|
tirefoamcan posted:
Absolutely agreed. Sadly I'm way below the hours I'd like to have in this year, but the weather has put pay to a lot of flying in addition to work. Any interior pictures of your aircraft?
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
I'm insanely jealous of you guys that own your own planes. Edit: VVV It's not the cost of the plane that keeps me away, it's the licensing/training. I'll get around to it one of these days. Godholio fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:25
|
|
|
It's cheaper than you think. ^^^^ Far 103 ultralights require ZERO training, however you would be a loving MORON WITH A DEATH WISH to fly one without any sort of training. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3474976  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEfBl4G30go helno fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:35
|
|
|
Depending on what you are interested in doing and how handy you are with the spanners, you can bring maintence and ownership costs on the n-reg down to very manageble levels. Helno has a great thread about ultralights and homebuilt aircraft in DIY and Hobbies although it is a little quiet. e: beaten to it by the man himeslf.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:36
|
|
|
Crosspost from the Space megathread in GBS Seemingly out of loving nowhere, manned deep space (out of LEO, likely L2) missions are rumored to be well in the planing stages even with budgets as they are. http://www.space.com/18380-nasa-moon-missions-obama-election.html Also, regarding licensing and private aircraft... you assholes have no idea how bad of an influence you are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
So gang,  What is this? by Powercube, on Flickr I can safely tell you what it's not- but that is not exactly helpful. VVV Cannot disagree with you, but I want to know what make model it is. Not adjectives! Powercube fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Nov 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
Powercube posted:So gang, 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 03:29
|
|
|
Powercube posted:So gang, Is it this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival_Provost There are a couple similar aircraft at that museum on airliners.net labelled as such.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
Solo-wing Pixy posted:Is it this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival_Provost Bingo. Apparently this frame was actually a gift from Zimbabwe... Much like the Canberra deeper inside the mountain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 04:23
|
|
|
Good, I spent an hour researching and got nowhere. Its also a lot younger then I was expecting. D C fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Nov 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 04:35
|
|
|
Powercube posted:So gang, Looks like a Westland Lysander and a Brewster Buffalo got it on one night
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 06:17
|
|
|
Powercube posted:So gang, Is it north Korea's latest fighter development, which will sweep the skies of capitalist running dogs and their inferior aircraft? No, no, I'm being silly. Indigenous radial engine technology is still years away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 08:21
|
|
|
Here are some more pictures of my plane. Under the hood, was installing a preheat system  Freshly polished prop!  Getting ready for a flight  At KDFI, just laying in the grass  Night flight panel  New hangar 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 19:51
|
|
|
Looks great, the propellor is quite something. You mention the pre-heat system. What do you make of it? I was probably going to get a small 40% greenhouse heating tube to put in the cowling on the recomendation of a friend who does the same on his rv-8.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
I have a Reiff preheat system which consists of heating band clamps around the base of the cylinders and an epoxied heating element on the oil pan. This type works quick to get the moisture out of the engine, I only run it for about 30-40 minutes before a flight. I have a Lycoming O-320 and the system I got ran about $450.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
Are owners of aircraft allowed to do their own maintenance or installation of parts? If so, does it have to get signed off by someone?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:24
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Are owners of aircraft allowed to do their own maintenance or installation of parts? If so, does it have to get signed off by someone? It depends on the regieme you operate under. But generally, yes, an owner can do preventative maintenance. Further work can often be done as long as it is signed off by a mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:28
|
|
|
Colonel K posted:It depends on the regieme you operate under. But generally, yes, an owner can do preventative maintenance. Further work can often be done as long as it is signed off by a mechanic. I have done almost all of the maintenance on my plane, some needed signoff. I was there when my mechanic needed to change my alternator belt which required the prop to be removed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
My big boss is buying a King Air 200, I hope there's enough money left over for bonuses this year! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Iranian Su-25 opened up on a US drone over water. Frogfoots are cool.
