Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on April 04, 2003, 07:02:21 PM
-
I have a video that my best friends nephew (a B-1 pilot) sent me. He said he used it to get "riled up". I wonder if someone can post it to a web site for all to see.
I'll e-mail it to ya.
-
sure.
mietla@raf303.org
-
how big is it?
if it's less than 10mb mail it to me stagaATTkolumbus.fi
if it's bigger I can send you a password and username for my serverspace so you can upload it yourself with a ftp-proggie.
-
Ok, here it goes, courtesy of Midnight Target
http://www.raf303.org/videos/b-1.wmv
-
B-1B is not alone.
Here is the competitor of the B-1B......... the Tupolev 160 Blackjack
(http://www.suchoj.com/andere/Tu-160/images/Tu-160_35.jpg)
the cockpit
(http://avia.russian.ee/air/cockpits/tu-160.jpg)
Blueprint
(http://www.suchoj.com/andere/Tu-160/riss/Tu-160_01.jpg)
-
Seems the russian made a lot of copies.. err competitors of many US things...
The B-1, C130, Starlifter... and it began with the C47!
-
Lest we forget the B-29, Rolls Royce jet engine, Concorde, and Space Shuttle. I'm sure there's more...
-
Nice video, thanks.
Wouldn't ya hate to be on the receiving end of that beast?
-
Always a cool combination rock planes and bombs
:)
thnx saved it
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Very nice video! Too bad the USAF didn't get the B-1A. The Russians got a lot more potent bomber in the form of the Mach 2 cruising Tu-160, than the B-1B. At least the USAF got the B-2 now.
Faster maybe. The B1B has a longer range, better terrain following capability, and much smaller radar signature.
Mach 2 isn't nearly fast enough to outrun a Mach 5+ Patriot missile.
-
Originally posted by Octavius
Seems the russian made a lot of copies.. err competitors of many US things...
The B-1, C130, Starlifter... and it began with the C47!
and dont forget that Mc Donnel/Douglas copied the MiG-25 Foxbat with the F-15 and they didint whine like you guys
-
Jeez, why do you all complain about Russians copying US designs? The US copied the Soviet MiG-25 by designing F-15 and Russians didint even have to complain and whine like you guys.
The F-15 was designed to counter the MiG-25, but I wouldn't say the F-15 copied the Foxbat. I guess you say this because of a few similarities in appearance. But, I could then say the MiG-25 incorporated (copied) elements of the A-5/RA-5.
Pssst, and I think you mean "murder capital" and not "capital murder."
-
Originally posted by Puke
The F-15 was designed to counter the MiG-25"
The MiG-25 was designed to counter the XB-70 "Valkyrie"
-
The MiG-25 was designed to counter the XB-70 "Valkyrie"
One Scooby Snack for you.
-
Originally posted by mietla
Ok, here it goes, courtesy of Midnight Target
http://www.raf303.org/videos/b-1.wmv
Thank you sir.
-
who's whining? i see nothing of the sort
-
Another video that was made shortly after 9/11 to the same music.Many here have already seen it,but for those who haven't here it is.
Taliban Bodies (http://grouchymedia.iscg.net/grouchymedia/GrouchyMedia_Taliban_Bodies_Special_Edition_Small.asf)
-
Thanks for posting!
(Brings back newbie engineering memories during the manufacture of B-1B aft and aft intermediate fuselage sections back in the late 80's)
-
Originally posted by Fridaddy
The MiG-25 was designed to counter the XB-70 "Valkyrie"
Then after the XB-70 was cancelled, The MiG-25 is now designed to counter the SR-71 with its AA-11 AMOS and AA-9 ACRID missiles.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Hmm ... B-1B is only capable of transonic speed, Tu-160 is supersonic. True, B-1B has better systems. Both have intercontinental range. Tu-160 radar signature is bigger, yet its high cruising speed makes it a more dificult target to intercept. The Tu-160's primary payload is 12 or 24 cruise missiles, so the Patriot doesn't factor in at all. With the 12 missile loadout it doesn't even have to enter US airspace.
The B1B is capable of mach 1.2, making it supersonic. You're right about the cruise missiles but then that limits the Blackjack to coastal targets.
