Author Topic: History Channel says...... (Read 2385 times)

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #45 on:** February 28, 2005, 05:23:48 AM »

Re: supercruise capability

Quote

Originally posted by leitwolf
Concorde?

Yes, Concorde, although it accellerated to SS speed with afterburner and switched them off after achieving speed.

The F-22 and the Eurofighter Typhoon can accellerate through transonic and cruise SS without afterburner use.

hogenbor · « **Reply #46 on:** February 28, 2005, 05:56:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Re: supercruise capability

Yes, Concorde, although it accellerated to SS speed with afterburner and switched them off after achieving speed.

The F-22 and the Eurofighter Typhoon can accellerate through transonic and cruise SS without afterburner use.

I my little library I have found quotes that the old BAC Lightning could exceed mach one without afterburner at any height. I don't know which version and with what load however. I also have heard that the F/A-18 and the Saab Gripen can do it.

I also once saw a documentary about the British Victor bomber, they claimed that it was the biggest aircraft ever to exceed mach one. THAT I found hard to believe

But this is all a bit vague of course and will not compare to a real supercruise capability. I expect Widewing to jump in and give us the details

The rivalry between F-15 and F-16 guys is also quite funny. Closest I have ever been to them is at an airshow.

Cobra412 · « **Reply #47 on:** February 28, 2005, 06:00:44 PM »

Hogenbor there is a reason we treat each other the way we do. It's really hard to explain though. Well maybe it's not so hard to explain. Just think of all the rednecks and how they fight over which is better a Ford or a Chevy.

There is one thing that Jaxxo didn't completely shed light to though in regards to why F-16s are so cheap. You see the F-16 is commonly used as weapon. It's not the type of weapon you may be thinking though. In order to use the F-16 as an efficient killing machine the aircrew must first follow three simple steps.

Step 1 consists of getting the aircraft airborne and headed to the nearest local community. This step is normally fairly simple so long as the crew chiefs and "integrated specialists" put the shapes back in the right holes after the previous days maintenance activities.

Step 2 consists of the almost certain engine or avionics failure where upon the aircrew will proceed to Step 3. Mind you this isn't as uncommon of an incident as some may think. Again this could be due to yet another F-16 specialist forgetting which shape goes where. It could even be due to the designers placing to big of a shape into too small of an area.

Now on to Step 3 which is the most difficult step to complete in this whole process. This is also where the aircrew rekindle a long time tradition in the F-16 world, a game of lawn darts. This step consists of flying the aircraft in a perfectly aimed ballistic profile at the closest local residence. You must be dead on the mark in order to achieve the best possible score.

The driveway is worth 2 points, the front and/or backyard is worth 1 point apiece and the house is worth 3 points. The maximum amount of points that can be achieved during this game is 7. To achieve the maximum amount of points you must spread your aircraft across all areas that are considered in play. If you miss the residence all together then it's considered a foul and you must return home. Mind you the only area that is in play is the residence itself and the area immediately surrounding the home. If you play out of bounds and into the next door neighbors yard it's considered a foul.

One important note that must be kept in mind when playing F-16 lawn dart. If the house is/was occupied when you finish the game you get 0 points and you go directly to jail.

Now just think if it weren't for so many aircrews playing a game of lawn darts then they might actually be able to spend some money on these aircraft and make them worth something. Then they wouldn't have the title of "Best Disposable Fighter of the Air Force".

MANDO · « **Reply #48 on:** March 01, 2005, 08:24:04 AM »

How is that USAF ended up with F16s having F18s at hand?

jaxxo · « **Reply #49 on:** March 01, 2005, 02:42:48 PM »

F-16's were developed in the early 70's. I believe the 18 was a little later. Againwhy pay 50 million for a ftr when a 25 million dollar fighter can carry the role out effectively. 16'S could not withstand the landing on a carrier or the Navy (marines) would have bought them as well.

jaxxo · « **Reply #50 on:** March 01, 2005, 02:46:05 PM »

Cobra a few words about lawn darts would have been enough. That was alot of typing to deliver that punchline lol.

grmrpr · « **Reply #51 on:** March 01, 2005, 03:47:22 PM »

Lets put this into car talk...

F-16's are like dweeb porche drivers with small donuts.

F-15's are like corvettes for real men with big balls.

Simple

USAF in it's infinate wisdom thinks the F16 can replace the A10. Yea right!

Now the A10 thats a real ac.

GrmRpr

Reschke · « **Reply #52 on:** March 01, 2005, 04:40:55 PM »

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher4/f18_1.html

The link has some interesting notes in it.

MANDO · « **Reply #53 on:** March 01, 2005, 05:37:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by jaxxo
I believe the 18 was a little later. Againwhy pay 50 million for a ftr when a 25 million dollar fighter can carry the role out effectively.

2 engines vs 1. A single engine failure means F16 down.

Cobra412 · « **Reply #54 on:** March 01, 2005, 11:52:09 PM »

As Reschke has posted the YF-16 and YF-17 battled it out for a spot in the military. The YF-16 was chosen in the end. The YF-18 was later requested for use by the Navy.

. I know Jaxxo. I'm really chitty at jokes as you can see. I'm sure you figured it out after step 2 where I was going with the whole thing.

Even though they do have a single motor they are pretty reliable airframes. Most of their bad rep was due to way back when they had the chaffing problem under the right hand forward fuselage if I remember right. I do know the integrated avionics guys say there is some issues with the wafer connections. Other than that if they keep from doing stupid stuff which isn't the norm I'd say they are pretty good birds.

I do know in the past that we got jealous quite often when they'd be gone before we'd get done with our BPOs and PRDs.
They even had an IFE for smoke/fumes in the cockpit while we were in the desert. They literally checked that aircraft over for no more than about 10 minutes on an engine run and CNDd the problem. Our supervision would have had us inspecting under every door and had us run that bird for no less than an hour before we even thought of signing it off.

SunTracker · « **Reply #55 on:** March 02, 2005, 01:20:38 PM »

I would rather have 2 F-16s than 1 F-15.

Cobra412 · « **Reply #56 on:** March 02, 2005, 06:09:06 PM »

So you'd rather be behind the power curve then when it comes to many of their avionics systems? Things like Link 16, JHMCS, and a radar set? That doesn't include having a weaker performance above MACH 1 and at higher altitudes.