|
Godholio posted:Yeah, nothing about it looks fake, besides being sped up which is pretty reasonable. You mean aside from the movement, and the fact that the only part that's sped up is the F-18, not the guy videoing? I'm still trying to decide if your post is sarcastic or not.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
WAR CRIME SYNDICAT posted:You mean aside from the movement, and the fact that the only part that's sped up is the F-18, not the guy videoing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
No, the dress is white and gold omg
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Vitamin J posted:The first half is normal speed and then it's sped up after the thumbs up. Watch the wings rock on the camera plane. ....which would kinda make it fake? look at the angle of attack the Hornet is at at the start lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
The AOA at the start is actually fine, it's a common sight in formation flying between fast jets and vintage WWII craft. Though this puppy is probably a bit slower than a Mustang or Spitfire. But airplanes just don't fly like that. The movement of the elevons does not match the extreme roll rate of the wave (especially considering the slow speed), and the breakoff and vertical acceleration is just ridiculous: it appears to go from slow flight at high AOA to breaking away at high speed and then to vertical at over 500knots in just a few seconds. I don't even think an F15 or F22 has enough thrust to do something like that. not to mention the G-forces a maneuver like that would take. Tsuru fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jul 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
the point is an F-18 at that AOA wouldn't then move at that speed hence that video isn't "real"
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:....which would kinda make it fake? Don't look at the AoA, look at the stabilators; they're perfectly horizontal. e: beaten of course
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
It is of course impossible for video to be replayed faster than the speed at which the events occurred.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:It is of course impossible for video to be replayed faster than the speed at which the events occurred. That's exactly what it is, but that also means it has been edited. Weirdly, something can be both real and not in the world of film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Vitamin J posted:The first half is normal speed and then it's sped up after the thumbs up. Watch the wings rock on the camera plane. Not if you go by the movement of the pilot in the cockpit. His movement speed never changes. The video is fake, and finding reasons for the video to be "sped up" when a normal video would work just fine, is kind of loving weird, guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Counterpoint: the only way it could be remotely interesting rather than a paint by number Tom Hanks vehicle is if it was told from the perspective of the flock of birds. Starring Ryan Gosling.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Ola posted:Starring Ryan Gosling. There needs to be a  with a goose
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
WAR CRIME SYNDICAT posted:You mean aside from the movement, and the fact that the only part that's sped up is the F-18, not the guy videoing? I wasn't really watching the guy, sorry. Yeah he's moving at normal speed and the Hornet is obviously not. WAR CRIME SYNDICAT posted:The video is fake, and finding reasons for the video to be "sped up" when a normal video would work just fine, is kind of loving weird, guys. When converting video to gif and you cut a bunch of frames out to save on filesize speeding up is a common way to smooth it out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Not an airplane, but seems relevant enough:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqpJS-q9gB8 More pics here: http://silodrome.com/radial-engined-pickup-truck/ Article here: http://www.hotrod.com/events/coverage/airplane-engine-1939-plymouth-pickup-radically-radial/
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Not an airplane, but seems relevant enough:  I'll allow it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Not an airplane, but seems relevant enough: That instrument cluster is, on a scale from one to ten, tits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:That instrument cluster is, on a scale from one to ten, tits. A 2? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Not an airplane, but seems relevant enough: Built by Colorado Auto Parts, the owner took me and some club members into his shop while he was still working on lowering that engine into the truck. These guys also built a killer delivery van that sports a loving urinal out of a B-52, supposedly, and the front seat is a loving chair lift. Also, comes with a pair of matching Ruckus scooters. Boomerjinks fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
Kind of an interesting article (on CNN.com, of all places) about flying on seven Air Koryo aircraft, because I'm guessing he just really likes combining his love of aviation with gambling: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/04/aviation/north-korea-airline-air-koryo-aviation-enthusiast-russian-airplanes/index.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Not an airplane, but seems relevant enough: That is Fallout as all gently caress, and also now a dream car of mine. Man I hope I win the lottery some day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Where's the dronechat thread? I'm looking for advice for a nice and cheap camera drone. vvvv thanks vvvv Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Where's the dronechat thread? I'm looking for advice for a nice and cheap camera drone. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3386779
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
$1 at a rummage sale by my work  
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:That instrument cluster is, on a scale from one to ten, tits. Looks like a Cessna 140 gauge panel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
So have you ever heard of the Supermarine Nighthawk? It was a purpose-built interceptor - of Zeppelins.  Twin engines, quad wings, a big honkin' spotlight on the nose for illuminating Zeppelins, a recoiless Davis gun as a offensive weapon (top) and a foreward machine gunner because that's how they rolled in World War 1. The cabin was enclosed and possibly even heated so it could stay in the sky for long periods, waiting for its prey to show up.    Only one was built. Flight tests revealed it had a horrible rate of climb, taking an hour to get to 10,000 ft. It was also flying by 1917, about the time Zeppelins started attacking at 20,000 ft. The Italian sources engines were also (apparently) pretty lovely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Knowing the kind of power they made at the time and looking at the size of the loving thing the lack of performance isn't exactly a surprise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 11:54
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So have you ever heard of the Supermarine Nighthawk? It was a purpose-built interceptor - of Zeppelins.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
You'd think they'd have improved upon these to make a proper anti-Zeppelin weapon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Prieur_rocket
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:You'd think they'd have improved upon these to make a proper anti-Zeppelin weapon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Prieur_rocket It sounds like once the idea spread, the British had perfected incendiary bullets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:Definitely the most beautiful airplane ever made by people with no business building airplanes (Fouga was a furniture-maker). Although it was designed as a trainer, several ended up on the wrong side of the Biafran war in a makeshift ground attack role. A few pages, ago, but the Biafrans never actually utilized their Magisters; they spent the war wingless in a hangar on Sao Tome, the wings having never arrived.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Q: How do you wash the bottom of a Hawkeye? A: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-EHwYOfY94&t=19s
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Q: How do you wash the bottom of a Hawkeye? Except now you have to wash out the seats of the Hawkeye. e: I'd have been a lot less glib if I'd realized people actually got injured in that incident hogmartin fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Q: How do you wash the bottom of a Hawkeye? I've only seen smaller lines snap like that, the idea of a loving arrestor cable going snapping under load is disturbing as gently caress. Also that E2 pilot's rear end in a top hat is probably still clenched from that, goddamn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Holy gently caress poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Holy loving bravo  e: I know they are supposed to go full throttle at landing just in case but I thought that cable bled off way to much speed to recover. Do they lower flaps too? slidebite fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Holy loving bravo Normal landing configuration is 2/3 flaps, and [edit for accuracy] Wingnut Ninja fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Jul 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
NOAA is doing a dive at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. They're exploring a B-29 wreck. https://twitter.com/SpaceHedge/status/751569378487832576 https://twitter.com/scxq28/status/751572131087921153 Venusian Weasel fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Venusian Weasel posted:NOAA is doing a dive at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. They're exploring a B-29 wreck. Oh! I remember this part! You put ballast under it and pop it back up to the surface, then the Boomers bomb Hoover Dam with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
hogmartin posted:Except now you have to wash out the seats of the Hawkeye. Deck crew from the cable snapping? Nothing on the video itself or in the comments that I saw indicating injuries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
The Locator posted:Deck crew from the cable snapping? Nothing on the video itself or in the comments that I saw indicating injuries. I just looked it up using the date on the footage (3-18), 8 people were hurt with the worst injury being a skull fracture. It was another Hawkeye crew on the deck from what I can tell. Yeah that kind of cable breaking sounds absolutely terrifying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 04:26
|
|
