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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Chris Hoffmann" wrote in message ...
Signature? Good grief....how many FBO's do they run? That's the FBO at Mitchell Field in Milwaukee, too. I had the same thought - Signature? - but for another reason: why would a fighter be parked there and not over near the military hangars? Cheaper fuel? : ) |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Noel" wrote in message news:ihatessppaamm- if you want loud, try the F-111. It purrs compared to the Vulcan. Greatest device ever created for turning fossil fuel into noise. John |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"The Raven" wrote: Try living in a motel at the end of a SAC runway (for 3 months). Triple buff takeoffs at 5am, full noise, about 200ft over your head. By November of 1972, Barksdale was *too quiet* for me to sleep. That was very wierd. Billy http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:45:23 GMT, "Scott Lowrey"
wrote: "Neal" wrote in message ... An F-15 can get pretty awesomely loud too, looks vaguely similar to an F-18, to the layperson, in that it also has twin vertical stabilizors/rudders but they're straight up instead of angled outwards. F-15's wing is much larger, and somewhat delta-shaped too. Good pics for comparison at: http://www.rijskamp.com/KLu/photos/photo_50.html That's an excellent shot, thanks. From my viewing angle and distance, I really didn't get a good enough look. All I caught were the twin verticals. Looks like the key is the wing shape (and angle of verticals). Unfortunately the roll in my direction put the wings level with me, so couldn't see them. I forgot to mention the F-14, it also has a twin tail, but it'd probably be pretty rare to see one in Minnesota. I've never even seen one in person myself, here in north Texas. Here's a cute photo of a Tomcat. http://www.rijskamp.com/KLu/photos/photo_66.html Water skiing, anyone? :-) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Noel wrote in message ...
In article , "Gerry Caron" wrote: if you want loud, try the F-111. Ahh, but the 'varks are gone and so are the rhinos. :-( even the EF's? Yes and what about the Australians? are theirs all gone too? No, although there has been a recent suggestion to retire them soon rather than keep them going for another 15-20 years. One evening a couple of months ago I was with some friends when we heard a loud jet. I looked over to the other person with an interest in aviation, and we both said something like "that's not a modern civil jet." The RNZAF B727s had just been retired, so they were out. Then I remembered - "The F-111s are here on exercise this week. It'll be one of them." Cue disbelief from some others in room that we could ID an aircraft from sound alone. snip Cheers Errol Cavit |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Billy Beck wrote in message . ..
"The Raven" wrote: Try living in a motel at the end of a SAC runway (for 3 months). Triple buff takeoffs at 5am, full noise, about 200ft over your head. By November of 1972, Barksdale was *too quiet* for me to sleep. That was very wierd. Billy http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php Read recently (in an article I cannot now find) about an airplane designed and built in the '60s or '70s that had a turbojet engine in the tail and a huge turboprop in the nose. Supposed to be a fighter or fighter-bomber. Only two were built, and after one flight the test pilots didn't want to fly them any more. They were LOUD in the cockpit or anywhere else. It hurt bad. Very few test flights were carried out. I imagine they were designed to defeat the enemy through intimidation alone. Apparently most of the noise came from the prop tips, which were running supersonic or transonic, even in static runups. One of the pilots lived ten miles from the airbase, and he could hear the techs running it up, on the ground, all the way from his home. That has to be pretty bad. Anyone here remember what it was? Dan |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan Thomas" wrote in message Read recently (in an article I cannot now find) about an airplane designed and built in the '60s or '70s that had a turbojet engine in the tail and a huge turboprop in the nose. Supposed to be a fighter or fighter-bomber. Only two were built, and after one flight the test pilots didn't want to fly them any more. They were LOUD in the cockpit or anywhere else. It hurt bad. Very few test flights were carried out. I imagine they were designed to defeat the enemy through intimidation alone. Apparently most of the noise came from the prop tips, which were running supersonic or transonic, even in static runups. One of the pilots lived ten miles from the airbase, and he could hear the techs running it up, on the ground, all the way from his home. That has to be pretty bad. Anyone here remember what it was? Dan You may have read about it in "Air and Space Magazine", if I remember correctly. Not exactly sure if this is the aircraft in question but would almost bet money on it. According to a senior curator I met at the Air Force Museum when it was tested there it was painful to be anywhere near. http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...hter/f84sp.htm Tex |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan Thomas" wrote in message
om... Read recently (in an article I cannot now find) about an airplane designed and built in the '60s or '70s that had a turbojet engine in the tail and a huge turboprop in the nose. Supposed to be a fighter or fighter-bomber. Only two were built, and after one flight the test pilots didn't want to fly them any more. They were LOUD in the cockpit or anywhere else. It hurt bad. Very few test flights were carried out. I imagine they were designed to defeat the enemy through intimidation alone. Apparently most of the noise came from the prop tips, which were running supersonic or transonic, even in static runups. One of the pilots lived ten miles from the airbase, and he could hear the techs running it up, on the ground, all the way from his home. That has to be pretty bad. Anyone here remember what it was? Dan IIRC, the Ryan "Fireball" was a prop up front and a jet out the rear... But, I think it was built before the 60's/70's time frame... FWIW... |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Beckman" wrote in message news:XZz5b.26099$S_.643@fed1read01... Waaaaay before the 60's/70's... Fireball Link: http://history.acusd.edu/gen/projects/Fireball.html The article on the XF-84H was in "Air and Space Magazine", pp 56-61 of the July 2003 issue. Tex |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Thinking out loud | Marco Rispoli | Owning | 21 | May 4th 04 04:22 PM |
LOUD | Scott Lowrey | Military Aviation | 40 | September 11th 03 12:39 AM |
'They want to ban recreational flying...' | Thomas J. Paladino Jr. | Piloting | 28 | July 22nd 03 07:20 PM |