http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft

If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-

PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
generation F/A aircraft.

Thanks Bob Nixon...

On Feb 3, 4:47 pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> generation F/A aircraft.
>
> Thanks Bob Nixon...

As an aside:

http://picasaweb.google.com/7thfight...63150448181842

On Feb 3, 5:07*pm, BryanUT <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 4:47 pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> > If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> > links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> > is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> > PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> > generation F/A aircraft.
>
> > Thanks Bob Nixon...
>
> As an aside:
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/7thfight...Gv1sRgCIW06db_....

Thanks Bryan for reminding us than this is very serious business.

Bob..

Bob Nixon wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft

On June 20, 1965 two Douglas A-1 Skyraiders shot down a Mig-17
over Vietnam.

??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?

SQ

On Feb 3, 5:02*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
>
>
> ??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
> bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
> dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?

Since bullets became capable of 651 knots.

On Feb 3, 6:02*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> Bob Nixon wrote:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> On June 20, 1965 two Douglas A-1 Skyraiders shot down a Mig-17
> over Vietnam.
>
> ??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
> bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
> dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?
>
> SQ

I asked specifically that you all eead the WHOLE FRIGGIN' artticle
before responding. IOW, the WWII fighters are only in the very
beginning. It goes all the way to the fifth generation F/A aircraft or
contemporary technology Just read it.

Bob Nixon..

On Feb 3, 6:02*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> Bob Nixon wrote:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> On June 20, 1965 two Douglas A-1 Skyraiders shot down a Mig-17
> over Vietnam.
>
> ??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
> bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
> dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?
>
> SQ

It was a head on attack...safer to shoot back than try to get away.
Firepower wise it was an unfair fight...the Skyraiders had more guns
and BETTER guns than the MIG.

Sean_Q_ wrote:
> Bob Nixon wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> On June 20, 1965 two Douglas A-1 Skyraiders shot down a Mig-17
> over Vietnam.
>
> ??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
> bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
> dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?

Since June 20, 1965, apparently.

S'mee wrote:

> It was a head on attack...safer to shoot back than try to get away.
> Firepower wise it was an unfair fight...the Skyraiders had more guns
> and BETTER guns than the MIG.

Still it seems to me that the Commie pilot held most of the high
cards... for some reason he didn't use them to the max.

The Skyraider could also turn a bit tighter. In _Zero_
by Masatake Okumiya the author relates an incident where
he attacks a Chinese biplane, which although much slower
was so maneuverable and skillfully flown that the Japanese
pilot had a tough time of it.

SQ

> In _Zero_
> by Masatake Okumiya the author relates an incident where
> he attacks a Chinese biplane

Oops, my bad memory. I believe the incident is in _Samurai!_
by Saburo Sakai.

SQ

Bob Nixon wrote:

> I asked specifically that you all eead the WHOLE FRIGGIN' artticle
> before responding.

I didn't, though. So there.

Yours disobediently,
Sean Quinlan

On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> generation F/A aircraft.
>
> Thanks Bob Nixon...

You know what abolishing the DOD would mean?

A good _start_ at reducing the deficit.

Jared wrote:

> You know what abolishing the DOD would mean?

North Korean troops parading up Pennsylvania Avenue?

SQ

On Feb 3, 10:43*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> Bob Nixon wrote:
> > I asked specifically that you all eead the WHOLE FRIGGIN' artticle
> > before responding.
>
> I didn't, though. So there.
>
> Yours disobediently,
> Sean Quinlan

Heah Sean, do as you will. your loss not mine-

Bob..

On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> generation F/A aircraft.

The days of manned military aircraft are numbered. Why design an
expensive playpen for a pilot when you don't have to? Nintendo
controls are the way of the future. No stinkin human withstanding G
limits to worry about, just grab your joystick and let her rip.

I didn't have time to read it, but if it's not recent then it probably
didn't mention that F-22 is dead and F-35 is a cluster. Meanwhile,
spending and development on unmanned combat vehicles is ramping up
quick.

On Feb 4, 3:28*am, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> Jared wrote:
>
> *> You know what abolishing the DOD would mean?
>
> North Korean troops parading up Pennsylvania Avenue?

Why would you project that they would treat us the way we treated
Iraq?