-
Is it just me or is she one sexy plane?
had one at the Montreal/Mirabel airshow a few years ago, loud as hell but oh so sweet
(http://link.freepichosting.com/image.cgi/29252/9.jpg)
(http://link.freepichosting.com/image.cgi/29252/8.jpg)
Primary Function: Long-range, multi-role, heavy bomber
Builder: Boeing, North America (formerly Rockwell International, North American Aircraft)
Operations Air Frame and Integration: Offensive avionics, Boeing Military Airplane; defensive avionics, AIL Division
Power plant: Four General Electric F-101-GE-102 turbofan engine with afterburner
Thrust: 30,000-plus pounds with afterburner, per engine
Length: 146 feet (44.5 meters)
Wingspan: 137 feet (41.8 meters) extended forward, 79 feet (24.1 meters) swept aft
Height: 34 feet (10.4 meters)
Weight: Empty, approximately 190,000 pounds (86,183 kilograms)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 477,000 pounds (216,634 kilograms)
Speed: 900-plus mph (Mach 1.2 at sea level)
Range: Intercontinental, unrefueled
Ceiling: More than 30,000 feet (9,144 meters)
Crew: Four (aircraft commander, copilot, offensive systems officer and defensive systems officer)
Armament: Three internal weapons bays can accommodate up to 84 Mk-82 general purpose bombs or Mk-62 naval mines, 30 CBU-87/89 cluster munitions or CBU-97 Sensor Fused Weapons and up to 24 GBU-31 JDAM GPS guided bombs or Mk-84 general purpose bombs
Date Deployed: June 1985
Unit Cost: $283.1 million (fiscal 98 constant dollars)
Inventory: Active force, 72; ANG, 18; Reserve, 0
-
Always reminded me of a giant catfish with the two fins below the nose :)
That second pic looks like a poodle! :D
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Hmm ... B-1B is only capable of transonic speed, Tu-160 is supersonic. True, B-1B has better systems. Both have intercontinental range. Tu-160 radar signature is bigger, yet its high cruising speed makes it a more dificult target to intercept. The Tu-160's primary payload is 12 or 24 cruise missiles, so the Patriot doesn't factor in at all. With the 12 missile loadout it doesn't even have to enter US airspace.
Plus the Tu-160 has a standoff range of more than 100 miles and it can release its AS-16 Kickback that weights almost 3000 lb to kill the Patriot's radar and make it useless
-
Now THIS is a thread that I know something about! (Gonna hopefully be flying one of these things in a couple years)
originally posted by pugg666
Power plant: Four General Electric F-101-GE-102 turbofan engine with afterburner
For those who don't know, that means it has 4 F-16 engines on it.
originally posted by pugg666
Armament: Three internal weapons bays can accommodate up to 84 Mk-82 general purpose bombs or Mk-62 naval mines, 30 CBU-87/89 cluster munitions or CBU-97 Sensor Fused Weapons and up to 24 GBU-31 JDAM GPS guided bombs or Mk-84 general purpose bombs
That means 84 500 pounders (28 per bay). The B-52 can only carry about 60 or so internally, although the buff is still allowed to use its external wing points so it can carry a higher total amount(I'll squeak more about that in a minute). This is also more than the B-2 can carry. Also of note, it can carry 24 2000 lb JDAM GPS guided bombs, 8 per bay on rotary launchers. The B-2 can only carry about 16 of these.
One thing it didn't mention on that fact sheet is that often times, if it's going to be an extremely long flight, they can load up the aft bay with a giant gas can and really increase their effective range without needing to find a tanker.
The B-1b does have external hard points for carrying CALCMs, ALCMs, and Harpoon missiles (ship sinkers). Unfortunately, it has been allowed to use them ever since we signed the START and START II treaties with Russia. I would hope that the Blackjack was similarly hamstrung by that treaty. This is the reason that you only ever see B-52s launching CALCMs on CNN these days.
originally posted by GScholz
Hmm ... B-1B is only capable of transonic speed, Tu-160 is supersonic.
As Iron pointed out, the top speed on the B-1b is Mach 1.25, which is by every definition supersonic. The top speed on the B-1a was about M2.5, but with the redesign, they put dividers in the air intakes, which had two effects: 1, it cut the top speed in half, but 2, it greatly reduced the radar cross signature given off by the engines.
originally posted by Octavius
Always reminded me of a giant catfish with the two fins below the nose :)
That second pic looks like a poodle! :D
I agree the canards make it look a little odd, but try to picture it without them. Same goes for the shockwave :cool:
And as a side note.....
originally posted by Ike2k
The MiG-25 is now designed to counter the SR-71
Umm.....I know the MiG-25 is fast, but there's no way in hell it could catch a SR-71. The unclassified top speed on those suckers was Mach 3.5+. That + was there for a reason.
edit: pictures wouldn't link correctly. :(
-
Top speed doesn't mean a whole lot. Spending any amount of time at full throttle means that you will be out of fuel very soon. Flying low, fast, and with a low radar signature is MUCH more effective than high, fast, and lighting up every radar scope for 500 miles.
