KnightMare
Veteran X
yeah pretty cool, remember watching the x-plane battle thing on pbs
Awesome F-35 info
- Thread starter Kurayami
- Start date
I actually just got around to watching that tonight. It was pretty cool (if a bit dated.)KnightMare said:
Anybody that wants to see it can grab it from emule:
ed2k://|file|NOVA.Battle.Of.The.X-Planes.XviD.ShareConnector.avi|1473101824|7A3DCA71F5EC9664AF2BDA535356E5F9|/
I still can't get over how ugly the X-32 was.
Hmm. It seems that the presentation video that the guy talked about in the post that I quoted has been torrented:
http://www.militaryvideos.net/torrents/jsf_mpeg1.mpg.torrent
Grabbing it now. I haven't seen it.
*edit: Holy shit. I'm getting 450K/sec on it. I'll have it in 2 minutes.
http://www.militaryvideos.net/torrents/jsf_mpeg1.mpg.torrent
Grabbing it now. I haven't seen it.
*edit: Holy shit. I'm getting 450K/sec on it. I'll have it in 2 minutes.
New Account
Veteran XX
whats funny about the f16 is it was the first fly-by-wire aircraft and its still the best dogfighter out there.
An interesting side note: The first f16's didn't have any feedback from the stick, but pilots were getting into a lot of trouble and getting very sore arms for some reason not having anything to push against, so they built in feedback into the stick. its much easier to fly when you can feel the controls tho for some reason.
An interesting side note: The first f16's didn't have any feedback from the stick, but pilots were getting into a lot of trouble and getting very sore arms for some reason not having anything to push against, so they built in feedback into the stick. its much easier to fly when you can feel the controls tho for some reason.
No it wasn't. The Vulcan used primitive fly-by-wire controls decades before the F-16 was even on the drawing board. The Avro Arrow also had a fly-by-wire system.New Account said:
If you want to go into the realm of digital fly-by-wire, the F-8 was the first aircraft to be fitted with a system (though not in production models.) The F-16 was the first truly useful implementation of fly-by-wire tech, though.
And it isn't the best dogfighter. As was mentioned, a number of Sukhoi aircraft will run circles around an F-16. It doesn't matter if the fight is with guns (the F-16 simply would not be able to follow some of the maneuvers) or with missiles (the Archer is a far better SRM than the AIM-9... Unless you're talking about F-16Is... I'm reasonably certain that those fit Python-4s, but the US doesn't use any.)
The F-16 is a budget jack of all trades, and it meets that specification better than any aircraft flying.
Walking_Man
Veteran X
I know pretty much nothing about military aircraft, but I'm pretty sure there are Russian planes that outmaneuver the F16 and carry better close-range weapons.New Account said:
rainbowsky
Veteran XV
Very cool. I'm glad we are still putting a lot of money into advancing air superiority.
While no one can compete now, we ensure no one will compete in the future by developing these technologies. We will continue to crank out and have the best planes in the world available to scramble at a minutes' notice.
While no one can compete now, we ensure no one will compete in the future by developing these technologies. We will continue to crank out and have the best planes in the world available to scramble at a minutes' notice.
Just watched the video. It isn't the one that the guy talked about, but it was fairly interesting nonetheless.
I am always struck by one thing, though...
Aerospace companies can design and build things that push the limits of what human technology is capable of achieving, yet not one of them is capable of creating a decent CG representation of their work.
I am always struck by one thing, though...
Aerospace companies can design and build things that push the limits of what human technology is capable of achieving, yet not one of them is capable of creating a decent CG representation of their work.
It's pretty ironic to see you posting in this thread considering your proclaimations in a very similar thread the other day (which you mysteriously dissapeared from after getting owned.)Slant_This said:
And what you said is false. There are many aircraft that can compete with everything that the US currently has in service. Hence the need for new aircraft.
rainbowsky
Veteran XV
Kurayami said:
There is no difference between colorized pictures of old aircrafts and the development of new ones that will protect us in the event of a future conflict with technologies applicable in many fields...
I think it was at 3am, sorry I can't post as much as you do, I actually have school work to do. And good job on the ownage...you really showed me that I should care about those colorized pictures, and how relevant they are to my everyday life.
I had the understanding that the fa18 and developing 22 pretty much kicked the ass of the other planes out there. Maybe I'm wrong, but somehow I still feel safe.
Evil Light Bulb
Veteran X
Any good resources on checking out the future of US missle tech? I am surprised at the continued use of some of the older weapons. I guess it deals well enough with the current threats so more development/resources were dedicated to ground attack munitions, but when you see shit like http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdw/jdw050217_1_n.shtml you gotta wonder hehe. Also kind of odd considering I'd be expecting a lot of money to be going into drone research. Dumb drones + smart missles.
