Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Only FIGHTER JETS

profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
Post your favourite fighter jets!! Has man made a cooler piece of technology? Personally, I love the F-18 Hornet, and F-16 Falcon, simple, clean, and mean.

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

Click for larger image
and an A-10 with a multi course meal for the Taliban
Click for larger image




May 9 2012 6:56PM
132 22
profile picture
Oldmann1584
Posts: 1399 - Karma: 95
i didn't realize people actually cared about fighter jets this much
May 15 2012 12:06AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
Actually they were F-5E's and F-5F's from the US Navy - Same Northrop airframe though.

F-5's were also used in Apocalypse Now for the Napalm scene - supplied by the Philippines.



This all reminds me of the F-20, and how it somehow wasn't brought on - even though it was like a super upgraded F-5 that was pretty much equal to the F16, yet was cheaper to build and maintain. Best fighter never produced...

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

Click for larger image


May 15 2012 3:08AM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
some of the pictures my brother sends me

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

and i got a BIG LOL out of this one..... navy pilots have ego's like no other.

Click for larger image
May 15 2012 3:22AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
USMC Pilots take the cake there...
May 15 2012 3:26AM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
ehhhh. so so..

this is a newer one

Click for larger image
May 15 2012 3:36AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
Haha. Least the ones I've met through friends/random shit have all been extremely egotistical...

One dude had the gall to hit on my girlfriend at the time right in front of me when we were out at a bar. then he proceeded to insult me for being a 'twig ass pipsqueek' when she told him off. I would have had words for him myself, but what good would it have done - dude was like 5'8 and had an obvious napoleon complex haha.

I don't even know why he was wearing his marines pilot garb on anyways. We were nowhere near Miramar or anything...
May 15 2012 4:30AM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
fucking little man syndrome is a bitch. I fucking hate dudes like that, always something to prove.

most of the guys i've hung out with that are naval aviators are over all pretty good dudes, it's the occasional asshole you have to look out for, and they're typically FNG's at that... yet again always something to prove.
May 15 2012 4:37AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
Yeah, one of my pretty good friends flew P3's. He now flies them for Calfire. Coolest guy ever - that said, it's not like he's flying jets I suppose? haha.
May 15 2012 4:50AM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
p3's are probably the most rugged planes still in use to date. they fly those things into hurricanes to collect data, pretty bad ass IMO. But as you said... that sound barrier thing (ie jets) is highly sought after, and ego of course tends to naturally come along with it.
May 15 2012 4:55AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
Yeah, he's never flown one into a Hurricane, but he did fly them over Kandahar in Afghanistan. Now he flies them over fucking forest fires and gets to bomb fires with retardant and water. Pretty sweet show.

He did however fly supersonic trainers before he decided he really wanted to fly bigger planes like the c130.


May 15 2012 5:01AM
0 0
profile picture
Cufe.
Posts: 1950 - Karma: 262
I am sure that most have seen this, but for those who have not... prepare to jizz

May 15 2012 9:01PM
0 0
profile picture
howlongcanausern
Posts: 4982 - Karma: 1,737
this sound gives me such a boner:



May 16 2012 12:12PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31038 - Karma: 29,003
+1, Dustin you're living one of my dreams.

But bad vision, a slight fear of heights, and not being able to handle my G's well (roller coasters....) all blew it for me
May 16 2012 12:16PM
0 0
profile picture
snowbombz
Posts: 2456 - Karma: 96
military aircraft prices rise linearly. The supply and demand model does not apply to military aircraft: only a few people buy them.

Click for larger image
Pugh, P. G. (2007). Source Book of Defence Equipment Costs. Bedford, UK: P. G. Pugh, 46.

Did the B2 price ever drop? No.
May 16 2012 2:42PM
0 0
profile picture
sherwood4099
Posts: 1173 - Karma: 22
That is because they are constantly in development even as they are deployed we upgrade avionics, targeting, radar, weapons capabilities etc all the time. Look at the difference between a B52 in the 60s compared to our modern ones. Or the orginal apache compared to the longbow. It's a good sign it means we are making the most out of each platform.
May 16 2012 5:01PM
0 0
profile picture
snowbombz
Posts: 2456 - Karma: 96
Very true, however its not necessarily a good thing.

