| Author |
Message |
    
Rick_a
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 11:50 am: | 
|
It's pretty obvious this project was planned before the economies of the Western world tanked...with a bloated budget like most all of these military programs.
The A10 and Harrier are my favorite aircraft 
Who knows...they may be around for a bit longer than planned. |
Rick_a
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 11:59 am: |
|
Some A10 love from the last Jacksonville airshow.
 |
Kc10_fe
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 01:57 pm: |
|
You guys know that fighter technology is based on the protection of the tanker fleet right? Cutting edge technology must be updated to protect the mothership at all costs! You saw what happened when they neglected to protect the Death Star right? No gas = no way home |
Delta_one
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 03:29 pm: |
|
just so long as they dont take the new updated fighter and try and make it an attacker too. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 03:41 pm: |
|
I don't see why not? The F/A-18 does a good job at both. Being able to hang & deliver bombs is nearly important as air superiority.
Cold war joke. 2 Soviet Armor Generals meet in Paris. "Who won the air war?" one asks.
Without air superiority, you can't bomb, true, but planes can switch hit. F/A-18's with better radar & weapons have fought their way to the target, though against better enemies, they would have to jettison the bombs to defend themselves. That would be a mission kill for the enemy even if no planes were shot down.
I don't think the "hang bombs on all the planes" mentality from Vietnam War idiocy is the right answer either. Back Then the statistical management style of McNamara messed life up. Kill figures, and bombs dropped as tonnage rather than results in accomplishing the mission, were important. Bad Fraking Juju to do things with that mindset. Bad. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 03:48 pm: |
|
The Ultimate switch hitter was/is the "anti air version" of the B-1B. They have built & tested a rotary bomb bay dispenser for AMRAMM missiles, and the B-1B was deliberately made with the nose ready to take a F-16 radar. You could shoot down a dozen plus fighters, then go on to loiter over our troops and drop smart bombs on call.
A bit expensive, and limited, though. |
Kc10_fe
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 04:12 pm: |
|
The F-14s last days were spent as a Bombcat over A-Stan. You guys dont appreciate how much larger the new F-18 and F-22 are compared to older fast movers in the F/A component. The Bone stays very busy these days. While the A-10 and AV8B have a CAS purpose they are power limited. The A-10 has gone glass and will be here for a long time to come. |
Mr_grumpy
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 11:44 am: |
|
Kc10, can you give us a jargon free version of that as I've no clue what your post means. |
Delta_one
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 12:00 pm: |
|
"The F-14s last days were spent as a Bombcat (an F-14 Tomcat refit as a bombing variant)over A-Stan (Afghanistan). You guys dont appreciate how much larger the new F-18 and F-22 are compared to older fast movers (quick maneuverable aircraft with high speed capability)in the F/A (fighter (air to air)/attacker(air to ground))component. The Bone stays very busy these days(??). While the A-10 and AV8B (Harrier) have a CAS (close air support) purpose they are power limited. The A-10 has gone glass (??) and will be here for a long time to come." |
Hughlysses
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 12:12 pm: |
|
A-10's are pretty damn cool. I used to work with a couple of guys that farmed "on the side" here in SC near Charleston. We used to have A-10's based at Myrtle Beach AFB (since closed). My co-worker said he'd been out plowing on his tractor on more than one occasion when he was surprised by an A-10 zooming from behind him at treetop level and then veering off. He just knew he'd been the "Soviet tank" in the guy's sights a few seconds before. |
Court
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 01:26 pm: |
|
"gone glass" = made the transition from traditional analog instruments to . . .well, something that looks like a collection of iPads.
Folks here would know better than I . . . but I think it's still an ongoing transition.
The A-10, admittedly one of my favorites, always seems to find new life. . . . not unlike the B-52.
They just "work".
http://www.rockwellcollins.com/products/gov/airbor ne/fighters/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cockpit
I miss my old 172RG with an artificial horizon, ball and altimeter. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 01:36 pm: |
|
payload, distance, time on patrol, weather conditions, the F/A-18 is not a replacement for an A-6.
nor does it have tanker variants
patrol variants
ecu battle variants (the EA-6B is still in service for now)
Some arm chair procurement slackee decided to replace a defensive tackle with a quarterback..... it doesnt work in foot ball any better.
