Go Back   Christian Guitar Forum > Hobbies & Entertainment > Automotive
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 08-17-2009, 04:37 PM   #76
Honda fan boy
 
robinson's Avatar
 

Joined: Jan 2004
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 114
Send a message via AIM to robinson Send a message via Yahoo to robinson
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaserRacer View Post
Ok, I will bite... F-15 F-16 F/A-18 or F-22?
Nope, and you'll never guess. Its a C-135.

We had a strong tail wind, so that was our ground speed, not TAS or IAS.

__________________


Current setup
-Ibanez Prestige SR1005 EWN
-Line 6 studio 110
-Buttkicker platform, amp, LFE
-Future sonics Atrio M5 IEM

Stuff lying around
-Ibanez SR305BK
-Carvin RL6815 Cylclops
-Aira Pro II "The Cat"
robinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Unread 08-18-2009, 12:00 PM   #77
Post impact
 
LaserRacer's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Kent, Washington
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by robinson View Post
Nope, and you'll never guess. Its a C-135.

We had a strong tail wind, so that was our ground speed, not TAS or IAS.
Cheater... Thats one heck of a tailwind. I didn't know we still operate C-135s. Are you guys going to upgrade any time soon? I see C-17s fly over my place everyday, they definately look like a blast.
__________________
Me fail English...Thats unpossible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Te eF Kay View Post
Mulletboy didn't say you were a/s/l, he asked if I thought he was an a/s/l.
That's what I thought of it anyway.
LaserRacer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 08:20 PM   #78
Sarcasm? What's that?
 
What5647's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,707
Bell-Boing is drawing up a replacement, it's basically a quad-rotor version of the V-22.

I expect it would prove to be an even bigger waste of money, and an even worse plane, than the V-22.

No, I'm not a fan of the V-22. Cool idea, but like the F-22, has spent way too much time in development. I'll grant you the V-22 is far more useful than the F-22. And don't start harping on the F-22 being some wonderplane, because it isn't. The Navy came up with what is in some ways a more capable plane in the Superhornet, which went from concept to fleet bird, all while the F-22 was in development. First Superhornet flight was in 1995, entered the fleet in 1999. The F-22 first flew in 1990, and entered it's fleet in 2005.

I wonder what Naval air power would be like if it had the Air Force's budget?

OK, sorry, /rant.
__________________

electric guitars: carvin bolt, cort z22
acoustic guitar: cort earth 200gc
amps: carvin VL100 legacy head, peavey rockmaster pre, carvin sx200c
effects: krank distortus maximus
cab: mesa oversized recto 4x12
What5647 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 09:39 PM   #79
recovering user
 

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by What5647 View Post
Bell-Boing is drawing up a replacement, it's basically a quad-rotor version of the V-22.

I expect it would prove to be an even bigger waste of money, and an even worse plane, than the V-22.

No, I'm not a fan of the V-22. Cool idea, but like the F-22, has spent way too much time in development. I'll grant you the V-22 is far more useful than the F-22. And don't start harping on the F-22 being some wonderplane, because it isn't. The Navy came up with what is in some ways a more capable plane in the Superhornet, which went from concept to fleet bird, all while the F-22 was in development. First Superhornet flight was in 1995, entered the fleet in 1999. The F-22 first flew in 1990, and entered it's fleet in 2005.

I wonder what Naval air power would be like if it had the Air Force's budget?

OK, sorry, /rant.
The V-22 is a deathtrap, and an engineering catastrophe. The F-22 is what happens when the Air Force has too much bloody money. To quote "gone in 60 seconds," they become 'self indulgent weiners.' The F-22 is prohibitively expensive, took forever to bring into service, and let's not forget that it's replacing an aircraft that has NEVER BEEN SHOT DOWN IN COMBAT. Not since 1976 when the F-15 entered service.
mulletman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 07:15 AM   #80
Sarcasm? What's that?
 
