dark light

DTJJ

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 157 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: C-27J Gunship & USAF PC-12 #2458050
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Technically speaking, the PC-12’s that have been with the 319th since ’05 are PC-12’s not U-28’s.

    They were U-28As from the start.
    http://www2.afsoc.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=226

    in reply to: C-27J Gunship & USAF PC-12 #2458071
    DTJJ
    Participant

    video of 1st U-28 arrival at Cannon here:
    http://www.afsoc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080109-088.wmv

    Interesting to note the cameraman seems very reluctant to show the ‘Nxxx’ registration. Its N131JN registered to Sierra Nevada Corporation. This is the mob that does a lot of spooky ISR C-12 mods for the US Army.

    I think the 10 on order are in addition to the six(?) already in service with the 319th SOS, as mentioned by Arthur.

    in reply to: C-27J Gunship & USAF PC-12 #2458251
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Most likely the 30-mm Bushmaster weapon which is replacing the 40-mm Bofors on the USAF’s AC-130H & AC-130U fleets as well as the 25-mm GAU-12 fitted on the AC-130U only.

    That would seem the obvious answer, but …. read the article in the original link!

    Regarding the U-28A, the first of 10 was delivered to the 318th SOS at Cannon in January

    in reply to: name that tanker #2455830
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Deployable Air Refueler/Logistics Equipment, Network Enabled

    = DARLENE

    in reply to: US Police and Parapublic aviation and Homeland Security #2475599
    DTJJ
    Participant

    There was a good rundown of the DHS organization a while ago in International Airpower Review – sorry I can’t remember which issue.

    in reply to: A Question about the Saab Gripen #2483922
    DTJJ
    Participant

    It’s not a Swedish/Saab thing, as you get into the Viggen/Draken et al from the left side.

    in reply to: Fun with Google Earth part 2. #2507346
    DTJJ
    Participant

    This is probably not the thread to put it in, but it is Google Earth…

    Leuchars, Lossiemouth and Kinloss have all been added very recently in high resolution to Google Earth/Gmaps.

    As has the area around Tain, and the RM Condor and airfield at Montrose. I think Campbeltown (Machrihanish) has also had it’s resolution improved.

    So has Spadeadam.
    Award yourself a pint of Jennings best if you can find the Su-22
    Two if you can spot the Blue Streak missile fuel section

    in reply to: CURRENT RAF BASES – Any more to add? #2544674
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Interesting (not very important, but interesting!).

    A few years ago the RAF were very keen to stress that it was ‘MPA’, not ‘RAF MP’. However, on reflection and based on what you say, I think the situation is that there is an ‘RAF Mount Pleasant’ station located at the ‘Mount Pleasant Airfield’.

    Anyhow, it’s Friday evening so I won’t worry myself too much more about it 😉

    in reply to: CURRENT RAF BASES – Any more to add? #2544767
    DTJJ
    Participant

    RAF Mount Pleasant it is. Even certain ‘purple’ bases in the UK are still titled RAF.

    http://www.raf.mod.uk/structure/stations.cfm?selectStation=9E0E8C39-F754-2F05-6BF4D6CE47462066

    I stand corrected – any idea when it changed?

    in reply to: CURRENT RAF BASES – Any more to add? #2544917
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Fairly sure that ‘RAF Mount Pleasant’ never existed. Its officially ‘Mount Pleasant Airfield’ (MPA) as it’s a ‘purple’ base – at least it was when I was last there.

    Not too sure about ‘RAF Al Udeid’ either. Can’t imagine the Spams or Qataris being too happy with it….

    If you want bases where the RAF have a ‘permanent’ presence, how about Kandahar/Basra etc?

    in reply to: picture(s) identification #2545609
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Looks like an icing test spray rig to me

    in reply to: JSTARS grandpappy was a UH-60 Blackhawk… #2549650
    DTJJ
    Participant

    It’s still around, being used for sensor test work at Fort Belvoir.

    in reply to: International Air Power Review (IAPR) dead? #2507582
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Got mine today – must say the J-10 article is well worth it. Great to see so much stuff in one place, and the drawings are really nice. (I’m also very partial to a bit of B-29/50 as well, so I’m happy)

    in reply to: Bastille Day, July 14th 2007 #2531068
    DTJJ
    Participant

    Allons enfants….!

    What size lens was that?

    DTJJ
    Participant

    1 Money
    2 Nationalistic pride
    3 Employment politics



    87 Operational requirements

    BTW, Rick, have you got an article/paper to write? :diablo:

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 157 total)