I miss my Jane's subscription
I miss my Jane's subscription
Umm.. But there is certainly historical value, which you conveniently ignored in an attempt to attack me.Slant_This said:
That might be a valid excuse if you hadn't brushed aside everybody that pointed out what a dickhead you were being and said "I'm going to bookmark this thread and come back to own you later."
The F/A-22 is barely what I'd call a production aircraft (there isn't even a full squadron is service yet.)
The Su-33 could be argued to be more than an equal for the F/A-18C in terms of navalized fighters (I'd like to see an F/A-18E vs. Su-33 comparison, though...)
As for everything else...
MDD ran a number of tests prior to being bought up by Boeing suggesting that the F-15C would lose a significant number of aerial engagements versus the Su-30MKI (I'm pretty sure it was the MKI, anyway.)
Think about that for a moment. The company that manufactured America's primary air superiority fighter stated that it was not signifcantly superior to an aircraft fielded by a third world nation (India, in this case. The MKI is an MK upgrade for the Indian market.) That does not exactly express an overwhelming dominance of the air.
There was also a big international simulated fly-off a while back using actual military pilots. I forget what the aggressor craft was (it might've been another Su-30,) but the results were pretty telling. As I recall, the F-15C and F-16C both struggled to maintain a 1:1 kill/death ratio. The Eurofighter managed something like 12:1 whereas the F/A-22 managed something on the order of 20:1.
That is of course only taking into account the Russians. Europe has a number of high quality aircraft that certainly stand up against what the US is fielding (Eurofighter, JAS-39, Rafale (even if it's a bit underpowered,) Mirage 2000, etc.)
KnightMare
Veteran X
x-32 wasnt that ugly IMO
I don't know of anything dedicated to it, but most defense contractors have some sort of page dealing with it.Evil Light Bulb said:
http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.com/
Lockheed's site. See if they have the Python-4 demo still up. The missile pulls a complete 180 and goes back the way it came in a pretty impressive amount os space.
AFIAK, the US isn't going to use them. Israel is.
How much does it cost? I never looked into it because I figured it would be pricey (plus I figured that the CIA/FBI/NSA/DoD would spy on me to make sure I'm not a TERRARIST.)I miss my Jane's subscription
rainbowsky
Veteran XV
Kurayami said:Umm.. But there is certainly historical value, which you conveniently ignored in an attempt to attack me.
That might be a valid excuse if you hadn't brushed aside everybody that pointed out what a dickhead you were being and said "I'm going to bookmark this thread and come back to own you later."
Yes, planes were important to the war and how it was fought. And the war and how it was faught influenced the present day. Yes, colorized pictures let you greater understand parts of the war, because it is closer to actually "being there." Therefore, colorized pictures contribute to your understanding of history and in a round about way the present day. I don't know, maybe I'm a cynic, but I can't shake this idea that a group of tribalwarriors are just sitting down and saying "cool - guns, planes, death."
The next day I was busy with an impromptu snowboarding trip, and that took priority. Sorry to disappoint everyone that I didn't dredge up a two or three day old thread to respond to your dryhumping of the importance of aircraft history.
And yes, I'll admit that I didn't expect tribalwarriors to fall in line behind you. Then I realized that I was at tribalwar, and there were a lot of people more like you, and less like me.
as much as i'd love to hear that argument...
oh wait there's more to your post
Ok, so f22 is the best tested.
rainbowsky
Veteran XV
Kurayami said:
I guess that is one way to interpret it.Yes, pretending that you have mob contacts, watching anime, and threatening people on the internet constitutes a life. I'm very jealous of you.Anti-Lyfe said:
By the way, if you had such a happening life, you wouldn't search out my threads to try to convince me of how cool you are.
Kurayami said:
It doesn't express an overwhelming dominance in the air, but it really doesn't need to. I know you're talking about 1 on 1 I'm the ace I'll kick your ass shit comparing all these planes, but air superiority goes so far beyond that.
You got the training of the pilots to consider. How many hours the pilots actually fly the damn things. Maintenence and ground crew efficiency. All the support assets from in flight refueling to C&C to AWACS detection to jammer and ECM support. Then throw in some special ops troops raiding the airbase after it gets hammered with a dozen tomohawks launched from a sub.
So, ya. The original test pilot for the su-30 series could slam an ROTC guy in an f-15 1 on 1. Throw in all the relevant support assets and I bet we could wax a squadron of su-30's with a flight of 4 F-4B shooting sparrow missiles flown by the alabama air national guard.