While there probably are a few "empire builders" outside the US, we
spend more on military stuff than pretty much the rest of the world
combined. I wouldn't lose too much sleep about the North Koreans
taking us over militarily. If they want our money they'll just take
over the south and sell us more Hyundais and LG flat screens...

saddlebag wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:47 pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>>
>> If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
>> links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run
>> it is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know
>> it-
>>
>> PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
>> generation F/A aircraft.
>
> The days of manned military aircraft are numbered. Why design an
> expensive playpen for a pilot when you don't have to? Nintendo
> controls are the way of the future. No stinkin human withstanding G
> limits to worry about, just grab your joystick and let her rip.

When someone invents a radio that can't be jammed or detected then that
might work. As things stand, drones are killable with simple jammers and
"He who radiates is lost" is the law of battlefield survival.

> I didn't have time to read it, but if it's not recent then it probably
> didn't mention that F-22 is dead and F-35 is a cluster. Meanwhile,
> spending and development on unmanned combat vehicles is ramping up
> quick.

And Obama once again proves that he is a fool.

On Feb 3, 10:38*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> > In _Zero_
> > by Masatake Okumiya the author relates an incident where
> > he attacks a Chinese biplane
>
> Oops, my bad memory. I believe the incident is in _Samurai!_
> by Saburo Sakai.
>
> SQ

iirc that would be the correct answer...IF I'd been a fighter pilot
I'd would rather have had sensei Sakai as the primary instructor.

On Feb 4, 1:02*am, Jared <jared4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> > If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> > links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> > is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> > PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> > generation F/A aircraft.
>
> > Thanks Bob Nixon...
>
> You know what abolishing the DOD would mean?
>
> A good _start_ at reducing the deficit.

So? Get rid of HEW would save MORE.

On Feb 3, 9:58*pm, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
> S'mee wrote:
> > It was a head on attack...safer to shoot back than try to get away.
> > Firepower wise it was an unfair fight...the Skyraiders had more guns
> > and BETTER guns than the MIG.
>
> Still it seems to me that the Commie pilot held most of the high
> cards... for some reason he didn't use them to the max.

actually in that engagement he did NOT hold the high cards. He made
the classic mistake of playing the other guys game and engaged in a
slugging match. That was a DUMB pilot and all dumb pilots DIE pretty
quickly...thus there are no old dumb pilots.

> The Skyraider could also turn a bit tighter. In _Zero_
> by Masatake Okumiya the author relates an incident where
> he attacks a Chinese biplane, which although much slower
> was so maneuverable and skillfully flown that the Japanese
> pilot had a tough time of it.
>
> SQ

No surprise. T-6's used to do that to P-51's during traing all the
time. 8^)

On Feb 4, 6:37*am, "Baby Snookums" <stevenkei...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> actually in that engagement he did NOT hold the high cards.

How would Baby Snookums know about ACM?

Diddums pway video games a wot?

saddlebag wrote:

> The days of manned military aircraft are numbered.

Could drones also be used for urban civilian surveillance?

Imagine police chases aided by these tiny planes fitted out
with cameras, radar, infrared sensors and other gadgets.
And smart logic to prevent it colliding with news media choppers
as well as auto detection of drug deals, hookers, felons fleeing
on foot, terrorists and North Koreans.

They could also be used to launch tear gas or rocket-propelled
stun grenades to precisely target street gangs, illegal assemblies,
malcontents protesting the Olympics and so on whilst minimizing
collateral damage to innocent bystanders.

SQ

"Sean_Q_" <no.spam@no.spam> wrote in message
news:G0pan.150201$uH1.49916@newsfe25.iad...
> Bob Nixon wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> On June 20, 1965 two Douglas A-1 Skyraiders shot down a Mig-17
> over Vietnam.
>
> ??????? HUH? Since when does a prop-driven WW2 relic dive/torpedo
> bomber with max speed 280 knots (ie, not at all designed for
> dogfighting) shoot down a jet fighter capable of 650 knots?

Like anything else, the better driver/rider/pilot can very often
make up for a deficiency in the hardware.

I'll put you on a Hayabusa and Valentino Rossi on a
Nighthawk and send you both out onto the track.
Should I bet against Rossi?

Bob M.

Bob Myers wrote:

> I'll put you on a Hayabusa and Valentino Rossi on a
> Nighthawk and send you both out onto the track.
> Should I bet against Rossi?

If Rossi is on a 250 Nighthawk, yes.

On Feb 4, 11:33*am, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid> wrote:
> Bob Myers wrote:
> > I'll put you on a Hayabusa and Valentino Rossi on a
> > Nighthawk and send you both out onto the track.
> > Should I bet against Rossi?
>
> If Rossi is on a 250 Nighthawk, yes.

