Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: The most aswome thing you can not buy!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hodgie View Post
    Yea, he had some funny stories about problems they had during testing. Apparently the propellant they were using in the bullets for the gun had to be changed. The gun shot so fast that the fumes exiting the barrel would cause the engines to stall.

    While we're talking about military planes, this is a cool video. An israeli pilot loses a wing on his f-15 and still manages to land it

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_EXtBEaBbs
    That's video is pretty nuts.
    Don't the South Koreans have the most advanced version of the Eagle now?

    I remember reading something a while ago about the engine flare-outs from the GAU-8, didn't know it was a propellant change that fixed it though.
    "An Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II flew a show of force and expended flares for emphasis over Salerno after enemy forces attacked a coalition forward base. The arrival of the aircraft prompted an immediate retreat by enemy personnel."

  2. Default

    Your both wrong. The F-14 Tomcat is what many fighter pilots want to fly. Earning your top gun wings is the great honor in the air force. The tomcat is so versatile as a mulit-role plane. Plus the 8 mavericks it carries are deadly to anything worth putting on the battlefield.
    -The enemy of my enemy is my friend-

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inthebutt View Post
    Your both wrong. The F-14 Tomcat is what many fighter pilots want to fly. Earning your top gun wings is the great honor in the air force. The tomcat is so versatile as a mulit-role plane. Plus the 8 mavericks it carries are deadly to anything worth putting on the battlefield.
    Yea, but it was retired a few years ago. Although retiring an aircraft doesn't always mean it's no longer flown...the SR-71 was also "retired" and given to the CIA. The problem is that you can only do so many upgrades to an existing design. Our aircraft fleet (in design terms) is relatively old. F-14,F-15,F-16 are from the 70's and the F-18 is from the early 80's... I'm not saying they aren't good aircraft and that their upgrades have allowed them to remain effective, but like I said, you can only do so much with a single design.
    Last edited by Hodgie; 04-10-2009 at 08:53 PM.

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inthebutt View Post
    Your both wrong. The F-14 Tomcat is what many fighter pilots want to fly. Earning your top gun wings is the great honor in the air force. The tomcat is so versatile as a mulit-role plane. Plus the 8 mavericks it carries are deadly to anything worth putting on the battlefield.
    Sorry if I'm wrong about this (I haven't looked beyond UPT), but isn't Top Gun the Navy school for fighter weapons training?

    In any case, I don't care much for Tomcats.
    "An Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II flew a show of force and expended flares for emphasis over Salerno after enemy forces attacked a coalition forward base. The arrival of the aircraft prompted an immediate retreat by enemy personnel."

  5. Default

    Tank busters FTW

    I have edited my first post to show how much better the forums are with youtube support.
    Last edited by ZERO; 04-11-2009 at 01:24 PM.



  6. Default

    Back to the toy shown, I think Zero's assessment holds up decently. This would never be something you would want to be on while being shot at, but truthfully you don't want to be in an unarmored humvee that's being shot at either but they still mount guns on the things.

    These things are definitely a possible force multiplier though. Given current tendency toward low density conflict and MOUT, these things could be a godsend for militaries capable of fielding them and hell on earth for insurgents.

    As a commander, I can reliably expect about a 10 minute mile from infantry in full gear/packs. With slight improvement these things could do a 2 minute mile for a soldier in gear. As an insurgent, the infantry reinforcements I'm worried about that used to take 5 minutes to get there now start arriving in just over a minute.

    And this is exponential, as with evenly distributed patrols the longer the time period the greater the number of reinforcements arrive per interval. Traditionally there is a greater limit to this because I have to worry about how fast I can return the now combat-exhausted troops to their assigned locations after a firefight, but with these, I can draw from a larger area and return them to it faster and with less fatigue.

    Infantry are absolutely essential to urban warfare, and the biggest issue with using them is getting them where needed. This solves getting them there. Granted, an insurgent could still ambush arriving reinforcements with planning, but that's no different than now. And with these, an infantry squad would travel with much larger spacing, reducing the vulnerability of the squad overall. IED's are what they are, being on foot wouldn't make you less vulnerable than being on one of these, and depending on their construction, this could offer some protection against some lighter anti-personnel mines. Getting thrown off and breaking an arm sure beats the hell out of getting a new leg. There are some anti-personnel mines that might never get set off by these; the tracks have a larger footprint than the boot soles the soldier would have on the ground so there is reduced ground pressure; and the track crawls so there is no percussion of a foot impacting the ground.

    That last part is why one of these could also make a soldier using one vastly superior at dealing with mud/snow etc. If it's built right, you could glide across without getting your feet stuck in. Like high speed snowshoes.

    Now of course, the big issues are: reliability/maintainability, maintenance complexity, supply logistics, and of paramount tactical importance; does it look sexy enough?
    "But it's just a game."
    "So's blackjack. Go cheat in a Moscow casino and when you get caught tell the mobsters it's just a game. They have great sense of humor, you'll have a fun story to tell your future children. Who will have to be adopted, after the little prank the mob does to you in return."

  7. Default

    Was just getting to the end of your post thinking about maintenance issues and then you mentioned it lol. Don't forget cost, already costs something like $17,000 to equip a single soldier, this thing would tack on an extra couple thousand.
    "An Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II flew a show of force and expended flares for emphasis over Salerno after enemy forces attacked a coalition forward base. The arrival of the aircraft prompted an immediate retreat by enemy personnel."

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paper View Post
    Was just getting to the end of your post thinking about maintenance issues and then you mentioned it lol. Don't forget cost, already costs something like $17,000 to equip a single soldier, this thing would tack on an extra couple thousand.
    And you KNOW that the soldiers would come up with some pretty inventive ways to break it.

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paper View Post
    something a while ago about the engine flare-outs from the GAU-8, didn't know it was a propellant change that fixed it though.
    They also added two plates to the bottom of the fuselage. They are attached to the bottom of the fuselage and point down. They channel the exhaust from the GAU-8 under the aircraft and keep it from going over the wing and into the engine.
    Attached Images

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •