Corsair7662 Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 MUHAHAHA The Blue Angels soooo should of went on with Grumman products :D :D :D
urze Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 Hornet Guys will meet Tomcats?!:megalol: :megalol: :megalol: :megalol: :megalol: Leftside Limited - ideas and solutions
hitman Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 I think the Navy didnt want their Mighty Blue Angels exploding in mid-air for no good reason.
ViperEagle Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 Actually..The Blue Angels DID request Tomcats, but were turned down as they were needed for frontline squadrons. They got the A-4 instead.
VMFA117_Poko Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 I think the Navy didnt want their Mighty Blue Angels exploding in mid-air for no good reason. You saw the supersonic hard turn and explosion video of tomcat, right? Hornet would crash even earlier with such a speed.
urze Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 You saw the supersonic hard turn and explosion video of tomcat, right? Hornet would crash even earlier with such a speed. Yup!:book: Leftside Limited - ideas and solutions
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 Here's a picture of an aircraft that WAS a Blue Angels aircraft...but what's wrong with THIS picture? :D
ViperEagle Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 VERY nice...It's a F-4D for one, at the United States Airforce Academy. Navy pranks!
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 Yup...none other than 67-463 to be exact. :D I can't remember if I was working down there that week or not.
SuperKungFu Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 I do admit the F-14 would look really good in the blue angels. With the wings swept back, you would have a nice tight triangle formation. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 What supersonic, hard turn was that? No aircraft should explode due to maneuver. First of all, its silly to say the F-14 in the video I think we are talking about (taken from the deck of DDG-53) was supersonic...it was nowhere CLOSE. Its also silly to think its explosion had anything to do with it maneuvering or the speed at which it WASN'T TRAVELING. The ultimate in silliness is, after all of the other silliness, to draw the conclusion that an airframe, not even shown in the video, would have done so sooner. You guys don't even know what caused the explosion of the F-14, claim it was supersonic after a low pass (something that would NOT HAPPEN), and then proceed to say "Yeah, but the F-18 would have been even worse"?!!! LMFAO!!! Good thing you guys aren't NTSB investigators, but then again, you'd never get past Crash School. :lol: In short, Hitman did NOT get owned by anyone since his opponents obviously haven't got the first clue as to what it is they are talking about. :D
Skopro_PL Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 well it looks cool but, if u think about it the angels dont fly fast enough for the wings to be sweap back..im guessing the wings on a tomcat dont sweep before 350-400knts cause the blues dont go faster than that,maybe once they will reach 450 and thats on the way down from the 6 point cross...and if they were open would play havok on flying in formation.... and that f4 looks like it was painted by a 5 year old... | 8700k @4.9 | Gigabyte Gaming 7 | 32gb Tridentz @3000 | EVGA 1080 TI SC2 | CV1 | VKB MCG PRO [sigpic]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FeLGqKyJ3K08k3z-7XaegWgRuGRGkKUs/view?usp=sharing[/sigpic]
Disso Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 AHHHH hahaha! you just got owned AGAIN right there about F-14's and F/A-18's hitman. Hornets are SH**!!!! uh..no he wasn't. Why are you so much of an immature fanboy? Both of those planes have their own superior qualities and in the end, both are up there in the skies protecting your ass. SU-30MKI F/A-18F ...Beauty, grace, lethality.
Corsair7662 Posted January 7, 2007 Author Posted January 7, 2007 both are up there in the skies protecting your ass. Somebody hasnt heard about Sunset.
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 well it looks cool but, if u think about it the angels dont fly fast enough for the wings to be sweap back..im guessing the wings on a tomcat dont sweep before 350-400knts cause the blues dont go faster than that,maybe once they will reach 450 and thats on the way down from the 6 point cross...and if they were open would play havok on flying in formation.... and that f4 looks like it was painted by a 5 year old... I think you're right about the wing sweep in relation to speed. I've seen them fully swept on the F-14 in a 400knot pass. About the F4, it was painted hastily in the middle of the night by a visiting group of Midshipmen. IIRC, the paint they used was a type that easily peels off after its dry, so no permanent damage was done. :D
hitman Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 AHHHH hahaha! you just got owned AGAIN right there about F-14's and F/A-18's hitman. Hornets are SH**!!!! Owned...as in they RETIRED the F-14? Get a grip on reality, kid. Majority of the Blue Angels pilots are Marines anyways. Tomcats explode and the Hornets will take it all. You just watch...wait..it allready HAPPENED.