bloops fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
Cool enough they didn't kill it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:Iranian Su-25 opened up on a US drone over water. Frogfoots are cool. But the IRCG most definitely is not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
Colonel K posted:It depends on the regieme you operate under. But generally, yes, an owner can do preventative maintenance. Further work can often be done as long as it is signed off by a mechanic. Thanks. When you say regieme, what do you mean exactly? IFR? Night or geographic location? Also, seems that the Iranians fired on a drone. And missed. assuming of course they were trying to hit it http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/first-on-cnn-iranian-jets-fire-on-u-s-drone/?hpt=hp_t1 quote:Two Iranian Su-25 fighter jets fired on an unarmed U.S. Air Force Predator drone in the Persian Gulf on November 1, the Pentagon disclosed on Thursday.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Thanks. When you say regieme, what do you mean exactly? IFR? Night or geographic location? It sort of depends on location, in the states there is Certificate of Airworthiness and experimental I think. In the UK there is also CofA and Permit to fly / Annex II . Annex II aircraft tend to be homebuilts, but there also some aircraft that can either be on the CofA or Permit to fly, such as chipmunks. On Permit to fly an owner can do virtually everything on the aircraft although permit to fly aircraft can't fly night or IFR. CofA varies a little depending on what category you operate in, Private, public transport etc. On the UK CofA there's not a great deal you can do other then 50 hour checks with a mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 03:29
|
|
|
slidebite posted:
People keep saying this...what advantage would sending an aircraft to fire warning shots accomplish? Keep in mind, this is the same country that shot down/jammed a UAS previously, so shooting to miss would actually be a de-escalation. I don't buy it. It would be very very difficult to actually bring one down air-to-air with guns. It's not even a slam against Iranian pilots to say that its perfectly credible they couldn't get it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
I agree with you; I actually think they tried to splash it but couldn't. However, why do you say it would be difficult to take down with canons? It's not like the drone "pilot" has any real situational awareness and they're not that small. I'm assuming they couldn't/wouldn't use AA missles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
Worth mentioning that since it was a Su-25 that means it was being operated by the IRCG, not the Iranian AF; the IRCG is a separate military force. That's a significant difference because while the Iranian military is generally pretty professional, the IRCG is nuts and will do stupid provocative poo poo like race directly at USN warships in speedboats or try and shoot down a UAV in international airspace. It also explains why they were using Su-25s instead of another actual fighter, because the Su-25 is the highest performance aircraft the IRCG possesses (their other stuff is either transports, trainers, or helicopters). So given that fact it is entirely plausible that they were straight up trying to shoot it down and missed. e: It'd be difficult because a) the Su-25 isn't set up for air to air so I can't imagine they would have any type of lead computing assistance on the HUD or anything like that and b) even when the target is moving in a straight line gunnery against a moving target is still difficult without that type of assistance, particularly if you are a member of the IRCG air arm, which probably gets even less training than the Iranian air force. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 04:31
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Thanks. When you say regieme, what do you mean exactly? IFR? Night or geographic location? In the US, some amount of minor maintenance can be performed by the owner. Generally things not involving drastic disassembly of the structure or change in the avionics. For example, changing the oil, repairing interiors, other small tasks. Larger undertakings can still be performed by the pilot under the supervision (sign off) of a licensed mechanic. Experimental home built aircraft in the US can be completely serviced by the person who completed more than 50% of the aircraft's assembly. If the owner who built the plane sells it later, the new owner needs the above mentioned supervision. The original builder could still service the airplane. I may be somewhat off on the particulars of this, I've only lurked around the Vans RV forums casually and I'm going off what I've read. Also, tirefoamcan's post reminded me to remind you guys that Ask/Tell has an aviation megathread going on for folks interested in being a pilot or who are pilots. It's found here in case anyone doesn't already know it exists. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 04:53
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:
