Alvis 3.1
Super Mods-
Content Count
214 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Everything posted by Alvis 3.1
-
First there was "rad". Then there was "Totally Rad" So this would naturally be Maximum Rad? Alvis 3.1
-
Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?
Alvis 3.1 replied to MacStingy's topic in General Discussion
Canadair was approached by the USMC in the early 60s to manufacture the Phantom, but with Spey engines. This was before the British did exactly that. My only guess as to why the USMC wanted Speyed Phantoms was the better low altitude and acceleration performance the Spey allowed over the J-79s, was that they were wanting to operate the Phantom from the smaller USN carriers. The Phantom was the #1 choice of the RCAF in the late 60s, with some of their evaluation pilots favouring the A-7. Instead, the F-5 was picked as it was the least expensive and we could get more of them for the same amoun -
So, back to the topic: What would be a probable fit of F-35 hardware into an upgraded F-22? Would that even make sense? Would it be better to go with something specific for just the F-22? The systems in the F-22 are certainly at least a decade older than the F-35, I'm assuming a restart would entail new hardware/electronics suites? Alvis 3.1
-
Okay, so we're back. Here's how this goes. Stop firing off cheap shots at other nationalities, it's political. If I find a thread that's having political squabbling/commentary/plain squabbling going on, it gets locked. I prefer that to deleting the whole thing, as it gives me the time to clean out the things people posted that maybe they didn't really mean to say. If people want to keep acting like their inner 14 year old, well, all that lovely info goes "poof". None of us really want that, do we? It's that time of year when tempers are short, patience is frayed and snarkiness is way too
-
Not necessarily, it would depend on how much altering of the aircraft would be required to update it. LockMart apparently kept the tooling for the F-22, but smaller suppliers may not have, as they would have moved onto other projects and tooling sitting around wouldn't be of any use if it was specific for the then cancelled F-22. Finding new suppliers would take time and money. This is conjecture on my part, I've not seen anyone with real hard numbers on what restarting the F-22 would actually cost, and I'm pretty sure nobody will be forthcoming with them if they are extremely high.
-
Don't sell previous Canadian governments short on lack of foresight on military procurements, you can go back to WW1 and the Ross Rifle, and pre-war on the lack of naval procurements. If the US starts up the F-22 again, I hope this time they stick with it and build modernized, up-to-date variants and in decent enough numbers. Limiting them to the USAF only and not allowing exports was a foolish choice, in my opinion. Alvis 3.1
-
One major difference between the cancellation of the B-1 and the cessation of production on the F-22 is time. The B-1 had not yet entered production, and as such, didn't have a host of subcontractors tooled up to make components. Restarting it was less trouble, as they didn't already have a supply chain in the first place that needed rebuilding. The F-22, on the other hand, did have a lot of suppliers, and after a 8 year shutdown, how many of them have moved on to other programs or even gone out of business. Sure, I think it's physically possible to restart the line, but would it be fiscally
-
ooo, I also got a brand new Ipod that refuses to sync. Huzzah! Alvis 3.1
-
A roasting turkey and several hours of quiet. Alvis 3.1
-
What Santa Would Fly, late 1960s edition.
Alvis 3.1 replied to Alvis 3.1's topic in General Discussion
Andrew D., I thank you for the inspiration. Here's the ironic bit: I was actually planning to do a Santa F-14 this year with a backstory on how it's the best fighter ever in the history of ever...but your suggestion of the Caribou just made so much more sense! Alvis 3.1 -
What Santa would fly, the late 1930s edition.
Alvis 3.1 replied to Alvis 3.1's topic in General Discussion
Alvis 3.1 -
What Santa Would Fly, late 1960s edition.
Alvis 3.1 replied to Alvis 3.1's topic in General Discussion
Noise abatement issues eventually forced Santa to switch to three bladed props, but the two-bladed was the standard fit of the day. Eventually, the entire Santa Fleet was converted to turboprop function. Kits used: HobbyCraft 1/72 Caribou, Airfix 1/72 DHC-2 Beaver Merry Christmas to all, Happy Holidays and Seasons Greetings! Alvis 3.1 -
What Santa Would Fly, late 1960s edition.
Alvis 3.1 replied to Alvis 3.1's topic in General Discussion
Santa's highly skilled loadmasters ensure the presents are evenly distributed. -
What Santa Would Fly, late 1960s edition.
Alvis 3.1 replied to Alvis 3.1's topic in General Discussion
The Caribou is actually a near perfect aircraft for Santa to use. It was designed to operate in harsh, cold climates, has excellent STOL capabilities, and is named after an animal that is pretty much identical to reindeer. Santa felt it deserved to be named for one of the lesser known reindeer, Olive. Using the SPS (Santa Positioning System) satellites, Santa's loadmasters could air drop presents and be assured of landing a package within 6 inches of a designated tree on most missions. The DHC-2 Beaver was carried on top, to give it longer range. If Santa was faced with a difficult p -
Thanks to Andrew D. The Jolly Rogers guy for this awesome idea!
-
What would Santa (or Saint Nicholas in this case) fly in the late 1930s? The Polikarpov I-53 would make a truly useful and very Russian contribution to his fleet of aircraft. Equipped with skis, it could get in and out of some remote areas in the cold of winter quite handily.Kit used is the HobbyCraft/Academy I-16, in 1/48 scale. Decals are from my inkjet printer.
-
I think that pretty much sums up what the OP was looking to not have happen. Trust me MacStingy, I won't be putting you on any blacklists for this. Maybe one of the Gunship Grey ones. I think this has run the full course. Thank you for your input and all that. Al P ARC Moderation Team
-
Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?
Alvis 3.1 replied to MacStingy's topic in General Discussion
I would like to see honest numbers on the relative costs of Supers VS F-35s. I would like to see politicians pick what is the best plane for the job AND for the money taxpayers provide over making points with certain interests, I would like to see people here not descend into bickering and squabbling and petty shot taking over something neither of them had anything to do with in the first place (ie: A decision made by a government they are not actually part of) I would like a pony, and an ice cream cone, and a Golly Wolly Fizz Pop too. I would like a lot of things, but I have -
Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?
Alvis 3.1 replied to MacStingy's topic in General Discussion
We now resume our regularly scheduled content. Al P ARC Moderation Team -
Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?
Alvis 3.1 replied to MacStingy's topic in General Discussion
Ok kids, lets settle down and stop tossing insults at each other. I'm sure we can have a discussion aboot F-35s and Supers without any degree of rancor, right? I'll be back later to unlock the thread. Al P ARC Moderation Team. -
Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?
Alvis 3.1 replied to MacStingy's topic in General Discussion
Um, he used 9/11 as rationale in any way to justify buying fighters? Ow, my head hurts. Alvis 3.1 -
Some good ideas have come from this thread. Muh-wa-ha-hahahahahaha. Ha. Alvis 3.1
-
I did this one a few years back, but I like the idea of the parasite delivery vehicle. Alvis 3.1
-
Fixed point in time, I'm afraid. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry... Alvis 3.1