|
Fucknag posted:So basically they're using their huge porkbarrel to try and ensure that they remain the only game in town; sound familiar, F-35 fans? Not just familiar, seeing as how ULA is a government forced alliance between Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:42 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Marine only aircraft? F-35B and the Harrier comes to mind. Yeah, pretty much. Everything else they fly had either the Army, USAF, or Navy to work the bugs out (though I suppose the Navy has/had a version of the -53E, but I'm hoping it's different enough to not ruin the joke; the USMC version is about as different from the Navy one as their F-35).
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 04:18
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
hobbesmaster posted:Marine only aircraft? F-35B and the Harrier comes to mind. The Osprey is Marine-only too, isn't it? Or at least the vast majority of its flight time gets logged by the USMC?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
^^ USAF flies them Super cobra is technically marines only even if it's a cobra with an extra engine slapped on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Why the gently caress did the guy marshal him towards power lines? Even with the dumb ground guys, how does the pilot not see those poles given the approach he took, and the altitude he was at?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The Osprey is Marine-only too, isn't it? Or at least the vast majority of its flight time gets logged by the USMC? There's also been talk of an anti-submarine variant for the Navy, but it's just been *talk*. Honestly I think they should just unmothball the S-3s.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
Hmm, a plane whose mission profile is "slowly follow a submarine for hours" and which would be carried on a full-size aircraft carrier. What sounds right: a lightweight airframe with long, straight wings, powered by a pair of high-bypass turbofans, or a goddamned tilt-rotor? Why did the S-3s get mothballed anyway? I thought they were kinda neat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
Wasn't there talk of resurrecting the S-3's in a cargo role because the C-2 is too small to bring spare F-35 engines?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Why did the S-3s get mothballed anyway? I thought they were kinda neat. Because NAVAIR was broke and no one cares about ASW anymore. ehnus posted:Wasn't there talk of resurrecting the S-3's in a cargo role because the C-2 is too small to bring spare F-35 engines? LockMart had a pitch to modify the S-3 airframes in the boneyard...basically build a new fuselage but keep the rest of the plane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Musk is by no means perfect and SpaceX certainly has issues, especially regarding how they treat their workforce, but the actual rocket itself is fine, and I hesitate to call most people in the Spaceflight thread "Elon fanboys". What's the story on workplace conditions?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 10:54
|
|
|
Groda posted:What's the story on workplace conditions? The main thing I know of is that they consistently push long hours, we're talking ~70 hour work weeks for months on end. Good way to burn your employees the gently caress out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Hmm, a plane whose mission profile is "slowly follow a submarine for hours" and which would be carried on a full-size aircraft carrier. What sounds right: a lightweight airframe with long, straight wings, powered by a pair of high-bypass turbofans, or a goddamned tilt-rotor? Because they sucked at finding submarines, which basically relegated them to the buddy tanking role, and they took up way too much onboard space just to be buddy tankers. If you want to find a vaguely modern submarine, you need, well, another modern submarine, but barring that you want a LAMPS helicopter with dipping sonar, not a fixed wing aircraft. In theory an Osprey -does- make sense, because you want to hover, dip, get a vector, and then reposition ASAP to repeat and triangulate - BUT an Osprey takes big deck space while an SH-60 can and should be carried on a picket ship, and I don't know how wonderful Ospreys are at constantly transitioning in and out of hover at low altitude. (Like iyaayas said, ASW is kind of a joke right now, and the grand budget fuckup that put out the LCS instead of a proper OHP replacement means you have all sorts of goofy poo poo like throwing towed arrays off the carrier's fantail, instead of subhunting with picket ships like sane people.) Snowdens Secret fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Aug 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:The main thing I know of is that they consistently push long hours, we're talking ~70 hour work weeks for months on end. Good way to burn your employees the gently caress out. Basically same as game industry. Cool job can take advantage of young employees since there are plenty of people to replace them. Good for SpaceX, bad for employees.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
smackfu posted:Basically same as game industry. Cool job can take advantage of young employees since there are plenty of people to replace them. Good for SpaceX, bad for employees. Wait, do you mean to imply that there are industries that don't do this? I thought it was SOP for most companies these days, regardless of the industry. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
McDeth posted:Well those rotary wing flying contraptions are certainly more beefy than I thought they were! What a loving rear end in a top hat. All poles have wires. Cross all wires above the pole. All poles have wires. Cross all wires above the pole. All poles have wires. Cross all wires above the pole.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The Osprey is Marine-only too, isn't it? Or at least the vast majority of its flight time gets logged by the USMC?  USAF use a few CV-22s for Special Forces support.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:
