Jump to content

G.J.S

Members
  • Posts

    1014
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About G.J.S

  • Birthday 01/18/1966

Personal Information

  • Location
    Deep 6 and closing . . .

Recent Profile Visitors

6850 profile views
  1. Hope you get well soon fella. I'm not schizophrenic, and neither am I . . . .
  2. Certainly an issue with the turbines, however Tugboats come in many sizes.
  3. I believe that’s true. Not really up on J79 intricacies though. BLC on FGR2 available gear down, flaps full. LE blown (so if there is a failure of the system, the aircraft will pitch down - not up).
  4. Your grasp of English is very good. The F-4 does just fine with the tools she was equipped with (AIM-4 notwithstanding). Cunning and guile from the crew made up for any perceived shortcomings, and raw brute force.
  5. Fully agree with your list there - a Canberra would be wonderful! It’s a shame the Buccaneer that was being worked on privately a while ago came to nought, that showed real promise. A Victor would be really nice as a refueller. Here’s hoping eh?
  6. There’s something that is bugging me about this report . . . . Being that it is secondhand (at best) from an after action report over 40 years ago is the first thing. Theres just little bits here and there . . . For instance. Im in no way doubting the F-14 in its early iteration was a fast bird, but why go hot on two inbound -25’s at M2.4, only to close to visual and formate? The fuel wasted just to ‘join up’ is eye-watering. I know about escort away from area of operation, but jeez, why make yourself look eminently hostile by blowing towards foreign fighters at Mach mucho? Muzic’s flight wasn’t the only airborne CAP, plus there were F-4’s a bit closer that could have intercepted and at the very least “tied up” the -25’s whilst the F-14’s placed themselves. Also, and this was something very prevalent during the Cold War, could the 2.4 be a little bit of disinformation? Make the ‘opposition’ expend time and money trying to develop something that can deal with a 2.4 cat, which at the time would be prohibitively expensive for any country, and hopefully break that country financially? The F-14 can certainly get close, but the difference between 2.3 & 2.4 can be millions of dollars and many months of trial and error for an opponent - maybe too much. It’s the same with drunks at a bar - they always try to appear more pumped and skilled than they really are - intimidation. If the other guy is bigger, harder, faster than you, you are less likely to want to tango. This incident certainly did happen, as did many more like it, but there’s just a few things . . . .
  7. Was told that pretty much every time I converted onto a new type
  8. Really??? I’m intrigued . . .
  9. Dammit . . . I’ll have to think of something else! I saw that 262 repro, don’t know why, but there’s just something about that . . . . Even without the rarity value, it’s got that ‘something’ . . .
  10. Low speeds, roll with rudder. Or as one instructor would sing - “when it buffets, use yer boots!”. The ailerons on the F-4 work as - to bank left, right aileron DOWN, left spoiler UP. The spoiler can exhibit some drag (it is a spoiler!) more than aileron deflection. At very low airspeeds and high AoA, the spoiler can ‘drag’ the nose around akin to a rudder (stall/spin entry for the unwary VERY easy here). But in this regime rudder will ROLL the aircraft. Takes a little bit of getting used to, but as long as YOU are ahead of the aircraft, and anticipate its idiosyncrasies, you can make her dance pretty well.
  11. It was only trialled on a handful of airframes, I believe less than 6. It would have been quite beneficial, improved bird strike resistance (somewhere around 450kts I think?), improved visibility (coaming jewellery notwithstanding!), less maintenance. But the trial came to nothing, the Phantoms days were already numbered, and the trial windscreens were just left in place instead of reverting the donors back to the original fitment. I know at least 3 were with the New Jersey ANG ‘E’s.
  12. Just drop into conversation that it’s her turn to choose a ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ thing afterwards . . .
×
×
  • Create New...