|
vulturesrow posted:E2 does just fine with 3 controllers. ~Naval Aviation Supremacy~ You're probably joking, but the level of control capability doors not even compare.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
Doctrinally is the E-2 kind of a relay for the carrier battle group? Like most control stuff still comes from the carrier?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Mrs. Slidebite and I are probably going to be in the SLC area around Sept 8-ish and we were thinking of driving to SFO. Enroute is Reno and the air races just happen to be on around that time. I have never seen the air races but I've heard they've started to lose a lot of competitors since that 2011 crash making them even cancel some events. Is it a worthwhile thing to try coincide a visit for a day or two? Since I'm not sure which day we'll be there, is a walk-up without prepurchasing tickets crazy or is there normally tons of available seats?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
Bad news everyone, the PKAF has grounded their Mig-19s: http://m.yna.co.kr/mob2/en/contents_en.jsp?domain=3&ctype=A&site=0100000000&cid=AEN20140730002800315&mobile The Mig-15s, however, are still flying. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
That isn't flying - it's falling. With style.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:E2 does just fine with 3 controllers. ~Naval Aviation Supremacy~ Linking because I just found it (caution PDF): http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/E2DAdvancedHawkeye/Documents/pageDocuments/E-2D_Cutaway_Poster.pdf
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Airborne warning and control. The purpose of an AWACS is to control air assets - that requires low latency to make quick decisions and have up to date information and to have someone with some rank onboard. I suppose it could be done with a ship in theatre with a remote connection to something flying overhead for radar coverage and improved coms range but that won't help in Afganistan. Satellite communications has considerable latency not present in line-of-sight or terrestrial comms but it is measured in hundreds to thousands of milliseconds, not in minutes. Would an extra 750ms be a dealbreaker?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:You're probably joking, but the level of control capability doors not even compare. I wasn't joking, but read what I said. I said an E-2 does just fine with 3. And it does. In fact, as a person whose worked with an E2 and E3 as an "end user" of their product, I've found nothing that sets the E3 over the E2 in any significant sense. If youd like to detail what you think makes it superior by all means go ahead. My only point is that as a tactical user I've yet to experience much difference in the two. hobbesmaster posted:Doctrinally is the E-2 kind of a relay for the carrier battle group? Like most control stuff still comes from the carrier? Not sure what you are asking here. The CSG exercises very little control over the what the air wing does from moment to moment. The E2 can be used as a relay but usually acts more as airborne intercept control and early warning. They do a lot of other stuff too but those two are some of the big ones.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Mrs. Slidebite and I are probably going to be in the SLC area around Sept 8-ish and we were thinking of driving to SFO. Enroute is Reno and the air races just happen to be on around that time. Where'd you hear that? Last year sounded like one of the best Unlimited races in years. A couple of the planes have had issues over the year (most famously the Dreadnought incident over San Francisco Bay) but it sounds like it'll be another good year this year, albeit with the new and weird management structure. Do go. There is plenty of room in the bleachers for everything but the Sunday Unlimited Gold race. Heck, you don't even need the bleachers - BUY A PIT PASS. Just watch from the rope in the pits. Seriously, Reno is awesome. If you stand next to a plane being wrenched on long enough they're likely to hand you a tool and ask you to hold something. The T-6 class is close enough you can get some great shots of 4 or more planes together as they pass the pylon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:I wasn't joking, but read what I said. I said an E-2 does just fine with 3. And it does. In fact, as a person whose worked with an E2 and E3 as an "end user" of their product, I've found nothing that sets the E3 over the E2 in any significant sense. If youd like to detail what you think makes it superior by all means go ahead. My only point is that as a tactical user I've yet to experience much difference in the two. That's because an E-2 has a very limited piece of the pie. In a pinch the AWACS can take over for the ASOC, TAOC, or AOC, depending on what kind of war we're dealing with. There's also significant tech advantages that you're not going to see in a 4v4 exercise or even an AW Fallon or Red Flag. A small number of E-3s can provide theater-wide C2, something you're gonna need a carrier loaded with nothing but Hawkeyes (or E-737s) to do. More radios, better datalink hardware, deeper look, better (but still poo poo) ELINT capability, more controllers, etc. There are noticeable differences, but frankly we manage to avoid most of the situations where it becomes painfully obvious. I don't know if it's feasible to go back and look up how Iraq was divided among C2 agencies, but if you can find a slideshow somewhere on CENTCOM/CENTAF's sites you'll start to get an idea. I know they're still around, nobody cleans that poo poo out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
