Jump to content

graves_09

Members
  • Content Count

    1,288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by graves_09

  1. T-38? No way. No gas and its always trying to kill you. T-6 all the way! Maneuverable. Spins like a champ, good cockpit visibility, and lots of Ps!
  2. "We were pulling 7.5 to 8 g's" Tom, I sure hope you weren't in a hornet pulling 8 g's, because you'd over g the aircraft!
  3. Best way to get the "current market price" is to sign into ebay and check the "sold items" button in the search criteria. Just looking at current auctions can be misleading because sellers can set artificially high prices (in which case they won't sell) or set very low prices to entice bidding (in which case most of the action is near the end of the auction) as with anything a larger sample size is usually better.
  4. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/04/did-india-shoot-down-a-pakistani-jet-u-s-count-says-no/ Unless the Pakistanis are playing an elaborate shell game, it appears the Indian claims of an F-16 kill are B.S.
  5. Because we can. And...The program spent the money on X-47 so they had to get something unmanned to justify the cost.
  6. Anyone build the CF-18A or F/A-18A versions, I'm interested in your extra parts for the 2 seat cockpit and C/D tails. I can buy or trade. PM me if interested.
  7. Exactly the opposite. F-35 is far more built on system integration. The F-35 is built on 2000s computer/communication technology F-22 was built on 1990s technology. The F-35 is a single glass cockpit with fully customizable displays. The systems are so integrated the pilot can have a "gods eye view of the battle space". It is by far the feature pilots like most about the JSF.
  8. The F-22 has a lower RCS than F-35. F-35 is still better than any of the 4th gen fighters, but F-22 is still the king of stealth. Also agree with TTYL. Restarting the production line for F-22 would be enormously expensive, so much so that F-35 would once again be the "cheap" option. Also not mentioned is the fact that F-22 production machinery and technicians have been moved to F-35 production. You can't restart F-22 without dramatically impacting the F-35 production rate. Given the current delays in JSF, I doubt anyone would accept further delays.
  9. Problem is most of the R&D money had already been spent. They are moving into the production and sustainment phase of the program. With an advanced super hornet you'd have to start flight tests from the ground up which would cost more money. Canceling get F35 now would be akin to canceling F22 after 122 aircraft. You've already invested the sunk costs. Cutting production just means you get less benefit for the investment you've already made. I love the hornet but JSF is the future.
  10. Because the plane isn't for Trump, it's for the President of the United States. After 2020 or 2024 we will still need a presidential transport regardless of how trump chooses to travel. Besides the planned replacement won't be ready until 2023 (at best) so trump will probably never use the new AF1.
  11. Anyone planning to buy this kit and not use the decals, send me a PM. I'd like to work a trade.
  12. That VX 23 scheme was the outcome of a squadron contest the CO ran a few years back.
  13. Darren, have you ever consider opening your home and charging admission? I'd pay money to see all your awesome Tomcat models! :)
  14. LANTIRN. Navy never bought the LITENING pod. Only the Marines.
  15. Mk 84's could be carried side by side in the tunnel. Your thinking of GBU-24's that couldn't be loaded side by side. (also a 2,000 lb bomb, but with larger fins/guidance)
  16. Nice job! Where did you source IMER from?
  17. More like a Boeing hoping that JSF would slip and F-18 could pick up the pieces. Denmark already rejected the advanced super hornet for the JSF. The IRST in the late stages of flight test and will likely be in the fleet in a few years. CFT probably won't happen with USN hornets this late in the game, as only 2-3 more lots of SH are planned. The concept is good, however the cost and time to test makes it prohibitive.
  18. Ejection seats are built so the pilot survives not for comfort. In order to survive the high gs and violent acceleration of an ejection the body must be in an optimum position. A fluffy seat cushion isn't very conducive to proper body position, so the seats usually have a very thin cushion. I'm sure there are newer materials available that can satisfy both comfort and pilot survivability, however anything new must be tested. And ejection seat tests are VERY expensive. That said you bring up a good point about the human factors that have historically been over looked in military aircraft.
  19. Was the Navy ever looking at CFT? The previous ones were a Boeing lead effort in hopes of selling it to the Navy. FWIW, I think it would be a great enhancement for the F-18.
  20. Also want to point out, I'm not a JSF hater. As a patriot and tax payer I WANT it to succeed. I WANT it to be all that and a bag of chips. The enemies we face in the future will be much better dealt with if JSF reaches all its promise and potential. Too many people depend on its success for it to fail. However, let's not pretend this program isn't the anything but a poster child for mismanaged aquisition programs. All the lessons learned from past programs were ignored and the prevailing attitude has always been "we're too big to fail or that won't happen to us". A wise man one said "ho
  21. Probably won't be a next round. I've made my point, either take it or leave it. My experience with military aquisition is the press and even official reports don't tell the whole story. Just trying to make that point in this discussion.
  22. VX-23 routinely uses a growler to test Block II SH upgrades, that should give you an idea of commonalities. Navy is keeping growler until 2050-2060. That should keep Canadian SH chugging along Being the last man standing isn't always a bad thing for spares. Ask Marine Harrier community or last tomcat squadrons. 1000+ retired Navy SH could provide quite a few cheap spares for a few Canadian SH in 2045. an estimate based on limited data. See reply below. 6 years x 20 aircraft/ year = 120 aircraft not in the fleet = 6 squadrons = 120 legacy hornets replaced with SH that should have
  23. The Navy has ordered 0 F-18 CFTs and unless someone decides to dust off the proposal in a few years we probably will never see them in the fleet. As for the NGJ pods, those are only the prototype pods. The real thing has a long ways to mature and may look very different than the prototypes.
×
×
  • Create New...