Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Widewing on February 08, 2014, 01:41:05 PM
-
I sure do miss the Grumman Tomcat... Last and greatest of the cats...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n81pIulraxY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n81pIulraxY)
-
Obviously hopped up airshow stunts! :old:
-
Obviously hopped up airshow stunts! :old:
:headscratch:
We had Tomcats on the Eisenhower when I was with her. The shows they would put on for visiting dignitaries was unbelievable. I don't bother going to other shows any more, just nothing to them.
-
Tomcat has always been and always will be my favorite airplane...
-
Neat facts about the F-14:
It had a lifting body design, allowing the wings to be much smaller than if it did not.
Part of the swing-wing mechanism covering the wing connection to the fuselage was fabric.
Two small canards would deploy automatically at speeds above Mach 1 to help with the nose down pitch caused by high speeds.
Much of the blame for the aircraft's poor accident record was put on it's original engines. However, the wide spacing of the engines and subsequent tendency to yaw caused flame-outs and crashes right up to the end of the F-14s service life.
For a book that really details the F-14 in combat (and I mean true combat), read http://www.amazon.com/Black-Aces-High-Fighter-Squadron-ebook/dp/B003JMFAUQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391900969&sr=8-1&keywords=black+aces+high (http://www.amazon.com/Black-Aces-High-Fighter-Squadron-ebook/dp/B003JMFAUQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391900969&sr=8-1&keywords=black+aces+high)
-
:headscratch:
I was channeling that other guy of the multiple-vacations-from-the-forums tribe that always poked sticks about those Grumman cats. ;)
-
There was a time when planes had character and presence. Machines you could love.
Todays planes like the F-22 and F-35, the most passionate thing I can say about them is that they are like a Toyota - they work as intended.
-
There was a time when planes had character and presence. Machines you could love.
Todays planes like the F-22 and F-35, the most passionate thing I can say about them is that they are like a Toyota - they work as intended.
In a few decades people will be romanticizing those two in a like manner.
-
In a few decades people will be romanticizing those two in a like manner.
Yes, because the next generation of fighters will be flown from an office chair with a mug of coffee in your left hand.
-
In a few decades people will be romanticizing those two in a like manner.
I don't know how can you romanticize a pig with small wings (a.k.a. F-35)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/A_U.S._Air_Force_pilot_navigates_an_F-35A_Lightning_II_aircraft_assigned_to_the_58th_Fighter_Squadron%2C_33rd_Fighter_Wing_into_position_to_refuel_with_a_KC-135_Stratotanker_assigned_to_the_336th_Air_Refueling_130516-F-XL333-404.jpg/320px-thumbnail.jpg)
On the other hand there plenty of modern beautiful planes:
Dassault Rafale:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Arm%C3%A9e_de_l%27Air_Rafale.jpg/320px-Arm%C3%A9e_de_l%27Air_Rafale.jpg)
Saab Gripen:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/SAAF-Gripen-001.jpg/320px-SAAF-Gripen-001.jpg)
Suchoi 30MKI
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Aero-Sukhoi1.JPG/320px-Aero-Sukhoi1.JPG)
Edit
Or even this one 5th generation Suchoi looks nice:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Sukhoi_T-50_Beltyukov.jpg/320px-Sukhoi_T-50_Beltyukov.jpg)
-
I don't know how can you romanticize a pig with small wings (a.k.a. F-35)
Fw-190. F-104 :D
-
Yes, because the next generation of fighters will be flown from an office chair with a mug of coffee in your left hand.
Yep, brain is in the bullet and their is too much technology to derive much romanticism from the whole affair. There ain't no "cavalry charges" in warfare anymore. So let's call the whole thing off. In order of intensity, playing AH, cage-fighting or some type of formalized dueling are more rational outlets for the natural aggression of the male hunter-ape :aok
-
Fw-190. F-104 :D
They were not a (fat) pigs with small wings they were rockets with small wings...