vulturesrow posted:I wasn't joking, but read what I said. I said an E-2 does just fine with 3. And it does. In fact, as a person whose worked with an E2 and E3 as an "end user" of their product, I've found nothing that sets the E3 over the E2 in any significant sense. If youd like to detail what you think makes it superior by all means go ahead. My only point is that as a tactical user I've yet to experience much difference in the two. Maybe I've had bad experiences with E-2 crews, but they seem to get task saturated way faster, which makes sense given the crew size. I've seen operations which were going just fine with an E-3 fall apart soon after the E-2 takes the airspace and finds themselves dealing with a far busier battle than they were ready for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
That can happen to anyone, and it absolutely happens to the E-3 as well...but every time I've seen it it's been a brand-new crew on their first 1-2 flights controlling half the aircraft in Afghanistan or something like that. After a little while they get the handle on the situation, which includes all new callsigns they dont know, procedures they've only done in the simulator for a couple of hours tops, and senior agencies breathing down their necks and poo poo rolls downhill to the scope operators. By the end of the second flight, half the crew is in the back at any given time waiting for their chicken nuggets to get out of the oven, just dicking around, or doing pushups or whatever kills the boredom. It's always busier than you're ready for. If it's not, it's about to be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Crescendo posted:Yep, you're all wrong, the F-5 is the most fighter-jet looking fighter-jet. Even better when it became the F-20.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Powercube posted:Bad news everyone, the PKAF has grounded their Mig-19s: http://m.yna.co.kr/mob2/en/contents_en.jsp?domain=3&ctype=A&site=0100000000&cid=AEN20140730002800315&mobile Would a Mig-15 or Mig-19 even notice an F-18 before it enters pulverization range?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Nope. A Scan Odd radar probably wouldn't see a Hornet until about 8 miles or so. Maybe less.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
When you're talking fighter jets, eight miles is what, 30 seconds or so?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Assuming a mutual closing velocity of Mach 1.8 at 20,000 feet, it's 22 seconds, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
Half that because it's the missile closing speed you care about. Even less time head on. You ded son.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Half that because it's the missile closing speed you care about. Even less time head on. You ded son. That's assuming USFK and ROK forces haven't noticed the 1950's style mobilization tactics DPRK uses- found out it was for real this time, and waltzed in with tacit air dominance to take them out on the ground. Remember, the AN-2 and LI-2 are still part of the PKAF. They are fighting 1958's war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
Godholio posted:That's because an E-2 has a very limited piece of the pie. In a pinch the AWACS can take over for the ASOC(Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition), TAOC(The Art Of Conversation.com), or AOC(http://us.aoc.com/) Thanks for making your reply a bunch of indecipherable bullshit. Spergs like you are the reason my ATC thread is useless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Thanks for making your reply a bunch of indecipherable bullshit. Air support operations center Tactical air operations center. A usmc thing. Air operations center. See also jaoc or caoc as needed. A naval aviator ought to know these things. Edit: is Kodiak the training E-3 squadron?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Thanks for making your reply a bunch of indecipherable bullshit. If only there was an acronym you could add to your Google search of those terms to indicate you were interested in them within the context of an Airborne Warning and Control System.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Powercube posted:That's assuming USFK and ROK forces haven't noticed the 1950's style mobilization tactics DPRK uses- found out it was for real this time, and waltzed in with tacit air dominance to take them out on the ground. Oh come on the AN-2 is a STOL utility plane. The huey is the same age and believe or not is still used by the US army (for training). Incidentally, the AN-2 vs CIA Huey "dogfight" is still like the best thing ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
PCjr sidecar posted:If only there was an acronym you could add to your Google search of those terms to indicate you were interested in them within the context of an Airborne Warning and Control System. He's just pointing out how unfriendly it is to non aviation nerds. Unfortunately we're only half a step above the eagle dynamics forum for that so...
