>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Crake:
^ and this

Nice stuff there
I come from a long naval tradition, so that read is a throw back to some of my Pa's stories. He would get on someone when they complained about being "stressed out" or something. He would bust out with you don't know what stress is till you are landing in dead of night, on a small white dot in the ocean, in hostile air space, with no fuel, an engine out and in the middle of a hurricane. Ya, being a civilian is nice


So you're dad's a jerk who has to denigrate everyone in the world who hasn't experienced the same thing that he has?

Oh, well, I'm sure he's in good company.

Warning tones are (1) radar altimeter (set to 1200' and 375') and (2) a rapid warning tone from the radar altimeter due to a generator failure. LSO calls for "Wing lights," which were lost due to the electrical malfunction (unknown to LSO). Expeditious emergency procedures for an electrical failure to regain lost electrical buses were completed while performing demanding tasks involved in landing a jet aboard the pitching deck of an aircraft carrier at night.

>> ^Crake:
^ and this


Nice stuff there

I come from a long naval tradition, so that read is a throw back to some of my Pa's stories. He would get on someone when they complained about being "stressed out" or something. He would bust out with you don't know what stress is till you are landing in dead of night, on a small white dot in the ocean, in hostile air space, with no fuel, an engine out and in the middle of a hurricane. Ya, being a civilian is nice

Tags for this video have been changed from 'su 33, carrier, abort, landing' to 'su 33, aircraft, carrier, abort, landing, wave off' - edited by calvados

^ and this

I remember one time in 3rd grade we had to listen to music and draw a picture of the first thing that came to our minds. I drew a duck running to take off of a crocodile's back like a jet would take off of an aircraft carrier. Kids just draw random stuff at that age.

It is kind of weird to me that a picture of jesus on the cross was drawn. I don't think ever in the history of random doodling or conscious attempts at artwork have I ever drawn jesus, jesus on the cross, or anything of religious nature.

Also check out the Boeing X-45 which should be able to land on aircraft carriers, and of which prototypes already exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-45

>> ^quantumushroom:
Wait. Obama has policies? What are they? Letting unemployment reach 25%? Hiring more maoists and tax cheats for his cabal of czars? Foisting an unworkable and expensive health care scheme? Sinking the US dollar to Plutonian levels? Waiting until an Iranian nuke hits an aircraft carrier?


For cryin out loud, 25%? You are off the reservation, sir.

Wait. Obama has policies? What are they? Letting unemployment reach 25%? Hiring more maoists and tax cheats for his cabal of czars? Foisting an unworkable and expensive health care scheme? Sinking the US dollar to Plutonian levels? Waiting until an Iranian nuke hits an aircraft carrier?

Go-fast/cigarette boats


Those are "small hydroplaning vessels".

For displacement hulls, drag due to wave-making increases precipitously around v = 5m^0.5/s * sqrt(length).

Vessels weighing tens of thousands of tons, such as aircraft carriers, cannot break that barrier.

There are displacement hulls, and there are hydroplaning hulls, and there are hybrids, but there is no third type of lift to take advantage of.

nothing humans do amazes me or makes me more jealous than people landing fighter jets on an aircraft carrier. it's simply too awesome >: P damn your excellent bodies and college degrees

Thanks Cool Peems!

In reply to this comment by kulpims:
*promote

Great clip, but it's a dupe of this one sorry:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Aircraft-Carrier-Landing-Pilots-View

Don't trust the aircraft carriers. The fronts fall off.

>> ^cybrbeast:
I have to remark that it could still be considered a cut. This is because this budget includes all the war money. If you remember the Bush days, every few months Bush would ask congress for XX billions to continue the war and support the troops. Obama isn't planning to do this AFAIK. So if you would add Bush's pleas to congress to his military budget it would probably be higher than Obama's. We'll just have to see if Obama doesn't come to congress for more...


Ahh, this is true, and in fact seems to be what Republicans are half-mumbling when confronted on TV about it.

That takes the conversation a little deeper. The essence of the Gates-Obama budget is that it's cutting back massively on cold-war style programs like the F-22, the airborne laser (seriously), and some of the fancier toys the Navy was building, including the new class of aircraft carriers.

Instead, it's beefing up funding for special ops teams, general recruitment, veteran's benefits, unmaned drones, and likely a wide array of other things that would be of direct assistance to the types of conflicts we're actually engaged in.

In short, defense contractors and their lobbyist-vehicles (aka congressmen and Senators) are going to be unhappy because it means their highly-expensive, dubious utility programs will be cut in favor of spending on things that are more valuable to the military, but less profitable to private industry.