrep.com/fightersweep/f-35-v-f-16-article-garbage/ https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-most-critical-test-180971734/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:54:19 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In short, the F35s sensors are so much better than a typical 4th generation aircraft that the 4th gen pilot is picked up and declared dead before they even know what's going on. In one case it may have reduced a man to tears... I fought F-22s in the F-15E, 2-v-12, in about a dozen engagements over the course of a week for the 422 TES at Nellis (so, engagements for the purposes of tactics development and test). In most of the engagements, there were no limitations on F-15E sensors, weapons, or tactics. I know we tried just about every "dirty trick" we could during these trials. There were no kills of Raptors, and in nearly every engagement all the F-15Es were killed BVR. That being said, there *were* the occasional visual merges out of those slaughter-fests. So, with reference to what you've heard, this is a case of "multiple things are true at the same time". |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:55:03 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bored? You seem to be fairly well entertained in telling an F-22 engineer how to build an F-22. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Getting bored with this...  "The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." I think it was Tom Clancy who said that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 11:58:00 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, but I'd think its less and less common. The Indo/Paki air exchange had an AWACS directed BVR lob fest, then a merge from a different fighter that one group never saw coming, guy bulled in, got a kill, and got shot down on the way back out. And really, the better SA/Sensors you have the better off you are. At least thats what I would think. And if you are that raptor pilot, or F35 pilot, having that SA advantage (and for the F22 the kinematic advantage) basically lets you dictate the fight. All of that is basically correct...but in the fog of war, just about anything can (and often does) happen. That gets proven at Large Force Exercises daily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:00:07 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Stop. Something that can pull 20g would only have the legs to make it to the merge if the merge was within the fence line of the base. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 6th Generation should remove the pilot from the airframe and I am dubious that the Air Farce will get on board as their entire culture is built on fighter pilots. So how would you propose to handle the datalink security for remote piloting, combined with the data delay and reaction time of remote piloting? And, if you think that the "entire (AF) culture is built on fighter pilots", then you literally don't know a f'n thing about the Air Force. I am not talking some dude flying a fighter from a trailer in Nevada, I am talking an unmanned fighter with some degree of semi autonomy. I know everyone wants a ‘man in the loop’ but the Chinese don’t really care if .1% of the time their autonomous fighter shoots down an airliner or bombs a school if it can pull a 20 g turn. In regards to Air Farce culture I may have been a little extreme but pilot entitlement is a real issue in the Air Farce, especially that of fighter jockies. SecDef Gates agreed when he slaughtered Air Farce senior leadership in 2008 and replaced them with trash haulers. Something that can pull 20g would only have the legs to make it to the merge if the merge was within the fence line of the base. Except there are already multi-ton missiles that can travel hundreds of miles at Mach 4 and make 15g maneuvers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:00:27 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Derp. First, the drawing is clearly dimensioned and is drawn to scale. I know it's scale, I created the drawing. Second, the drawing is an example to illustrate the value of high attack speeds. As explained, from an old discussion. It's included here to illustrate how F-22 maximum altitudes compare to "outer space". Third, the airplane cruised at the altitude the mission dictated. . Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The SR-71 flew at a sustained 85k feet, dunno if your picture shows it correctly. Derp. First, the drawing is clearly dimensioned and is drawn to scale. I know it's scale, I created the drawing. Second, the drawing is an example to illustrate the value of high attack speeds. As explained, from an old discussion. It's included here to illustrate how F-22 maximum altitudes compare to "outer space". Third, the airplane cruised at the altitude the mission dictated. . Derp. First, your “scale” is missing information. Instead of acting like a Douche and trying to sound smarter you could have very well added the information to your post instead of saying “Derp.” Just because you made it I can only take it as “read it on the internet.” Second, your post does not contain ANY reference to what you just said about the F-22. Third, you just basically confirmed your drawing is at best a rough example that is really not to scale since it is missing the altitude since we don’t know what altitude you set it at. Could it be 85k feet? 120k feet? But wait it says SR-71 in your drawing, not F-22 so where is it in relation and to the edge of space? I asked a simple question about your drawing and the information it was lacking and you decided to act “smarter than thou” when you just proved in your reply that your “scale” drawing is not really scale when you don’t have all the information. So spare me the “derp” comment when with you vast wisdom lack to properly scale your image.