-
Ok GScholz, I see your point. I was defining supersonic in laymen's terms as "Greater than the speed of sound (Mach 1.0)." But now that I understand your question, let me do a little digging and get back to you. I know the B-1b requires afterburners to get to that speed, but whether it can then sustain speeds of greater than M1.0 without AB on or not, I'm not sure.
Also, side note, be careful with the use of the term "supercruise." That term is now being used with reference to the F-22, because it can get up to M1.4 without ever using AB. The Concorde may be able to hold a higher speed without them, but it does need AB to get to that speed in the first place.
-
GScholz, which do you suppose would be more useful. A bomber that can hit an enemy's coast, thus provoking the launch of several thousand ICBMs, or a bomber than can quietly infiltrate deep into the heart of an enemy country possible knocking out many of those ICBM sites before they can launch?
-
What band and whats the song title?
-
wow nice vid/music and pictures :)
thanks!
-
band: Drowning pool
title: Bodies
album: Sinner
on the xXx soundtrack.
Originally posted by GtoRA2
What band and whats the song title?
-
Nice!
-
Is it possible that baby flies like a fiter ?
1 section looked like it perform kind of a barrel roll with a split S.
Possible for such a big plane ?
-
is there any western planes that can do this manuver:D
http://www.safe-skies.com/su_37_flip.htm
after you click this link, click su-37 flip.
-
I have seen the B1b barrel roll.
-
BAH! now this is a bomber :D
(http://www.avrovulcan.org.uk/andy_leitch_vol1/graphics/4443.jpg)
(http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/vulcan/full/vulcanb2xl319leucharsjanuary1979.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Furball
BAH! now this is a bomber :D
(http://www.avrovulcan.org.uk/andy_leitch_vol1/graphics/4443.jpg)
(http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/vulcan/full/vulcanb2xl319leucharsjanuary1979.jpg)
...and its only to be beaten easily by MiG-21s and F-4 Phantoms:D
-
Check this "Super manuverability" of the SU-37 Super Flanker equip with thrust-vectoring engine nossles. The Sukhoi Su-37 defies physics and if someone in a Western Fighter jet fights a Su-37 at close-range, you're toast. :D
(http://www.webcindario.com/maquetismo/Sujoi%20Su-37%20Superflanker.jpg)
(http://www.highgallery.com/cockpits-omc-su-37.jpg)
check this video clip and you'll know what i'm talking about.
http://www.safe-skies.com/su_37_flip.htm
-
bets on weather ike is really from LA...
-
Nice video, thanks MT & mietla.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
Check this "Super manuverability" of the SU-37 Super Flanker equip with thrust-vectoring engine nossles. The Sukhoi Su-37 defies physics and if someone in a Western Fighter jet fights a Su-37 at close-range, you're toast. :D
(http://www.webcindario.com/maquetismo/Sujoi%20Su-37%20Superflanker.jpg)
(http://www.highgallery.com/cockpits-omc-su-37.jpg)
check this video clip and you'll know what i'm talking about.
http://www.safe-skies.com/su_37_flip.htm
Whoa neato!
How many of the Su-37's are in service? :D
-
Originally posted by fffreeze220
Is it possible that baby flies like a fiter ?
1 section looked like it perform kind of a barrel roll with a split S.
Possible for such a big plane ?
Yep they can do all kinds of stuff. Incredible airplane.
-
http://www.safe-skies.com/su_37_flip.htm
Pfff, I could do that.
:D
-
Originally posted by wazimada
http://www.safe-skies.com/su_37_flip.htm
Pfff, I could do that.
:D
NOT FOR AMERICAN PLANES!!!
The 360 degree cobra can only be done of Sukhoi Su-37. NOT FOR F-22.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
NOT FOR AMERICAN PLANES!!!
The 360 degree cobra can only be done of Sukhoi Su-37. NOT FOR F-22.
Possibly the F-35 (JSF) when they get that working. It has thrust vectoring too. Not sure if the one engine has enough **** behind it to make it all the way around though.
-
Originally posted by fffreeze220
Is it possible that baby flies like a fiter ?
1 section looked like it perform kind of a barrel roll with a split S.
Possible for such a big plane ?
Oh yes, very possible. That's what's so cool about it. :cool:
I got a chance to fly in the B-1 simulator at McConnell AFB (before the B-1 drawdown). They told me that if the plane is hugging the deck (it's capable of flying at 200 feet at 550 kts with terrain following radar), they can kick in the power and it can be up to 14,000 feet in 30 seconds. I tried it. It worked. The plane can also do aileron rolls, although they are discouraged.
