|
NosmoKing posted:END OF THE loving WORLD VIDEOS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChhYOO1s-nY requesting picture of Air Force truck on the tarmac wrapped around the landing gear of a parked aircraft.
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2010 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
According to the internet, during the cold war, some near dozen US nuclear weapons and estimated 40 former soviet nuclear weapons were lost and never recovered. This does not count any european or asian losses.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2010 00:17
|
|
|
Backpack nukes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Atomic_Demolition_Munition  suitcase nukes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuke  Click here for the full 640x450 image.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 06:35
|
|
|
The AIR-2 Genie nuclear air to air missiles.  There were actually a handful of other different nuclear air to air missile projects deployed but there were 3000 of the Genie made and they were in service until 1985 when the Canadians finally retired them. One live munition was actually fired in 1957 in operation Plumbbob at 15,000 feet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 07:02
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:
I guess the guys who flew through that cloud had the highest radiation doses of anyone at a nuclear test.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 09:46
|
|
pedantry...the AIR-2 was actually unguided, making it technically a rocket and not a missile. Yes, they put a nuclear warhead on an unguided rocket.
|
wkarma posted:You left out the best part...it was on a timer. Set timer, launch in the vague direction of a soviet bomber formation, beat feet and hope you kinda sorta had the range right. From Wikipedia quote:Detonation was by time-delay fuze, although the fuzing mechanism would not arm the warhead until engine burn-out, to give the launch aircraft sufficient time to turn and escape. Lethal radius of the blast was estimated to be about 300 meters (1,000 ft). 300 meter kill radius? A bear has a loving wingspan of 50 meters. So you are supposed to aim this thing to where the bombers are supposed to be when it detonates? A loving bear moves at 250 meters per second. If you miss the formation by 4 seconds they would be 1000 meters away from your poor shot. Either they are underestimating the kill radius, or you had to be very lucky with this thing. There is no way that if you were 2000 meters away from this detonation in a Bear that you could just fly along without problem. Firing this thing into a group of bombers would probably get the job done. I can't understand why they wouldn't have continued with this one instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-26_Falcon
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 10:00
|
|
|
NosmoKing posted:Rocket fun time! We also have active minuteman III sites stretching from here across Nebraska to the Kansas border. Lastly we have the daddy of all ICBM's the LGM-118 Peacekeeper "MX" missiles in 50 silos. The only ones that were ever made. The cold war was special to me because my main job while in he air force was to guard and control access to these babies. I saw the Berlin Wall fall from a tiny TV screen while on alert. Then watched as other events associated with Perestroika signaled the beginning of the end of the actual cold war.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2010 20:59
|
|
|
The new cold war http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110105/china-leaked-stealth-fighter-photos-110105/ pics  video http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=53d_1294436432 Sure Chinese avionics may be 20 years behind, but they don't have to waste much resource in R&D. But there is the fact that they have no less than 5 different stealth aircraft projects. By the time these things are flying they will be getting their clocks cleaned by US made UCAV Omnicorp/Cyberdyne Robo-Planes which can out speed or out-G their missiles let alone their guns.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 01:42
|
|
|
I like turtles posted:Someone needs to come with me on this tour: http://www.titanmissilemuseum.org/view.php?pg=10 I would love to own that. t makes my 50 BMG look boring by comparison 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2011 02:19
|
|
|
from here: http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/locations.php quote:
I have been reading about a few times in war games where SU-30's are beating US aircraft because of their passive IR sensor. I knew about this sensor and the Russians used to tout it as an incredible capability for tracking down invading bombers or while fighting aircraft in the sky. This sensor allows them to find and close in with other aircraft without ever emitting radar signals and giving up the ghost. The US answer to this is the AWACS. It can transmit information right to the radar screen of the fighter aircraft it is supporting. This information is displayed to the fighter as if it has its own radar on but much more powerfully than it could ever emit. Enough info to even allow it to launch radar guided missiles beyond the normal capability. What the Indian Air Force did was commit a massive force to take out the AWACS (at simulated great cost/sacrifice to themselves). Then they used passive IR equipped aircraft to mop up the remaining US planes who were forced to turn on their radars or stand zero chance. picture