dark light

Arthur

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 4,426 through 4,440 (of 6,424 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Bush's Unilateral Shootout #1974609
    Arthur
    Participant

    This is way too much fun…

    in reply to: General Discussion #393817
    Arthur
    Participant

    Originally posted by Distiller
    Ford was born in Omaha, Nebraska, July 14th, 1913, he grew up in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

    Hey, i doubt many people will see GWB as a Connecticut kid either. Nor Reagan being from Hollywood, Illinois. I think your disclaimer of “being born there doesn’t mean being from there” is a bit subtle.

    in reply to: Question for those who are into American politics #1974631
    Arthur
    Participant

    Originally posted by Distiller
    Ford was born in Omaha, Nebraska, July 14th, 1913, he grew up in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

    Hey, i doubt many people will see GWB as a Connecticut kid either. Nor Reagan being from Hollywood, Illinois. I think your disclaimer of “being born there doesn’t mean being from there” is a bit subtle.

    in reply to: Israeli Air Force piccies #2686168
    Arthur
    Participant

    I stand corrected once more!

    in reply to: Israeli Air Force piccies #2686170
    Arthur
    Participant

    Love the museum pic Skythe. Are you sure about the Mystères prior to 1956 though? I thought only the Ouragans were in service at that time.

    Also, if you know the story behind the Albatross, i’d be happy. I’ve heard both stories that it was an actual candidate to replace the Tzukit, or that this L-39 was used for the Elbit/Bedek systems upgrade for later Albatross variants (like those for Thailand). The pic with the Star-of-David marked Albatross is definately taken at Vodochody in the Czech Republic though.

    I forgot to tell the story behind the F-84Fs, will edit the posting.

    in reply to: China to build 3 Aircraft Carriers #2077431
    Arthur
    Participant

    I think even small carriers could be very helpful in a Straits conflict. Posted to the East of TW they can act as both a buffer between TW and any support fleets, and pose a threat to the RoC from a new direction. And with Flankers aboard, they would still have the range to make carrier/mainland missions and vice versa, making replenishment and attrition replacements a smaller issue than it would have been with the CVs operating independently.

    Besides, the PLAN hardly has the replenishment fleet to support serious carrier cruises anyway. Using carrier in a tactical sense as off-shore strongholds/airbases rather than as strategical power-projection assets does IMHO make a lot of sense in China’s case.

    in reply to: Israeli Hetz rocket secrets in Egyptian hands #2686172
    Arthur
    Participant

    If it weren’t sad it could be funny.

    I don’t think anyone was killed because of it, so i do think i can afford a chuckle. I think it’s so silly, it’s definately funny!

    Egyptian computer engineers in Cairo work with Israeli computer engineers in Tel Aviv on the most expensive and most important defense project Israel has developed in the last decade – the “Wall” project, that operates the Arrow missile batteries…

    With no intentions to have this thread turn political (honestly!), i think the nomenclature is nice. The Wall is an ABM project, while the wall is actually a fence. May i interpret this as mild irony?

    The Arrow is the world’s only operative ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile).

    No, it isn’t. Moscow has it’s A135 Gorgon system, it’s operational since the mid/late 1980s and hasn’t stood down.

    in reply to: Monino, Moscow – Any interest? #1609964
    Arthur
    Participant

    -82-
    T10-1 again, the Flanker prototype. Followed by the rest of the Sukhoi-row. These have the fortune of being in the shade from the trees for some time during the day, it shows in their paintjobs which are a bit less faded.

    -83-
    A MiG-23 prototype. You can see another MiG-23 prototype in the background, and that one also has code ‘231’ 🙂

    -84-
    This is a MiG-25. Note the single cockpit, different nose, different wheels and other details to distinguish it from the MiG-31.

    -85-
    An early MiG-27. Many people confuse the MiG-23BN/BK with the MiG-27, but the trick is in the intakes, cannon and jetpipe. The 23BN/BK have large intake splitter plates, a small gun and a long exhaust. MiG-27s have fixed intakes, a big rotary cannon and short jetpipes.

    -86-
    A MiG-31 again, this time the second pre-series machine.

    -87-
    The MiG-29 prototype. You can tell by the nose wheel: the prototype had this placed right under the cockpit, all subsequent Fulcrums had it placed further back.

    -88-
    A real MiG-29 FULCRUM-A, which has been robbed of some goodies.

    -89-
    A later MiG-29 prototype, can tell from the big mudguard on the nosewheel.

