Big bombers.
- Thread starter plan_D
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
it was two on each wing and they were only used to give a bit extra speed over the target, they weren't on all the time....................
- Thread starter
- #104
MP-Willow I think you've been misinformed about the NATO exercises; the SAS does not take part in these 'competitions, neither do the Navy Seals, Delta Force or SBS.
The U.S Rangers are classed as a 'specialist' unit and are marked above the normal U.S Army, and Marines. Here in Britian we have the Army in which there are many different regiments, the most famed and highly skilled being the Paras. We then have the Royal Marines, the commandos who are not special forces, neither are the paras. Then there's the RAF Regiment, who are also not special forces but are all very well trained. The RAF regiment and Marines are normally the ones at the top of the NATO exercises, above the U.S Rangers, Marines and standard Army.
The first official incursion into Iraq (2003) was made by the Royal Marines and Navy SEALs, a British standard unit with an American specialist.
The B-52 will keep flying, they won't fall out of the sky because of the expensive matinence put into them, that keeps them flying. The B-52 can do low level attack work, and has done it in the past. On the SAMs, look at Vietnam, for 11 days in late 1972, pausing only to celebrate Christmas, B-52s pounded North Vietnams capital Hanoi and its harbour Haiphong in the most savage bombing campaign in the history of air warfare, it flattened the place but with a loss of 15 B-52s to the Vietcong SAMs.
The U.S Rangers are classed as a 'specialist' unit and are marked above the normal U.S Army, and Marines. Here in Britian we have the Army in which there are many different regiments, the most famed and highly skilled being the Paras. We then have the Royal Marines, the commandos who are not special forces, neither are the paras. Then there's the RAF Regiment, who are also not special forces but are all very well trained. The RAF regiment and Marines are normally the ones at the top of the NATO exercises, above the U.S Rangers, Marines and standard Army.
The first official incursion into Iraq (2003) was made by the Royal Marines and Navy SEALs, a British standard unit with an American specialist.
The B-52 will keep flying, they won't fall out of the sky because of the expensive matinence put into them, that keeps them flying. The B-52 can do low level attack work, and has done it in the past. On the SAMs, look at Vietnam, for 11 days in late 1972, pausing only to celebrate Christmas, B-52s pounded North Vietnams capital Hanoi and its harbour Haiphong in the most savage bombing campaign in the history of air warfare, it flattened the place but with a loss of 15 B-52s to the Vietcong SAMs.
MP-Willow
Staff Sergeant
Plan_D: Thanks I will look into that B-52 missions. As for the special units I should read more on the structure of the British sorry for my poor education.
The IAI F-10 project (The Delta F-16 derivitive) was canceled in 1987 due to increased coast and that the US Congress was afriad it would hurt the export of the F-16. It is reported that China has worked with the IAI to develop the J-10 an aircraft that is just like the F-10. That is what I found with a quick serch. there are some new Delta designs, but I need to look deeper. 8)
The IAI F-10 project (The Delta F-16 derivitive) was canceled in 1987 due to increased coast and that the US Congress was afriad it would hurt the export of the F-16. It is reported that China has worked with the IAI to develop the J-10 an aircraft that is just like the F-10. That is what I found with a quick serch. there are some new Delta designs, but I need to look deeper. 8)
- Thread starter
- #106
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
The F-16 is a good plane. However, it should not be confused as being big or a bomber.
- Thread starter
- #109
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
while we're on the subject of jets, what role would you give the harrier, is it a fighter, multi-role, ground attack or anything else??
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
Predominately it has been used as a ground attack aircraft. The addition of radar and AMRAAMs to the newest versions have done alot to improve it as a fighter though.
MP-Willow
Staff Sergeant
Plan_D, I have not looked at the first Delta, yet another aircrat type I could look at, I am trying to pick a few and learn more about them.
As for the F-16 I was designed I would say as a pure fighter that could have done very well in WWII dogfights with only cannon. It is a fighter bomber, but as such it is not as good as the F/A-18. A storry here that two Hornets in the Gulf War in 1991 were on a bombing run when they cam up on two Mig-29s, they shot the migs down and went on the bomb run. Never needing to shed the bombs to down the fighters.
As for the herrier, it is a ground attack close support. A friend is in Iraq now with the Marines as a Harrier driver.
As for the F-16 I was designed I would say as a pure fighter that could have done very well in WWII dogfights with only cannon. It is a fighter bomber, but as such it is not as good as the F/A-18. A storry here that two Hornets in the Gulf War in 1991 were on a bombing run when they cam up on two Mig-29s, they shot the migs down and went on the bomb run. Never needing to shed the bombs to down the fighters.
As for the herrier, it is a ground attack close support. A friend is in Iraq now with the Marines as a Harrier driver.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
dirver, do you mean pilot or are we back with the lawnmower..............
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
Pilot. Many fighter pilots commonly refer to themselves as drivers as in Eagle Driver.
- Thread starter
- #115
The F-16 was designed as a fighter but soon found it capable of ground attack and bombing runs. It is a multi-role aircraft.
The F/A-18 is a good fighter, a little slow, but good. It shooting down these MiG-29s (which personally I find hard to believe) would not really prove much, in the hands of Iraqi pilots it can be a poor craft. I haven't heard of Iraq ever having MiG-29s, maybe 21s or 23s but not 29s. I don't know, maybe you can prove otherwise.
The Harrier is a multi-role aircraft, mainly known as ground attack though. In the Falklands War they were credited with several Argentinian Mirage and A-4 Skyhawk kills while only losing three Harriers in the whole war to ground fire.
The Gr.7 is more than capable of dogfighting with the best of them, day or night. I imagine the (American) AV-8B is capable of this also, with the same RADAR as the Hornet, and Gr.7 as mentioned before.
The F/A-18 is a good fighter, a little slow, but good. It shooting down these MiG-29s (which personally I find hard to believe) would not really prove much, in the hands of Iraqi pilots it can be a poor craft. I haven't heard of Iraq ever having MiG-29s, maybe 21s or 23s but not 29s. I don't know, maybe you can prove otherwise.
The Harrier is a multi-role aircraft, mainly known as ground attack though. In the Falklands War they were credited with several Argentinian Mirage and A-4 Skyhawk kills while only losing three Harriers in the whole war to ground fire.
The Gr.7 is more than capable of dogfighting with the best of them, day or night. I imagine the (American) AV-8B is capable of this also, with the same RADAR as the Hornet, and Gr.7 as mentioned before.
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
The center-mounted engine of the Harrier is something of a liability though as an IR missle will home on the center of the plane rather than the tail.
Plan_D, you should find this site interesting . . .
http://www.britains-smallwars.com/gulf/IraqiAircraft.html#mig29
Plan_D, you should find this site interesting . . .
http://www.britains-smallwars.com/gulf/IraqiAircraft.html#mig29
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
surely if you're it by a missile it doesn't make any difference where you're hit.............
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
You'd be surprised. Most IR missles have a relatively small warhead (25lbs on the Sidewinder) and a plane with two engines might survive (or at least remain stable enough for ejecting to be practical). A Harrier would receive a hit right in the center of the plane which would at least cause considerably more structural damage and perhaps even kill the pilot.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
but if the missile came in from behind it would hit the back end first so it's the same as having the ngine at the back, and as the exaust of the harrier isn't at the back it would stand more of a chanse??