of sensor just ahead of cockpit:  Supposedly this sensor is just a larger souped-up version of the argon cooled seeker found in air to air missiles. I understand that not only does this passive sensor detect but it scans and displays the info on a kind of little radar like display to allow you a locational/directional reference to close with your quarry. I had read at one time that it might be slaved to a night vision with a telescopic optic to allow long range visual identification. This seems like a very awesome capability. I can't imagine why we would not have this simple capability on our own aircraft. I would suspect that the FLIR company has probably developed the technology to passive auto scan and display direction for suspected targets in the sky. Usually if you can imagine it, and it is within the realm of technology, then it has probably been done already.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 17:43
|
|
|
Sunday Punch posted:This is fascinating, although I'm kind of surprised this sort of passive sensor technology isn't more widespread, considering the huge advantage of being able to see the other guy without yourself being seen. Kind of like how subs with passive and active sonar don't go around pinging everything because it's a good way to give away your position and eat a torpedo. I would be interested to know how effective the IR sensor is, and what sort of range it can track targets at compared to the aircraft's radar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-30MKI quote:Laser-optical locator system whoa.. more on the technology and its earliest uses by the US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRST
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2011 21:02
|
|
|
I really thought GD would make the F16XL (Cranked Arrow) F-16.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2011 06:51
|
|
|
priznat posted:From the pad directly that is.. Without blowing anyone up Here you go. LGM-118 Peacekeeper, I have been told it's first stage is the same as the SRB's. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCSoN1tqmgU edit: not a PK but its MM3 brother, and a loving awesome video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S6EDNrfSsA B4Ctom1 fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Apr 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2011 05:37
|
|
|
bomb dropping mishaps http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=959_1305530249
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2011 17:26
|
|
|
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=68f_1306880662
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
Sunday Punch posted:Nice suits. You read some places that they use Mercury space suits and in others that they used Gemini space suits. Wikipedia has a different take on it. They say that the suits made by David Clark Company are more closely related to the suits worn in the space shuttle missions. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sr-71#Life_support especially here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_Entry_Suit and more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Clark_Company
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2011 22:14
|
|
|
atlas silo's http://maps.google.com/maps?q=41.08...86&z=17&iwloc=A and http://maps.google.com/maps?q=41.37...89&z=14&iwloc=A Peacekeeper Silo http://maps.google.com/maps?q=42.00...49&z=18&iwloc=A Minuteman 3 Silo http://maps.google.com/maps?q=41.30...49&z=18&iwloc=A Peacekeeper and Minuteman training silos side by side next to training building at FE Warren AFB. You can see the one on the right is "open hole" with the whole circus set on top of it. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=41.14...25&z=19&iwloc=A B4Ctom1 fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Jun 23, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
Ygolonac posted:Yup, Malmstrom. When they had Big Sky Day (base open-house/airshow), they'd run tours through the command-capsure simulator. (They also did the with the Civil Air Patrol.) I got to turn the key on two seperate occasions. If you look at my google earth links you can see one of these payload vans straddling an open hole at the training facility.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2011 06:04
|
|
|
Duck and Cover There were many Thuds and Buffs shot down by migs. My favorite story is about this B52 named "Diamond Lil" on display at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.  From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress#Air-to-air_victories quote:On 24 December 1972, during the same bombing campaign, the B-52 Diamond Lil was headed to bomb the Thái Nguyên railroad yards when tail gunner A1C Albert E. Moore spotted a fast-approaching MiG-21. Moore opened fire with his quad fifties at 4,000 yards (3,700 m), and kept shooting until the fighter disappeared from his scope. TSG Clarence W. Chute, a tail gunner aboard another Stratofortress, watched the MiG catch fire and fall away. The Diamond Lil is preserved on display at the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado. Moore was the last recorded bomber gunner to shoot down an enemy aircraft with machine guns in aerial combat. These victories make the B-52 the largest aircraft to be credited with air-to-air kills. The quad 50's were only mounted in B52 tails for a short period. Then they switched to 20mm, then they did away with them all together. I am lucky to have an ammo can marked "FOR B52 AIRCRAFT USE ONLY".
