Page 6 – Key Publishing

St. John

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 547 total)

← 1 2 3 … 5 6 7 … 35 36 37 →

Author

Posts
February 27, 2019 at 10:25 am in reply to: Pakistan Air Force #2113833

St. John
Participant

Source?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/27/world/asia/kashmir-india-pakistan-aircraft.html

February 27, 2019 at 10:13 am in reply to: Advantage of "first look first shot " in 1980s era combat #2113835

St. John
Participant

One study reckoned that Soviet jamming could reduce radar effective range down to 9-11km, which was why IRST was introduced for the Typhoon.

February 26, 2019 at 3:33 pm in reply to: What is the safest fighter today ? #2114049

St. John
Participant

4 deaths in 400,000 flying hours is pretty good. The RAF have had none in 150,000 flying hours. All but 1 death was down to the pilot.

February 25, 2019 at 10:30 am in reply to: UK's new Tempest fighter ! #2114318

St. John
Participant

What would be the point though? RR doesn’t need help designing engines.

February 25, 2019 at 10:25 am in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114323

St. John
Participant

I bet it could have easily gone supersonic in a modest dive.

Unlikely. If you read the inherent problems described on the wiki page, it would take an extremely brave person to go anywhere near the cockpit.

February 24, 2019 at 7:28 pm in reply to: General Discussion #221153

St. John
Participant

Well I don’t remember seeing anything about the 2016 version of the EU on a bus in 1975, a) because I wasn’t alive, and b) because it wasn’t.

February 24, 2019 at 5:22 pm in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114470

St. John
Participant

On the contrary to official knowledge…a colonel of USAF ( as he introduced himself to me ) told me ( via e-mail ) he had flown F-84H supersonic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFhSzReWTgs

He never returned to me when I asked more data.

—

XFY-1 went 600 mph as well; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9pxxu1muyQ

Pretty tall story there. What would the rotor tip speed be at supersonic flight speed? And so successful it never entered service. It honestly sounds like it was a flying plague of problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H_Thunderscreech

It’s still never going to fly as fast or high as a jet at any rate.

February 24, 2019 at 12:42 pm in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114531

St. John
Participant

Much aerial warfare happens at night time surely? Most of Israel’s airstrikes against Syria are carried out at night I believe.

The jet-engined plane will always have the advantage at the merge. And of course the prop-engined plane relies on the jet-engined plane to actually be bothered stopping to fight them WVR. It may just take them out BVR with height and range advantage or simply fly over them and bomb their bases and C4I infrastructure and then fly back over them.

February 24, 2019 at 12:39 pm in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114535

St. John
Participant

Many aeroplanes are fitted with a radio. Radio messages can be used to warn about enemies… from a radar operator etc ? For instance..: “Red Leader, Bogies at 2 o’clock high !”

Won’t help during the intensity of a WVR battle.

February 23, 2019 at 10:26 am in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114852

St. John
Participant

What if the pilot uses sun glasses ?

Won’t help much when looking directly at the sun.

February 22, 2019 at 6:44 pm in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2114975

St. John
Participant

Surely the jet-engined aircraft would just stay high and come out of the sun.

February 22, 2019 at 6:30 pm in reply to: General Discussion #221155

St. John
Participant

Hello St.John, I am a pensioner receiving two pensions,one from the UK and the other from Spain.

You should be okay then, private pensions should not be affected. It only affects EU employee pensions because the EU opted not to have a pension pot and run it like a proper pension scheme, so pensions are paid by whoever is in the EU at any given time through annual contributions. This was so when Britain joined, even though the pensioners then had not been employed whilst Britain was a member, Britain’s annual contribution was still used to pay them, so the same is true in reverse now.

February 22, 2019 at 10:24 am in reply to: 2019 F-35 News and Discussion #2115061

St. John
Participant

If the USAF has to get some F-15Xs they’d be better off with two-seaters to supplement the F-15E fleet. The F-35A is a great aircraft but it doesn’t have quite the same legs. Had they the money I imagine the USAF would want a new design to replace the F-15E and it would probably be the size of the F-111 if not slightly larger.

If the DoD was serious about getting some new thoroughbred air-superiority fighters to replace aging F-15 then we should cough up the cash and pay to restart production of an updated F-22. Yet I don’t think it is being taken that seriously. This F-15X order is just about keeping Boeing’s military division busy and the production line running. It’s quite unfortunate some short-sighted individuals prevented the same from being done with the the F-22, which the USAF actually wanted more of.

I agree, the F-22 was originally planned to replace the F-15C/D, and that’s exactly what it should have done. Cutting production short just led to a ridiculously high unit price.

February 21, 2019 at 6:19 pm in reply to: 2019 F-35 News and Discussion #2115308

St. John
Participant

The Boeing lobby is strong.

February 21, 2019 at 6:11 pm in reply to: Could a propeller driven aeroplane still be lethal in aerial combat today ? #2115313

St. John
Participant

A helicopter could be lethal against another helicopter.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 547 total)

← 1 2 3 … 5 6 7 … 35 36 37 →