If you read it carefully, you’ll note that my qualification never was a topic to this debate.. I have used the above mentioned car as an analogy only.. we all get to use examples from our own line of work sometimes.. topic closed
English isn’t my first language but from what i understand
You said test pilot opinions should not be trusted, the analogy is that your opinion on your car shouldn’t be taken as some reputable source which now should be quoted by TopGear, AM&S. In which others replies that, an average car owner doesn’t have the level of expertise about their car in the same way a test pilot and Top Gun instructor have about their aircraft. It end with you claim that you are not an average car owner but at the same time refuses to back up that statement by any mean.
From my perspective, your argument doesn’t make alot of sense. If you indeed have as much knowledge about your car as Berke has about aircraft then iam sure your opinion is quotable.
P/s: While we should be able to give examples from our line of work, because you are online, it is a given that anyone can have any jobs so if you don’t want to back it up, there is no reason to say it at all.
Yes, roughly..there is no 1-vs-1 analogy, of course, but I’d say I am in the same ballpark of experience level in my line of work.
The thing is that I am not seeking for your appreciation, approval or anything like this. Your beliefs have zero impact on how I see myself. In case you somehow hoped I would now devote any effort trying to provide you evidence or certificates about my qualification, then I have to disappoint you
I don’t care so much about the Sprey interview. I don’t have enough patience to listen to 60 minutes Podcast. But internet has enough self proclaimed experts as it is, there is no point for you to say that you are an expert if you can’t back it up. If you don’t care about appreciation or approval then why even mention it at all?.
New post is up
It has been such a long time since last article, I thought you stopped writing.
While my dislike for de briganti’s style of faulty editorial posing as journalism is deeply rooted, it isn’t often one of his “articles” makes me laugh out loud. I particularly love how he starts off with comments from the AvWeek message board scrum. They are a special breed. He ends with alleged unnamed military personnel comments.
He is so butt hurt that he has to invent some fake stores, sound like JSR
By “picture” he meant this video starting at 6’40:
Would you mind write down what he wrote in French?
Interesting data from this small picture (a jurnalist embedded in a test/ferry flight)
assembly time 2 weeks. Several months of test : 3 on ground + ?
max speed tested during the npicture with 3x1200L tanks : mach 1.7. G limit in this config, 5.5g
auto follow “griuond” at sea : 100 feet, 450 kts.
Can you post the photo again, i can’t see anything.
in detail JSR could argument in detail about it with pro-Russian argumentation.
I don’t agree with Bayars but JSR posts are more or less wasting forum bandwidth
How did it make the turn at 3:35 without thrust vector control?
So it looks like it can detect radars but then it compromises its stealth, so probably not really functional against short range pop-up threats. Seems like they use them in a sort of periscope kind of manner. Take a quick look every now and again.
From the article quote Alan Brown and Sherm Mullin’s words, the radar locator is a concept study and was never put on F-117. Could be because it doesn’t work against pop up threat ?.
As for the deficits with the engine, a physical effect, the ground effect is taken into the design, which effectively creates more thrust.
The tandem wing design is also noteworthy for the ground effect optimization
As i remember ground effect doesn’t create more thrust
Is it just me or PAK-FA thread became F-35 thread and F-35 thread became PAK-FA thread ?
It start to get annoying.
Do any of you realize that forum has a search function ?. This thread and Pak-FA thread are literally the same certain members bring up the same topic every few weeks.It get tiring.
Well there must be a reason for everything. Doesn’t mean it’s a good reason.
In this case, the reason is perfectly justified.
^ @LEG: are you the guy that got embarrassed here : http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?2902-F-32/page2
Somebody was saying that these drawings are to scale and that they prove that the Raptor has a smaller frontal cross section. I think these pics prove the opposite
If you cut off F-22 wing because people said its’t in correct scale, try to make it looks convincing at least. That photo look terrible