Depends on the track.

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote
| When someone invents a radio that can't be jammed or detected then that
| might work.

They just about have. Without getting into specifics, upward (toward
satillite) directional antennae and psuedo - random freq diversity make
xmtrs hard to detect and they don't need to xmt often. The freq diversity
plus fast error correction make jamming difficult. Of course nothing is
impossible.

| And Obama once again proves that he is a fool.
|
Yes. What's the count now?

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote
| I'll put you on a Hayabusa and Valentino Rossi on a
| Nighthawk and send you both out onto the track.
| Should I bet against Rossi?

Well <grin> If Sean is as good as I remember I was he'd win hands down.

On Feb 4, 3:06*am, saddlebag <saddle...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:47*pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> > If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> > links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run it
> > is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know it-
>
> > PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> > generation F/A aircraft.
>
> The days of manned military aircraft are numbered. *Why design an
> expensive playpen for a pilot when you don't have to? *Nintendo
> controls are the way of the future. *No stinkin human withstanding G
> limits to worry about, just grab your joystick and let her rip.
>
> I didn't have time to read it, but if it's not recent then it probably
> didn't mention that F-22 is dead and F-35 is a cluster. *Meanwhile,
> spending and development on unmanned combat vehicles is ramping up
> quick.

It's already Happening, Saddle.there are lots of unmaned AC plans on
the board now. They can have one have flying a manned AC for
controlling a whole squadron of [1]"AI" developed smart fighters or
strike AC that are cheaper to build and will withstand higher G loads
than manned AC.The Generation "5" F22 & F35 are the last US manned
fighters. The Russians can sell their roughly comparable wares for 1/2
the price as our manned fighters. Lets hope the F-35 doesn't go belly
up as there are lots of European $$ riding on them buying the F-35's
as well.
[1] artificial intelligent

Bob..

On Feb 4, 3:14*am, saddlebag <saddle...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 4, 3:28*am, Sean_Q_ <no.s...@no.spam> wrote:
>
> > Jared wrote:
>
> > *> You know what abolishing the DOD would mean?
>
> > North Korean troops parading up Pennsylvania Avenue?
>
> Why would you project that they would treat us the way we treated
> Iraq?
>
> While there probably are a few "empire builders" outside the US, we
> spend more on military stuff than pretty much the rest of the world
> combined. *I wouldn't lose too much sleep about the North Koreans
> taking us over militarily. *If they want our money they'll just take
> over the south and sell us more Hyundais and LG flat screens...

In the long term you are wrong Saddle. It's not Iran or the North
Koreans we have to worry about but the Indian, Chinese and yes even
the suppliers or the Russians. Lake a look at this link if you doubt.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html

Bob..

On Feb 4, 5:57*am, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...@cox.net> wrote:
> saddlebag wrote:
> > On Feb 3, 6:47 pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_aircraft
>
> >> If you have problems reading this article click on the highlighted
> >> links and read them. It's really not that hairy and in the long run
> >> it is similar to performance MC's and your real future as we know
> >> it-
>
> >> PS. read the entire article if you can or up to and including fifth
> >> generation F/A aircraft.
>
> > The days of manned military aircraft are numbered. *Why design an
> > expensive playpen for a pilot when you don't have to? *Nintendo
> > controls are the way of the future. *No stinkin human withstanding G
> > limits to worry about, just grab your joystick and let her rip.
>
> When someone invents a radio that can't be jammed or detected then that
> might work. *As things stand, drones are killable with simple jammers and
> "He who radiates is lost" is the law of battlefield survival.
>
> > I didn't have time to read it, but if it's not recent then it probably
> > didn't mention that F-22 is dead and F-35 is a cluster. *Meanwhile,
> > spending and development on unmanned combat vehicles is ramping up
> > quick.
>
> And Obama once again proves that he is a fool.

This is old school or old fool thinking. There are virtually non-
jamable systems out there and the position of the manned mother AC
would make effective jamming nearly impossible anyway .BTW haven't you
ever heard of "artificial intelligence" or the unmanned team of AC
being able to down the enemy by itself or drop smart munitions
independent of outside control, In fact it's already being done
including loitering stand-off weapon with Cruise missiles and existing
UAV's plus Laser assisted LJDAM dumb bombs with cheap bolt on smart
bomb upgrades.

Bob..