search results matching tag: harrier
» channel: motorsports
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (22) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (6) | Comments (79) |
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (22) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (6) | Comments (79) |
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 Most Costly Joke in History
Asmo says...The sheer energy advantage of jet aircraft overwhelms any maneuverability advantages of WWII aircraft, so when a modern aircraft can't outturn and/or out-energy a 40 year old fighter, it's a steaming pile of shit...
And it's always completely irrelevant until it's completely relevant. eg. new technology comes online jamming guided missles and reducing planes to cannon warfare...
And I'd love to see how your prancing sniper does when he has to get in to knife range (close ground support where cannon fire does matter...).
The plane is an overpriced turd that has been repeatedly polished to give it the shine of a gem, but ultimately it's still a turd.
I love the last line though... "then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by..." By? By the 40 year old workhorses that the turd is supposed to replace... X D
The F-35 will replace the US Air Force A-10s and F-16s, US Navy F/A-18s, US Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers and F/A-18s, and UK Harrier GR7s and Sea Harrier
Two of your three mop up planes are already F35's. Good luck with that!
The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.
There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.
Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.
It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.
Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.
The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.
noisy live video game music
ant*british *geek
"André Duracell plays Space Harrier and Turrican."
Close Air Support (best A-10C Warthog video ever)
MordhausCorrection, the Air Force Brass hates them. Why?
1. They work perfectly for the role they were designed for. Brass want a plane that will be obsolete after 15 years or so, so that they can score big with plane mfg's
2. The typical AFB idea of close combat is a few miles away by button. You shouldn't be close enough to see the carnage. Just a poof and turn around to land. Having such a brute force plane is distasteful to them.
3. The A10 is called to support infantry most of the time. The Air Force overall still has a chip on their shoulder when it comes to the Army and other 'ground' forces. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't go out of their way to piss on an infantryman if he was on fire.
Basically the A10 is similar to the Harrier, it works well, it's not flashy, and it takes a beating. Complete opposite of most Air Force planes. The F35 that they want to replace both with is a joke and is mindbogglingly more expensive. If you watch any video that has an A10 pilot in it, talking about the plane, they can't sing it's praises enough. Sadly they have no say in whether it gets replaced.
the infantry love these planes and the airforce hate them. They are cheap (relative) and highly effective
AV 8B Harrier Lands without Nose Landing Gear - on a stool!
siftbot2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.
Harrier pilot talks about landing without nose gear
siftbotThis video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by oritteropo.
Harrier pilot talks about landing without nose gear
oritteropoDarn. Well it's a good backup for:
*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/AV-8B-Harrier-Lands-without-Nose-Landing-Gear-on-a-stool
kulpims
(Member Profile)
oritteropoThanks
And here, have a bonus vid 
KC-130J - Sea Stallion, Harrier Aerial Refueling
*quality
Zawash
(Member Profile)
siftbotYour video, AV 8B Harrier Lands without Nose Landing Gear - on a stool!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 10 Badge!
AV 8B Harrier Lands without Nose Landing Gear - on a stool!
siftbot2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.
No nose gear, landing a Harrier on a carrier
siftbotThis video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by mintbbb.
No nose gear, landing a Harrier on a carrier
kulpims*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/AV-8B-Harrier-Lands-without-Nose-Landing-Gear-on-a-stool
No nose gear, landing a Harrier on a carrier
siftbotThis video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by kulpims. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.
Harrier taking off and landing on USS Kearsarge
SpaceOddityOoh-Rah Marine Aviation!
My grandfather was a crew chief in the Air Force for decades.
One of my favorite stories that he told was of the first time an AV-8A (original British Harrier, before US adopted them) landed at his base for a demonstration. He, along with everyone else on the flightline, watched in awe as it gently slowed to a halt mid-air, before decending to the runway. It apparently about gave them all a heart attack for fear of a stall.
*quality
First Footage of F-35B Vertical Takeoff
coolhund says...I dont know the exact differences, but I do know that the F35B is fly by Wire, while the Harrier is not. Also the Harrier is extremely hard to fly and there were many accidents involving deaths in VTOL situations. Thats why they only let the best of the best fly these things now, but there are still accidents.
So due to fly by wire, the F35B should be much safer.
Another fun fact is that Lockeed bought the sweep engine technology from the Russian manufacturer Yakovlev, which was developed for their canceled Yak-141.
How does this compare to a Harrier?
First Footage of F-35B Vertical Takeoff
grinterI've been trying to make that out, but am still confused. Maybe someone who has better info can chime in.
I think the VTOL capability of the F35B is very much inferior to that of the harrier, in that the F35B will only be able to use VTOL to move the plane short distances under a reduced fuel load... I'm guessing without any armament?
It should be able to execute short take off and vertical landing (STOVL) in battle ready condition.
How does this compare to a Harrier?