warthogmadman987 Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Wow! somebody REALLY needs to get out the books and research or something, I recommend this www.wikipedia.com!!!! The AIM-54C was retired less than a year ago and has NEVER been put into storage until Tomcat Sunset 'September 20th". Dude, not to ruin your day, but wiki isnt as truthfull as many think it is. It is full of lies and opinions. :music_whistling: 1
GGTharos Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 It was retired in late 2004, AFAIK; but missiles are in storage all the time, like it or not ... safest place for them to be in! :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Pilotasso Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 It'll work on fighters since it can handle maneuvering supersonic missiles, but it won't work on'em quite as well as say an AMRAAM ... couple that with older seeker and guidance technology and software and you have what is known as an issue. Don't forget the million dollars a shot. And here goes to the newest senior member here. :) Thats what I tryed to tell Jontex. Word pilotasso.... (scratching head) well I guess your right man. You know I cant compete with you.:worthy: Cant believe this, I signed up for the Navy to ask them one specific question and I missed my opportunity:mad: . :D But with a massive dose of sarcasm he showed us how wrong we all are about AIM-54C sould be used in place of AMRAAM. I guess working 5 years in the navy automaticaly entitles him to do that regardless of everything else. :music_whistling: .
ivan_v4 Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Hey i got a question. What happened to the RIO's of the tomcats squadroms after switching to the Hornet? 1
Hellcat61 Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Not looking to get in the debate, but I did want to cite those quotes (and seemingly a lot of the info Corsair is posting) to the Tomcat Sunset website and forums. http://www.tomcat-sunset.org Peace, Helk61 "When you're out of Tomcats, you're out of fighters!"
VMFA117_Poko Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Hey i got a question. What happened to the RIO's of the tomcats squadroms after switching to the Hornet? Nothing. They will be rename to WSO (Weapon System Officer). F/A-18F SuperHornet Block 2 is two-seater. The same for F/A-18G Growler.
AerialHawk Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Like we say in another forum: STUPID, close the thread and ban everybody.
rattler Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 S~! F14 gone, time up. Let it go. F18 SH new, better, more cost effective - embrace. That is a pretty short but very true and to the point statement, that I would have to totally agree with. WE have to move forward!!! Look back with PRIDE.Cheers. 1
Corsair7662 Posted December 7, 2006 Author Posted December 7, 2006 Nothing. They will be rename to WSO (Weapon System Officer). F/A-18F SuperHornet Block 2 is two-seater. The same for F/A-18G Growler. What? no. The squadrons that flew the F-14 and getting the F/A-18E, their RIO's are required to learn to fly or be switched to another squadron which has the F. Like for VF-31 that I know, their RIO's are learning how to fly and some will be transfered to VFA-32, mostly because VFA-22 is getting new F/A-18F's and VF-31 is getting the used E's -22 has been using. Thats what I know atleast.
JonTex Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Thats what I tryed to tell Jontex. But with a massive dose of sarcasm he showed us how wrong we all are about AIM-54C sould be used in place of AMRAAM. I guess working 5 years in the navy automaticaly entitles him to do that regardless of everything else. :music_whistling: Really ... wow... look man I can tell this bothers you more than it does me so yes... you are right the Aim-54 is and was designed to shoot down fighters and :doh: ... oops sorry .... ahem , bombers and cruise ships ...:doh: grrrrrrrr .... cruise missles. It was never intended to be used against fighters and fast manuevering aircraft just slow moving bombers and missles. Furthermore GG is correct also when he states the following: It'll work on fighters since it can handle maneuvering supersonic missiles, but it won't work on'em quite as well as say an AMRAAM ... couple that with older seeker and guidance technology and software and you have what is known as an issue. so in conclusion pilatasso you are right (mind you, me admitting this wont do a bit of good but anyway) GG, i know you are not debating with me but just to cover all bases you are right also. And The F14 is old and beat up and out dated , sigh, and inferior to the Super Hornet and I would be wasting my time comparing anything to the SH including the Tomcat 21 because it never even past the development stages. I see this now and my love for the Tomcat clouded my ability to see what you want me to see. see i made it all better:D Tex out [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Force_Feedback Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Tomcats rule!!! Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
JonTex Posted December 7, 2006 Posted December 7, 2006 Hey i got a question. What happened to the RIO's of the tomcats squadroms after switching to the Hornet? They transitioned as well ... dont quote me I dont know and dont care which version of the SH is a two seater but they are still gainfully employed in the backseat sucking up all the LOX. hehe:D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
ViperEagle Posted December 8, 2006 Posted December 8, 2006 Depends really, if the squad was transitioning to the E, the RIO's went off to train and left the squadron. If it was transitioning to a F, the RIO's went along and became the WSO, weapons system operator/Guy In Back
Corsair7662 Posted December 8, 2006 Author Posted December 8, 2006 What? no. The squadrons that flew the F-14 and getting the F/A-18E, their RIO's are required to learn to fly or be switched to another squadron which has the F. Like for VF-31 that I know, their RIO's are learning how to fly and some will be transfered to VFA-32, mostly because VFA-22 is getting new F/A-18F's and VF-31 is getting the used E's -22 has been using. Thats what I know atleast. From earlier as a reply of what Poko said. Edit: Woah, hey look! more proof that Super Hornets arn't built Tomcat tough.:D http://s102164210.onlinehome.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=103388
GGTharos Posted December 8, 2006 Posted December 8, 2006 Woah, you must be unaware of the tomcat's delicate engines and swing-wing failures! :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Corsair7662 Posted December 8, 2006 Author Posted December 8, 2006 Woah, you must be unaware of the tomcat's delicate engines and swing-wing failures! :D Um there were no such failures bud, and the engines werent as delicate as the stupid little F414-GE-400 turbofan's of the SH.
