Bronco, I clearly see 2 catapults on the bow, one on the angle, and (in the first picture) steam rising from the catapult tracks of the angle and port bow catapults.

Of course, you can do a lot with photoshop.

Posted there by PhantomII:

“There was a proposed fighter version of the A-5 Vigilante with a third J-79 engine above the other two, and armament consisting of AIM-54 Phoenix air-to-air missiles, but it never got past the drawing board.

http://www.vectorsite.net/ava5.html

Scroll down toward the bottom of the page after clicking that link, and you’ll find a drawing of it…..it was called NR-349.
__________________
Fox-4! “

And a couple of Photoshop jobs from earlier threads here :dev2:

The take-off weights and speed for the A-6 required more than the “short” BS-5 could put out.

The A-6 did, however, fly off the Ark Royal in an “exchange” operation:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=44318

Note the USN Phantom as well.

The new A-6Es & the EA-6Bs were only fitted for the nose-bar type launch, and the A-6A>E conversions had the bridle attachment points removed.

The A-7A/B/C, and maybe the E now, could have operated off the French carriers… although they might have been restricted to a lower max payload.

No, the “FB-111 series” was NOT “independant from the F-111 series”… they were all variants of the same basic design.

Yes, there was an F-111B and a FB-111B (and an F-111A and a FB-111A), just like there was an A-6A EA-6A, A-6B, & EA-6B… but there was no A-6D between the A-6C and the A-6E, even though there was a KA-6D (and NO KA-6A, B, or C).

Technically, modified variants should receive a model letter in proper sequence with the main variant, but ignoring this rule is just as common in the US military designation system as any other non-standard sequence… the entire F/A-18 series is an example of incorrect numbering, as there is no such thing as an “F/A” in the designation regulations.

Likewise, the “bomber variant” of the F-111 should have been “BF-111″… “Bomber modification of Fighter number 111”, but some idiot in the government (Sec Def Bob MacNamara, probably) thought that “FB for Fighter-Bomber” sounded better than BF (there are lots of profane nicknames that can be created from those letters in American Military slang).

Lastly, note that the “FB-111H” was proposed 2 years before the “FB-111B”… indicating that General Dynamics had originally planned to follow the main lettering sequence.

Apparently, since the Strategic Air Command wanted its Aardvarks to be designated differently than the Tactical Air Command’s versions (SAC flies BOMBERS, not Fighters)… the next proposal then reverted to the alternate sequence.

from Joe Baugher’s site:
“FB-111B was proposed in 1979”
“In 1977, General Dynamics proposed an advanced version of the FB-111A, the FB-111H”

Lightndattic, the letters after the numbers have no meaning, they are simply an alphabetical model designation to show the order in which models of a specific aircraft were built.

Snapper… note the following:
“The Spanish word negro originates from the Latin word niger, meaning black. In English, negro or neger became negar and finally nigger, most likely under influence of French nègre. Neger (sometimes spelled “neggar”) prevailed in northern New York under the Dutch and also in Philadelphia, in its Moravian and Pennsylvania Dutch communities. For example, the New York City African Burial Ground was originally known as “Begraaf Plaats van de Neger.”

In the United States, the word nigger was not originally considered derogatory, but merely denotative of black, as it was in much of the world. In nineteenth-century American literature, there are many uses of the word nigger with no intended negative connotation (see below). The perception of the term nigger as derogatory is no doubt related to the fact that the Negro race itself was regarded by many whites of the time as inferior, lazy, simian in appearance, stupid, and criminally inclined. There is an observable pattern of terms denoting black people which have come to be regarded as derogatory, just as exist for all ethnic groups. Some well known ones are: Nigger, darky, coon, Spook, and colored, all of which were at various times acceptable, but are now considered offensive in North America. Black was generally the preferred term from the late 1960s until the 1990s, but has now been displaced in politically correct usage by African American, which resembles the term Afro-American that was in vogue in the early 1970s. However, Black continues in widespread popular use as a racial designation.

In Cuba the Spanish word prieto (similar origin to the Portuguese preto) is not derogatory. In Cuba a prieto is someone who is very dark, but not black (“Negro”). The Spanish word for “black” is “negro.” White Southern dialect in many parts of the southern United States changes the pronunciation of “Negro” to “nigra.” The form “nigger” may have come about from “nigra” through metathesis.

At times, black people have appropriated the slur, subverting it to a self-referential term that is often suggestive of familiarity, endearment, or kinship.

The word is occasionally spelt nigguh or even nikuh in imitation of some speakers’ pronunciation. However, the forms nigga and niggah are far more common alternatives. Other variations designed to avoid the term itself include nookah, nukka, and nagger.”

Diplomat, yes.

Ambassador to China.

{looking furtively around} also Director of the CIA.

Yes, but as late as 1998 the USAF was still annoyed enough about the reliability problems of the F100 (yes, the F100-PW-229 also) to evaluate the possibility of retrofitting the F110 to the existing -E fleet, going as far as modifying F-15Es and flight-testing them with the F110.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f15_10.html
last paragraphs:
“In mid 1994, there was a prolonged grounding of many F-15Es because of problems with their F100-PW-229 engines. The problem seems to be with stress-related cracking of the engine’s fourth-stage turbine blades. This affected 75 F-5Es at Elmendorf AFB, RAF Lakenheath, and Lellis AFB. Another grounding of F-15Es based at RAF Lakenheath took place in January of 1998 because of complaints about compressor stalls and an unexpectedly-rapid deterioration of some vital engine parts.

Because of reliability problems with the F100-PW-229 engines, in June of 1998 the USAF began an evaluation of the General Electric F110-GE-129 IPE (Improved Performance Engine) as a possible alternative powerplant for the F-15E. The afterburning thrust of the F110 engine is 29,000 lb.s.t. The 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron at Nellis AFB had actually carried out series of flight tests of the F110 engine fitted to F-15Es 87-180, 86-189, and 88-1678.”

“Svenska Freds, a Swedish peace organisation who’s pretty much against anything military, actually wants Sweden to aquire 3 C-17’s.”

Well, Transports are not directly offensive weapons, and can be used for many peacetime & peaceful purposes… disaster relief, emergency evacuation, transport of scientific personnel & equipment, etc.