BTW
- 190 does not have small wings at all...
- F 104 maybe was "romanticized", it reality it was horrible aircraft with even more horrible record killing its pilots more than enemies...
-
For a WWII fighter the 190 has really really small wings in relation to it's own weight.
They were not a (fat) pigs with small wings they were rockets with small wings...
BTW
- 190 does not have small wings at all...
- F 104 maybe was "romanticized", it reality it was horrible aircraft with even more horrible record killing its pilots more than enemies...
-
I don't know how can you romanticize a pig with small wings (a.k.a. F-35)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/A_U.S._Air_Force_pilot_navigates_an_F-35A_Lightning_II_aircraft_assigned_to_the_58th_Fighter_Squadron%2C_33rd_Fighter_Wing_into_position_to_refuel_with_a_KC-135_Stratotanker_assigned_to_the_336th_Air_Refueling_130516-F-XL333-404.jpg/320px-thumbnail.jpg)
On the other hand there plenty of modern beautiful planes:
Dassault Rafale:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/Arm%C3%A9e_de_l%27Air_Rafale.jpg/320px-Arm%C3%A9e_de_l%27Air_Rafale.jpg)
Saab Gripen:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/SAAF-Gripen-001.jpg/320px-SAAF-Gripen-001.jpg)
Suchoi 30MKI
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Aero-Sukhoi1.JPG/320px-Aero-Sukhoi1.JPG)
Edit
Or even this one 5th generation Suchoi looks nice:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Sukhoi_T-50_Beltyukov.jpg/320px-Sukhoi_T-50_Beltyukov.jpg)
All are pretty planes, but the problem is not their looks.
Here is what Giora Epstein had to say about the F-16 (07:10):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ESF4RObYB3M#t=429
I remember him saying the exact same thing already some 25 years ago.
He is not wrong. I feel the same thing about cars. My old cars were like pets - I cared about them like they were animals, they had character. My current one is a Toyota and the worst thing I can say about it is that there is nothing wrong with it. It is what it is, goes from A to B. I don't love it or hate it - I feel nothing about it - it may have been a toaster. It is not something I can really point at and claim to be the problem. This car simply convey the message that you should not care - open the engine hood and you see nothing but black plastic. Everything is covered. Automated gears, automated choke, power steering that prevent any feedback from the road and allow you to drive with one finger. All good features, and I would not change them in a family car, but it is a lifeless machine.
-
All are pretty planes, but the problem is not their looks.
Here is what Giora Epstein had to say about the F-16 (07:10):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ESF4RObYB3M#t=429
I remember him saying the exact same thing already some 25 years ago.
He is not wrong. I feel the same thing about cars. My old cars were like pets - I cared about them like they were animals, they had character. My current one is a Toyota and the worst thing I can say about it is that there is nothing wrong with it.
See your point. Indeed. However as you can see it hadn't started with F-22/F-35. But as you quoted F-16 was already that way.
In any case I assume, the modern fighters are still far more romantic than Toyota. Finally some stuff makes things simpler like no need to manually control the mixture is quite a nice thing...
-
The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Fokker_EIII_210-16.jpg)
Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.
-
The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Fokker_EIII_210-16.jpg)
Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.
That would be great if machines could do all the fighting with other machines, leaving us humans free to chill out and smoke pot.
-
Sure... Until one side runs out of machines to defend themselves, and then the enemy machines starts predating upon them.
Well... that's already a reality.
(http://dronewarsuk.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/predator-firing-missile4.jpg)
-
I sure do miss the Grumman Tomcat... Last and greatest of the cats...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n81pIulraxY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n81pIulraxY)
There was always something about the Tomcat. I always thought she was the most beautiful of that generation of American fighter Planes. Out of the F-14 F-15 F-16 and F-18 it was the F-14 I was always most excited to see flying and I was an Air Force puke. :lol
-
:lol
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/drone-wars.png)
-
The same arguments have been used by pilots going all the way back to the original fighter...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Fokker_EIII_210-16.jpg)
Some day in the not so distant future, a commander in a bunker, warship or command aircraft somewhere will be informed by a computer that the enemy has been detected and can be engaged. The commander will then release the computer to go fight this enemy as it deems best, launching its UCAVs and other unmanned assets and fighting a war with minimal human interference. Human flight will be limited to transport and recreational/sporting purposes.