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Why make people work so hard for it if not to exclude open participation? The possibility of accessing the relevant information with additional keywords does not make the discussion less spergy. EDIT: You spergs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Air support operations center The average reader of this thread isn't a naval aviator, though. I'm guilty of dropping the occasional acronym myself, but if there's five of them in a sentence, googling gets tedious, you know?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Incidentally, the AN-2 vs CIA Huey "dogfight" is still like the best thing ever. Oh man I haven't heard about that one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Incidentally, the AN-2 vs CIA Huey "dogfight" is still like the best thing ever. Beaten but, uh, I would definitely like to know more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:Beaten but, uh, I would definitely like to know more. StandardVC10 posted:Oh man I haven't heard about that one. quote:On 12 January 1968, four North Vietnamese Air Force AN-2 Colt biplanes lifted off from an airfield in northeastern North Vietnam and headed west toward Laos. The aircraft were on a mission to destroy a US radar base that was guiding bombers in attacks against targets in North Vietnam. Known to the Americans as Site 85, the radar facility was perched atop a 5,800-foothigh mountain, Phou Pha Thi. Manned by US Air Force volunteers “sheepdipped” as employees of the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, the site had been in operation only a few months. The mountain, used for many years as a staging base for CIA-directed Hmong guerilla fighters and American special operations and rescue helicopters, was only 125 nautical miles from Hanoi. Air America, a CIA-proprietary, provided aerial support for the facility, the technicians, and the security forces. A++ Vietnam
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Thanks for making your reply a bunch of indecipherable bullshit. Defining those three acronyms isn't going to help anyone that doesn't already know what those agencies are, how they normally interact, and what the context is. When it comes to things like airport codes then sure, type it out, but occasionally people that know a lot about certain areas of aviation are going to discuss things that the average goon will probably not understand in, y'know, the aviation thread. Should we not discuss anything that the average goon will not be able to immediately comprehend? Sometimes, like with this very post, you need to just use your scroll wheel and move on to the next post. - A concerned KLIT poster
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Prop Wash posted:Defining those three acronyms isn't going to help anyone that doesn't already know what those agencies are, how they normally interact, and what the context is. When it comes to things like airport codes then sure, type it out, but occasionally people that know a lot about certain areas of aviation are going to discuss things that the average goon will probably not understand in, y'know, the aviation thread. Should we not discuss anything that the average goon will not be able to immediately comprehend? Sometimes, like with this very post, you need to just use your scroll wheel and move on to the next post. Pretty much this. There is a lot of jargon in this thread. I don't understand half the stuff the maintainers post. I either look it up our move on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
I went down to Genesee Park for day 3 of the Seafair Air Show and (because I am a poor, cheap bastard who doesn't want to pay $35 for a ticket) sat a few blocks south of the viewing stands and watched the show from there with all the rest of the poors/cheaps. I saw:
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Pretty much this. There is a lot of jargon in this thread. I don't understand half the stuff the maintainers post. I either look it up our move on. We don't understand it either. Fly safe!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Powercube posted:That's assuming USFK and ROK forces haven't noticed the 1950's style mobilization tactics DPRK uses- found out it was for real this time, and waltzed in with tacit air dominance to take them out on the ground. Don't forget the Il-28, a plane that could conceivably become a high-tier end-cap in the Soviet tech tree in War Thunder, and was last considered mildly menacing when the USSR based a good handful of them in Cuba during the Missile Crisis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
I hardly understand any of the posts by the maintainers or whoever the E-3 guy is or the other military people because of the acronym soup and inside jargon. I just look at the pretty pictures.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
If I care: I go look it up. If I don't care: Highly unlikely cause I love all of this poo poo. but in the unlikely even I will just scroll past. Carry on. Just don't shoot video vertically with your phones on purpose. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:53
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Air support operations center I don't know if Kodiak is a callsign that's actually used, it doesn't ring a bell. Dragnet is the training squadron. The guys in Alaska use Yukla (flight deck) and Focus (mission crew) as I recall. Kodiak might belong to someone else up there, F-15s or a ground agency maybe. And yeah, my bad on the acronyms earlier. They're all command and control agencies/headquarters tasked with specific aspects of managing the air war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Aeronautical Insanity: Official E-3 Appreciation Thread (In all honesty, I find the stuff about AWACS pretty interesting.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I don't know if Kodiak is a callsign that's actually used, it doesn't ring a bell. Dragnet is the training squadron. The guys in Alaska use Yukla (flight deck) and Focus (mission crew) as I recall. Kodiak might belong to someone else up there, F-15s or a ground agency maybe. Not that I recall...the GCI guys with ANR use Top Rock and the fighters were generally something associated with the squadron. IIRC it was usually Dice for the 90th and something to do with dogs for the 525 (Bulldog maybe?), can't remember what the Eagle squadrons were...although given the fact that the 19th's patch features a rooster and F-15 pilots are a bunch of children, I'm sure Cock got used at least occasionally. GCI - Ground Control Interception...using radar(s) on the ground to tell the interceptors where to go. ANR - Alaska NORAD Region...since NORAD is responsible for air defense for the entirety of the North American continent, it's divided into three regions: Continental US, Canada, and Alaska. Due to its proximity to Russia and its strategic location, ANR does the vast majority of the interception of Russian bombers conducting long range recon flights around the periphery of North America. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:54 |
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Aeronautical Insanity: Official E-3 Appreciation Thread I don't know that I'd use the word "appreciation"...
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 07:05
|
|