I assumed an Su-25 would have some sort of computerized AA piper/funnel or something. Learned something new. I know it's an attack aircraft, but thought it would have rudimentary AA for self defense if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I assumed an Su-25 would have some sort of computerized AA piper/funnel or something. Learned something new. I know it's an attack aircraft, but thought it would have rudimentary AA for self defense if nothing else. I'm not an expert by any means, so it very well could, but I kind of assumed that since the Iranians only possess the older -K export version that it wouldn't. FWIW I'm fairly certain the A-10 HUD does have a funnel, so I might be wrong on this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm not an expert by any means, so it very well could, but I kind of assumed that since the Iranians only possess the older -K export version that it wouldn't. I was just reading about this earlier. The A-10 did not have a lead-computing gunsight, at least as of the first gulf war, but it did score two air-to-air kills in that war. Even without a sight, the gun is so accurate and high velocity that scoring hits on a helicopter wasn't too difficult: quote:"My wingman and I were working a kill box in western Kuwait, just west of Ali Al Salem airfield. It was our third mission of the day, about 3:45 in the afternoon, and we had just rippled six Mk-82s (500-lb dumb bombs) on some building the Iraqi Army was using as a command post. The AAA (Anti Aircraft Artillery fire) had really picked up and we were tired. Coming off the bomb pass we spotted a tank moving down a nearby road- the Iraqis had learned by now not to move in convoys, so individual vehicles would make sprints between assembly areas. We backtracked from the moving tank and found two more, then another four. We both had two Mavericks. I took the eastern group and I had my wingman take the western group. I got both my missiles off -scratch two tanks- and then saw two black dots moving fast across the desert. They were moving way to fast to be tanks or trucks so I flipped over to the AWACS frequency to find out if any friendly choppers were in the area. AWACS said no friendlies were supposed to be in our area. I was padlocked on these guys by now and closed to visually ID them. About the time I positively ID'd them as hostile, they split. They had been flying line abreast, heading west-south-west, but now one turned toward the south, while the other turned to the north. I picked up the southern guy, called up my LIMA (AIM-9L Missile) and tried to get a tone but, the missile wouldn't track. The Hog had just recently had the AIM-9 added to its inventory and I really wanted to use it, but it just wouldn't lock. By now I was getting really steep, 60-70 degrees, and was starting to push the "floor"- our minimum altitude that keep us out of Iraqi small arms fire. As I pulled out of the dive I ran about 75 rounds across the choppers flightpath. It wasn't my best gunnery, the bullets stung out, instead of being concentrated, but I got a piece of him. A Forward Air Controller in an OV-10 Bronco that saw the engagement said that the Iraqi started flying very erratically. I pulled up, pirouetted and in another steep dive put 300 rounds into him. The helicopter exploded and tumbled into the desert. Without a lead computing sight the GAU-8 (30mm cannon) really helped out- the bullet drop is only one foot at a mile, so at the ranges I was shooting I was basically able to put him in the gun cross and pull the trigger. Here's the other story: To War in a Warthog I wouldn't be surprised if the Iranians had tried to use an air-to-air missile but couldn't achieve lock on a small piston-engined drone with whatever outdated export-model missiles their Su-25s might be able to carry. NightGyr fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 06:25
|
|
|
Well there you go, that makes me feel a little better about my initial reaction then, since like I said the -K Frogfoots that the Iranians have would be from around the same time period as the early A-10s. The A-10 definitely has a funnel now, so that must've been added in at some point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QGwsRazhvA e: Valid point about the more than likely rear aspect only older IR missiles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 06:42
|
|
|
According to NBC, the Su-25 made multiple passes, fired hundreds of rounds, and definitely tried to shoot it down. But failed to hit it with even a single bullet. "But a senior defense official said two Iranian ground-attack jets were involved in the incident. The jets circled the Predator several times, firing 30-millimeter cannons at the unarmed drone." "Asked whether the Iranian jet was firing warning shots, Little said the jet "fired to take it down." He would not speculate on whether this constitutes an act of war." WWI pilots shot down more planes with less gadgets; predator may be small, but it still shouldn't be a difficult target, even if it took evasive maneuvers. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 13:21
|
|
|
grover posted:WWI pilots shot down more planes with less gadgets; predator may be small, but it still shouldn't be a difficult target, even if it took evasive maneuvers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 13:29
|
|
|
One would doubt the pilot's skill, but presumably they were able to safely land the frogfoots (frogfeet?). I can't even land the A-10C warthog on my janky desktop PC with a terrible plastic $20 unweighted joystick, but I can still hit a slow moving blackhawk without the aid of the targeting computer. This event seems to be nothing more than a firm political swat to tell the US to back off on it's blatant intelligence gathering without actually prompting a "proportional response" from the US military. Occam's razor, etc etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 15:16