The F22 has practical role in the military today; it was designed for the Cold War. flying one f22 is more expensive than just flying two fa18s (not to mention the upfront cost) , one with radar jammers (fa18g) and another with weapons (fa18f). Sure it pushes the envelope on technology, but its a pointless machine with a 130 million dollar price tag. There is a reason its cancelled.
May 16 2012 7:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Flying~Squirrel
Posts: 6494 - Karma: 192
when the first jet planes were being developed towards the end of WWII, they were a lot more expensive than the piston engine planes of the time and therefore didnt get used much, even though there performance was much greater. 20 years later, as jet engines became more mundane, they became cheaper to produce and soon piston engines were completely obsolete. now to apply that analogy in the 21st century, the piston aircraft are non stealth fighter (f/a-18, f-15, su-27, etc.) and the jet engine is fifth generation aircraft (f-22, f-35, t-50, etc). give it some time and a combination of competition and new innovation will make 5th generation planes much easier to produce.
May 16 2012 7:30PM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
f/a18f's have radar jammers already, though their scope is limited.

when f/a 18 f's and 22's go up against each other it is ultimately a draw, unless they get a visual. because neither one can see each other on radar.

that being said, the russians recently released a SAM that can overcome the jammer's of the f/a 18-f, and the e 18-g, thus making both useless and a stealth design useful.
May 16 2012 7:33PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
I'd love radar and stealth technology to get so badass that they have to go back to guns... haha.
May 16 2012 7:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
Me gusta...sounds frightening. Beauty plane!
May 16 2012 7:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Flying~Squirrel
Posts: 6494 - Karma: 192
they put a gun in the f-22 for a reason
May 16 2012 7:42PM
0 0
profile picture
RickAstley
Posts: 953 - Karma: 32
That was a great, great post
May 16 2012 7:47PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
I just wish they would put 2 of the guns they slapped on the A10 in another plane - imagine that fucker being around in ww2...
May 16 2012 7:53PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
Whoah, you're right. They look a lot like the blacked out 38s the U2 guys fly.
May 17 2012 9:45PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictional_military_aircraft

In the 1986 film Top Gun, Lt. Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (Tom Cruise) squared off against MiG-28s with no NATO reporting name and of unspecified nationality. These were nothing more than American Northrop F-5s, which at the time were being used as aggressor aircraft for dissimilar air combat training at the real TOPGUN seminar (now known as theUnited States Navy Fighter Weapons School). The F-5s "acting" as MiG-28s were painted flat black to indicate their villainous status, and retained those paint jobs after production closed.[4] The paint also increased the aircraft's visibility, a plus for filmmaking. The nation flying these MiG-28s is not specified whatsoever in the film but assumed to be theSoviet Union or another Communist state; audio commentary on the film's Special-Edition DVD release states that they were originally intended to be North Korean. In the script, American pilots are warned that the MiG-28 is armed with the Exocet, a French-made anti-ship missile not found in the inventory of Soviet forces. In video games licensed from the films, the enemy planes are replaced with real Soviet aircraft, the MiG-29 "Fulcrum".
May 17 2012 10:02PM
0 0
profile picture
kebbek
Posts: 408 - Karma: 170
May 17 2012 10:07PM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
On October 14, 1947, the Bell X-1 became the first airplane to fly faster than the speed of sound. Piloted by U.S. Air Force Capt. Charles E. "Chuck" Yeager, the X-1 reached a speed of 1,127 kilometers (700 miles) per hour, Mach 1.06, at an altitude of 13,000 meters (43,000 feet)

Click for larger image

This is the X-15 from the 1960's. During its research program the aircraft set unofficial world speed and altitude records of 4,520 mph (Mach 6.7 on Oct. 3, 1967, with Air Force pilot Pete Knight at the controls) and 354,200 ft (on Aug. 22, 1963, with NASA pilot Joseph Walker in the cockpit).

The X-15 had no landing gear, but rather skidded to a stop in a 200 mph landing on skis. It had reaction controls for attitude control in space, and was a major step on the path toward space exploration. Much of what was learned on the X-15 was applied to the Space Shuttle.


Click for larger image


The Russian Tupolev Tu-160 (Blackjack) is the largest and heaviest bomber ever produced, mounting the most powerful jet engines ever used on a military aircraft. It was Russia's answer to the American B-1 Lancer. Note the similarities. First pic (Tu-160), second pic (B-1).


Click for larger image

Click for larger image

And here's some more B-2 Spirit porn.