What5647's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,707
Well, my understanding is that the F-15 doesn't end up in as many ground strikes, which is where most of our losses are from. Air-to-Air we slaughter, but ground fire will always be an issue. Still, the F-15 is still a very dominant air superiority fighter. Heck, could you imagine if they did like the Navy did with the Superhornet and made a new version of the F-15 based on the old aircraft? You can reduce the radar signature be redesigning the engine inlets, update the engines, avionics and cockpit displays, etc. Bound to be cheaper than an F-22, and still be very effective. Remember, the F-22 still shoots the same weapons as an F-15.
__________________

electric guitars: carvin bolt, cort z22
acoustic guitar: cort earth 200gc
amps: carvin VL100 legacy head, peavey rockmaster pre, carvin sx200c
effects: krank distortus maximus
cab: mesa oversized recto 4x12
What5647 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 09:16 AM   #81
Honeymoonin'
 
redbaron's Avatar
 

Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Bremerton, wa
Posts: 5,042
Send a message via AIM to redbaron
honestly I'd rather see an updated F16 for an air superiority fighter, but realistically the days of true dogfights are long gone, the romance of air to air combat has been reduced to target missiles, let AWACs give you the coords and fire away

Also, take your airplane nerd talk to the airplane forum known as CPF
__________________
-andrew
{insert witty signature}
-->check out my user title!<-- (Oh BTW CLICK ON THAT RED STUFF )
redbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 10:04 AM   #82
recovering user
 

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by What5647 View Post
Well, my understanding is that the F-15 doesn't end up in as many ground strikes, which is where most of our losses are from. Air-to-Air we slaughter, but ground fire will always be an issue. Still, the F-15 is still a very dominant air superiority fighter. Heck, could you imagine if they did like the Navy did with the Superhornet and made a new version of the F-15 based on the old aircraft? You can reduce the radar signature be redesigning the engine inlets, update the engines, avionics and cockpit displays, etc. Bound to be cheaper than an F-22, and still be very effective. Remember, the F-22 still shoots the same weapons as an F-15.
Don't forget that we have possibly the best ground attack airplane ever conceived in our inventory. I'd be all for giving the A-10 a bit of an update.... Using the F-15 for ground attack, when A-10's are available.... is like eating ice cream with a knife when there are spoons in the drawer. But yeah.... an updated F-15 would be a better idea than a -22. I would love to see a "super Eagle," and a "SuperHog."
mulletman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 06:51 PM   #83
Slappa da bass mon
 
scared2mosh's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,226
Wow... I guess next time I want some serious back and forth conversation I'll make my thread about planes
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis
"Fascism will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a Bible."
scared2mosh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 09:49 PM   #84
recovering user
 

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,434
Be careful.... it will be a fight to the death....

mulletman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 12:04 AM   #85
Slappa da bass mon
 
scared2mosh's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,226
well I think it would be better to return to topic so....

I went 100 on the way home from the movies tonight (my bro was driving) the funny part was that it was the aveo

I was scared...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis
"Fascism will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a Bible."
scared2mosh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 02:50 AM   #86
Registered User
 

Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 27
I drove to church the other day for the first time.

I was going about 30, and it was a Dodge Caravan
BassDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 09:59 AM   #87
Post impact
 
LaserRacer's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Kent, Washington
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by What5647 View Post
Bell-Boing is drawing up a replacement, it's basically a quad-rotor version of the V-22.

I expect it would prove to be an even bigger waste of money, and an even worse plane, than the V-22.

No, I'm not a fan of the V-22. Cool idea, but like the F-22, has spent way too much time in development. I'll grant you the V-22 is far more useful than the F-22. And don't start harping on the F-22 being some wonderplane, because it isn't. The Navy came up with what is in some ways a more capable plane in the Superhornet, which went from concept to fleet bird, all while the F-22 was in development. First Superhornet flight was in 1995, entered the fleet in 1999. The F-22 first flew in 1990, and entered it's fleet in 2005.

I wonder what Naval air power would be like if it had the Air Force's budget?

OK, sorry, /rant.

That is the replacement for the C-130...the C-135 is a non-tanker KC-135 (so basically a re-engined 707).

Speaking of the Superhornet and capable in the same sentence without a "not" bothers me...it is a bit like a swiss army knife, it can do everything half assed. The aircraft it replaced all did their respective jobs significantly better.

As to an updated, multi-mission F-15, it exists in the F-15E.

The need for multi-mission "stealth" aircraft is overstated. Look at how the air war ran in the gulf in '91... send in a few "stealth" aircraft in the form of the F-117 to destroy air defence sites, then destroy the remaining ground forces using conventional aircraft...much cheaper and equally effective.

