RE: What's the significance of this?

RE: What's the significance of this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

whippleofd -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 8:51:46 AM)
quote: Seeing as how the aircraft was crewed by two intrepid JOs, they just did it and figured it was better to ask forgiveness. I'm betting noone said anything after the fact. I like this one better! :) Ring knockers need something nice said about them once in a while. Whipple

TheElf -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:01:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dtravel quote: ORIGINAL: TheElf But Kudos to DTravel for being the first and first correct reply (without googling). The retirement of the Tomcat is being discussed in a Usenet group I read. The timing of that and your photo post made it seem a reasonable guess. I have to admit I don't understand why the Navy is retiring the F-14. The FA-18 may be smaller and a more nimble dogfighter but it strikes more as an interceptor, not an air-superiority fighter. It just doesn't have the same oomph saying "This is MY sky!". [:D] Yeesh. Can o worms my friend. The reality is that the Kitty is past her prime. These days the Navy is being run like a business. Bottom line is the Bottom line if you get my drift. The retirement of the Turkey has been in the works since the early 90's. The only thing that saved it was a demonstrated capability to morph into a "Strike-Fighter" using the LANTIRN pod. It always had the capability, but the Swaggering fighter jocks of the 70's and 80's were too proud to evolve and it almost cost them. The Tomcat was saved at the last minute and it soldiered on until March 10th of this year when it's time had come. No one doubts its performance figures, but consider that for every 1 hour of flight it required 20 hours or more of maintence. The Cost of continuing to fly them was prohibitive. That and the Superhornet is ahead of production schedule. There just weren't any more excuses to keep her around. As far as the Hornet is concerned, let me assure you it is no interceptor. It's just too slow. The hornet is neither an interceptor nor an Air superiority fighter. It is a Strike-Fighter. Fight in, drop bombs, fight out. The Superhornet is the same, just bigger with longer legs. BTW, the phoenix missile was retired a couple years ago. Shelf life expired. So the last couple deployments the Turkey had no long range missile.

dtravel -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:07:01 AM)
It just seems like such a bad idea for the Navy to not have at least one carrier plane who's job is to control the air. That just seems like a recipe for disaster.

TheElf -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:16:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dtravel It just seems like such a bad idea for the Navy to not have at least one carrier plane who's job is to control the air. That just seems like a recipe for disaster. That is what the Air Force is for...

whippleofd -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:18:09 AM)
quote: The lines you speak of are Foul lines, and you are right about the seriousness of "fouling them". However, in this photo there are three of them. From left to right: The line that touches the tops of the two greenshirts, the purpleshirt, and Yellow shirt in the bottom left hand corner and runs through the middle of the LA (Landing Area) is the Starboard-most edge of CAT 4(the Port-most Cat) The middle foul line, the one everyone is toeing in the pic is the Foul-line for Cat 3 (the inboard of the two waist cats) The rightmost or inboard Foul line is for the LA. Since this is a launch evolution the LA foul line is not enforced. Because the crowd is toeing the middle Fouline of the three, you can deduce this aircraft is launching from Cat 3. Yup, you are correct shipmate. Now I know why you brown shoes didn't like us snipes being able to come into the daylight and complete the requirements for AW - It'll get you just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Care to come into the land below the DC deck and let me recover my dignity? BTW, thanks for posting the pic. I learned something. Can't give you any better complement than that. Whipple

TheElf -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:26:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Whipple quote: The lines you speak of are Foul lines, and you are right about the seriousness of "fouling them". However, in this photo there are three of them. From left to right: The line that touches the tops of the two greenshirts, the purpleshirt, and Yellow shirt in the bottom left hand corner and runs through the middle of the LA (Landing Area) is the Starboard-most edge of CAT 4(the Port-most Cat) The middle foul line, the one everyone is toeing in the pic is the Foul-line for Cat 3 (the inboard of the two waist cats) The rightmost or inboard Foul line is for the LA. Since this is a launch evolution the LA foul line is not enforced. Because the crowd is toeing the middle Fouline of the three, you can deduce this aircraft is launching from Cat 3. Yup, you are correct shipmate. Now I know why you brown shoes didn't like us snipes being able to come into the daylight and complete the requirements for AW - It'll get you just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Care to come into the land below the DC deck and let me recover my dignity? BTW, thanks for posting the pic. I learned something. Can't give you any better complement than that. Whipple Anytime[;)] As long as I learn something too...

whippleofd -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:35:12 AM)
quote: That is what the Air Force is for... Negative. The Air Force is a drain of resources for the Navy. Of course, I MIGHT be biased. Fleet protection is now the job of Aegis. No more Backfires/Bears = No need for Pheonix. Even the SM2ER is obsolete, and has been for awhile. (Perfect example of a freakin good missle with no target, not to mention no shooters left that can use it.) Only combat shoot was from the Tommy-T. Whipple

whippleofd -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 9:38:57 AM)
quote: Anytime As long as I learn something too... Come on down to the "dark-side" learn what makes the pointy end go through the water. :) Whipple

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 10:53:00 AM)
The F-14's time was just up. No matter how many bombs they hung on her, she was always meant as the Phoenix shooter; no Phoenix, no Tomcat. As for the A-6, the F/A-18E/-F can do her job a lot better. Gotta keep moving forward, and both Tomcat and Intruder were getting too old. (stands waiting for the inevitable firestorm...)

