Warplanes
- Thread starter Barbas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sometimes all you need is a gun the size of a small SUVDarren716 said:
Continuing on the same vein of 'aircraft with ridiculous gun armaments' here's a fun one from World War II.
The was one of the main issues with the whole 262 program. They barely had enough resources to manufacture the primary air-superiority variant in any numbers, but Hitler and higher-ups within the Luftwaffe kept demanding all sorts of weird variants. A dedicated ground-attack variant, a recon variant, a variant you could strap rocket boosters onto to turn it into a slightly less suicidal Me-163, and so on.
Well yeahMarxie said:
But they fly enough like their historical counterparts to where knowing what the plane was actually designed to do matters (in everything above arcade mode anyway. Arcade is just one big derp-fest), and the flight models are realistic enough to get the job done and reward good piloting over acting like an idiot. It strikes a nice enough middle-ground, I think.Most of the other good flight games out there are hardcore sims that I just don't have the time, money or 20/20 eyesight to play properly. I do greatly enjoy watching videos of DCS, Battle of Stalingrad and the like though, and learning about actual real-life aviation. I just prefer something a little bit lighter to spend my leisure time on.
The Frogfoot is definitely a good plane, it's just so plain looking though.
I was an Aircraft Electrical and Environmental Systems Specialist in the USAF. I worked on C130H's.
I'm just glad I never had to work on C17's. C17's are planes that are so goddamn big, they literally eat up and shit out other cargo planes.
I'm just glad I never had to work on C17's. C17's are planes that are so goddamn big, they literally eat up and shit out other cargo planes.
There's just nothing quite like the Harrier with it's unique design and most famous feature: VTOL and who likely jumped to great public consciousness with the memorable use of a sister plane from the US Marine Corps in True Lies.
Sadly the Royal Airforce and Royal Navy have retired their fleet of these planes, although I can only assume it was for the right reason.
The design was unfortunately becoming obsolete fast. Still, they were retired years before the F-35 (or the new carriers) replacements were ready, so for a few years each way our Navy has been riding around with aircraft carriers that have nothing to carry. :/Gordon_4 said:
There's just nothing quite like the Harrier with it's unique design and most famous feature: VTOL and who likely jumped to great public consciousness with the memorable use of a sister plane from the US Marine Corps in True Lies.
Sadly the Royal Airforce and Royal Navy have retired their fleet of these planes, although I can only assume it was for the right reason.
T'was a damn good plane though. Without the Harrier, the Argentinian flag may very well still be flying above Port Stanley. Hell, the US military like building fighter jets more than anyone and even they just copped it and bought the Harrier. For a while there, there was simply nothing else that could do what it could do quite so well.
Oh man, the F-35. What a huge goddamned waste of time and money. Over a trillion dollars spent on it since the project started more than a decade ago, and they still haven't worked all the kinks out of it. The F-35 is an amazing example of crony-capitalism taking precedence over whether or not the product being provided is worth it.NinjaDeathSlap said:
One plane to do everything for every branch sounds amazing on paper, and as a talking point, but I've really got to wonder how it's going to work in practice whenever they get the thing up and working right.
Also, I just hate the way it looks, lol. The F-35 looks like an F-22 that hasn't hit puberty yet. It just looks so thick, and stubby, and awkward. Not that it's main competitor, the X-32, was much better in the looks department...
I will say that I do really like the look of the Dassault Rafale. It just has this really nice, clean, sleek look to it.
The Rafale and the Typhoon have got to be two of the best looking modern warplanes...rcs619 said:I will say that I do really like the look of the Dassault Rafale. It just has this really nice, clean, sleek look to it.
No stealth capability, but makes up for it with sheer speed and manoeuvrability.
I'm also a fan of the F-15E. Not the flashiest, but you can't argue with results. Between time in service, missions completed and losses taken, it's to date the most successful fighter in history.
Isn't it the case that the Harrier was decried at first as everyone thought it was going to be rubbish/useless, then it was put into action and silenced the detractors? My memory's fuzzy.Gordon_4 said:
There's just nothing quite like the Harrier with it's unique design and most famous feature: VTOL and who likely jumped to great public consciousness with the memorable use of a sister plane from the US Marine Corps in True Lies.