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:01:44 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's not at all true. Lockheed has admitted that they don't have the equipment or technical expertise to start production again. A lot of the people who designed and produced the aircraft are retired now.. Maybe they did or maybe they didn’t but LockMart needs the bucks from a clean sheet design to fund their bonuses. Dwight was right. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:02:24 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." I think it was Tom Clancy who said that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Getting bored with this... "The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." I think it was Tom Clancy who said that. Augustine's Law Number XLIV: Aircraft flight in the 21st century will always be in a westerly direction, preferably supersonic, crossing time zones to provide the additional hours needed to fix the broken electronics. This one is for all the GD experts: Augustine's Law Number XXXV: The weaker the data available upon which to base one's conclusion, the greater the precision which should be quoted in order to give the data authenticity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:03:48 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The F35 does not "dogfight" The fight is over before you know it even started. Not true at all |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:04:06 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I bet there's an opening in F-22 support for you. Paper drawings, CATIA, and that crappy low end viewer.  My F-22 composites story: When the wings arrived at Palmdale, the shop there was grinding the skins to fix the smoothness and waviness to meet the signature requirement. That caused a panic wave through the strength group in Seattle since there was no allowance or sacrificial plies. I have a couple more, but I have probably told you those. . I bet it stinks like BCA a little too much for my liking over there. I actually had a worse offer than that Friday. A strength guy’s worst nightmare. I should probably not go on about that one though... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:04:30 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The F22 has it's origins from the 1980s. Why the fuck do we want to restart it in 2021? Hell even the F-35 is 1990's tech. This, x1000 I'm especially amused with these recent articles that suggest that the Raptor and Lightning are so fatally bad that the answer is to go magically start up production of the F-23 and X-32. I don't know why people feel like it makes any logical sense to endow aircraft that never really existed with fanciful capabilities that somehow make them better than the actual winners of fly-off competitions. This is the same reason that the internet is always willing to gush over the Avro Arrow or TSR2, or any number of other aircraft that never made it into operational service, but were always "ahead of their time" and could apparently out-fly anything that is actually sitting on the ramp today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:07:45 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: His graphic depicts the cruise performance better than your suggestion. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The SR-71 flew at a sustained 85k feet, dunno if your picture shows it correctly. Yes it does show that but now he is manhood is hurt and he completely skipped passed that in his reply to me since people were talking about altitude in relation to the edge of space and the F-22 but he post a “scale” drawing that is missing information about altitude in relation to the ISS and what is the edge of space but rather has information about speed, distance to target and time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:08:20 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Uh, no. Gates fired the CSAF (one person, Mosley) for the specific reason that he was advocating for F-22 acquisition over pushing that same money into acquiring more Predators to support the bottomless pit of Army requests for ISR. He replaced Mosley with a 4-Star who came from the C-130 world, and who is widely regarded as one of the worst CSAFs of modern times (next only to McPeak) for a wide variety of reasons. So, that's "sort of what happened" in a way, and not for the reason you state. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: SecDef Gates agreed when he slaughtered Air Farce senior leadership in 2008 and replaced them with trash haulers. Uh, no. Gates fired the CSAF (one person, Mosley) for the specific reason that he was advocating for F-22 acquisition over pushing that same money into acquiring more Predators to support the bottomless pit of Army requests for ISR. He replaced Mosley with a 4-Star who came from the C-130 world, and who is widely regarded as one of the worst CSAFs of modern times (next only to McPeak) for a wide variety of reasons. So, that's "sort of what happened" in a way, and not for the reason you state. I worked at the Pentagon at the time and there was a lot more to it than what you mentioned. In no particular order; - Accidentally flying a nuke across the country without knowing it was happening. - Miserable inspection results for the Air Force ICBM fleet. - Spending GWOT money on a golf course. - Failing to meet the agreed upon milestones for UAVs in the war zone (I am told Gates especially lost his mind when Air Farce brass mentioned ‘crew rest’ as one the reasons; for dudes sitting in a trailer in Nevada.). - Asking for $20 million to develop a new pistol for pilots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:08:39 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except there are already multi-ton missiles that can travel hundreds of miles at Mach 4 and make 15g maneuvers. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 6th Generation should remove the pilot from the airframe and I am dubious that the Air Farce will get on board as their entire culture is built on fighter pilots. So how would you propose to handle the datalink security for remote piloting, combined with the data delay and reaction time of remote piloting? And, if you think that the "entire (AF) culture is built on fighter pilots", then you literally don't know a f'n thing about the Air Force. I am not talking some dude flying a fighter from a trailer in Nevada, I am talking an unmanned fighter with some degree of semi autonomy. I know everyone wants a ‘man in the loop’ but the Chinese don’t really care if .1% of the time their autonomous fighter shoots down an airliner or bombs a school if it can pull a 20 g turn. In regards to Air Farce culture I may have been a little extreme but pilot entitlement is a real issue in the Air Farce, especially that of fighter jockies. SecDef Gates agreed when he slaughtered Air Farce senior leadership in 2008 and replaced them with trash haulers. Something that can pull 20g would only have the legs to make it to the merge if the merge was within the fence line of the base. Except there are already multi-ton missiles that can travel hundreds of miles at Mach 4 and make 15g maneuvers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:09:40 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It has been established that an aircraft can do 12gs if the structure and the pilot could withstand it. In general, high performance aircraft are designed to withstand the gs that a pilot could withstand since over engineering the aircraft beyond that limit makes little sense in terms of cost and weight. Theoretically you could take any airframe designed for 9gs and with the weight savings associated with removing systems devoted to the pilot, make the aircraft 12g capable. But admittedly, it makes more sense to design it for 12gs from the beginning. Now, that doesn’t even account for the advantages associated with being able to pull negative gs, which I assume you know, are even more limiting to a pilot than positive gs. Advantages, based on current technology, of going beyond 12gs are questionable at this point but so was breaking the sound barrier in the 1930s. And again, going back to the original topic, we are relying on the F-35 to be a BVR killer. We tried that once before and it didn’t work out for us very well and caused the entirety of US fighter development and training to be revisited. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 6th Generation should remove the pilot from the airframe and I am dubious that the Air Farce will get on board as their entire culture is built on fighter pilots. So how would you propose to handle the datalink security for remote piloting, combined with the data delay and reaction time of remote piloting? And, if you think that the "entire (AF) culture is built on fighter pilots", then you literally don't know a f'n thing about the Air Force. I am not talking some dude flying a fighter from a trailer in Nevada, I am talking an unmanned fighter with some degree of semi autonomy. I know everyone wants a ‘man in the loop’ but the Chinese don’t really care if .1% of the time their autonomous fighter shoots down an airliner or bombs a school if it can pull a 20 g turn. In regards to Air Farce culture I may have been a little extreme but pilot entitlement is a real issue in the Air Farce, especially that of fighter jockies. SecDef Gates agreed when he slaughtered Air Farce senior leadership in 2008 and replaced them with trash haulers. Your ignorance really needs no more confirmation, you've already gone well above any requirement. CM Johnson comes to mind ... This is an example of how real world limits look - https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/348/46231.PNG It has been established that an aircraft can do 12gs if the structure and the pilot could withstand it. In general, high performance aircraft are designed to withstand the gs that a pilot could withstand since over engineering the aircraft beyond that limit makes little sense in terms of cost and weight. Theoretically you could take any airframe designed for 9gs and with the weight savings associated with removing systems devoted to the pilot, make the aircraft 12g capable. But admittedly, it makes more sense to design it for 12gs