Click for larger image

Click for larger image






May 21 2012 3:09PM
0 0
profile picture
Poems
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 3
I got one
/claim
May 21 2012 3:19PM
0 0
profile picture
Bodhisattva_
Posts: 5749 - Karma: 2,009
Oh fuck yeah. And flying planes and cutting chute cords was badass.
May 21 2012 3:49PM
0 0
profile picture
KravtZ
Posts: 6637 - Karma: 2,629
if i was bill gate or zuckerberg or buffet i would buy a personal fighter jet...employ a ex us marine/airforce/navy pilot for a few hundred grand a year plus benefits, to fly me around. BRB going to cali from ny in like 2 hours
May 21 2012 4:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
MOAR!
Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Click for larger image


May 21 2012 11:43PM
0 0
profile picture
El_Barto.
Posts: 11630 - Karma: 24,465
Or just be a boss and buy an L39 for under 200k
May 22 2012 12:08AM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
This thread is now BATTLESHIPS. The US Navy does not operate battleships anymore :(

Click for larger imageClick for larger imageClick for larger imageClick for larger imageClick for larger imageClick for larger image
May 26 2012 7:11PM
0 2
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
that's because they're basically just floating targets now.

with the advanced technology the planes have they can just launch a missile from 40 miles out and sink the fuckers..

granted they are badass, but they're more or less just useless at this point. not to mention most of our current wars are based inland at this point, granting them even further redundancy.
May 26 2012 7:19PM
0 0
profile picture
geteducated
Posts: 6410 - Karma: 86
so then what are air craft carriers? not floating targets?

there are two kinds of boats in the navy. targets and submarines.
May 26 2012 7:22PM
1 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
true, but they still have a purpose.
May 26 2012 7:27PM
0 0
profile picture
Dwarftosser1
Posts: 2602 - Karma: 951
The Missouri is a museum at Pearl Harbor.
May 26 2012 7:34PM
0 0
profile picture
extravert
Posts: 1112 - Karma: 3,174
Not anymore. For years ships have been equipped with Phalanx systems that can shoot down enemy missiles using 20mm gatling guns and radar. Firing at an insane 4500 rounds per minute, they effectively create a wall of lead

Click for larger image

Just listen to that sound

May 26 2012 7:36PM
0 0
profile picture
TACO-DOG.exe
Posts: 11986 - Karma: 12,239
Click for larger image
May 26 2012 7:44PM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleships#Modern_times

i'd like to highlight

"With the decommissioning of the last Iowa-class ships, no battleships remain in service (including in reserve) with any navy worldwide."
May 26 2012 7:44PM
0 0
profile picture
geteducated
Posts: 6410 - Karma: 86
they told him his wife was on board.
May 26 2012 7:47PM
0 0
profile picture
TACO-DOG.exe
Posts: 11986 - Karma: 12,239
the pilot was all like LOL NOPE
May 26 2012 7:56PM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
the rail gun is an interesting idea no doubt, however it will probably be contained to use on cruisers and destroyers, seeing as rail guns are recoil-less they won't need a platform as big as a battleship to be fired.

battleships at this point just cost to much damn money to manufacture, fuel, and man. even the next generation of carriers are getting fitted with more efficient reactors, and have a much lower crew number. as I previously stated they are large targets. when air craft carriers took over as the "capital" ships, naval warfare changed drastically, I mean what's the point of a huge ass ship that's limited to firing shells 40 miles when you have much smaller craft that can launch cruise missiles 600 miles, or a ship that can launch air craft to rain down hell on the enemy combatants... despite how awesome they are, they just aren't practical any longer.
May 26 2012 7:57PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24704 - Karma: 29,687
"Red 2 come back to base... You're cleared to land"

"copy that..... SIIIIKEEEEE... leeeroooyyyy jeeenkinssss"

"Red 2..."
May 26 2012 8:02PM
0 0
profile picture
geteducated
Posts: 6410 - Karma: 86
this shit blows my mind.



like a fighter doing that, ya okay whatever, but a kc?? damn!!!
May 26 2012 8:04PM
0 0
profile picture
geteducated
Posts: 6410 - Karma: 86
cuttin the grass!

May 26 2012 8:12PM
0 0
profile picture
geteducated
Posts: 6410 - Karma: 86
Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Click for larger image

Click for larger image
Click for larger image

apparently the f15 photo was released around the time NK lit their failed rock.

these are all bases in south east asia area.
May 26 2012 8:58PM
0 0
profile picture
Dr.Gnar
Posts: 896 - Karma: 197
I'm doubtful they'd ever need it given the current fleets, weapons, and technology.

Regarding Iran...
"But if the Iranian military threat is much more potent than it was in the 1980s, the Pentagon insists that it still would be no match for US firepower. One aircraft carrier is able to deploy more air power than the entire Iranian air force, and it is difficult to argue with the assessment of most military analysts that it would take just a few days to knock out the entire Iranian military effort."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8995261/Can-Iran-close-down-the-Strait-of-Hormuz.html

This video makes me smile very much

Deck view of the USS Wisconsin

May 26 2012 10:16PM
0 0
profile picture
saskskier
Posts: 4772 - Karma: 9,984
May 28 2012 1:21AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)