1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Aviation Stuff

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by TigerVols, Apr 17, 2012.

  1. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    I know I'm not the only aerogeek around here, so I thought I'd start a new thread...taking off with this head-smacker that the Navy is seeking to replace the Hornet II with -- something other than the troubled JSF. WTF?

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/super-hornet-jsf/

    Does this mean the Navy thinks the JSF will never go into carrier service? Hmmm.
     
  2. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    It's frustrating to see all the problems with the F-35 because it's going to be an incredible plane if they can ever get it straight.

    Just spitballing here, but I would have to think the "Son of the Super Hornet" is going to move more toward an unmanned aerial vehicle if they want to avoid redundancy with the F-35. I'm thinking of something that is more capable of combat than a Predator drone.

    If you're talking about 20 or 30 years from now before it goes into service, it just seems natural that the unmanned technology will be vastly improved. I don't think we'll be completely out of the piloted aircraft game by then, but I think you're going to be seeing a lot more jets that don't require a body in the cockpit.
     
  3. finishthehat

    finishthehat Active Member

    And a lot more jets that do things that would kill a pilot who was in the cockpit at the time, in terms of G force-creating maneuvers.
     
  4. Bamadog

    Bamadog Well-Known Member

    But it's all they have. It's do or die on the JSF. If the JSF goes away, it'll be Super Hornets and nothing else. And those would be easy meat for a Su-35, a Rafale, a Gripen or a Typhoon in a turning fight. Just to think if they wouldn't have canceled the A-12 during the first Bush administration...

    As for the UAVs, I think that they're the future in some roles, but they're not the panacea everybody thinks they are. Jam their datalinks and they're just expensive targets. They're going to have to be more autonomous and then you're getting into Skynet time.
     
  5. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Yep, the A-12 was the correct answer for all these problems.
     
  6. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  7. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    The corn must not have been in season at the time.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  8. three_bags_full

    three_bags_full Well-Known Member

    Real aircrews. Not pretty-boy jet pilots, who are worried about job security.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nvTgkurCccQ

    ;D
     
  9. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Ha! You don't see any UAV dust-offs on the horizon, TBF?
     
  10. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    That video was better than any commercial any of the military branches run.
     
  11. Bamadog

    Bamadog Well-Known Member

    If the estimates are correct, it would've been cheaper than the JSF and had better range and payload moving mud. The JSF is a modern-day, stealthy F-105. Big and fast on a single engine, but with little dogfighting capability and warload.
     
  12. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    Don't tell anyone, but the USAF has Raptors and next-gen F-15s in the skies near Iran.

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/armada-masses-near-iran/
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page