Page 63 – Key Publishing

BIGVERN1966

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 1,215 total)

← 1 2 3 … 62 63 64 … 79 80 81 →

Author

Posts
May 20, 2006 at 8:50 am in reply to: Panavia Tornado versus the F-14, Su-24, MiG-23, JH-7 and F-15 #2563882

BIGVERN1966
Participant

Hi all

The Tornado is under powered,turns like a pig,,,, A Hunter 50years old can out turn and out accelerate one at low speed…at high speed a Lightning goes faster and with more range…. the only thing a Tornado has going for it is it weapon load. Its a standoff weapon platform not a fighter..

I’d like to know where you got this information from? Lightning may be faster high up, but with more range!!!!!! RUBBISH. A F3 flew from Goose Bay to Conningsby without refuelling once. Lightning would never be able to do that. Also the clean F3 could out manouver and out accelerate a clean Hunter anytime, Hunter would never have got close in real life anyway. The Tornados biggest problem was engine power, It was fast on the deck clean, however load it up and pull it was 25,000 feet and it was pushed to stay there. the aircraft was designed as a low level bomber and modified to be a Bomber killer. With JTIDS, AMRAAM (with the command data link fitted) ASRAAM, AWACS support and a crew that know what they are doing, the F3 stands a chance against any fighter in the world, as long as it stays out of the high speed turning fight. What is a fighter? an aircraft that is designed to kill other aircraft. If the Tornado F3 is a standoff weapon platform so is the F14, F15, Mig 23, Mig 25, Mig 31, Etc.

May 20, 2006 at 12:17 am in reply to: What-If: NATO-WP Air War in Central Europe in 1987 #2564127

BIGVERN1966
Participant

Fat chance. They’d have to get through M-1s, Leopard IIs, Challengers, Apaches, Cobras, A-10s and a sh!tload of other anti tank assets. Would have made the “highway of death” look like a fender-bender.

Plus the remains of the waves of WP attack aircraft would have had problems landing on their airfields after 400 odd Tornados had sprayed them with JP233 and MW1 from bases in Germany and the UK.

A fact that has been totally over looked here as well. Its been quoted that certain US equipment at the time was only 30% effective. What makes any of the people praising the WP forces think that any of their kit was any better (most of the Russian electronic kit in service at the time was valve driven and need lots of operator actions to acquire and engage a target. They were pushed to have any of the ECCM systems required to allow the system to work in the face of either active or passive ECM due to the fact that most of the volume of the platform for electronics / avionics were taken up with the valves and transistors required to make the thing work as a basic system).

May 19, 2006 at 6:37 pm in reply to: What-If: NATO-WP Air War in Central Europe in 1987 #2564336

BIGVERN1966
Participant

SO now the SAM was aimed by TV camera or by naked eye? 😮

ALMOST ALL RUSSAIN SAM SYSTEMS ARE FITTED WITH A TV CAMERA AND AN ASSISTED TRACK ENGAGEMENT MODE, SO THERE IS A VERY GOOD CHANCE THAT THE F117 THAT WAS SHOT DOWN WAS DONE SO WITH A CAMERA AND THE NAKED EYE 😉

May 18, 2006 at 10:06 pm in reply to: Sea King Sortie #2565214

BIGVERN1966
Participant

Woodbridge

More photos from my trip on a Sea King. After flying up a part of the Suffolk coast past Bawdsey Manor and some interesting ‘Des Res’ homes along this bit of the English coast, being houses made out of the old Napoleonic period Martello Towers, (the quote of an Englishman’s home is his castle is spot on in this case. However I didn’t get a good photo of one of them) the Sea King then went inland to the old USAF airfield at Woodbridge where it landed and dropped me and the winchman off near the old rifle range. The aircraft then took off again after about 10 minutes on the ground. We were winched back up into the helicopter again from next to the side of a building as a practice in winching causalities out of a confined space.

May 18, 2006 at 9:18 pm in reply to: Modern USN Aircraft Carrier Deliberately Sunk #1279450

BIGVERN1966
Participant

Forgive me if I am splitting hairs here but I could not help but notice the alacrity of some in shouting out “Wrong forum – modern aviation”. I don’t know what time zone some of you are on but a carrier built over 50 years ago and last operated over 30 years ago and which is older than me, by the way (50 this year 😮 ) is, in my humble opinion, hardly ‘modern aviation’. It should at least be here and if not then it should be in a maritime forum. :diablo:

He has a point :diablo:

May 18, 2006 at 8:51 pm in reply to: Modern USN Aircraft Carrier Deliberately Sunk #1279462

BIGVERN1966
Participant

The most famous pilot I know about who served on this old carrier was
Lt. Dick Wyman (Kittery ME) who flew F8 aircraft mission and spotted a
MIG 17, and began a 70 mile, 15 min. chase. Eventually, Wyman got a
missile on the 17, making it spin, crash into rice paddy, and burn.

Then there is RINO Senator John McCain ( “Rebublican In Name Only),
a pilot on this ship who was shot down. He was son and grandson of top
US Navy brass, and mush has been written about him. I think he may have
flown a A-4 Skyhawk.

I believe that the A-4 Skyhawk was developed early 1960s. Then later
a different version of it was fitted with Rolls Royce engine, and vertical
gizmos by McDonnell Douglas to create the Harrier VTOL fighter/bomber
used by the US Marines beginning in the 1980s.