from the beginning. Now, that doesn’t even account for the advantages associated with being able to pull negative gs, which I assume you know, are even more limiting to a pilot than positive gs. Advantages, based on current technology, of going beyond 12gs are questionable at this point but so was breaking the sound barrier in the 1930s. And again, going back to the original topic, we are relying on the F-35 to be a BVR killer. We tried that once before and it didn’t work out for us very well and caused the entirety of US fighter development and training to be revisited. What are you willing to give up? What is the maneuver where 20g's might be employed in a fighter? What is required to get there? What is the weapons configuration? What are the carriage limits? Your 12g comment is nonsense, removing the pilot, cockpit, and crew support does not magically transform into a stronger vehicle, or suddenly allow flight into parts of the envelope where 9g's or 7.33g's or whatever are not permissible. My technical expertise is airframe structural integrity. Dosed with other hands on, relevant experience. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:10:12 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I worked at the Pentagon at the time and there was a lot more to it than what you mentioned. In no particular order; - Accidentally flying a nuke across the country without knowing it was happening. - Miserable inspection results for the Air Force ICBM fleet. - Spending GWOT money on a golf course. - Failing to meet the agreed upon milestones for UAVs in the war zone (I am told Gates especially lost his mind when Air Farce brass mentioned ‘crew rest’ as one the reasons; for dudes sitting in a trailer in Nevada.). - Asking for $20 million to develop a new pistol for pilots. Fair enough, valid shots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:11:34 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This, x1000 I'm especially amused with these recent articles that suggest that the Raptor and Lightning are so fatally bad that the answer is to go magically start up production of the F-23 and X-32. I don't know why people feel like it makes any logical sense to endow aircraft that never really existed with fanciful capabilities that somehow make them better than the actual winners of fly-off competitions. This is the same reason that the internet is always willing to gush over the Avro Arrow or TSR2, or any number of other aircraft that never made it into operational service, but were always "ahead of their time" and could apparently out-fly anything that is actually sitting on the ramp today. Now you've done it! You've invoked the sacred CF105! Which means that I have to post this.  BIG FAST AND KICKS ASS FEB 28 This whole channel is Dunning-Kruger personified. They talk about adding thrust vectoring, fly by wire controls and a pair of cannons to an Arrow that escaped scrapping. But if we are going to go around mass producing fighters that never made it out of the testing phase, make mine an F36.   Attached FileI also like the looks of the Himat drone though...  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:12:34 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Cool...In the port bay I see an exhaust pipe and a dps filter that is a direct fit OEM for a Ford F-250..  And they cost $20,000 in that bay.  TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:12:38 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Once. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:13:38 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Military Industrial Complex is hungry. Exactly. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:13:40 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except there are already multi-ton missiles that can travel hundreds of miles at Mach 4 and make 15g maneuvers. The shuttle Columbia performed a similar maneuver on February 1, 2003 over east Texas... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:16:18 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Now you've done it! You've invoked the sacred CF105! Which means that I have to post this.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RELtb2TwR14This whole channel is Dunning-Kruger personified. They talk about adding thrust vectoring, fly by wire controls and a pair of cannons to an Arrow that escaped scrapping. Love it! Exactly what comes oozing out of the dark corners of the internet every time "The (insert fighter here) sucks!" is uttered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:17:33 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Derp. First, your “scale” is missing information. Instead of acting like a Douche and trying to sound smarter you could have very well added the information to your post instead of saying “Derp.” Just because you made it I can only take it as “read it on the internet.” Second, your post does not contain ANY reference to what you just said about the F-22. Third, you just basically confirmed your drawing is at best a rough example that is really not to scale since it is missing the altitude since we don’t know what altitude you set it at. Could it be 85k feet? 120k feet? But wait it says SR-71 in your drawing, not F-22 so where is it in relation and to the edge of space? I asked a simple question about your drawing and the information it was lacking and you decided to act “smarter than thou” when you just proved in your reply that your “scale” drawing is not really scale when you don’t have all the information. So spare me the “derp” comment when with you vast wisdom lack to properly scale your image. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The SR-71 flew at a sustained 85k feet, dunno if your picture shows it correctly. Derp. First, the drawing is clearly dimensioned and is drawn to scale. I know it's scale, I created the drawing. Second, the drawing is an example to illustrate the value of high attack speeds. As explained, from an old discussion. It's included here to illustrate how F-22 maximum altitudes compare to "outer space". Third, the airplane cruised at the altitude the mission dictated. . Derp. First, your “scale” is missing information. Instead of acting like a Douche and trying to sound smarter you could have very well added the information to your post instead of saying “Derp.” Just because you made it I can only take it as “read it on the internet.” Second, your post does not contain ANY reference to what you just said about the F-22. Third, you just basically confirmed your drawing is at best a rough example that is really not to scale since it is missing the altitude since we don’t know what altitude you set it at. Could it be 85k feet? 120k feet? But wait it says SR-71 in your drawing, not F-22 so where is it in relation and to the edge of space? I asked a simple question about your drawing and the information it was lacking and you decided to act “smarter than thou” when you just proved in your reply that your “scale” drawing is not really scale when you don’t have all the information. So spare me the “derp” comment when with you vast wisdom lack to properly scale your image. Reading is fundamental. The note says dimensions are statute miles. The angles are denoted in the conventional manner. That's all the hand holding you'll get. You can confirm the Earth radius, ISS orbit, and the height above the surface at 80k feet yourself, but you'll need to READ. So you won't need to scroll back -  That drawing was posted in a section of the thread with retarded discussion of altitudes. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:17:49 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not true at all Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The F35 does not "dogfight" The fight is over before you know it even started. Not true at all I am just a civilian so take it easy on me. The guy above you that flew F15e's just said that is pretty much how it works. I probably didn't read it correctly. "There were no kills of Raptors, and in nearly every engagement all the F-15Es were killed BVR." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:21:03 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I bet it stinks like BCA a little too much for my liking over there. I actually had a worse offer than that Friday. A strength guy’s worst nightmare. I should probably not go on about that one though... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I bet there's an opening in F-22 support for you. Paper drawings, CATIA, and that crappy low end viewer. My F-22 composites story: When the wings arrived at Palmdale, the shop there was grinding the skins to fix the smoothness and waviness to meet the signature requirement. That caused a panic wave through the strength group in Seattle since there was no allowance or sacrificial plies. I have a couple more, but I have probably told you those. . I bet it stinks like BCA a little too much for my liking over there. I actually had a worse offer than that Friday. A strength guy’s worst nightmare. I should probably not go on about that one though... LoL F-18 Repair Manual, MQ-25 and S.M. Something Else and G.G. or Almost Everything Else . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:21:39 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Love it! Exactly what comes oozing out of the dark corners of the internet every time "The (insert fighter here) sucks!" is uttered. I want to find whoever is responsible for that channel, tie him to a chair and show him in detail how everything in his little fictional universe is wrong Clockwork Orange style. Maybe I could talk one of his countrymen into helping me?   101 - F-101 Voodoo |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:25:09 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I want to find whoever is responsible for that channel, tie him to a chair and show him in detail how everything in his little fictional universe is wrong Clockwork Orange style. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Love it! Exactly what comes oozing out of the dark corners of the internet every time "The (insert fighter here) sucks!" is uttered. I want to find whoever is responsible for that channel, tie him to a chair and show him in detail how everything in his little fictional universe is wrong Clockwork Orange style.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:25:40 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I also like the looks of the Himat drone though... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1844992.