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:One would doubt the pilot's skill, but presumably they were able to safely land the frogfoots (frogfeet?). I can't even land the A-10C warthog on my janky desktop PC with a terrible plastic $20 unweighted joystick, but I can still hit a slow moving blackhawk without the aid of the targeting computer. This event seems to be nothing more than a firm political swat to tell the US to back off on it's blatant intelligence gathering without actually prompting a "proportional response" from the US military. On the other hand, one shouldn't attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 15:55
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:One would doubt the pilot's skill, but presumably they were able to safely land the frogfoots (frogfeet?). I can't even land the A-10C warthog on my janky desktop PC with a terrible plastic $20 unweighted joystick, but I can still hit a slow moving blackhawk without the aid of the targeting computer. This event seems to be nothing more than a firm political swat to tell the US to back off on it's blatant intelligence gathering without actually prompting a "proportional response" from the US military. It's not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 16:01
|
|
|
On other aviation boards I post on discussions about Iran's military aviation capabilities nearly always segue into fantasy war bullshit so can I distract you all with a little more French weirdness from Le Bourget? I didn't get a full photo of it, but this is like the rotor mast for a helicopter experiment. Except the rotors are biplane wings.  Me am bizarro 737-200!  Okay so this unusual one is German but it's in a French museum so there. These planes may be old news to a lot of you but they're the sort of thing I had no idea existed before I became a complete spergy diehard airplane nerd so I thought I might share them with people who aren't necessarily so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
grover posted:WWI pilots shot down more planes with less gadgets; predator may be small, but it still shouldn't be a difficult target, even if it took evasive maneuvers. "Evasive action" in a Predator? I'm sure like every program they have their secrets, but the entire MQ series is intended for a permissive environment. With the wing loading, airspeeds and thrust on tap the Predator (or any drone of significant size for that matter) is almost completely unable to defend itself from anything more than small arms fire (which it does through altitude and distance). And depending on where it was being controlled from don't forget the lag which wouldn't allow the operators to defend it from a gun attack, which happens very, very fast. I would be very surprised if the Frogfoot had any mechanization for A/A gunnery aside from a boresight marker set to some fixed distance/airspeed/g-loading. Basically, you would be just as well served to draw a crosshair on the canopy with a grease pencil, especially considering the next point: A/A gunnery is loving hard. In modern western fighters you often see the gun boresight canted up a couple degrees above the horizontal axis of the aircraft. That helps get you a solution much faster in an engagement, but makes hitting poo poo on the ground harder. All the Soviet era fighters and attack aircraft have boresights directly in line with the axis of the aircraft. In general this makes ground attack easier and hitting anything airborne a bitch. Even if the Frogfoot had a funnel, it would comically hard to use in anything other than level, 1G flight, which as someone pointed out above would be hard to achieve on a slow-rear end Predator. That's not even getting into the mechanics of why you want the nose moving as you fire, how fast, and under what kind of loading. Without only the funnel, with a gun designed for A/A engagement, in a modern aircraft with HOTAS and modern flight control systems that make things far, far easier than they should be, I've known only a few really skilled guys who were capable of hitting PLANFORM fighters consistently (in the sim, or simulated in the jet) in set-ups designed to practice our gunnery skills. Now try that with a much narrower target, that might be uncooperative, with a background of not having nearly as much time in the cockpit as you need to stay current (much less tactically proficient) and I bet these guys were hoping for that "golden BB". For comparison: The Israelis get mucho hours, fly a modern, exremely capable fighter shooting what many would argue is the best IR missile in the world AND as an overall fighter culture have more relevant combat experience to draw on than just about anyone alive(and are some of the most professional, disciplined and skilled pilots I've ever flown with: I've always said, the country I would least want to get into a no poo poo A/A shooting war with is Israel, by a loooong shot) and their F-16I needed 2 Pythons to take down that drone a little bit ago. All of that being said...I've seen the raggedy-rear end speedboats bravely charging US warships so this is far from the craziest thing the Iranians probably did today alone in the Gulf.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
slidebite posted:I agree with you; I actually think they tried to splash it but couldn't. I say it because I've seen USAF pilots struggle to target smaller UASes, and our guys get a lot more practice at the skills necessary. Our computer-assisted targeting systems are also much better than what can be find in anything Iran flies, ESPECIALLY a ground-attack aircraft like a Su-25. A Predator isn't particularly small, but that was probably a mission those pilots have never practiced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 19:47
|
|