dark light

mike.m

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The name of the AH-1 Cobra #1159190
    mike.m
    Participant

    Isn’t it true tho, that some variants of the AH-64 like those flown by the British Army, are known as ‘Longbows’?

    in reply to: Waddington 2009 #523091
    mike.m
    Participant

    Hi Paul, yes i was about 100 yards further down by the look of it. AWESOME shot mate! bloody brilliant! would love a copy of that!!

    Heres a couple more of mine.

    Mike

    in reply to: Harriers and Tornados #2331202
    mike.m
    Participant

    Harriers knackered?? Where are you getting this information from??

    ALL, I repeat, ALL 50+ GR. 9’s have plenty of life left – certainly enough for 10 years – probably more. You know they’ve all recently had a shedload of work, right?? Even the remaining GR. 7’s aren’t beyond further service.

    You’ll perhaps also note that they haven’t (nor will they be) been disposed of and, indeed, are still ground run? No? Thought not…

    I COULD point you in the direction of several threads elsewhere with contributions from those who really DO know but using your your rather slip – shod research as my benchmark, I can’t be @rsed.

    Frank

    the info came from the RAF, not me. I was only saying what i was told guys! no need to berate

    in reply to: Just Jane news? #1102296
    mike.m
    Participant

    Probably not. The BBMF are very lairy of flying formation with civilians.

    Moggy

    It was never a problem for PS853. There was talk of the Canadian Mk 10 Lanc making a trip. The news all went quiet tho

    in reply to: Japan to consider F/A-22 to replace its F-4s #2460347
    mike.m
    Participant

    A VERY PUBLIC APOLOGY

    To all those concerned with this thread, may I offer my sincerest apologies to anyone whom I have personally upset. I let my feelings run away with me and this, upon reflection, was unforgivable.

    CAN I ASSURE ALL USERS HERE THAT THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE

    SORRY GUYS http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/images/icons/icon9.gif

    Mike

    in reply to: Canada, why not the Super Hornet? #2460364
    mike.m
    Participant

    A VERY PUBLIC APOLOGY

    To all those concerned with this thread, may I offer my sincerest apologies to anyone whom I have personally upset. I let my feelings run away with me and this, upon reflection, was unforgivable.

    CAN I ASSURE ALL USERS HERE THAT THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE

    SORRY GUYS http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/images/icons/icon9.gif

    Mike

    in reply to: Japan to consider F/A-22 to replace its F-4s #2460382
    mike.m
    Participant

    I was told on this thread that Typhoon has NO advantages over Rapter. Below are the statistics of both aircrafts official websites. They manufacturers don’t agree with you boys!

    From the F-22 Rapter official website
    Wing Area: 840 sq ft
    Engine Thrust Class: 35,000 lb
    Level Speed: 921 mph
    Total Length: 62.08 ft
    Wing Span: 44.5 ft
    Horizontal Tail Span: 29ft
    Tail Span: 18’10”
    Total Height: 16.67ft
    Track Width: 10.6ft
    Engines: Pratt & Whitney F-119
    Max. Takeoff Weight: 60,000 lb (27,216 kg) Max. External Stores: 5,000 lb (2,270 kg) Weight Empty: 31,670 lb (14,365 kg) Ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,240 m) Crew: 1 G Limit: +9 G First Flight: September 7th 1997

    From The Euro Fighter Typhoon Website
    General characteristics
    • Crew: 1 (operational aircraft) or 2 (training aircraft)
    • Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
    • Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
    • Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
    • Wing area: 50 m² (538 ft²)
    • Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
    • Loaded weight: 15,550 kg (34,280 lb)
    • Max takeoff weight: 23,500 kg (51,800 lb)
    • Powerplant: 2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
    o Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
    o Thrust with afterburner: 90 kN (20,000 lbf) each
    Performance
    • Maximum speed:
    o At altitude: Mach 2+ (2,120 km/h, 1,320 mph)
    o At sea level: Mach 1.2
    o Supercruise: Mach 1.1[134]-1.5[135]
    • Range: 1,390 km (864 mi)
    • Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,300 mi)
    • Service ceiling 19,812 m (65,000 ft)
    • Rate of climb: >315 m/s[136][137] (62,000 ft/min[138])
    • Wing loading: 311 kg/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
    • Thrust/weight: 1.16
    Armament
    • Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon 150 rounds

    I will concede that stealth for Euro Fighter is an issue and apart from agility which is a at best a low speed regime because of the body’s ability to withstand G forces, the facts here speak for themselves. Typhoon is faster by some 500mph, better rate of climb, carries more fire power than rapter (twice that of Tornado!) and has a better combat radius.

    i dislike being hurranged in public just because i have a different view than our friends across the pond. Where’s the special relationship now??????

    in reply to: Canada, why not the Super Hornet? #2460386
    mike.m
    Participant

    Just to throw a little fuel on to the fire, so to speak. I was told on this thread that Typhoon has NO advantages over Rapter. i think You’ll find, boys, that the manufacturers don’t agree with you.