I actually take this is evidence our next armed conflict will be against someone with a semi-legit navy. We're really good at forgetting the specific doctrine and conops that we need next. I predict the next one will involve 4th generation fighters and post-WWII submarines and we'll initially have a hard time with both. Edit: Iraq III doesn't count, although the bad guys do have modern tanks now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
 F-8 SUPERCRITICAL WING has a nice ring to it. Looks happier than usual, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Sir Cornelius posted:
Question for anyone who might know: It strikes me, looking at this picture, that there must be a tremendous amount of extra mechanical complexity putting the engines out in the rotating pods. During the long history of Osprey development, did they ever look at configurations with roof mounted turbines ala conventional helos? Seems like it would potentially be better. The Osprey we got has power shafts to cross couple the engines anyways, so there shouldn't be any weight gain from moving the engines inboard. Might even save some weight, and more importantly two large heavy objects would be very close to the center of mass, which seems desirable. I also remember reading news stories years ago about Osprey prototypes having persistent issues with all the plumbing in the rotating engine pods. Fuel or oil lines abrading as the pods rotated, leading to eventual puncture and engine fire, fun stuff like that. (Were there compelling reasons to put the engines out in the pods? Guess what I'm curious about is if anyone knows what the trade studies looked like.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Well the exhaust provides a small amount of extra thrust. Also, farther apart the engines are the less likely both will be taken out in one hit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:Question for anyone who might know: It strikes me, looking at this picture, that there must be a tremendous amount of extra mechanical complexity putting the engines out in the rotating pods. During the long history of Osprey development, did they ever look at configurations with roof mounted turbines ala conventional helos? It's a rotary-wing aircraft powered by turboshaft engines. "Minimal mechanical complexity" is not really a design parameter. With the current setup, they only need two gearbox sets, one in each pod, with a connecting shaft system. If they put the engines in the fuselage, it would require three gearbox sets. One in the center, one in each wingtip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Sir Cornelius posted:
I don't get it. "C" is for cargo, and "M" is for special missions, right? So why is the Air Force's special forces version the CV-22, and the Marines' assault helicopter for carrying dudes the MV-22?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Hanging out in the MSP observation deck. Nice and quiet with a good view of the runway traffic. Any other airports still have one of these?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:I don't get it. "C" is for cargo, and "M" is for special missions, right? So why is the Air Force's special forces version the CV-22, and the Marines' assault helicopter for carrying dudes the MV-22? Because the air force doesn't think too highly of their own army - which is fair enough given that an army isn't very aerodynamic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Hanging out in the MSP observation deck. Nice and quiet with a good view of the runway traffic. Any other airports still have one of these? They're rarer than they used to be. LAX has something on top of the Theme Building (the spaceship-looking building in the center of it, which does not rotate) but I'm not sure what its hours are and I usually watch the airplanes from elsewhere. edit: Japan is apparently lousy with airport observation decks but I've never been.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Hanging out in the MSP observation deck. Nice and quiet with a good view of the runway traffic. Any other airports still have one of these? Anchorage does/did. I can check on Friday when I go through. They added a native art exhibit next to it so things are extra quiet now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Friend of mine posted a thing on Facebook about a cheaper method of using electrolysis to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, and using the hydrogen to provide both buoyance and fuel to an airship; and that it's totally safe because the Hindenburg was a freak accident. So, in looking up airship accidents I came across this: DELAG LZ-6 posted:LZ-6, owned by the world’s first passenger airline, DELAG, was destroyed at Baden-Oos by a hydrogen fire which began when a mechanic used petrol to clean the ship’s gondola. "...a mechanic used petrol to clean the ship's gondala." Sure cleaned it out alright! Worthleast posted:Hanging out in the MSP observation deck. Nice and quiet with a good view of the runway traffic. Any other airports still have one of these? CAK use to have one, but when they renovated to have nice things like skates/ramps they got rid of it. Also happened around 2001, I believe, so they were able to hand wave complaints with "9/11, the terrorists will win if we let you watch airplanes!" CovfefeCatCafe fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Aug 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Charlotte Douglas has one. It's even got a placard with all the radio frequencies listed in case you want to take your scanner. Not usually necessary, though, as all the times I've been, there have been guys with scanners and large sound systems. Listening to (say) Delta Ground Ops is pretty cool. The pilots get to complain about ramp delays and talk to schedulers and stuff and about how they're gonna run out of crew rest or fuel or something. Then you hear them on the Ground Control freq asking for an ETA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Lobster God posted:Heard some noise earlier, stuck my head out the door and the Vulcan flew past, escorted by both flying Lancasters. Pretty cool. No, really (1952 vs 1941).