That wont end the war. To win a war History has proven the losing side will have to lose half or more of it population. Fighting with drones will not fix the problem. Do YOU REALLY THINK THAT some A******e in some goverment is going to back down just because all there robots were shot down. It has been proven many times in history that artificial intelligence does not make up for real intelligence.
Another example of what I am talking about is when the Air Force said that there would be no need for guns in Dogfights anymore. Well the F4 Phantom was created with no gun. The next thing they know is that they are on the 6 of mig with no way to shoot them down. ( IF was in those Migs Iwould been scared SH****ss until I realized they had no gun.. . Then probable laughed till I cried.)
My point is Robot will never ever replace human pilots. Reason is that there is no way to make up for Human Intelligence. Artificial intelligence will never cut it. There are to many reasons why they need to keep a warm body in the cockpit of the fighter
-
The human decision making can be done remotely if needed.
This is five years old already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1pr683SYFk
-
I don't know how can you romanticize a pig with small wings
As an FM2 fan I sincerely hope you understand that there's a stubby hard to kill exception to that statement :)
-
The human decision making can be done remotely if needed.
This is five years old already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1pr683SYFk
Just wait till a drone gets hacked. It is not a question if it will get hacked, just when. Then see what happens.
If a terrorist(i.e Chinese) could hack a drone with Helfires on think of the political ramification. Congress will be have a cow. That day will be worse than nuke dropped on Washington :salute.
-
Not going to happen with autonomous systems. You will no more be able to "hack" an autonomous UCAV than you're able to "hack" a cruise missile today. If you have the right codes you may be able to order it to abort or change its mission, but never to engage targets its on-board systems identify as friendly. It's not like these things will be flying around with open WiFi and Bluetooth giving access to its core programming. That only happens in the movies... Experience shows that autonomous computer systems are much harder to compromise than system involving humans. "Social engineering" is the most successful hacking method these days... Simply asking an unsuspecting human for the log-in credentials. A human pilot can be fooled by a convincing radio transmission. A computer cannot.
-
Not going to happen with autonomous systems. You will no more be able to "hack" an autonomous UCAV than you're able to "hack" a cruise missile today. If you have the right codes you may be able to order it to abort or change its mission, but never to engage targets its on-board systems identify as friendly. It's not like these things will be flying around with open WiFi and Bluetooth giving access to its core programming. That only happens in the movies... Experience shows that autonomous computer systems are much harder to compromise than system involving humans. "Social engineering" is the most successful hacking method these days... Simply asking an unsuspecting human for the log-in credentials. A human pilot can be fooled by a convincing radio transmission. A computer cannot.
Is that computer software wrote by a human. Also is it connected to a satelitte.
-
Everyone knows the best thing about the F14 is it's "Cruise",they dont call it a "Tom" cat for nothing..... :devil
Sorry Mace I couldnt resist! :lol
:salute
-
Is that computer software wrote by a human. Also is it connected to a satelitte.
Should we also be worried about Skynet? I ask because you're obviously an expert in this field :rolleyes:.
-
Tell me about it Wide. Thats the main reason I left the Navy and went to the Army. I worked on the Tomcats for 8 years and when I found out they were being decommissioned, I decided to switch branches. It kind of sucked. My dad spent 21 years out of his 40 at Grumman as an engineer on the F-14 so I was groomed to work on it. I have hours of video of the air power demo's done by the F-14 from my days on carriers. One of my fondest memories about the F-14 was at an airshow at NAS Oceana ( where I was stationed ). My mom and I could not find my dad anywhere so we put our heads together and we wandered over to the F-14 static display and there was my dad surrounded by Tomcat pilots answering their questions about it........ thought I would share that.