The A-10 could do with some all weather capabilities, some other avionics upgrades wouldn't be too bad either. However it is almost perfectly suited to its mission already (the canopy is nice and big so they can write all over it with grease pencil during FAC missions).


(sorry, This should really be a multiquote but I am too lazy to change it)
__________________
Me fail English...Thats unpossible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Te eF Kay View Post
Mulletboy didn't say you were a/s/l, he asked if I thought he was an a/s/l.
That's what I thought of it anyway.
LaserRacer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 10:02 AM   #88
recovering user
 

Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,434
I basically just want to see something called the "SuperHog" enter service...




Quote:
Originally Posted by LaserRacer View Post
Speaking of the Superhornet and capable in the same sentence without a "not" bothers me...it is a bit like a swiss army knife, it can do everything half assed. The aircraft it replaced all did their respective jobs significantly better.
Except for the 'A' model F-14's. You know, the ones that had that severe inconvenience of fireballing while passing through mach one....
mulletman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 10:08 AM   #89
Post impact
 
LaserRacer's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Kent, Washington
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phantom Mullet View Post
I basically just want to see something called the "SuperHog" enter service...






Except for the 'A' model F-14's. You know, the ones that had that severe inconvenience of fireballing while passing through mach one....
Indeed, however, the F-14D had already entered service and fixed that...besides, firing on six targets simultaniously (sp?) is more important than not worring about randomly exploding for no reason.
__________________
Me fail English...Thats unpossible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Te eF Kay View Post
Mulletboy didn't say you were a/s/l, he asked if I thought he was an a/s/l.
That's what I thought of it anyway.
LaserRacer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-20-2009, 10:47 AM   #90
Sarcasm? What's that?
 
What5647's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaserRacer View Post
That is the replacement for the C-130...the C-135 is a non-tanker KC-135 (so basically a re-engined 707).
I so read that wrong lol. I'm familiar with the c-135.

Quote:
Speaking of the Superhornet and capable in the same sentence without a "not" bothers me...it is a bit like a swiss army knife, it can do everything half assed. The aircraft it replaced all did their respective jobs significantly better.
Yes, the planes it replaced did their jobs better-when they flew. That was the one of the Navy's driving goals, get a simple, easy to maintain aircraft that can perform as many jobs as possible. A carrier has to carry everything it needs to service and fly all the aircraft in it's air wing, and having the bulk of your aircraft based off of the same platform is a huge help in that regard. The Navy doesn't have some of the supply luxuries that the Air Force does.

Quote:
As to an updated, multi-mission F-15, it exists in the F-15E.
True, but it's still pretty much a normal F-15 with some upgrades. I was talking about a new f-15 based off of the old platform, much like how the Superhornet "evolved" from the old Hornet.

No matter how you look at it though, I'd say the old Mcdonnell/Douglass group easily made some of the best aircraft our nation has ever flown. Developed the F-4 for the Navy, made the F-15, F-18, F-18E/F, AH-64, C-17, and the Tomahawk. An impressive list.

Quote:
The need for multi-mission "stealth" aircraft is overstated. Look at how the air war ran in the gulf in '91... send in a few "stealth" aircraft in the form of the F-117 to destroy air defence sites, then destroy the remaining ground forces using conventional aircraft...much cheaper and equally effective.
For the Air Force, perhaps. But, you have to keep in mind that that you need to have a base to fly them from. That's why we have aircraft carriers. And as I stated above, multi-role aircraft make more sense aboard ship.

Quote:
The A-10 could do with some all weather capabilities, some other avionics upgrades wouldn't be too bad either. However it is almost perfectly suited to its mission already (the canopy is nice and big so they can write all over it with grease pencil during FAC missions).
Agreed, the hog is beautiful just the way it is. Extremely tough, massive payload, great low-speed manuverability. Plus they're just cool to see in the air. We see them down here from time to time. It's cool that with all the glamorus aircraft in the Air Force's inventory, that what's probably one of the most loved ones is a slow, simple, old-fashioned, heavy hulk of a plane.
__________________

electric guitars: carvin bolt, cort z22
acoustic guitar: cort earth 200gc
amps: carvin VL100 legacy head, peavey rockmaster pre, carvin sx200c
effects: krank distortus maximus
cab: mesa oversized recto 4x12
What5647 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:04 AM.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2