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
poo poo. Ground stop in MSP. May have to sleep up here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:They're rarer than they used to be. LAX has something on top of the Theme Building (the spaceship-looking building in the center of it, which does not rotate) but I'm not sure what its hours are and I usually watch the airplanes from elsewhere. Odd question, but I'm going to be connecting through LAX at the end of September, coming in on a domestic flight, leaving international; are all the terminals connected? Like, can I go from Terminal 8 to TBIT without having to leave the 'secure' area, or will I have to go through TSA as part of my connection?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Itzena posted:The weirdest thing about this is that the first flight of the Vulcan was barely more than a decade after the first flight of the Lancaster. The weirdest thing is that the final development of the Lancaster platform (the Shackleton) was in RAF service for almost a decade after the Vulcan was retired...
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Odd question, but I'm going to be connecting through LAX at the end of September, coming in on a domestic flight, leaving international; are all the terminals connected? Like, can I go from Terminal 8 to TBIT without having to leave the 'secure' area, or will I have to go through TSA as part of my connection? You'll have to go through TSA regardless, I think. I know I had to be totally re-screened along with my luggage when I arrived on a flight from France to MSP before I could board a domestic flight to my destination in California. But LAX isn't really built for connections and I would assume that there's no direct path between TBIT and Terminal 8.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:They're rarer than they used to be. LAX has something on top of the Theme Building (the spaceship-looking building in the center of it, which does not rotate) but I'm not sure what its hours are and I usually watch the airplanes from elsewhere. My local airport here in Fukuoka, Japan has an observation deck and during the summer they set up a beer garden where you can get drunk and watch the planes. It is a pretty busy airport as well so a lot of the time you can't have much of a conversation due the noise of the engines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:"...a mechanic used petrol to clean the ship's gondala." This was super common back in the day, though. If you look through old (1950s ish) magazines you'll frequently come across handy household tips like "spilled grease on your tablecloth? Just soak it in gasoline, then hang it up to dry!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
A Handed Missus posted:
Still not as happy as the happiest variant. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:This was super common back in the day, though. If you look through old (1950s ish) magazines you'll frequently come across handy household tips like "spilled grease on your tablecloth? Just soak it in gasoline, then hang it up to dry!" And those were the days when gasoline had lead in it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:I don't get it. "C" is for cargo, and "M" is for special missions, right? So why is the Air Force's special forces version the CV-22, and the Marines' assault helicopter for carrying dudes the MV-22? CV also means aircraft carrier. The Navy wouldn't let the marines get way with that one. All that said - shouldn't it be a UV if it can carry guns and stuff?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Friend of mine posted a thing on Facebook about a cheaper method of using electrolysis to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, and using the hydrogen to provide both buoyance and fuel to an airship; and that it's totally safe because the Hindenburg was a freak accident. Petrol was used as a cleaner in the WW1 airship service as well - It was (probably) behind the Ahlorn Disaster, when every airship at Ahlhorn blew up after a fire in the shed with two airships in it. I can see future airships using a fuel cell with a giant inflatable sausage of hydrogen powering it, (so you get buoyancy that way) but that's a bit different than using it as a conventional lifting gas. Sagebrush posted:This was super common back in the day, though. If you look through old (1950s ish) magazines you'll frequently come across handy household tips like "spilled grease on your tablecloth? Just soak it in gasoline, then hang it up to dry!" "More Dangerous than Dynamite!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 03:42 |
|
|
Eej posted:Still not as happy as the happiest variant. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 01:28
|
|
