The aerial warfare thread.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-01-2018, 07:01 AM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
~20 minute A-10 / close air support documentary with some good interviews and footage from both the pilots and the soldiers.




'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
05-01-2018, 07:28 AM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
I don't know why but I have always loved the F 111. Aesthetically it pleases me.

Got to see one close up at an air museum on Hawaii. It had been donated by Aussies who evidently have a soft spot for them too.



[Image: df-st-87-12346.jpg]

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like KidCharlemagne1962's post
05-01-2018, 09:47 AM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
My Dad was 82'nd airborne.
He has flown many times and I shit you negative he has never landed.
He jumped out every time.

Sadly I suspect that drones will be replacing fighter aircraft.
There is a performance limit imposed by the human body.
We can build planes that can take a lot more G's than the human body.
More maneuverable and faster without a pilot.

[Image: barfly_condenados_pelo_vicio.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-01-2018, 10:17 AM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
"It took us a wile but we fixed..."


So... the 'Ardvark' in American service had an, um, interesting development.

By the time it was deemed a worthwhile asset for Australia to procure. Mission profiles had changed such that 'Strike' aircraft needed to fly low and fast to avoid enemy counter measures.

The F-111 was not origianlly designed for such specifications. It losing out to what would, effectivly, become the F-14.

So... in its new guise as a low altitude strike craft a rather troubling characteristic made itself known.

The air intakes, while perfectly capable of adjusting air flow into the engines across various flight speeds, were unfortunately not able to correct for low level turbulence. Hence, really strong wind buffets and other 'Gusty' ingestion of air into the turbine face could lead to compressor stalls.

Losing an engine in flight is... 'Not good'. With altitude and correct proceedures an engine should be able to be restarted.

At low altitude? A pilot's life becomes 'Extreamly interesting' as they deal with the new developing situation on top of everything else that might be happening around them.

The Americans had continued to lose aircraft to this problem. The on-sold units the Australian's resceived? Well, they were also well informed of the problem. Much thought, research and efforts was put into diagnosing and trying to rectify/fix/aleviate the problem.

The Autralian's fix? Extend a 'Shock-cone' spike (Not visible in the above image as the leading edge root extension is obsuring it) out the front of the intake.

Yup, a long, (Six foot? Five foot?) pole of metal spearing forwards from the top corner of the air intake which, basically, 'Makes' the incoming air behave in a nicer fashion pretty much even before it's passing into the intake profile.

Simple, maybe not 'classically' eligant but effective.

Big Grin

Not at work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Peebothuhul's post
08-01-2018, 11:54 AM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
(23-06-2016 06:09 AM)Banjo Wrote:  F86 vs Mig 15.

There are several points of view. The Soviets claim than Chinese and NTH Korean pilots were unsuitable for such pressures as the jet age.

The Americans claim up to a 9 to 1 kill ratio.

Soviet pilots claim either 4 to 1 or 2 to one, depends on the source. This means Soviet aces, not Korean or Chinese.

Wings of the Red Star has different numbers to other shows.

I do recall Chuck Yeager believing the Mig was a pilot killer and the F86 far better than the Mig. Interesting though that the Mig 17 could out turn any aircraft until the advent of the F16.

The Mig was half as light and far more heavily armed than the Sabre. One cannon shot could bring down a Sabre.

I suppose we will never know. Both amazing aircraft though.




Near as I know, North Korean flyers weren’t that great during that age, in one instance a MiG-15 driver being clumsy enough to operate his MiG low and slow enough to be jumped and shot down by a USMC Corsair. The Soviet pilots who fought in the war didn’t much better.

The MiG-15 (NATO codename Fagot - don’t ask why) had better climbing and maneuvering characteristics than the the F-86 did. I would argue the F-86’s armamaent of 6 x .50 cal M2 machine guns was a superior armament, particularly in the fighter vs fighter area. It was just better at shredding a fast, small, nimble target than a slow firing cannon was.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2018, 12:09 PM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
Anybody seen pictures of that P-40 the Egyptians recovered from the desert? The colors they chose indicate vision problems.

[Image: nintchdbpict000375786120.jpg?strip=all&w=960]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
08-01-2018, 10:41 PM
RE: The aerial warfare thread.
(05-01-2018 07:28 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  I don't know why but I have always loved the F 111. Aesthetically it pleases me.

Got to see one close up at an air museum on Hawaii. It had been donated by Aussies who evidently have a soft spot for them too.

Yep... our RAAF flew 36 in total of the F-111Gs and F-111Cs up until the last December 2010. We managed to crash 8 of them since 1973. A dozen of them have been preserved in Aussie aviation museums around the country, but I didn't previously know of one being donated to the US, as that's where they were manufactured. Good to know. Smile

Our F-111Cs were the fastest (2,655 km/h, versus the current F-35 Lightning II at 1,930 km/h) and longest range combat aircraft in SE Asia at the time, but were never used in active combat.

[Image: 93411d1253204022-f-111-f111_takeoff_1152-2-.jpg]
This is a RAAF F-111 taking off from
Darwin NT headed to Indonesia (I think).



F111 World's Last Ever Dump & Burn
at Williamtown NSW RAAF Base 2010

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: