dark light

Bruggen 130

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 2,114 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Oh dear! #1827640
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    If I may the only way a “Typhoon” could be navalised would be to go back to a blank drawing board.

    The intake position and associated front landing gear mounting are more than a little not good for a naval aircraft in my opinion.

    Already been looked in to. 🙂

    In February 2011, BAE debuted a navalised Typhoon in response to the Indian tender. The model offered is STOBAR capable, corresponding to the Indian Navy’s future Vikrant class aircraft carrier. The changes needed to enable the Typhoon to launch by ski-jump and recover by arrestor hook added about 500 kg to the airframe. If however the Indian Navy pursues a catapult launch carrier, the Typhoon is uncompetitive against tender rivals (e.g. Rafale and Super Hornet) since meeting “… catapult requirements would add too much weight to the aircraft, blunt performance and add substantially to modification costs”.[26]

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #910936
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    Not quite: missing from this list are Stirling, Halifax, Wellington, Whitley, Hampden (and B26 Marauder) among others:highly_amused:

    Cees

    Where are they hiding them at Duxford? 🙂

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #911391
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    Duxford seems to miss opportunities for example while air space was being built they had the BBMF air day where they could have had their Lancaster outside with the BBMF one but no one seemed interested in towing theirs out of hangar 4 to the flight line.

    Curlyboy

    Just think of it, all the main allied Bombers lined up, B29, B17, B24, Lancaster, B25, But the thing to remember is most people at Duxford are volunteers who have a heavy work load as it is.

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #911449
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    Thanks for the info, curlyboy! Much appreciated.

    I’m sad to see the AAM machines won’t be on the flightline during the show, that would make for some fantastic photos and experiences for showgoers.

    What a missed opportunity 🙁

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #911748
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    May air show participation update

    http://www.iwm.org.uk

    Hi. Are any of the AAM aircraft B29 B24 B17 being left out for this show Brian?

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    That’s kind of the point isn’t it? You didn’t know so why have a go?

    And no, I didn’t know but I didn’t criticise them for not doing something they were actually doing.

    Let us know who else should be ashamed of themselves next. Perhaps the navy for not painting their new ships up as HMS Victory or the army for not dressing their soldiers in bright red tunics. 🙂 I’m outraged. How dare they!

    🙂

    No you didn’t criticise them, probably because your not bothered, well I am, I want to see this Country celebrate these events, I can just see the little smile on your face when they wheeled it out 🙂 as for your the last comment, it’s pathetic.

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    I thought the RAF should be ashamed of themselves Bruggen?

    Did you know that was in the paint shop Wings? no thought not, well neither did I Wings.

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    hopefully Bruggen will be happy now!

    Very happy, now all we need is 112sqd to reform then we can have sharks teeth pain job. 🙂 🙂

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    [QUOTE=Evalu8ter;2217073]Bruggen,
    Because it’s pretty, and different. I like it.

    The RAF has a number of aircraft in ‘Sqn 100yrs’ schemes with more to come, a peerless national heritage flight of airworthy aircraft and has painted Hawks/Tucanos in faux 1940s schemes (shame that the latter was well after I flew them, the black ones were a novelty then!).

    Your complaint sounds a bit like “oh great, another Pitts/F16/Tornado display

    Simple question will the RAF have a Front line jet with a full painted scheme to commemorate the Battle of Britain this year, yes or no? and Mike J I hope your going to reveal some RAF kick Ass paint job that will make Us proud. 🙂

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    No it’s a waste of money. The RAF has the BBMF and doesn’t need to paint fast jets in spurious colour schemes when several spits and a couple of hurricanes already fly in memorial.

    If they do want to spend several thousand pounds is rather it went to the benevolent fund and help a veteran who needs help rather than keeping a handful of spotters happy at air shows.

    So yes, seriously I wouldn’t

    So why are you all swooning over the Can/jet then if it’s not that important, obviously it’s a waste of money. So Seriously I would.

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    Evalu8ter is right Bruggen and quite honestly your comment just sounds like a good old knee jerking rant. The RAF BBMF fly up and down the length of the UK for over 30 years keeping the memory of the Battle alive and in recent years the RAF have painted at least a hawk and Tucano in retro schemes and yet you think the RAF should be ashamed of themselves. Should the RCAF by that token be ashamed they don’t have their own BBMF? Of course not.

    Seriously.

    Do you not think it’s embarrassing that we can’t afford to paint one fast jet up, Seriously?

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    The RAF should be ashamed? Really? I think a collection of vintage aircraft of global significance somewhat outweighs some fancy paint on a modern FJ.

    Well I don’t, it’s a good job Typhoon was not designed with a twin tail or we wouldn’t even have a painted tail to look at, think of the cost of having to paint two.

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    The R.A.F. should be bl**dy ashamed of themselves.

    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    XM607 before it falls to bits like the one at Blackpool. 🙂

    in reply to: Theodore Roosevelt 22/03/2015 #458483
    Bruggen 130
    Participant

    Nice pics Anna, I was hoping someone would post Pics. 🙂

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 2,114 total)