    From the F-22 Rapter official website

    Wing Area: 840 sq ft
    Engine Thrust Class: 35,000 lb
    Level Speed: 921 mph
    Total Length: 62.08 ft
    Wing Span: 44.5 ft
    Horizontal Tail Span: 29ft
    Tail Span: 18’10”
    Total Height: 16.67ft
    Track Width: 10.6ft
    Engines: Pratt & Whitney F-119
    Max. Takeoff Weight: 60,000 lb (27,216 kg) Max. External Stores: 5,000 lb (2,270 kg) Weight Empty: 31,670 lb (14,365 kg) Ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,240 m) Crew: 1 G Limit: +9 G First Flight: September 7th 1997

    From The Euro Fighter Typhoon Website

    General characteristics
    • Crew: 1 (operational aircraft) or 2 (training aircraft)
    • Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
    • Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
    • Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
    • Wing area: 50 m² (538 ft²)
    • Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
    • Loaded weight: 15,550 kg (34,280 lb)
    • Max takeoff weight: 23,500 kg (51,800 lb)
    • Powerplant: 2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
    o Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
    o Thrust with afterburner: 90 kN (20,000 lbf) each
    Performance
    • Maximum speed:
    o At altitude: Mach 2+ (2,120 km/h, 1,320 mph)
    o At sea level: Mach 1.2
    o Supercruise: Mach 1.1[134]-1.5[135]
    • Range: 1,390 km (864 mi)
    • Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,300 mi)
    • Service ceiling 19,812 m (65,000 ft)
    • Rate of climb: >315 m/s[136][137] (62,000 ft/min[138])
    • Wing loading: 311 kg/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
    • Thrust/weight: 1.16
    Armament
    • Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon 150 rounds

    Agility aside which is a low speed regime at best. typhoon is faster, carries more fire power, has a better rate of climb. Do I really need to go on?

    Quote: ‘He who laughs last, laughs longest!’

    in reply to: Valkyrie #1214717
    mike.m
    Participant

    Rommel was shot up by a flight of Spitfires from 350 (Belgian) Squadron. his staff car overturned and broke his back. He was under arrest at the time.

    in reply to: An all white Lancaster appeared on the approach… #1214827
    mike.m
    Participant

    Fantastic Lanc Photos. Don’t you just love it? there are rumours of NX611 being restored to flying condition. Anyone have any info on this?

    ‘………. All i got was a belly full of English Channel!!’

    in reply to: Japan to consider F/A-22 to replace its F-4s #2460754
    mike.m
    Participant

    hmmmmm………….er…………….blimey. Phew!!

    in reply to: Japan to consider F/A-22 to replace its F-4s #2460787
    mike.m
    Participant

    one day, the truth will out, and when it does, we’ll see who is laughing then! 😀

    ‘when you shout from the tops of mountains, you’re just a voice in the wilderness!’http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/index.php?

    in reply to: Canada, why not the Super Hornet? #2460790
    mike.m
    Participant

    the same thing it did to the Indian Air Force Sukhoi’s

    ‘don’t laugh at the truth when the truth laughs at you…..’

    in reply to: Canada, why not the Super Hornet? #2460793
    mike.m
    Participant

    Random BS huh? well, you ought to tell that to the USAF because they were stunned by what typhoon did to their new ‘baby’. ……and i can back it up!!:D

    in reply to: Falklands "What if…?" #1214868
    mike.m
    Participant

    Thanks Creaking, my views about the Falklands often get me to trouble. to be perfectly honest, yes, we took a hell of a risk going down to the south Atlantic. Ardent, Antilope, Coventry, Sheffield, Atalntic Conveyor, Sir Tristrom and Sir Lancelot are proof of that.

    In 1992, I met a famous casualty of the logistic ships that were bombed, a Welsh Guardsman, 10 years after the conflict and I asked him did he think it was worth all of the sacrifice. He only answered with one word…………………..yes! Then he shook me by the hand, signed my book, looked me in the eye…………and wept.

    Bravery has many faces, doesn’t it?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)