Cool pic of an SU-25 landing or taking off from a flooded road...
- Thread starter bunk22
- Start date
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Did you catch my correction? I combined Dr. Strangelove with a David Allan Coe lyric, "if that ain't country, it'll hare-lip the Pope".Yeah but everyone in the Navy is already harelipped anyway, so.
Last edited:
Boris Badenov
This is no laughing matter.
Goddam. You did, too. You're pretty smart for a Sailor! Hell, I reckon you might even die of old age instead of getting kicked in the head by a horse, if you play your cards right and let someone else do the saddling!
Which is why one can't judge the survivability of the A-10, regarding the current move to retire it, by the work it did in Afghanistan......uncontested for the most part. Take the A-10 into any kind of truly contested ADA or IADS environment, and it will have problems. We lost 6 overall in Desert Storm, alomst lost one in Kosovo, and lost one in OIF.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Almost always a mistake to prepare to fight the last war.
Boris Badenov
This is no laughing matter.
Except in the case of Carriers! Cause that's preparing to fight the War before last. No, wait, the War before that!
Couldn't help it. Low-hanging fruit, etc.
bunk22
Well-Known Member
Oh boy, the carrier has so many uses and they have been used successfully in every conflict since WWII. There is a reason there are some pretty scary anti-ship missiles, the carrier is kind of potent sometimes
Boris Badenov
This is no laughing matter.
Just sayin. If I were a nefarious nogoodnick working for the Black Hats, I reckon I'd have figured out how to punch a couple of holes in Yankee Doodle's floating Imperialism Projector in the last ~60 years or so. I hope I'm wrong, cause you guys have the best airplanes AND the best paint schemes evar!
bunk22
Well-Known Member
A good article from the Navy War College, some pro's and con's to the modern carrier...
http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/...-05df6e416b3b/The-Future-of-Aircraft-Carriers
http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/...-05df6e416b3b/The-Future-of-Aircraft-Carriers
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
I fear the Navy has lost much of their interest in ASW. If the Iranians mass-produce their mini-subs, the Persian Gulf becomes a crowded bath tub.
Wasn't it just 5 or 6 years ago that a Chinese diesel-electric boat surfaced within the USS Kitty Hawk carrier battle group and near the carrier?
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Yeah, 2005 or 2006. In the 80's, heads would have rolled. This is the kind of incident that could have seen a fleet admiral face an early retirement. ASW is so Cold War.
inigo88
Composite-lover
I think I first heard that in Ben Rich's autobiography "Skunk Works" (including the detail about the front companies), although I'm not 100% sure. I did find this reference in Smithsonian Magazine that mentions the same:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/The-Object-at-Hand-Stealth-Machine.html
Another cool fact from the "Skunk Works" book that is confirmed, is that the mathematical theory behind the original "Hopeless Diamond" radar cross section shape Lockheed engineers used to create the prototype stealth fighter (the HAVE BLUE) was published by a Soviet mathematician named Petr Ufimtsev. Ufimstev's work was deemed not strategically important by the Russian government, and was allowed to be published internationally. Ufimstev's published work was apparently used by both Lockheed engineers on the HAVE BLUE/F-117 and the Northrop engineers on the B-2.
Here it is:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/nov/13/20061113-121539-3317r/?page=all
Interesting quote from that article:
"The Kitty Hawk battle group includes an attack submarine and anti-submarine helicopters that are charged with protecting the warships from submarine attack."
Did they forget about the anti-submarine airplanes too.....the S-3s? So HS gets the nod, but VS doesn't even get mentioned?
Good quote here from another article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html
"Commodore Stephen Saunders, editor of Jane's Fighting Ships, and a former Royal Navy anti-submarine specialist, said the U.S. had paid relatively little attention to this form of warfare [ASW] since the end of the Cold War."
Vector4Food
This job would be easier without all the airplanes
FWIW my father was a submariner in the 60's/70's and it was a known issue how easy it was to sneak around US ships/sub assets in a diesel electric.
Canada often played the role of a diesel electric Russian sub during war games back then, and they would routinely "destroy" their targets without ever being found, sometimes at very close proximity to some high class American hardware of the time.
For the record, those same subs my dad served on only retired recently, replaced by complete pieces of junk the British Navy "sold" to us (read tricked us into buying)
The first one catching fire at sea and nearly killing everyone on board.
Canada often played the role of a diesel electric Russian sub during war games back then, and they would routinely "destroy" their targets without ever being found, sometimes at very close proximity to some high class American hardware of the time.
For the record, those same subs my dad served on only retired recently, replaced by complete pieces of junk the British Navy "sold" to us (read tricked us into buying)
The first one catching fire at sea and nearly killing everyone on board.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
There is no doubt where most of the titanium came from, it's the claim that CIA front companies were used to purchase it that i am curious about. I've seen the same story repeated many times in reputable sources, it just hasn't shown up in released documents that have mentioned aspects of titanium production and sources. Released documents describe Kelly meeting with Titanium Metal Corporation to stress importance of delivery schedule. Do any of those descriptions have details, like the names of the front companies? Did you see my post in the military pilot forum?
Last edited:
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
By 2000, the S-3 lost its ASW misson and most all of its ASW gear. They removed the MAD boom and plated over 44 of 60 sonobuoy tubes. That's why it wasn't mentioned.
On a related note, the S-3 might return for an encore performance:
http://www.janes.com/article/29013/...ished-viking-aircraft-to-korean-and-us-navies
Last edited:
WestIndian425
Well-Known Member
Next to an A-10, this is a plane I'd want to own as a civilian.
The 2S6 is the in-between of the ZSU-23 and ZSU-57 systems gun-wise, with the added party favor of a SAM capability. This system, combined with the SA-15a/b Gauntlet mobile SAM system, comprise a very vicious mobile ADA system in the low and medium altitudes.
And lets also not forget or downplay older Soviet SAM systems, as they are still very lethal in the hands of a trained operator, as evidenced by:
A-10 shot down by SA-9 mobile SAM in Desert Storm
A-10s shot down by SA-13 mobile SAMs in Desert Storm
F-15E and F-14A shot down by SA-2 in Desert Storm
F-16 in Desert Storm and F-117 and F-16 in Serbia shot down by SA-3
F-16 in Desert Storm and F-16 in Yugoslavia shot down by SA-6
Numerous aircraft in Desert Storm shot down by MANPAD and AAA, including AV-8B, A-6E, OV-10, F-15E, and AC-130H
If there was one thing the USSR always had us bested in, and still do to this day, is Air Defense Artillery
Similar threads
