|
The problem with that plan is that the Indian Air Force does not actually want the F-16.
Nonetheless, it's ultimately the government's decision, not the military's, so it's not impossible; but Trump-brand diplomacy has made it quite difficult. According to insiders, through the past two years, the Modi government has gone from very eager to buy an American fighter to seal a strategic partnership with the USA to very reluctant to do so because, to put it frankly, the Americans have pissed them off. Which might be why LockMart lobbyists are courting the opposition now in the hope the BJP loses the coming elections.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 22:09
|
|
Pakistan's 
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
 was tickled by this concept, idk
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:
You need an "oh lawd he comin"
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Yeah someone slap the An-225 on the far right side of that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
Maybe a Beluga?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
Where's the Spruce Goose/Hercules? Or the Kalinin K-7? Or ANT-20? BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Feb 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6QJf83Oe3w
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:Yeah someone slap the An-225 on the far right side of that. I'm quite pleased that my occassional visits to CHS have been enough to get me eyes-on with both Dreamlifter and Mirya
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:I'm quite pleased that my occassional visits to CHS have been enough to get me eyes-on with both Dreamlifter and Mirya Literally the only good parts of Charleston.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:
I like it but it needs an A380, the chonkiest and least loveable of all airplanes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:You need an "oh lawd he comin" Unfortunately it’s racist to say that now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I like it but it needs an A380, the chonkiest and least loveable of all airplanes. Agree, but it actually looks good in BA Landor livery! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 00:50
|
|
|
meltie posted:Agree, but it actually looks good in BA Landor livery! Wrong; it looks less bad, but that's not the same thing as looking good. Compare it to a beautiful 747-200 in the same livery and despair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:The problem with that plan is that the Indian Air Force does not actually want the F-16. Isn't the Tejas kind of its own F-35esque clusterfuck by now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
meltie posted:Agree, but it actually looks good in BA Landor livery! Still laughing that they’re Spanish now
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Inacio posted:This Star Citizen weirdo asked on Twitter what landing gear this comes from (if it even is real) and now I really want to know Late response, but almost certainly a 3D asset store like turbosquid. Or some poor soul rolled their own. Was originally going to guess Unity Asset Store, but also just found out star citizen is being built with Amazon Lumberyard which is another level of sadness and hilarity. Edit: Amazon, Lumberyard, boy howdy I'm never going to get over that branding decision.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
hellotoothpaste posted:Late response, but almost certainly a 3D asset store like turbosquid. Or some poor soul rolled their own. Was originally going to guess Unity Asset Store, but also just found out star citizen is being built with Amazon Lumberyard which is another level of sadness and hilarity. That'd be from one of the 90s wing commander games that had FMV. Its a physical prop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:
I like it My suggestion for ultimate chonkage: one of those new airships (An-225 - acceptable)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Isn't the Tejas kind of its own F-35esque clusterfuck by now? They're both enacting Zeno's paradox with their FOC, but they kinda have opposite problems. Main problem with the Tejas, besides the delays, is that HAL is utterly incompetent at industrial production, and have only managed to deliver like eight of them, prototypes included.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:
Nebakenezzer posted:I like it oh lawd he comin 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:oh lawd he comin gatdamn
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:oh lawd he comin I change my answer to this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:oh lawd he comin 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:That'd be from one of the 90s wing commander games that had FMV. Its a physical prop. Oh cripes, haha
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
   I'll never not be sad when people bully the A380. It has the hottest wings in a commercial airliner and this is pretty much indisputable fact.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
Inacio posted:
Dreamboat wings and a shipwreck face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Inacio posted:It has the hottest wings in a commercial airliner and this is pretty much indisputable fact. That stopped being the case the moment Boeing dropped pics of the 777X.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 03:54
|
|
|
99% of the A380's ugly is because they put the cockpit on the first level and gave the plane a fivehead. Stick it up top, where it properly belongs (q.v. 747, C-5, An-225, etc) and it looks way better: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 04:03
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:99% of the A380's ugly is because they put the cockpit on the first level and gave the plane a fivehead. Yeah, I have to agree. It looks mean, serious, dignified. They must have had some serious technical reasons for it, because aesthetically it's a pretty obvious choice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 04:16
|
|
|
Inacio posted:Yeah, I have to agree. It looks mean, serious, dignified. They must have had some serious technical reasons for it, because aesthetically it's a pretty obvious choice. Official reason: being so far away from the runway can lead to ground handling problems like speeding Unofficial reason: Frenchmen will enjoy Budweiser before they admit Americans got something aesthetically right REAL reason: Airbus was hoping someone was going to ask them to make a heavy lift transport, and moving the cockpit upstairs will take years and poo poo-tons of money
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:99% of the A380's ugly is because they put the cockpit on the first level and gave the plane a fivehead. The proposed MD-12 is what you’re seeking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
N00ba the Hutt posted:The proposed MD-12 is what you’re seeking. ... It's the airplane version of that photoshop meme where they shrink somebodies face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 05:17
|
|
|
xergm posted:360 degree panorama of an SR-71 cockpit. That's really cool! Thanks for that!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 06:04
|
|
|
The ugliness of the A380 translates to the dot on my radar scope. I assume that's why I have to vector aircraft around its very presence. I had to turn two 737's going under one of those monstrosities just a little while ago. On the plus side, I got to ask one if he wanted to go way behind or if he'd prefer an intercept vector to completely avoid the wake. He picked the intercept 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
fknlo posted:The ugliness of the A380 translates to the dot on my radar scope. I assume that's why I have to vector aircraft around its very presence. I had to turn two 737's going under one of those monstrosities just a little while ago. I feel there's a pun to be made/meme to be crafted with comparing the A380 to Big Gay Al from South Park. "I'm suuuuuper, thanks for asking!" I still want to fly on one of them before they're consigned to the clearance house, though. I'm sure Air France will keep flying them until those glorious wings fall off as a testament to national pride, and I've wanted to check out the Musee l'Air at Le Bourget.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 07:36
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Official reason: being so far away from the runway can lead to ground handling problems like speeding Air France is actually looking to offload some of theirs. They are difficult to make money with on a lot of routes chiefly because they have so little excess cargo volume remaining after you have loaded all of the bags. At this point the program is doing so poorly I'm not even sure we will ever see a proper 80x80m A380-900.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 08:21
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Actual real reason: in new aircraft there can be no pax seats located forward of the forward-most doors. Here, the 747-8 has the luxurious advantage of being a grandfathered 1960s design. Why would that matter? In the photoshop I posted, all of the passenger seats are still behind the forwardmost door.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 08:23
|
|
|
Emirates still has about 100 A380s, which if they loaded them all up at once, you could have ~50,000 people flying around in them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 09:15
|
|
|
I would fly the poo poo out of that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 09:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Why would that matter? In the photoshop I posted, all of the passenger seats are still behind the forwardmost door. What do you do with all that space you've freed up forward of L1/R1 by moving the cockpit upstairs? Squash courts?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 10:59
|
|