-
Should we also be worried about Skynet? I ask because you're obviously an expert in this field :rolleyes:.
Well my point is if it is created by, it can be hacked
-
Assuming you can gain access to its core programming. And if the designers have even half a brain stem, the core processor and drives will be completely independent of navigation and any wireless comm systems. And protected by the best programs paid off hackers can create.
-
Assuming you can gain access to its core programming. And if the designers have even half a brain stem, the core processor and drives will be completely independent of navigation and any wireless comm systems. And protected by the best programs paid off hackers can create.
How many times have plans for are classified military equipment been stolen.
-
Better question: How many times have the computer systems of F-16s and other fly-by-wire aircraft been hacked the last 30 years?
-
With $26 worth off the shelf hardware you can hack in and get a Predator Video Feed.http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB126102247889095011 What do you think you can accomplish with more time and money.
You have to remember that if something is made it can be reverse engineered. Also their enough people to be bought with enough cash that have access to the blueprints and knowledge of these drones.
-
The difference between intercepting an unencrypted video feed being broad casted by a drone vs. actually hacking into the drone's command functions is enormous. In fact it is totally different and cannot be compared. It's the same difference as listening to an F-16 pilot's unencrypted radio communication vs. hacking the F-16's flight computers and taking control of his aircraft. Only happens in Hollywood. Never going to happen in the real world, and certainly not by goat molesters in some -stan.
-
No, no, he's absolutely right. The US is just plain inept at security software and separation of core systems.
I hear they're upgrading the F-22's software to a freeware version of Vista, purchased from Yemen. God, what a brilliant idea!
-
With $26 worth off the shelf hardware you can hack in and get a Predator Video Feed.http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB126102247889095011 What do you think you can accomplish with more time and money.
You have to remember that if something is made it can be reverse engineered. Also their enough people to be bought with enough cash that have access to the blueprints and knowledge of these drones.
It is sad the US does not learn from other's mistakes by using an unprotected communications link.
In 1997 the Israeli Navy commando unit had fall in a trap by Hizballah, having 12 fatal casulties, because of the UAV's video that was intercepted and reviled the potential route of the unit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shayetet_13#Ansariya_Ambush
-
Countersurveillance is unfortunately an area of expertise both our armed forces and police seems almost negligently inept at.
-
Countersurveillance is unfortunately an area of expertise both our armed forces and police seems almost negligently inept at.
But you can bet the NSA has read this conversation! :devil
-
Hi NSA guys! Nope, just us again. Have fun! :aok
-
Tell me about it Wide. Thats the main reason I left the Navy and went to the Army. I worked on the Tomcats for 8 years and when I found out they were being decommissioned, I decided to switch branches. It kind of sucked. My dad spent 21 years out of his 40 at Grumman as an engineer on the F-14 so I was groomed to work on it. I have hours of video of the air power demo's done by the F-14 from my days on carriers. One of my fondest memories about the F-14 was at an airshow at NAS Oceana ( where I was stationed ). My mom and I could not find my dad anywhere so we put our heads together and we wandered over to the F-14 static display and there was my dad surrounded by Tomcat pilots answering their questions about it........ thought I would share that.
Thank you for sharing. I was born about 20 years too late to ever see the Tomcat in flight, let alone work with them.
Lucky B'tard!
-
There's a Tomcat on display at the Aviation Museum in Tulsa. You can even sit in the cockpit.
-
http://s933.photobucket.com/user/stryker125_2010/media/FastEagle101.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0
That is me next to VF-41's " FAST EAGLE 101 ". Plane was later lost over the Meditteranen Sea due to hydraulic failure.
-
Obviously hopped up airshow stunts! :old:
:rofl :aok