It set all sorts of world records for speed, climb rate, payload, and distance. Probably a few other categories I'm forgetting too.
edit: found a link (http://www.b1b.wpafb.af.mil/pages/world_record.htm)
-
Originally posted by mjolnir
Oh yes, very possible. That's what's so cool about it. :cool:
I got a chance to fly in the B-1 simulator at McConnell AFB (before the B-1 drawdown). They told me that if the plane is hugging the deck (it's capable of flying at 200 feet at 550 kts with terrain following radar), they can kick in the power and it can be up to 14,000 feet in 30 seconds. I tried it. It worked. The plane can also do aileron rolls, although they are discouraged.
It set all sorts of world records for speed, climb rate, payload, and distance. Probably a few other categories I'm forgetting too.
I thought i ididnt see right when i looked at that film lol.
-
ever seen the pic of the Lancer blasting at low alt over some mountain lake with a nice big shockwave on the water? I think Rockwell distributes it.
-
Originally posted by mjolnir
Possibly the F-35 (JSF) when they get that working. It has thrust vectoring too. Not sure if the one engine has enough **** behind it to make it all the way around though.
But the F-35 cannot perform flips like the Su-37 because it doesnt have the aerodynamic properties like the SU-37 or MiG-29. But what's good about the F-35 is that it can "supercruise".
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
But the F-35 cannot perform flips like the Su-37 because it doesnt have the aerodynamic properties like the SU-37 or MiG-29. But what's good about the F-35 is that it can "supercruise".
Look at my earlier conversation with GScholz, it's the F-22 that has supercruise, not the F-35.
Here's a link so you can see the difference:
http://www.lmaeronautics.com/products/combat_air/x-35/index.html (http://www.lmaeronautics.com/products/combat_air/x-35/index.html)
-
That cute flippy maneuver won't do much good when it's dodging slammers from F-22's that the Sukhoi can't even see. :)
-
LOL im from los angeles and i fell in love with the Su-37's "high envelope manuverability":D
Would F-35 outperform F/A-18s and F-16s? If not, the JSF is a bust.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
Would F-35 outperform F/A-18s and F-16s? If not, the JSF is a bust.
I hate to break it to you, but airshow stunts don't count for too much in combat. :)
-
Originally posted by funkedup
That cute flippy maneuver won't do much good when it's dodging slammers from F-22's that the Sukhoi can't even see. :)
just pray that F-22s wont have to come close to Su-37 or else they've just flush that $120 million machine to the toilet bowl.
-
Originally posted by funkedup
I hate to break it to you, but airshow stunts don't count for too much in combat. :)
The F-35 looks funny if you look at it sideways and it doesnt give me an impression that it can out-manuver F/A-18s and F-16s:D
-
Originally posted by Rasker
ever seen the pic of the Lancer blasting at low alt over some mountain lake with a nice big shockwave on the water? I think Rockwell distributes it.
You mean this one? :D
(http://www.b1b.wpafb.af.mil/images/gallery/b1_lake.jpg)
It's artwork, not a real picture, but still cool.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
Check this "Super manuverability" of the SU-37 Super Flanker equip with thrust-vectoring engine nossles. The Sukhoi Su-37 defies physics and if someone in a Western Fighter jet fights a Su-37 at close-range, you're toast. :D
unless a eurofighter typhoon pilot looks at it and decides to shoot it down :)
-
cool! i read a report from an RAF test pilot flying the typhoon for the first time. Its very impressive!
-
The Euro-Fighter will be the Be-yatch of the JSF and F-22...sorry but true............
-
The Russians do design some very nice aircraft, no arguement. But considering that they can hardly support and maintain the current generation of combat aircraft, let alone upgrade to the newer equipment, its a moot point isn't it? ;)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The F-22 is indeed an awesome machine, however its cost is not propotionate. Given equality in $ value a fleet of Eurofighters would be more capable than a fleet of F-22s. Fortunatelly for the USAF they can spend a lot more than any other nation.
Obviously the US isn't the land of unlimited resources but when only the best will do we spend the bucks.
-
We (the US) has something the rest of the world cannot afford: true Stealth technology. Everything our military does now and the future will revolve around it. Sure the Su-27 has vectored thrust etc. and the Euro-fighter is very nimble. The F-22 and JSF are that PLUS they are invisible. Anyway-in 15 yrs you will still be flying the Euro-fighter and fighting with France about the name of the next Euro-program ;we will be flying unmanned, supersonic, stealth drones. Prototypes are already flying right now. Thank God we don’t have to work with the French!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!