Photo of EKA, F-4, and F-8 at web page below:

a3skywarrior.com/gif/f8-a4-a3.jpg

………………………. 🙂

The A4 Skyhawk and Harrier are not related in anyway (Bristol Aero Engines at Patchway Bristol ENGLAND developed the vertical gizmos that went into the Harrier and the aircraft itself was developed by the Hawker aircraft company at Kingston upon Thames, near London ENGLAND). Ed Heinemann and Sidney Camm must be turning in their graves if they saw a comment like that above. As for Senator John McCain, I do believe he has a very high award for gallantry (could be the CMH) that he got for saving the life of a pilot when on the USS Forestal when the ship had a very bad fire in 1967 after a Zuni rocket was fired on the deck and hit a Skyhawk. (The one that McCain was sitting in if I recall).

May 17, 2006 at 11:14 pm in reply to: Sea King Sortie #2566115

BIGVERN1966
Participant

FIRST IN THE FIELD

As I noted, I missed the most famous point on the mouth of the River Deben, a very famous Manor house that was the home to the first air defence unit of its type in the World. The RAF unit that was there being equipped with the first operational AMES Type 1 🙂 A war winner if ever there was one. I’ll let somebody else fill in the details 😀 😀 😀

May 17, 2006 at 10:40 pm in reply to: Cold war prototypes that didn't make it #2566135

BIGVERN1966
Participant

i do hope that russia continues development on these designs. am i right in saying that these types of machines are unique to the former USSR.
another cold war prototype that didnt make it…the Shorts Sperrin. the first V-bomber !!!!!!. 😉

More of an S-bomber actually :diablo:

May 17, 2006 at 8:58 pm in reply to: Fly-by-wireless has come! #2566310

BIGVERN1966
Participant

😮 😮 😮 A VERY BAD IDEA!!!!!!! 😮 😮

May 17, 2006 at 7:51 pm in reply to: Sea King Sortie #2566341

BIGVERN1966
Participant

As ever, excellent shots; many thanks for posting them!!!

What is your role on the helo, if you don’t mind me asking?

:diablo: :diablo: :diablo: The Disaster survivor (volunteer from another RAF unit. In fact Wattisham is an old posting of mine. I was based there on a mobile Air Defence radar unit (144 Signals Unit, what is now No 1 Air Control Centre) in the very early 1990’s when Wattisham was a big Air defence base, 56 and 74 Sqn Phantoms and 85 Sqn Bloodhounds, plus the mobile AD radars):diablo: :diablo: :diablo:

More photos from on the boat after I was winched down to it (Camera failed on the way down, plus you spin a lot in the downwash). I landed at the stern and then went with the winch man to the middle of the port side were we were picked up by the Sea king (me in a very horizontal position and then hauled into the aircraft. (Pick ups from the sea are always done in this way now as it has been found that if your in the water, the water pressure helps cut off the blood supply to the legs, as your body tries to combat the heat loss of being in water that is cold. If you are lifted out of the water in the normal way, the lack of water pressure and gravity forces the remaining warm blood from your body core in the legs and it can result in massive hypothermia that will kill you in the time it takes the winch to get you from the water to the helicopter). Again the camara went low battery on the way up. 😡

One point to add on this is when the Helo is in the hover over water, The sea spray stings a bit.

May 17, 2006 at 7:20 pm in reply to: Maximum glide ratio #1281305

BIGVERN1966
Participant

I think 37 is an extremely good L/D – indeed it’s only really the top sailplanes that get over 50.

17+ metre wing span in other words.

May 17, 2006 at 7:11 pm in reply to: Oh dear! #1281420

BIGVERN1966
Participant

I bet I am not alone in reading these arguement threads for their amusement value.

Spot on, some of them have had me in tears over the last few months :diablo:

May 17, 2006 at 5:53 pm in reply to: Sea King Sortie #2566430

BIGVERN1966
Participant

More Sea King Sortie Photos

More photos. Lowish level (down to 100 Feet) over the River Deben and out to sea, keeping an eye out for any birds of the flying type (had problems with the camera battery giving up on me 😡 towards the end of the river, hence I missed the most famous place on the route on the way out). Then out into the North Sea where the aircraft meet up with the Union Pluto, a small tramp steamer which allowed the Sea King to lower a couple of guys (the Winch man (an air engineer and ex TG3 techie (same trade as I was in) and myself on to the deck). The Winch man can just be seen about to make contact with the stern of the ship in one of the latter shots).

May 17, 2006 at 1:05 am in reply to: Sea King Sortie #2567061

BIGVERN1966
Participant

Second set. more shots of Watisham from the air and a photo of the Steely Eyed Missile Man himself ( 🙂 My Username is not BIGVERN for nothing 🙂 ). some shots from up the front of the aircraft as well, plus a shot of Woodbridge town and the A12 as well.

May 17, 2006 at 12:07 am in reply to: the most shot down or lost.. #1282405

BIGVERN1966
Participant

The Me109 must be pretty high on the list, not only from combat attrition, but from the high number of accidents in training from it’s notorious landing characteristics……..
If more than 12,000 were lost that would be greater than 1 in 3.

The Lancaster would be in the one lost for every two built range at least, 7,377 built, 3,249 were lost on combat operations alone giving a figure of 1 to 2.27. This ratio does not count aircraft written off in accidents or due to combat damage.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 1,215 total)

← 1 2 3 … 62 63 64 … 79 80 81 →