Ursa MAior -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 11:47:07 AM)
Bye F-14! Even behind the iron curtain you were the symbol of HIGHtech. I will always remember shooting down 20 Backfires and some escorting fighters with 4 Tomcats in the GIUK gap in Harpoon 2. 6 Phoenix rule!

Nikademus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:19:39 PM)
Can the F-18 preform long range Fleet Defense?

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:28:48 PM)
Yes, it can... And since the threat is no longer multi-regiment attacks of Backfires with big-ass anti-ship missiles, well...

Nikademus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:42:12 PM)
Can the F-18 lug a Phoenix?

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:45:59 PM)
Doesn't need to. They got this new-fangled thing called an AMRAAM now... Besides, can a Phoenix hit a maneuvering fighter, or a light suicide plane packed with explosives? That remains highly doubtful. The AMRAAM has a proven track record, the Phoenix didn't...

Nikademus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:47:28 PM)
true....suppose we are past the era of massed bomber attacks on CV TF's.....still, I find it a bit disturbing that the F-14 is being retired for some reason.

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:49:29 PM)
That's because it's such a cool machine. I felt the same way when I heard it, but hey-ho...

Nikademus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:54:05 PM)
Hiiiiiiiighway tooooo the DANNNNGER ZONE....da da da da

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 4:55:11 PM)
I feel the need... The need for speed...

Mynok -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 5:20:15 PM)
You've lost that...lovin' feelin'........ It is curious that the Navy is getting rid of air superiority capability and going with strike aircraft that defend themselves. Can't really argue against it because with limited numbers on a CV, one absolutely wants multi-function aircraft. Just seems like one would want some kind of air superiority capability, even if not a dedicated model.

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 5:27:34 PM)
The F/A-18E/-F is more than capable of providing fleet defence and air superiority. Long legs, large missile load, very advanced radar, data links, etc...

ChezDaJez -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:05:29 PM)
quote: I guess the Backfire/Bear threat is gone, and the Navy needs to keep up with the times. But a CVN without F-14's? It's just not MY Navy. That's what I said when they took the last of the F-4s off the carriers![:D] Chez

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:07:13 PM)
Wonder if the F-14 would have become such an icon without Tommy C.?

Nikademus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:07:15 PM)
Chez is OLD. [:'(]

MorbiusStorm -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:13:56 PM)
I lived on the Roosevelt (CVN-72) for a couple of years and that picture looks wrong. I don't care if its taking off from the agle deck or not, the people aren't where they should be. They would all be toast if that was correct. You don't have the flight controllers standing around off to the sides of the cats while the air planes zoom past them. That's a load of bull and there is no way those people would be on that deck where they are if the agle deck was in use. Something is wrong with that picture. Its doctored. If it did a touch and go, same thing, those people would not be standing around in the middle of the planes trajectory and its hook would be extended. It's hood is not extended. But its landing gear is down. Similar to taking off. But all those people on the flight deck are simply in the wrong places for it. After living on one, I can tell you without a doubt that something is very definately wrong with that picture despite what anyone think it looks like. Everyone on the flight deck would be looking at court martial if they stood around like that during air ops on the flight deck. If that picture is absolutely real, which I seriously can't believe, then the only way is if it was some kind of presentation showing the aircraft fly by. Nothing else is realisic. It's a bogus picture.

treespider -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:17:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Eloryn I lived on the Roosevelt (CVN-72) for a couple of years and that picture looks wrong. I don't care if its taking off from the agle deck or not, the people aren't where they should be. They would all be toast if that was correct. You don't have the flight controllers standing around off to the sides of the cats while the air planes zoom past them. That's a load of bull and there is no way those people would be on that deck where they are if the agle deck was in use. Something is wrong with that picture. Its doctored. If it did a touch and go, same thing, those people would not be standing around in the middle of the planes trajectory and its hook would be extended. It's hood is not extended. But its landing gear is down. Similar to taking off. But all those people on the flight deck are simply in the wrong places for it. After living on one, I can tell you without a doubt that something is very definately wrong with that picture despite what anyone think it looks like. Everyone on the flight deck would be looking at court martial if they stood around like that during air ops on the flight deck. If that picture is absolutely real, which I seriously can't believe, then the only way is if it was some kind of presentation showing the aircraft fly by. Nothing else is realisic. It's a bogus picture. Are both pictures bogus?

MorbiusStorm -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:19:24 PM)
Despite the fact that the angle of the picture is above and behind the aircraft. Its simply not realistic for real flight ops.

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:19:44 PM)
Hey, maybe the whole "The Tomcat retires" story is bogus! Maybe it's just a clever ruse...[8\|]

m10bob -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:24:23 PM)
Well...After WWII some of the most common planes ceased to be in our skies.. The Martin B 26, P 38 and P 47 come to mind, and they sat in the desert for years, just basking "in case".. Planes are still there, (till the torch comes.) Veteran groups usually get "first dibs" for static display planes. I do not believe I have ever seen a Tomcat in real life.......

Terminus -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:25:19 PM)
Well, most planes aren't meant to be Methuselas like the B-52.

Ursa MAior -> RE: What's the significance of this? (3/16/2006 6:36:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nikademus Hiiiiiiiighway tooooo the DANNNNGER ZONE....da da da da I just wanted to say that, Maverick.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.671875