GGTharos Posted December 8, 2006 Posted December 8, 2006 Um there were no such failures bud, and the engines werent as delicate as the stupid little F414-GE-400 turbofan's of the SH. Whatever you're on, it must be good ... -really- good ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
sp0nge Posted December 8, 2006 Posted December 8, 2006 I like the tomcat HAHA GG :P Is breaking the laws of gravity illegal? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
hitman Posted December 8, 2006 Posted December 8, 2006 Um there were no such failures bud, and the engines werent as delicate as the stupid little F414-GE-400 turbofan's of the SH. Do you realize how stupid this argument sounds? When was the last time you saw a hornet explode in midair? This is getting plain stupid.
Corsair7662 Posted December 9, 2006 Author Posted December 9, 2006 Do you realize how stupid this argument sounds? When was the last time you saw a hornet explode in midair? This is getting plain stupid. Holy crap, your not talking about the time the F-14A blew up on flyby are you? Listen smart one, do the research and look it up! If you had, you would know that any gas turbine engine designed is subject to foreign object damage (FOD) which can lead to catostrophic failure of internal components. Thats what triggered the explosion, NOT faulty equipment,structure, OR engine. 1
GGTharos Posted December 9, 2006 Posted December 9, 2006 If -you- had any clue and had done any research, you'd have known that the TF-30 was temperamental, prone to compressor stalls and flameouts, causing internal damage spontaneously. Just because it didn't like your face. The wingbox was also a major source of maintenance troubles, though not as bad as it is on the F-111 or B-1. The F-14's record is -by no means- clean nor spotless. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 9, 2006 Posted December 9, 2006 From earlier as a reply of what Poko said. Edit: Woah, hey look! more proof that Super Hornets arn't built Tomcat tough.:D http://s102164210.onlinehome.us/forums/index.php?showtopic=103388 [sarcasm]Wow! You're absolutely right! I have never heard of an F-14 popping a fuse plug when the pilot stepped on the brakes a little too hard after landing. :music_whistling:[/sarcasm] Nice photos in that link, but if you're serious about that being proof that the Superbug is a POS...well...:megalol:
Pilotasso Posted December 9, 2006 Posted December 9, 2006 Really ... wow... look man I can tell this bothers you more than it does me so yes... you are right the Aim-54 is and was designed to shoot down fighters and :doh: ... oops sorry .... ahem , bombers and cruise ships ...:doh: grrrrrrrr .... cruise missles. It was never intended to be used against fighters and fast manuevering aircraft just slow moving bombers and missles. Furthermore GG is correct also when he states the following: so in conclusion pilatasso you are right (mind you, me admitting this wont do a bit of good but anyway) GG, i know you are not debating with me but just to cover all bases you are right also. And The F14 is old and beat up and out dated , sigh, and inferior to the Super Hornet and I would be wasting my time comparing anything to the SH including the Tomcat 21 because it never even past the development stages. I see this now and my love for the Tomcat clouded my ability to see what you want me to see. see i made it all better:D Tex out Dude, you can have a friendly discussion without having to resort to this. I was merely making apoint, no need to pretend you lose and I win to end something your not liking the way its going. Cheers! .
Pilotasso Posted December 9, 2006 Posted December 9, 2006 Holy crap, your not talking about the time the F-14A blew up on flyby are you? Listen smart one, do the research and look it up! If you had, you would know that any gas turbine engine designed is subject to foreign object damage (FOD) which can lead to catostrophic failure of internal components. Thats what triggered the explosion, NOT faulty equipment,structure, OR engine. I recommend you reading "F-14 Tomcat" by Mike Spick. Youll find out your the one not looking it up. Its a curious phenomena that no one likes to listen to certain truths and leave the bias and dogma about his fav aircraft. This reminds me of some discussions we had about certain missiles being on the Su-33 :D .
Recommended Posts