one a plus note, the squadron farewell parter was tail hook 91 
It wasnt me, I wasnt there, you dont have any proof |
Kc10_fe
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 06:29 pm: |
|
Sorry folks 17 years and 5800 hours of Aircrew were typing. I forget to use civilian speak. You pretty much got it covered though. The BONE is simply the B-1 B-ONE = BONE. The B-1 and A-10C share the same new SNIPER Pod (BADASS). Its not just about analog indicators. Its about data linking, chat, instant messages, email, video you name it. Basically every jet can now share real world views and screens via data transmission. What this means is 1 jet can be 300 miles away from everyone and broadcast exactly what it sees to those around it. Ive watched F-18s refuel other F-18s while we refuel other KC-10s. ECM battle varients can be any plane now. Old technology meant shit was stupid big and it required a jet to lug pods. Look at what your I Phone does and now visualize what we can slip into a 1000 lb pod these days. You realize that we kill people daily flying remote controlled planes from 5000 miles away that shoot missles and drop bombs these days. Small diameter bombs are all the rage these days. F-22s have a drop capacity because its nonsense to have a dedicated anything these days. The fighter pilot is an endangered species. The F-35 may be the last piloted fighter. The remote/automous fighter/tanker are on the planning boards. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - 09:14 pm: |
|
A flying buddy is a CF-18 pilot up in Canada. ( CF-18 is a lighter non naval variant of the F/A-18 built for Canada. )
The CF-18 has data link, so one plane can use it's radar and another can see it's take. It also has a mother of a flashlight built into it, since Canadian rule call for visual ID. The light is built in such a way so you fly not quite aimed at the target, ( just off the target's right )and if the object in the multimillion candle beam is unfriendly, you just roll left and squeeze the trigger. No more bad guy.
While intercepting Migs up North, they took to splitting up the lead/wing formation, so that the wing would illuminate with radar from dozens of miles away, and the lead would cruise into the right spot behind the Migs. The reaction when the light hits is priceless. Roll, dive, wobble wobble....Russian cursing on Guard.
He tells me when you get hit by the light from behind, the canopy lights up so bright your first reaction is that a nuke just went off behind you... then you go to full bright on the instruments while your eyes recover. ( if you don't panic )
The F-14 was always designed to carry bombs, but politics kept them as "fighter only" until the very last years in service. The range to target in Bosnia was such that the F/A-18 couldn't get there with a big bomb load....but the F-14 could, so they put fuel tanks and a few missiles on the -18's and had them escort the best Naval Interceptor while it carried bombs. The under body on the F-14 had a quick change "pallet" that usually had Missiles attached, but there were bomb pallets in storage for years. Different missions had different pallets. You'd drop the old pallet and lift into place the new one, already loaded. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 11:12 am: |
|
The A12 was the replacement for the A6 but it got scrapped.
The F18 replaced the A7, not the A6. It was never meant to replace the A6.
The F18 was pressed into service to replace the A6 since the A12 got scrapped.
The F18E/F is an interim aircraft to replace the F14 until the F35 replaces it.
The Navy has historically preferred twin engine aircraft, however the reliability of modern engines has made the twin engine requirement less of an issue. The Navy would have likely selected the F16 over the YF17 (which became the F18) if it weren't for the bias towards twin engines. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 11:20 am: |
|
The F-14 was specifically designed to carry the Phoenix missile, a radar guided fire and forget over the horizon missile that was designed to take out Soviet bombers before they got in nuclear range of the carrier or the US.
The F14 was a bomber interceptor. Get to the target fast and fire a missile. It isn't really all that great of an air to air fighter. Look at an F14 from behind. It's all engine. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 11:45 am: |
|
the bear or the backfire was in nuclear range of the carrier, before the carrier ever knew was there. That kitchen killer of theirs, the naval sea cruise missile is indeed a hull breaker, and from way over 25 miles over the horizon.
and radar cross section on an anti ship cruise missile ? you would never see it coming at over 400 knots, 50 ft off the deck . it is a day ruining piece of armament.
you can hope the CIWS will get it.... I am betting if they launch two of them like they were want to do in drills, flat top is indeed done.
(Message edited by cityxslicker on January 19, 2011) |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 11:58 am: |
|
We routinely tracked and intercepted bears when they were more than 200 miles away. Fly up along side, show them the Phoenix, ask them to change course. Range on the Phoenix is over 100 miles. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 12:19 pm: |
|
and this is what I get from being an analyst on the attack side of the house
but that kitchen is no fool to mess with, the chinese loved it so much they of course copied it, the silkworm is probably the most fired anti ship missile out there.
.... I do love in top gun when the mock Migs (american tigers at that) were supposed to be carrying the exocet missile !
gotta love holly wood. |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - 12:24 pm: |
|
I'd not want to be on board if one or more were launched. Still, I slept better knowing there were 14's on CAP. |
|
