dark light

Entropy

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 427 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Ejection Pics #2580248
    Entropy
    Participant

    That ejection sequence is crazy… they eject through a fireball… try patricks avaition site for the video, i think i got it there.

    in reply to: US NAVY Aviation quiz: #2055854
    Entropy
    Participant

    Wanshan answered that… VF-84 and -81.

    edit- whoops SOC beat me!

    in reply to: US NAVY Aviation quiz: #2055871
    Entropy
    Participant

    A1- Patrol Squadron 21
    A2-Wright R-1820 and GE J31
    A3-USS Lexington and they flew Furies (FJ-3D)
    A4- VA-212 from the Bonne Homme Richard, also briefly flew in Blue Angel colors
    A5- Satan and Mithras…

    Hope at least some of these are right!

    in reply to: Ejection Pics #2581090
    Entropy
    Participant

    Just thought I add a little bit of trivia… guess where the K-36 seat is going to be made? Good ol’ US of A, CT to be exact…

    http://www.conntact.com/archive_index/archive_pages/2656_Business_New_Haven.html

    look at section entitled “up in smoke”

    Another mention of it…

    http://www.ctcase.org/bulletin/14_1/briefs14_1_99.html

    in reply to: Ejection Pics #2581095
    Entropy
    Participant

    If i remember the early F-104 ejected downwards, with later ones upwards. This caused some serious and fatal issues with pilots familar with the older style ejection sequence….

    in reply to: Ejection Pics #2581807
    Entropy
    Participant

    Doesnt the F-111 use a pod system? i didnt think there were ejections seats in them, the crew sits in a pod that blows clear of the aircraft….

    in reply to: 70 new JAS may be scrapped #2583335
    Entropy
    Participant

    If i am not mistaken niether Sweden nor Switzerland allow militia pilots anymore… The Hunter was the last aircraft that allowed milita pilots in Switz, not sure in Sweden. I think now they are all professionals. There is also an age limit in Sweden, older pilots are transferred to transport units i believe, have to check my sources though…

    in reply to: F-5 in R.O.C. Taiwan #2583357
    Entropy
    Participant

    Whats the story with the above picture? Is the MiG over Taiwan?

    in reply to: Show us those interception pictures! #2584248
    Entropy
    Participant

    These are great! Please keep them coming!

    in reply to: 70 new JAS may be scrapped #2584554
    Entropy
    Participant

    I am following this thread with interest, I will be working a bit with the War College in Stockholm this summer and am working with the Flygvapnet. This should be interesting…

    in reply to: Mig-21 and Mig-29 at Batajnica AB – new photos #2592238
    Entropy
    Participant

    Whats wrong with you? Why cant you explain your position and educate us in an polite form? You made a good point in there but it was lost and no one will now listen.

    What you just did was horribly emabarrasing for all who frequent this board.

    in reply to: Is the F-22 Worth it? #2592432
    Entropy
    Participant

    My understanding was not that they wanted to kill the F-15 and replace it with the F-16 but rather once they charmed Schlesinger with the F-15 he gave them the go ahead for the LWF. The F-16 came well after the F-X project. I dont believe that Boyd was against the F-15, only the F-111B and “higher, futher, faster” mentality that led to the problems of the Vietnam era. I think Boyd was happy with the F-15, he was certainly not against any heavy fighter, just what he saw as a contiutation of the problems from the F-4.

    The Figher Mafia worked very closely with MD during the devolpment of the F-15 in the late 1960’s early 70’s and I believe they got what they wanted.

    Yes, I do like John Boyds work, not just in air warfare, he later stuff on manuever warfare if much better, but he did have many short comings, some of which persist today. He was brash, took problems head-on and made many enemies.

    I have never disagreed with you c/o the F-16, yet without him there would not even be an F-16 or an A-10 for that matter. He forced the USAF to accept the F-16 and i think it was the right choice in the long run. As does any aircraft it certainly had it sahre of shortcomings and problems, but today is a highly valued assets with not only the USAF but at least 17 other countries as well. The point with the F-16 is not that had shortcomings or was ill concieved, but that it exists at all.

    I applaud thier efforts, this type of rocking-the-boat within a bueacracy like the Pentagon is often needed, whether one agrees with what they are doing they make one think. That is the point of the exercise.

    in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2592665
    Entropy
    Participant

    There are still 700-800 missing soilders from the Korean war, you don’t hear about that on the news, so that should explain to you that IT IS possible to cover up losses, for years.

    These are not covered up, families of the soldiers have been notified that they are missing in action- presumed dead, as that could be no corraboration on their death and no body could not be recovered. There are no families that are sitting at home going “my brother/father/son went to war and did come home, no one told me what happened”. The US gov told them they were MIA. The issue with the MIA’s in Vietnam has nothing to do with a US coverup, but rather with the belief that the N. Vietnamese gov did not return all prisoners during the 1973 exchange. (<– very very short version of the issues revolving around this)

    in reply to: last of the props #1325199
    Entropy
    Participant

    Last RAF SQUADRON to operate a piston engined combat fighter type aircraft was the Air Fighting Development Squadron at Binbrook in 1963. The unit had an Airworthy Spitfire PRXIX as a gate guard, formally off the Historic Aircraft Flight (the unit that became BBMF in 1973 when the Lancaster was moved to Coltishall from Waddington). The Spitfire PS853 was recalled to flying status to take part in very Dissimilar Air Combat Tacitics trials against the unit’s Lightnings. The purpose of the trials being to see how the Lightning would deal with the Mustangs operated by Indonesia in the build up to the Confrontation. The Spitfire being the closest thing to the Mustang that the RAF could get their hands on.

    For All Spitfire fans, the results of the trials were that the Spitfire gave as good as it got, the Firestreak AAM would not home on the Spitfire’s engine and in a turning fight the Spitfire was better than the Lightning.

    Where did you get this info? I would like to read up on this, quite interesting!

    in reply to: Is the F-22 Worth it? #2592720
    Entropy
    Participant

    Straight from the Air College and Air Chronicles… “The resulting F-15 design was everything the Fighter Mafia advocated, with a TW at combat load of 1.4:1, good cockpit visibility, and other ACM features, including a gun.”

    http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/jim.html

    The orginal F-X (actually it was VFX project, as the F-X spun off that, as that was the start of the Mafia) project was what the Fighter Mafia objected too, not the end result. I suggest you famalirize yourself with what the USAF orginally wanted out of the program, a heavy complicated, swing wing aircraft much like the F-111. It was through “personal” contacts at MD that, in part, led to the design of the F-15, heavily influenced by Boyd.

    I do find it mildly amusing that ppl on the board are slamming one of the most influential groups within the Air Force in the last 25 years! (actaully its a little frightening)
    $11 million per copy is a low and ridiculous, but not the point. The Fighter Mafia always advocated a high low mix i.e quality and quanity are both important. Look at the makeup of the USAF fighter force, (in 2002) 54% of tactical aircraft were F-16’s while 27% were F-15’s, a hi/lo mix. This is what the Fighter Mafia was advoacting with low cost fighters, the ablity to field both types of aircraft, quality and quanity.

    They were simply objecting to the huge rising cost of aircraft and the problems assocaited with a much smaller force (they do address the increased capablity, but that only goes so far i.e if you dont have enough aircraft you cannot be everywhere you need to be)

    SOC- I am shocked you have not read some of this stuff more, I’ll be more then happy to pass some stuff on if you’d like, personally I like you’d find it very interesting. I have seen you argue some of the same things that Sprey, Boyd and Ricconi were up too…

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 427 total)