- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:43 am to Swagga
Same counts showed up and just declared what happened at the airshow a while back
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:45 am to momentoftruth87
The jet is 100% negatively affected by the VTOL requirement the marines threw down with. Plane could have been incredible on all fronts if they left it out. What you gain with VTOL is not worth what it cost.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:45 am to Britlab
Not the only thing that matters, but yes.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:47 am to grsharky
The insurance salesmen and real estate brokers saw their opening huh?
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:47 am to Napoleon
That is a stupid mentality to have.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 5:53 am to CFDoc
Several things wrong in this post. This is coming from someone who isn’t that big of a F-35 fan btw.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 6:15 am to LSUGent
After reading some thoughts from pilots on another page, the going consensus is this:
The vertical lift fan malfunctioned while the nozzle stayed at nominal power while hovering. This results in the pitch down of the nose. The F35 has an automatic eject system as well that is implemented during some sort of loss of maneuverability and/or power during hovering operations.
Plane fricked up.
The vertical lift fan malfunctioned while the nozzle stayed at nominal power while hovering. This results in the pitch down of the nose. The F35 has an automatic eject system as well that is implemented during some sort of loss of maneuverability and/or power during hovering operations.
Plane fricked up.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 7:25 am to METAL
quote:THis
What you gain with VTOL is not worth what it cost.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 7:34 am to LSUGent
When I see shite like this and then hear people talk about all the advanced stuff we have that public does not know about; it makes me question it.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 7:35 am to Traveler
quote:
From the Navy's perspective, it made perfect sense to combine multi role platforms into one or two aircraft.
It was not unusual in the 60-70's to observe A-4's, A-3D's, RA-5's, A-6's, A-7's, F-4's, F-8's, E-2's, C-1's and SH-3's on one carrier flight deck and all with generally one primary mission. That's a lot of space, spare parts, crew and support people just in the airwing on one boat. When the F14s and F18s began deploying, the aircraft which were not already being phased out, accelerated the need for the others to be retired as the Tomcats and Hornets could do the work of all of those being retired reducing the requirements for single mission aircraft. Support measures to keep aircraft mission ready was cut dramatically.
THis 100%, TARPS on tomcats were the end of vigilantes and arrival of Hornets did away with intruders and corsairs. Hawkeye still around, I don't believe the current tanker system is any where near what KA-6s were. Growler better than prowler. Not sure Seahawks have the anti sub range that vikings did. and I still firmly believe carriers need at least 1 if not 2 pure air superiority fighters. The demise of the tomcat was it's maintenance load not the platform itself.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 7:37 am to LSU Tigerhead
The f32 was really ugly.
Now the f23 that was a plane. (The movie Stealth used the f23 prototype as a base)
Now the f23 that was a plane. (The movie Stealth used the f23 prototype as a base)
This post was edited on 12/16/22 at 8:52 am
Posted on 12/16/22 at 7:46 am to LSUGent
Glad the navy is keeping their super horents
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:09 am to LSUGent
That video looked like a Monty Python sketch
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:15 am to The Boat
When I worked the Fort Polk airfield, a Harrier landed and it melted the runway, they had to close it for a like a week for repairs.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:22 am to choupiquesushi
quote:
tomcats were the end of vigilantes
The Vigilantes were pretty much already shore based when the Tomcats were deployed. I think there was only one VX squadron left at NAS Norfolk and one at Pax River when the first F14's arrived at Oceana. The F-14's were replacing the F-4's at a faster rate in carrier based roles.
The E-2 Hawkeye will still be around for a while longer. Always loved the S-3 Viking, but its ASW package was getting outdated and budget cuts killed any plans for upgrades.
quote:
The demise of the tomcat was it's maintenance load not the platform itself.
Very true for the "A" with the Pratts. When the B & D came along with other upgrades, AOG time was reduced, but the Hornet was already being put in position to replace it and there was no stopping those plans moving forward.
This post was edited on 12/16/22 at 8:51 am
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:29 am to SlowFlowPro
Nothing that is all in one does anything better than something designed for one purpose.
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:44 am to LSUGent
The electronics fry after ejection to avoid falling in enemy hands...
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:45 am to Traveler
quote:
Pax River
Was there from 09-12. I do believe there is a Vigilante gate guard near VX-23
Posted on 12/16/22 at 8:59 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
Vigilante gate guard
That's pretty cool. Not all military aircraft need to be sleeping in the desert or chopped up. And the Vigilante was a beautiful aircraft for this purpose.
This post was edited on 12/16/22 at 9:01 am
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News