Page 13 – Key Publishing

mobryan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 224 total)

← 1 2 3 … 12 13 14 15 →

Author

Posts
December 27, 2006 at 2:38 am in reply to: Australia to buy 24 F-18F's? #2541140

mobryan
Participant

The Brits are pretty consistent with calling it “Dave”… as in “Dave-A for the USAF; Dave-B for the RAF, RN, USMC, etc.; Dave-C for the USN”!

All stemming from one commentor’s statement from before the official naming: “It doesn’t matter what they call it… they could call it ‘Dave’, and it wouldn’t change anything.”.

So if they don’t buy any, does that mean “Dave??? Dave’s not here, man!!!!”

Sorry, couldn’t help myself 😮

Matt

November 30, 2006 at 4:20 am in reply to: Would It Have Been Possible?? #2512267

mobryan
Participant

…love the ‘camo’

…judging by the front-view, i’m not sure if it would have been flown because of downward wings?! would needed a lot of computer software for aerodymanics, i guess…

Doesn’t look that much less aerodynamic than a Nighthawk, course that’s like being the tallest midget in the room :diablo:

Matt

November 30, 2006 at 12:19 am in reply to: Russian aircraft design #2512343

mobryan
Participant

What i do not understand is why we need to argue senseless aspects of aircraft design of course Russia and the Former USSR were influenced by the West and viceversa, the US also copied the MiG-25 in the F-15.

Influences are natural and a result of the level science and technology achieved in a specific time period.

I agree in general w/ this post, but other then the most basic details (two wings, two tails, two engines, a cockpit 😉 ) I don’t see much resemblence between the Foxbat and the Eagle :confused: :confused:

Foxbat was intended as a strict intercepter (please, lets not get into WHAT it was to intercept 😮 ), The Eagle as a fighter.

Each type has it’s good points and bad, but I just don’t see much overlap between the points.

Matt

November 29, 2006 at 1:17 am in reply to: FB-111M-3 #2512970

mobryan
Participant

mobryan… if you read the text below that pic,

Sure does once I blow up the image. Stupid 13″ moniter anyhow 😀

Thanks,

Matt

November 29, 2006 at 1:15 am in reply to: Video of Land Phalanx taking out bombs and mortar rounds. #1805300

mobryan
Participant

For example, throwing dice is random, with a uniform distribution (which is probably what you’re thinking of as a “random distribution”). Things like test scores, height, etc. are also random, but with a z-distribution. Samples from data that are z-distributed have a t-distribution. There are other distributions for other purposes (e.g., f-, Chi-squared, etc. etc.)

I need to google up some images. I think we’re just talking past each other with the same general idea, and different terminology (my fault on that, never was much good at exact definitions.) 😉

Matt

November 28, 2006 at 5:36 am in reply to: Video of Land Phalanx taking out bombs and mortar rounds. #1805382

mobryan
Participant

A random distribution is just that, random.
A bell curve implies a pattern to the overall distribution, with a majority of incidences clustered near the designated center, and discrepancies tapering off toward the limits

Obviously, you don’t expect a mathmatically perfect curve in a real sample, at least not on this planet, but the overall shape will have such a pattern.

BTW, I do agree, the exact type of distribution between a single and multi mount are pretty much irrevelent for intercepting a mortar shell, assuming that the bore axis difference remains a small percent of the engagement range.

Matt

November 28, 2006 at 4:03 am in reply to: FB-111M-3 #2513540

mobryan
Participant

trivia- were they really considering eight swiveling pylons??? Talk about optimistic!!!! 😉

Matt

November 28, 2006 at 4:00 am in reply to: Video of Land Phalanx taking out bombs and mortar rounds. #1805390

mobryan
Participant

There is no contradiction between the two. In fact, the shells are likely randomly distributed in a bell curve.

Please, start again. You can have a random distribution, OR you can have a bell curve distribution.

No such thing as a random bell curve.

Matt

November 26, 2006 at 8:52 pm in reply to: SU-43 "Fullback" tactics??? #2514266

mobryan
Participant

I was just wondering what is the longest combat missions which have been flown by pilots in aircraft which do not have the facility for getting up and stretching the cramped musceles. i.e. is to say the pilot has to remain strapped to his seat for full length of the flight.

I think 3000km radius mission or say around 8 hour mission would be the limit?

Not exactly “combat” but the May 1959 U-2 flight from NAS Cubi Point was nine hrs,forty minutes, fortytwo hundred miles. NAS Cubi Point, Lake Biakal, Lhasa, Dhaka. (taken from the area51specialprojects website)

Matt

November 25, 2006 at 11:42 pm in reply to: F-18 and drag shute #2514621

mobryan
Participant

Because real men fly choppers 😀

Or Harriers 😉

Matt

November 25, 2006 at 6:40 am in reply to: Russian planes #2514883

mobryan
Participant

a picture of a Tu-22 Blinder dropping bombs would be nice, or a Su-15 Flagon launching a Anab, also has enyone a nice picture of a long nosed Firebar, these pictures are like rocking horse muck, but one of you must have something.. 😉

May I add to the request list ANY Fiddler firing missles???

thanks,

Matt

November 25, 2006 at 6:38 am in reply to: SU-43 "Fullback" tactics??? #2514886

mobryan
Participant

Su-24 pilots reported the Platypus being only marginally less manoeuvrable than Su-27. If this is true, then that would make a reasonably good fighter.

If that is true, count me suitably impressed. The number and nature of the modifications lead me to believe it would be a real pig in the air. I guess being based off the world famous Flanker probably did leave them with some manuverbility to spare. IF it can keep up with the Mud Hen in that department, I’m totally off base with my objections. I thought it more comparable to the Aardvark then the Beagle, a larger, shorter ranged, and lighter payload Aardvark 😉

SOC- you’re right about the range, I either got some bum info or transposed numbers again (damned dyscalcula 😡 )

It still seems like a lot of effort for no more payload than it has, though.
If this was thirty-forty years ago, I think it would serve very well as a light nuclear bomber, but hopefully those days are forever gone…

Matt

November 24, 2006 at 7:50 pm in reply to: UK Trident Replacement #1805531

mobryan
Participant

Oh they’re talking about it. They want to base it on the Virginia class hull which just goes to show you the “talent” they have working on the idea. :rolleyes: No way are you going to fit Ohio/D-5 capability on a Virginia class hull.

Sure they will…

Take two pressure hulls, weld them together, cap the whole mess with a decent outer skin, and call it the Typh-ette :diablo: :diablo:

Matt

(No, I am NOT being serious. 😀 )

November 23, 2006 at 2:17 am in reply to: Mig 25 thread #2515928

mobryan
Participant

They could both be liars as far as we all know.

True, but I’ll trust an individual far before I’ll trust any government. 😉

Matt

November 23, 2006 at 2:00 am in reply to: Mig 25 thread #2515935

mobryan
Participant

Who shall we trust, Belenko or the Russian air force PVO?

Belenko

Matt
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 224 total)

← 1 2 3 … 12 13 14 15 →