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Video of that living museum of the atlas site in Arizona people talked about earlier in the thread. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5bb_1311641968 daskrolator posted:Around 4 years ago I was digging up some old documents at work and found a bunch of marketing material for rail-based MX. Brochures, glossy booklets, key chains, was all very funny. Didn't snag any unfortunately. The "Rail Garrison" was going to be based here in Cheyenne from FE Warren AFB. I was part of some security ergonomic testing for this program. Our peacekeepers were going to park here and then sometimes, like during heightened tensions, or just random times they travel around the country on trains. This would make them impossible to track. If you attempted to track them real time, such as following in a car etc by using humint they would be able to catch spies. would you like to know more? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peacekeeper_Rail_Garrison_Car I would like to point out that where I live would be, would have been pretty toasty in the event of nukes flying.  Why so many? well there is a nuke field here. Sure, some of the plan is to trying to "dig up" some of the nukes. But it goes beyond that.. their plan was to cast so much soil and dust into the atmosphere that it would destroy the missiles. Just so that you understand. When a missile takes off, it quickly accelerates to many times the speed of sound. Passing through only air alone the top of the missile will get glowing hot from friction. Imagine a shooting star but going up instead. Adding only a small amount of material to the air such as dust, the missile would be shredded apart on its way to apogee. No material in the world could handle the friction of that forceful extrusion through the dust filled air at that velocity. How many nukes for you? Check your state. http://portland-or.com/survive/nuclearsurvival/list.htm
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:I posted this a while ago in AI under the aeronautical thread, but I've discovered that your TFR goons are really spectacular (thanks again for the M1 help), and I think you'll get a kick out of this. You have a problem EXCEPT THE FLY-BY OMG OMG OMG 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2011 08:20
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:hell yeeeaaah Where is that video of these german guys buzzing each other on a berm super close to the ground? While looking for it I found this which is nearly as amazing in its own http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMWbvoab274
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
ming-the-mazdaless posted:Not exactly cold war but I thought some folks may get a kick out of this: I want one.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2011 18:29
|
|
|
grover posted:Yes, that's it, ekronoplan aircraft carrier about 13:00 in, just look at the motherfucker: It looks like a mix of the badguy plane/ship from the final battle from Avatar and some sort of end boss plane from an early Ace Combat.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2011 11:19
|
|
|
fuf posted:Can anyone solve this?   Suicide Watch posted:the winningest wing commander ever: on a separate note, I think I might get one of these EDF "Nano" ready to fly planes. http://www.bananahobby.com/electric-rc-airplanes-electric-fighter-rc-jets.html This A10 has me excited http://www.bananahobby.com/2222.html
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
Airpower collection called, "Lower Than A Snakes Belly In a Wagon Rut - And Other Stories Of Low Flying" http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/325/Lower-than-a-Snakes-Belly-in-a-Wagon-R.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
The coasties colors remind me of  I would love to see the army get the A-10's when they are retired, but some need to go to the coasties.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0007FIIC0
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:God, that single engine looks really weird landing on a carrier to me for some reason. Are there any other single-engine carrier planes? How about 4 engine? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar-poc38C84
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:I looked through the thread and didn't see this. Its like a steampunk Su-25 I used to draw planes like this as a child.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:We live in a fossil-fuel-punk world. The water injected engines on B-52's and KC-135's are a noise even at a distance that will rival anything you have ever heard.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Was this covered already? Define Irony: ok http://www.newser.com/story/198019/wichita-crash-killed-3-in-flight-simulator.html
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I was asked to develop a concept for providing indirect fire protection for a contested airborne operation and I've been staring at a blank slide for 30 minutes. The answer is a group of B52's full of GBU-39/B small diameter bombs flying at high altitude. quote:The U.S. Air Force is continuing to upgrade its fifty year old B-52s. The latest upgrade will enable each B-52 to carry over 110 of the 130 kg (285 pound) Small Diameter Bombs (SDB, also known as the GBU-39/B). Six years ago the rotary bomb rack inside the B-52 was modified to carry 32 SDBs instead of 15 larger bombs. Pre-coordinated strikes will allow a "dump strike" over any given GPS kill box where the enemy is sighted. Precision strike capability will still maintained for any popup target engagement. In order to have an airborne operation, air superiority would be required. This would also allow for any B52 operation needed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
This video is making the rounds even though it's a-year-old. I apologize in advance if it is already been posted. I looked before I posted that it may have been a few pages back and I forgot. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IWJeqrvoF6M
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:I joined pretty late in the thread, and yes, it has been posted before. Still pretty funny though. Air superiority arguments were so awesome when it was a thing. But I feel sometimes it has lost its luster.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:The Rafale is a Super Hornet equivalent that is literally more expensive per unit than the F-35A managed to be. Isn't stealthy, isn't supermaneuverable, can't supercruise with an air to ground loadout. 100% external stores, which removes any pretension of being LO. Its first flight was in the 80s. Funny, they build a carrier for theirs. We turn ours into practice drones?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
From irc:quote:wkarma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI4Qiccct40
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 00:47
|
|