mjg407
Well-Known Member
http://thetravisty.com/Saturday_Night_Live/wmv/Iceman_-_The_Later_Years.htmMD-90 or 737-800 in a dogfight? What do ya think?
Navy blasphemy
- Thread starter CaptBill
- Start date
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
Something house keeping cleans?
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
It's an AIRFIELD. It's not SUPPOSED to have any speed.
We can't turn it into the wind -- our pilots can land in crosswinds.
But, the next time the winner of a war is decided by how well you can land on a boat, the US Navy is really gonna kick ass.
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
flyingmaniac
Well-Known Member
I'd like to see that land on an aircraft carrier, just once.
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
When I fly to PNS MOB, GPT and see all those OLF (some I use to land at in the 34C before they said off to the back seat you go), I think wow, I wouldn't want to land there in a Bonanza. Then there is VPS where you land long to miss the cable and taxi just shy of V1 for 5 mins to get to the terminal. Not in a position to take sides obviously, but if I ever made a firm landing, which of course I never do
My favorite quote from the Navy:"Flare to land Squat to Pee"
Nark
Macho Superpilot
Dude,
I'm pretty sure anything can land on an aircraft carrier, just once...
Thanks to a stupid movie, chicks dig guys with swords.
Semper Fi
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
They don't always turn into the wind. I remember taking off in the back of a fully loaded COD while the America was making steerage in the Adriatic- downwind. Literally knocked the spit out of me on the catstroke. The COD guys hang out with the various flavors of P-3 guys, and when we landed at Sicily I asked him WTH? Says that happens a lot in constricted places like the Adriatic, and it was one of the largest head of steam he had ever had to get the right end speed. I got the hold back bar nub as a paperweight
And the guy behind me (in front?) got a bunch of my spittle on the back of his helmet. yukk
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
I know you don't like the Phoenix (based on multiple posts), and it has failed in its only combat use. But really the scenario it was designed for never had to be used. The Russkies never sent out regimental formation of bombers with long range hypersonic AS-XX missiles against a Carrier battle group. It did it purpose just like the minuteman missile. imho Everybody knows the AMRAAM is better, but the sparrow in its time did what needed to be done. this is like a p51 f-22 comparison.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Totally valid point.
If it were 1973 and a horde of Bears was approaching the Carrier Battle Group, it would be a great weapon.
Really my beef is with people (not you) who spout off about how great particular airframes or weapons are with no actual clue of what their capabilities are, nor the capabilities of comparable equipment. The Tomcat is a frequent target of such adoration (thanks to a particular 1980s movie), as is the Phoenix.
The Phoenix was good at what it was designed to do -- it's just that most people have no concept of what that was.
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
When's the last time you saw an Air Force base sink?
CaptBill
Well-Known Member
Your beef is with people who are simply sharing thoughts and ideas about airframes and weapon systems in very general and non technical terms. To say "I think the Phoenix is a cool missile, or "I like the F/A18", does not require them to have a Jane's Reference Manual in his/her lap to defend it against the AMRAAM, Tomahawk, F-22 or a Star Wars Laser (if there is one). It is not an engineering thread where the merits of any one system are dissected to the nats ass. The Tomcat was a big airplane and admittedly developed a big fan base (TopGun). It wasn't a superior fighter and has several shortfalls, but despite that, it was an awesome and fun airplane to fly and watch. This is not a thread where something has to be torn down to build something else up. If you take objective looks at most military airplanes developed in the past, you could find less than ideal characteristics with almost every one of them. The light hearted Navy / Air Force / Marines / Army banter in the first few pages of this thread is amusing with a bit of eye rolling here and there. However, it seems to me that the thread is taking on a tone where words like "uninformed" and "spouting off" are upping the ante.
This thread should be mostly about small talk and not much more. I can assure all of you that the F-15 and the Air Force will not be any less capable or threatened by what a bunch of JC buddies scribbling on their laptops have to say in a little spirit of entertainment and friendship.
If we want to have a serious no BS discussion about military platforms and weapon systems and how they compare using hard data, let's start a thread and run with it - this thread isn't it.
And it was a Russian AN-124 that brought that P-3 back to the states.
http://www.jdunman.com/Intell/hainan.htm
Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
That incident happened right before I got to Kadena. It was funny seeing the P3 dudes around the base (navy det was just down the road from my squadron), they had some absolutely hilarious patches made about it.
Bumblebee
Commodore
Why do you think they call him the "Reaper"!
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
Negative shipmate that would be the EP-3E ARIES II
Just a minor point, but you know I had to make it. A slick would have prolly, made it back to base after its kill. Only the mighty Orion can a version be made so overloaded and with have a drag form so high and fly... Let alone act as a fighter blender.
:beer:
granlistillo
Well-Known Member
Well at least it is a name based callsign. My favorite one in our squadron was "Roca". Roca is the major manufacturer of urinals and toilets in Spain. One night after a few too many bevvies Roca decided to wash his face in some place other than the sink. he he heWhy do you think they call him the "Reaper"!