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1844993.JPG It reminds me of the series of X-ish planes in the 80s that the popular press of the time were convinced were the "next best thing" and going to change the design of fighter aircraft forever: - The F-8 with the supercritical wing - The F-15 with canards - The F-16 XL (and the proposed tail-less version) - The X-29 forward swept wing At least the X-31's thrust vectoring and post-stall AOA maneuvering really turned into something. And, I suppose, the F-16XL sorta kinda morphed into the Israeli Lavi, which morphed into China's J-10. Maybe that was pretty successful after all! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:27:08 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OPSEC, how does that work? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Tell us then, friend of Kelly, what are the current operational readiness rates? My guess not much over 10%... if that OPSEC, how does that work? LOL, so you have nothing. Governmental Secrecy: Shield for Tyranny, Incompetence, and Corruption An essential pillar of democracy is openness. There is no way that people can meaningfully participate in government, even if only by voting for representatives, if they do not have access to accurate information related to government operations. This was well understood by the founders of the US and embedded in the Bill of Rights. Conversely, a salient characteristic of undemocratic systems of all types, such as Czarist Russia, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany is a high degree of governmental secrecy. The standard excuse for the suppression of governmental information is national security. In practice, it is improperly used in most situations. I.e., there is no legitimate reason for keeping secret the great majority of information classified secret by the government. Secrecy is used to conceal abuse of power, illegality, corruption, incompetence, and waste. Tell us, Did you vote Biden? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:28:16 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It reminds me of the series of X-ish planes in the 80s that the popular press of the time were convinced were the "next best thing" and going to change the design of fighter aircraft forever: - The F-8 with the supercritical wing - The F-15 with canards - The F-16 XL (and the proposed tail-less version) - The X-29 forward swept wing At least the X-31's thrust vectoring and post-stall AOA maneuvering really turned into something. And, I suppose, the F-16XL sorta kinda morphed into the Israeli Lavi, which morphed into China's J-10. Maybe that was pretty successful after all!  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:28:41 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am just a civilian so take it easy on me. The guy above you that flew F15e's just said that is pretty much how it works. I probably didn't read it correctly. "There were no kills of Raptors, and in nearly every engagement all the F-15Es were killed BVR." You did say, “The fight is over before you know it even started.” To be fair you damn well know you are in it, an enemy aircraft will absolutely know it’s about to be killed. It’ll just have no idea from where or by what. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:31:25 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I had the GI Joe knockoff of the X-29! http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Fk9bWRxchUI/VP7hwqqcbbI/AAAAAAAAArk/l4GDRDbwaqg/s1600/100_2839.JPG That's so cute! Reminds me of this, a proposed Harrier replacement. Another one of my favorites.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:32:23 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It reminds me of the series of X-ish planes in the 80s that the popular press of the time were convinced were the "next best thing" and going to change the design of fighter aircraft forever: - The F-8 with the supercritical wing - The F-15 with canards - The F-16 XL (and the proposed tail-less version) - The X-29 forward swept wing At least the X-31's thrust vectoring and post-stall AOA maneuvering really turned into something. And, I suppose, the F-16XL sorta kinda morphed into the Israeli Lavi, which morphed into China's J-10. Maybe that was pretty successful after all! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I also like the looks of the Himat drone though... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1844992.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_jpeg-1844993.JPG It reminds me of the series of X-ish planes in the 80s that the popular press of the time were convinced were the "next best thing" and going to change the design of fighter aircraft forever: - The F-8 with the supercritical wing - The F-15 with canards - The F-16 XL (and the proposed tail-less version) - The X-29 forward swept wing At least the X-31's thrust vectoring and post-stall AOA maneuvering really turned into something. And, I suppose, the F-16XL sorta kinda morphed into the Israeli Lavi, which morphed into China's J-10. Maybe that was pretty successful after all! The Lavi, or a first attempt at Grumman, preceded F-16XL. Anyway, I nominate the obvious choice, the awesome Bird of Prey -    I'm saddened by the Boeing sticker in those photos. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:33:44 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: LOL, so you have nothing. Governmental Secrecy: Shield for Tyranny, Incompetence, and Corruption Tell us, Did you vote Biden? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Tell us then, friend of Kelly, what are the current operational readiness rates? My guess not much over 10%... if that OPSEC, how does that work? LOL, so you have nothing. Governmental Secrecy: Shield for Tyranny, Incompetence, and Corruption An essential pillar of democracy is openness. There is no way that people can meaningfully participate in government, even if only by voting for representatives, if they do not have access to accurate information related to government operations. This was well understood by the founders of the US and embedded in the Bill of Rights. Conversely, a salient characteristic of undemocratic systems of all types, such as Czarist Russia, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany is a high degree of governmental secrecy. The standard excuse for the suppression of governmental information is national security. In practice, it is improperly used in most situations. I.e., there is no legitimate reason for keeping secret the great majority of information classified secret by the government. Secrecy is used to conceal abuse of power, illegality, corruption, incompetence, and waste. Tell us, Did you vote Biden? I'd love to force you to sit through a monthly intelligence highlights brief, even at the secret level, ESPECIALLY when someone like the NGIA gives an eye watering "guest" briefing for 1.5 hours showing before and after satellite photo differences. "here you can see on slide 457, as compared to slide 1,576 this truck has moved approximately 48" since it's last position shown on slide 4,508 in the last 8 weeks, per our previous 2 hour presentation 1.5 months ago. Our forensic analysis has determined that the truck has indeed moved. " You'll never want to ask for a fucking FOIA again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:34:01 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's so cute! Reminds me of this, a proposed Harrier replacement. Another one of my favorites. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_png-1845025.JPG That looks like Burt Rutan fucked an F-16 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:36:46 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That looks like Burt Rutan fucked an F-16 Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That's so cute! Reminds me of this, a proposed Harrier replacement. Another one of my favorites. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_png-1845025.JPG That looks like Burt Rutan fucked an F-16  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:37:26 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That looks like Burt Rutan fucked an F-16 If I am ever able to write that F35 novel I keep blathering on about ill be sure to include that line in it. Odds are you will never see it again. Never even made it to the "let's build a scale model." Phase of testing. And Rutan did come up with at least one 'combat aircraft' design... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:37:48 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The F-20 was designed from the get-go as an export fighter. So, no, the AF didn't buy any...and not "because it wasn't their idea." The AF/DoS killed it because we wanted to sell export F-16’s. Maybe we benefitted from the expanded fleet numbers and unit costs or AF Generals benefitted from retirement gigs with GD, the F-20 was deaded by zero foreign sales. Or, it might have been a bad plane. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:38:36 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's so cute! Reminds me of this, a proposed Harrier replacement. Another one of my favorites. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/383325/image_png-1845025.JPG Wasn’t there a non FSW version of that concept too? Or am I thinking of something else... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:48:27 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes it does show that but now he is manhood is hurt and he completely skipped passed that in his reply to me since people were talking about altitude in relation to the edge of space and the F-22 but he post a “scale” drawing that is missing information about altitude in relation to the ISS and what is the edge of space but rather has information about speed, distance to target and time. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The SR-71 flew at a sustained 85k feet, dunno if your picture shows it correctly. Yes it does show that but now he is manhood is hurt and he completely skipped passed that in his reply to me since people were talking about altitude in relation to the edge of space and the F-22 but he post a “scale” drawing that is missing information about altitude in relation to the ISS and what is the edge of space but rather has information about speed, distance to target and time. There's no hard "edge of space" but any discussion of space should start somewhere around 100,000m / 300,000ft, and even then, that's a pretty "adventurous" region in which to hang out. Starlink trash hangs out at 500,000m, 5 times the "edge" of space, but these things will fall victim to drag in a roughly 5 years worth of orbits. The Soviets accomplished an orbit somewhere in the range of 150km to 350km; one. So, there's no hard "edge". It's just a matter of what you are trying to accomplish. For an air breather, the SR-71 is about as high as we been pushing 1g flight. But, the non-airbreathing X-15 was still able to use aero control surfaces at and a little above 100km, about 4x higher than the SR-71 ceiling. And the where and when of space shuttle control surface movements/response would be an even more interesting thing to look at |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:49:19 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: LOL, so you have nothing. Governmental Secrecy: Shield for Tyranny, Incompetence, and Corruption Tell us, Did you vote Biden? No, but I have been in a leadership position in a USAF Fighter Wing in which I was responsible for reporting Mission Capable rates, MICAP data, and SORTS data to higher HQ....all of which is classified. So, I actually know a thing about this topic, and know that neither you nor I are going to be able to find the information you're speculating about in open source documentation or discussed on the internet. Besides, you are the one making the literally evidence-less claim, and countering my challenge with blather about government secrecy and some kind of irrelevance about how I might have voted. It isn't that *I* "have nothing". |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:50:03 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wasn’t there a non FSW version of that concept too? Or am I thinking of something else... I don't know, I don't think so. But my knowledge of that program is practically nonexistent, beyond that one drawing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:52:30 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Boy do I have a trainwreck of a funny story that involves a component selection by me for a target ballistic missile, almost every VP in Lockheed Space Systems losing their mind (unbenownst to me for weeks), and an ERP system designed solely for long duration and man rated missions that said component had to be routed through. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Once. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:53:37 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know, I don't think so. But my knowledge of that program is practically nonexistent, beyond that one drawing. For me as a conceptual military aircraft LEGO modeler all I care about are a few neat drawings existing. The secret projects forum was awesome for me back when I was building models all the time. So many cool concepts to build, even if many were a bit unrealistic. There was a whole thread on the harrier replacement concept art and I think there was a non FSW concept similar to the one you posted. But it’s been a few years and I could be wrong. I wanted to do a model of the FSW concept but I kept getting stuck on how to form certain shapes for it. I might try it again sometime since I am more skilled now and there are more curved slopes for shaping such a plane nowadays. Bless Corvin and Psaiki for putting out new pieces they knew us fans wanted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:54:17 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would provoke China. We’ll never do it. The Government and Military are more likely to give them to China. TC |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:55:33 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It reminds me of the series of X-ish planes in the 80s that the popular press of the time were convinced were the "next best thing" and going to change the design of fighter aircraft forever: - The F-8 with the supercritical wing - The F-15 with canards - The F-16 XL (and the proposed tail-less version) - The X-29 forward swept wing At least the X-31's thrust vectoring and post-stall AOA maneuvering really turned into something. And, I suppose, the F-16XL sorta kinda morphed into the Israeli Lavi, which morphed into China's J-10. Maybe that was pretty successful after all! In the now ancient Jane's Fighters Anthology combat sim, you could fly and fight in the X-29 and X-31.. man do I miss those days
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:57:05 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right but for me as a conceptual military aircraft LEGO modeler all I care about are a few neat drawings existing. The secret projects forum was awesome for me back when I was building models all the time. So many cool concepts to build, even if many were a bit unrealistic. There was a whole thread on the harrier replacement concept art and I think there was a non FSW concept similar to the one you posted. But it’s been a few years and I could be wrong. Some very interesting things come up on the Facebook page, The Greatest Planes that Never Were. That's where I go to see all sorts of weird projects. I've wanted a 3D printed model of the Bugatti 110P for awhile.  Attached File Attached File Attached FileI tried to talk a member of this site into making a drawing of the X Wing concept as an operational full sized fighter, he seemed very interested. But he never got back to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2021 12:59:26 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, air vehicle "lifetime" operational envelopes really span the gamut, and it's easy for us to fall into myopia and lose sight, and our minds, over what falls by the wayside, or becomes increasingly important. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Once.  |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
