search results matching tag: airplane
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
Videos (645) | Sift Talk (16) | Blogs (68) | Comments (877) |
Videos (645) | Sift Talk (16) | Blogs (68) | Comments (877) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
The Better Boarding Method Airlines Won't Use
Physicist Cuts Airplane Boarding Time in Half has been added as a related post - related requested by RFlagg on that post.
The Better Boarding Method Airlines Won't Use
*related=https://videosift.com/video/Physicist-Reduces-Airplane-Boarding-Time-in-Half
Seems it didn't take as I forgot the *... so on to that one, to go back this way...
F-18 Criticisms in the 80's mirror those of the F-35 today
Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon say the F-35’s superiority over its rivals lies in its ability to remain undetected, giving it “first look, first shot, first kill.”
Hugh Harkins, a highly respected author on military combat aircraft, called that claim “a marketing and publicity gimmick” in his book on Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35S, a potential opponent of the F-35. He also wrote, “In real terms an aircraft in the class of the F-35 cannot compete with the Su-35S for out and out performance such as speed, climb, altitude, and maneuverability.”
Other critics have been even harsher. Pierre Sprey, a cofounding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” at the Pentagon and a co-designer of the F-16, calls the F-35 an “inherently a terrible airplane” that is the product of “an exceptionally dumb piece of Air Force PR spin.” He has said the F-35 would likely lose a close-in combat encounter to a well-flown MiG-21, a 1950s Soviet fighter design.
Robert Dorr, an Air Force veteran, career diplomat and military air combat historian, wrote in his book “Air Power Abandoned,” “The F-35 demonstrates repeatedly that it can’t live up to promises made for it. … It’s that bad.”
The development of the F-35 has been a mess by any measurement. There are numerous reasons, but they all come back to what F-35 critics would call the jet's original sin: the Pentagon's attempt to make a one-size-fits-all warplane, a Joint Strike Fighter.
History is littered with illustrations of multi-mission aircraft that never quite measured up. Take Germany's WWII Junkers Ju-88, or the 1970s Panavia Tornado, or even the original F/A-18. Today the Hornet is a mainstay of the American military, but when it debuted it lacked the range and payload of the A-7 Corsair and acceleration and climb performance of the F-4 Phantom it was meant to replace.
Yeah, the F/A-18 was trash when it first came out and it took YEARS and multiple changes/fixes to allow it to fully outperform the decades old aircraft it was designed to beat when it was released.
The F35 is not the best at anything it does, it is designed to fully be mediocre at all roles in order to allow it to be a single solution aircraft. That may change with more money, time, and data retrieved from hours spent in actual combat, but as it stands it is what it was designed to be. A jack of all trades and master of none, not something I would want to be flying in a role where I could encounter a master of that role.
As @ChaosEngine says, it is far beyond time that we move to a design where the pilot is not in the plane. There is no reason at this time that we cannot field a plane that could successfully perform it's role with the pilot in a secure location nearby. Such planes could be built cheaper, could perform in g-forces that humans cannot withstand, and would be expendable in a way that current planes are not. However, this would mean that our corporate welfare system for huge defense contractors would take a massive hit. We can't have that, can we?
ant (Member Profile)
Congratulations! Your video, Airplane! - Lies From the Doctor, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.
This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 69 Badge!
ant (Member Profile)
Your video, Airplane! - Lies From the Doctor, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Samantha Bee, Full Frontal - Voter Suppression
I did for years....I rode my bike 35 miles a day between home, school, and work. I got pulled over without ID, then went on my way without issue.
"Travel" is a different word from "drive"....that's why they are spelled and pronounced differently. You're sounding like one of those idiotic "Freemen" who think they can declare personal sovereignty....they always claim a right to travel without ID means any type of traveling including driving and flying on airplanes, it doesn't.
You can not ideally travel in USA with out an ID.
Walk to work
to the store
walk with your date to the movies
On paper the right to travel is good in reality you can not move about without a vehicle and hence you need a ID
Unless you vehicle is a horse
Airplane! - Lies From the Doctor
*because *Airplane
Samantha Bee, Full Frontal - Voter Suppression
To imply that not having a ID to vote racist is BS.
Everyone of age has an ID.
You need an ID for nearly anything important.
Buying
Smokes,
Liquor,
Airplane tickets
Getting a job
Getting a Gun
To drive
To get a passport
Buying groceries and paying with a check.
Buying some forms of medicine
Opening a bank account
Apply for food stamps
Apply for welfare
Apply for Medicaid/Social Security
Apply for unemployment
Rent/buy a house
Drive/buy/rent a car
Get married
This false argument is brought up by Democrats every election.
Mordhaus (Member Profile)
Your video, Airplane Makes Emergency Landing on Busy California Freeway, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Zero Hour! (1957) Theatrical Trailer
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Comparison-Zero-Hour-1957-Vs-Airplane-1980
Zero Hour! (1957) Theatrical Trailer
Comparison: Zero Hour! (1957) Vs Airplane! (1980) has been added as a related post - related requested by ant.
Zero Hour! (1957) Theatrical Trailer
*relatedto=http://videosift.com/video/Comparison-Zero-Hour-1957-Vs-Airplane-1980
Dolphin enjoying a bow ride
Haven't Googled anything, but I think it's like ground effect in airplanes and helicopters. The dolphin is pushing against a horizontal "column" of water the ship is pushing in front of it. Allows it to move along with little effort.
I would think that, to the dolphin, it feels like how a dog does with it's head out a car window. All the benefits of moving fast, with almost none of the effort.
Can someone Google the physics on how this works? Thanks in advance.
Mordhaus (Member Profile)
Your video, MELTDOWN On Airplane - Spirit Airlines, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Sagemind (Member Profile)
Congratulations! Your comment on MELTDOWN On Airplane - Spirit Airlines has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.