    -90-
    A MiG-23ML FLOGGER-G, with the short vertical fin but without the large chaff/flare dispensers on the rear fuselage and the extra dogtooth on the wing root. One of the most impressive sights i’ve ever seen (uhhh… aircraft-related that is) were some 300 of these parked for storage along the runway at Lipetsk, together with some 80 MiG-29s.

    -91-
    A Tu-16K-26 BADGER-G Mod. The specific variant to carry the K-26 missile, but it’s easier to spot the strange ‘inverted T’ on the nose. Only Tu-16K-26s have that.

    Nice pics Mark!

    in reply to: F-5Es for Austria? #2686253
    Arthur
    Participant

    I think any Draken replacement is in poor taste anyway.

    in reply to: is this close ? #2686447
    Arthur
    Participant

    Here is a video where it was beyond close. HUD-video of a midair collision of an F-16 with an F-15. Ouch.

    http://www.rob.com/matt/videos/F15_midair.wmv

    in reply to: General Discussion #393967
    Arthur
    Participant

    Gratuliere!
    http://cards.artie.com/cards/arg-uncle-harry-smokin-enjoy-your-birthday.gif

    in reply to: Happy Birthday Frank! #1974742
    Arthur
    Participant

    Gratuliere!
    http://cards.artie.com/cards/arg-uncle-harry-smokin-enjoy-your-birthday.gif

    in reply to: A4 SkyHawk any chance of one flying here #1610364
    Arthur
    Participant

    One or two years back, a few former Israeli Skyhawks also stopped over in the UK on their way to the US. And apart from the Singaporeans, there is now another Skyhawk operator Europe. BAe Flight Systems at Wittmund in Germany has replaced it’s F-100s with former Israeli Skyhawks. These F-100s occasionally visited some airshows, so perhaps the Skyhawks will do that too.

    in reply to: The Deuce #2686509
    Arthur
    Participant

    Originally posted by fantasma_337
    And this is the 4th thread about the F-102 started by PhantomII…

    Shhhh! Don’t tell that – it would be getting REALLY boring if he started copy-pasting his earlier threads in stead of just regurgitating old ones 😀

    Originally posted by Distiller
    A strange idea to paint an interceptor SEA green/brown.

    It actually makes a lot of sense, IMHO. With pre-doppler radars only able to pick up targets with a nice empty sky as a background, i would guess a low flying interceptor firing SARH AAMs head-on against higher flying targets sounds like a pretty workable tactic. Painting your interceptors in some sort of camo rather than air superiority grey does make sense if you use ’em like this.

    in reply to: SHARs #2686551
    Arthur
    Participant

    Originally posted by Jonesy
    Like I said earlier, however, I would have been much happier to see the effort applied to getting Storm Shadow cleared for GR9, instead of the radar, as I’d rather the CVS group have the ability to attrite the opponents combat power from a very long way off as opposed to it relying on the air defence potential of an aircraft of even lower performance than the FA.2 and being forced to operate inside the opponents effective surveillance and weapons envelope.[/B]

    Did you realise that was just one sentence? I thought mine were impossibly long, thanks for the moral support 😉
    I disagree with your preference of Storm Shadow over an on-board radar though. Most important reason for me is that Storm Shadow is an excellent but expensive weapon to hit coordinates with. On the other hand, a radar is a device which acquires targets. Of course there is no difference if your target is a bridge or fixed radar site, but if your target is a mobile radar system, high priority convoy or even a forward deployed helicopter base, that radar is IMHO far more indespensible than a long-range coordinate killer like Storm Shadow.

    Secondly, Storm Shadow (damn, i hate that name – it’s too long to write in full, but i don’t want to make an acronym of it either :rolleyes: ) is big and expensive. I don’t think the current British Harrier-carriers are able to take a strategical supplies of these missiles with them. Your HAS-plinking example a few posts up in this thread illustrates this perfectly: let’s say you need to attack a reasonably hardened airbase with 40 HAS’es and surface command/control facilities (tower, comms, stuff like that). Storm Shadows would do the job, i have no doubt about that. But when that job is done, your carrier’s arsenal is left with little more than rounds for your 27mm cannon and perhaps a few 500lbs bombs. And you can correct me of course, but i don’t think the RN has enough replenishment ships to support such operations for the duration of a campaign a few weeks in length.

Viewing 15 posts - 4,426 through 4,440 (of 6,424 total)