![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Man o man. When I read a few British aviation mags, they always make
their product out to be so superior--what's up with that?! It cannot be so! It's almost as it you *the reader* should be stunned into amazement that the friggin' thing actually ...flies! The Brits enjoy trumping up every minor wiedo attribute of their strange birds. And, they do have some very odd ducks flying about defending their country (Island?)... Good thing Goerring wasn't around today, he'd have an easy time picking them off--even with 109s and 262s... FYI: I won't mention the Harrier or the Eurofighter at this time, we can have much more fun with those at a later date. So, without further delay, lets discuss some of Britains modern combat aviation products: The Panavia (British Designed) Tornado F.3? ("...the F-14 was considered, but it was not up to the job... ...inferior radar..." I love that one--Hardee har-har! Inferior indeed! Lets talk about the development time for the Foxhunter radar). How about the Electric Lightning F.6? ("Pioneered supercruise!" ... sure; "better than an F-15" uh-huh, bear in mind F.6 did not have a gun--just two short range and very ineffective missiles. Although no longer in service, it's frequently brought up as a high water mark of British aircraft engineering. Even among the Brits it had a notorious reputation for being short ranged and almost impossible to maintain. Lastly, who can forget the beautiful Blackburn Buccaneer? ("Faster than an F-16 or F-15 with a full load of armament..." OK... ****'s getting deep.) I'm not trying to belittle the Brits, but this aircraft is still in front line service (Although I'm sure that point will be disputed). What they don't say is that the Buccaneer can only achieve this by flying at the lowest of levels-which due to the density of the air, does create high drag on the F-16 and F-15. But it also penalizes the Buccaneers own range. At moderate altitudes where a typical aircraft would fly the bulk of the journey before descending to attack (have you ever seen a tanker at lo-lo level--other than landing?), both F-16 and F-15 have superior range and speed-even with a full bag of ordinance. The Buccaneer, assuming it had refueled several times to reach the attack point, would promptly be shot out of the sky upon the initiation of an attack. Why, you ask? She would make a wonderful target: Her obsolete tail pipes would be glowing red hot, or better yet, the opposition would have an excellent heat lock due to the boundary layer control system (engine bleed gases exiting the wing leading edge) used to enhance lift. Jeez. I love the Brits. -Chuck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
General Aviation Legal Defense Fund | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Home Built | 3 | May 14th 04 11:55 AM |
Here's the Recompiled List of 82 Aircraft Accessible Aviation Museums! | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 18 | January 20th 04 04:02 PM |
Associate Publisher Wanted - Aviation & Business Journals | Mergatroide | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | January 13th 04 08:26 PM |
PC flight simulators | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 178 | December 14th 03 12:14 PM |