Sadly the Royal Airforce and Royal Navy have retired their fleet of these planes, although I can only assume it was for the right reason.
There's a lot of snazzy aircraft in this thread but I might have to go with the Harrier. It fits fairly well with my time and place, it has a nice unique look and certainly had a unique set of skills. I'll also always have an affinity for the Tornado (GR bomber and F3 fighter, IIRC) as my home growing up was right on the RAF flight path for sending these things up and down the country. Barely a day went past without a few of these screaming through the glen in one direction or another.
Edit with pikchars!
Hnng, dat swept-wing design.. dat ludicrous tail! Get in.
Well, it was either the Harrier or about a quarter of all military hardware ever, it seems.Teoes said:
And another quarter turns out to be seriously flawed when first introduced, the the bugs gets worked out later but the poor reputation still lingers.
Quite possibly. At the time it was a pretty radical design, and the few others who had attempted to make VTOL technology work hadn't been very successful. Part of the prejudice may have come from the Harrier's jump jets sacrificing supersonic speed, and so people assumed they'd get shot down all over the place. Not true, as it turned out.Teoes said:
I always found these three planes coming back as my favorites:
Spitfire VIII
I adore the designs and the performance of the Camel and the Corsair in their periods respectively but the Spitfire is the T-34 of fighter aircraft. Ahead of its time when produced, proved to be a nasty shock to the Luftwaffe and could be upgraded well enough to stay in the air war to compete with new German types. That and the elliptical wings are just so endearing. Pilots from the era describe the early spitfires as the most wonderful aircraft to fly. Armament got heavier so naturally the nature of the aircraft changed with the weight but it still remains a beauty.
I like Hurricanes too but there can only be one Brit from WWII here.
Spitfire VIII
I adore the designs and the performance of the Camel and the Corsair in their periods respectively but the Spitfire is the T-34 of fighter aircraft. Ahead of its time when produced, proved to be a nasty shock to the Luftwaffe and could be upgraded well enough to stay in the air war to compete with new German types. That and the elliptical wings are just so endearing. Pilots from the era describe the early spitfires as the most wonderful aircraft to fly. Armament got heavier so naturally the nature of the aircraft changed with the weight but it still remains a beauty.
I like Hurricanes too but there can only be one Brit from WWII here.
Good choices! By the way, there was another thread made in response to this one, about tanks. Thought you might like to know.Redlin5 said:
OT: How's about this baby, credited with more kills than any other fighter in Allied service during WWII?
It certainly lived up to its name. Good kitty.
I went up in one for a half hour flight last summer. If I can be arsed to remember my Flickr login I'll post some of the pictures I got.Barbas said:
As for mine, I'm rather partial to the SU-47 Berkut. I love the way this plane looks.
The F-4 Phantom is another favorite for me as well.
I also have to give some love for the SR-71, even if it wasn't exactly an attack craft.
Partially true. The Hellcat had the most kills of any Allied naval fighter - The Bell P-39 holds the distinction of having the most individual kills of any fighter overall, while the Brewster F2A Buffalo (Finnish Only) holds the distinction of having the best kill/death ratio.Barbas said:OT: How's about this baby, credited with more kills than any other fighter in Allied service during WWII?Redlin5 said:
It certainly lived up to its name. Good kitty.
And yes, that is a Swastika on a US designed and built combat aircraft. Whee!
I can't believe no one has mentioned this one yet: The General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon. For years it humbly sat along its more expensive brothers, such as the F-15, providing a more affordable platform that could be used, and a reliable and solid export to the USA's allies. The F-16 was also equipped with numerous fun toys - The first relaxed static stability/fly-by-wire system (Intentionally making an aerodynamically unstable aircraft to increase maneuverability, combined with a fly-by-wire system to make control of such an aircraft both possible and easy), a reclined seat to improve pilot performance during high-g maneuvers, and a control stick located on the arm rest, to reduce pilot strain and ensure they could control the aircraft even if their arms were pushed by by g-force.
The F-16 has always performed well, even though it was unwanted from its very inception, and quickly changed jobs from air superiority to multi-role. And, personally, I think its the best looking fighter aircraft the US military has had since the inception of the jet engine.
