Nebakenezzer posted:

Lusso posted:

I saw one of these on final approach to 19R at Dulles one morning and stopped to watch it fly overhead. It was freaking awesome.

Preoptopus posted:

You saw the only one.

VikingSkull posted:

Also I get the A-1 love, but seriously the A-10 is doing that exact job right now. A prop plane might be cheaper, but you're gonna lose a ton of them to rifle fire.

Phantom LOLbooth posted:

I present to you, the de Havilland Venom:

CmdrSmirnoff posted:

While not quite a Venom, you can own your very own Vampire for the price of a decent car.

VikingSkull posted:

It's not inherently more dangerous because of the speed, more like it's easier to lose a prop and a heavy machine gun can do that easily.

Besides, when the A-10 exists and is filling the role already, it's doubtful any prop based program is going to gain traction in the Pentagon. Wouldn't the A-10 carry more weapons and loiter longer than a prop plane that isn't ridiculously big?

VikingSkull posted:

It's not inherently more dangerous because of the speed, more like it's easier to lose a prop and a heavy machine gun can do that easily.

Besides, when the A-10 exists and is filling the role already, it's doubtful any prop based program is going to gain traction in the Pentagon. Wouldn't the A-10 carry more weapons and loiter longer than a prop plane that isn't ridiculously big?

Godholio posted:

There are only so many A-10s to go around, and they're getting up there in years/flight hours. We're not going to build more of them, so what's next?

Forum Hussy posted:

Why not one of those Embraer Super Tucanos or whatever they're called? They make an armed version that would be perfect for close range ground support.

Fake edit: wiki says the Air Force and the Navy are (were?) both evaluating the aircraft for this exact purpose.

Pretty Little Rainbow posted:

Gunships pretty much do this job but better already.

VikingSkull posted:

As I learned today, he saw one of like 54. The 6 engine one you're thinking of is even larger than that.

e- I saw that one land at Stewart and it's mind boggling.

InitialDave posted:

The DeHavilland Comet, which ... has passed its DNA down to the RAF's current Nimrod.

Forum Hussy posted:

Why not one of those Embraer Super Tucanos or whatever they're called? They make an armed version that would be perfect for close range ground support.

Fake edit: wiki says the Air Force and the Navy are (were?) both evaluating the aircraft for this exact purpose.

VikingSkull posted:

Also I get the A-1 love, but seriously the A-10 is doing that exact job right now.

Fucknag posted:

To expand on this, picture the AN-124. Now add fuselage sections, wing root extensions, longer wingspan, beefed-up suspension, twin vertical stabilizers, and remove the rear door and ramp. BAM! An-225. And I'm not exaggerating, that's literally what Antonov did for the 225, they stuck the required mods into the 124's blueprints, handed it to the engineers and said "Build this."

ursa_minor posted:

ursa_minor posted:

Boat posted:

Weren't those things really really difficult to land?


Wow. That thing looks all kinds of . I don't think I've ever seen double-folded wings before either.

orange lime posted:

Yep. Up here in Tempe, you'd think that you get used to the sound of jet engines from the one airliner every 90 seconds landing at Sky Harbor...and then some of the F/A-18s come in off training or whatever and you remember what a turbine REALLY sounds like.

quote:

Operation Tidal Wave was a strategic bombing mission executed by the American Air Forces in August 1943, during World War II intended to put nine Romanian oil refineries around Ploiesti "out of action." The mission was unsuccessful in that it resulted in "no curtailment of overall product output".
In terms of loss of life, this mission was one of the costliest for the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) in the European Theatre, accounting for the loss of 53 aircraft and 660 aircrewmen. It was the worst loss ever suffered by the US air forces on a single mission. The day that it took place is known as "Black Sunday." Five Medals of Honor and numerous Distinguished Service Crosses were awarded to Operation Tidal Wave crew members.

leica posted:

I've always thought Dragonflies were pretty cool.

orange lime posted:

It was my dream to own one of these things, because it seemed like the perfect 2-seater jet. Small engines, straight wings, 2 tandem seats, carries all kinds of stuff under the wings in pods. Then I learned that the engines make a constant shrieking noise that's probably second only to the Thunderscreech in terms of sheer ability to infuriate.

quote:

meltie posted:

Whilst we're here, is there a name for the blue used to paint cockpits? "Cockpit Blue" as a search doesn't seem to turn up much of use. Is there a real name for it, and what are the reasons behind its use? I figure it's easy on the eyes and reduces fatigue?

quote:

Psychology of Color: Blue

Ask people their favorite color and a clear majority will say blue. Much of the world is blue (skies, seas). Seeing the color blue actually causes the body to produce chemicals that are calming; but that isn't true of all shades of blue. Some shades (or too much blue) can send a cold and uncaring message. Many bedrooms are blue because it's calm, restful color. Over the ages blue has become associated with steadfastness, dependability, wisdom and loyalty (note how many uniforms are blue). People tend to be more productive in a blue room because they are calm and focused on the task at hand. Some studies are showing that weight lifters can lift more weight in a blue gym - in fact, nearly all sports are enhanced in blue surroundings.

silversiren posted:

http://www.precisionintermedia.com/color.html

silversiren posted:

This thing just seems like it would be extremely difficult to fly.

quote:

It would seem that the displacement of lift vs weight, and thrust vs drag, would have induced tendencies to yaw and roll requiring continual trimming to control, but the aircraft proved very stable and maneuverable. Indeed, Dr. Vogt had calculated that the greater weight on one side of the aircraft could be cancelled out by the torque of the propeller.

quote:

In his book, Sled Driver, SR-71 Blackbird pilot Brian Shul writes: "I'll
always remember a certain radio exchange that occurred one day as Walt (my
back-seater) and I were screaming across Southern California 13 miles high.
We were monitoring various radio transmissions from other aircraft as we
entered Los Angeles airspace. Although they didn't really control us, they
did monitor our movement across their scope. I heard a Cessna ask for a
readout of its ground speed."90 knots" Center replied. Moments later, a Twin
Beech required the same. "120 knots," Center answered. We weren't the only
ones proud of our ground speed that day as almost instantly an F-18 smugly
transmitted, "Ah, Center, Dusty 52 requests ground speed readout." There was
a slight pause, then the response, "525 knots on the ground, Dusty." Another
silent pause. As I was thinking to myself how ripe a situation this was, I
heard a familiar click o f a radio transmission coming from my back-seater.
It was at that precise moment I realized Walt and I had become a real crew,
for we were both thinking in unison. "Center, Aspen 20, you got a ground
speed readout for us?" There was a longer than normal pause.... "Aspen, I
show 1,742 knots" (That's about 2004.658 mph) No further inquiries were
heard on that frequency.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In another famous SR-71 story, Los Angeles Center reported receiving a
request for clearance to FL 600 (60,000ft). The incredulous controller, with
some disdain in his voice, asked, "How do you plan to get up to 60,000 feet?
The pilot (obviously a sled driver), responded, "We don't plan to go up to
it; we plan to go down to it." He was cleared.

OptimusMatrix posted:

I've always liked these SR71 stories.