Fudd Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 5 out of 11 is hardly the majority (3 of them are the KC-130 pilots) http://www.blueangels.navy.mil/index.htm Anyway, even being a former Marine, I have to say the Hornet sux compared to the Tomcat! The code is probaly in Russian anyway.
Stealth_HR Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 Hate to break it, but the Tomcat would've been a very sorry show jet. Guess why most display teams use(d) Skyhawks, Falcons, Fulcrums and Flankers... if it's maneuverable, it's flashy. :smilewink: Then again, there's always cases like demo teams made of Phantoms and Frogfoots... :music_whistling: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Real men fly ground attack :pilotfly: where EVERYTHING wants a piece of you :D
GGTharos Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 The F-14 was maneuverable, but I don't think it was operationally suitable to Airshows. [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
ViperEagle Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 The Tomcat was suited for one or two plane Demo's. It was simply too large for close formation demo teams. And the Tomcats wing sweep was automatic, unless the pilot over-rode the Wing Sweep Computer. In that case, the Tomcat can do manuvers at 300-400 knots with the wings swept back. Also, the old TF-30 powered Tomcats would have had problems with the aggressive throttle actions and high alpha manuvers done by the BA's. Now, had the Angels been flying the GE powered Tomcats, it would have been a very nice show. The Hornet is the right choice for the BA's, just as the Super Hornet would be.
Hellcat61 Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 Hornets are SH**!!!!How so? In its respected field, the Hornet does quite well. I dont believe that it was an adequate replacement for the Tomcat, but it does have a role. Majority of the Blue Angels pilots are Marines anyways.Not true. Minus the Fat Albert crew, the Blue Angels usually only fly with two Marine pilots in their formation, sometimes less. The Blue Angels recieved their first Marine in 1954, eight years after their establishment. As for the Tomcat discussion: In the past, the Blue's flew aircraft that were piloted by both Navy and Marine crews in the fleet. Being that the Tomcat was solely a Navy airframe, it could limit its acceptance into the Marine contingent of the Blue Angels. The Tomcat/Blue Angels debacle has come up before, and according to several people I know from the Sunset Community, the swing wings on the Cat wern't exactly ideal for close-in formation flying. Makes sense. Tomcats explode and the Hornets will take it all.The older PW TF-30 model Tomcats had compressor stall issues when going supersonic. Make no mistake that these wern't the only jets to ever have this problem. This issue was later reduced with the "B" and "D" model Tomcats (GE F-110 engine). Compressor stalls did still occasionally occur. This can happen with any jet aircraft. Hornets don't have a spotless safety record either, so be fair and weigh the circumstances of both aircraft before casting a blanket statement. The jet stayed in service for 32 years for a reason. You just watch...wait..it allready HAPPENED.Tomcats have nearly ten years on the Hornets, not to mention that thay are a much more complex airframe. The Tomcat was retired due to the age of it's airframe and the lack of a ongoing assembly line, two things that the Hornet didn't have to contend with. Many of the early Hornets now are in bone yards or are gate guards, replaced by newly built models. The Tomacat didn't have this luxury, and existing airframes had to be procured and repaired. Case in point, the Tomcat was retired due to its age and cost to maintain, not because of any lack of capability. The Navy lost an asset in September 06. Hate to break it, but the Tomcat would've been a very sorry show jet. Guess why most display teams use(d) Skyhawks, Falcons, Fulcrums and Flankers... if it's maneuverable, it's flashy.Care to back that first part up? It may have not been ideal for close-formation monuvering, but the Tomcat was undoubtedly an airshow favorite; and due to it's slow-speed handling, was quite monuverable. I can find you hud footage of a Tomcat turning and burning with a German MiG-29. Maneuverability was never an issue with the Tomcat. Cheers, Hellcat "When you're out of Tomcats, you're out of fighters!"
Pilotasso Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 Nevermind,Corsair posts one of these threads each week, at the least... :D Maybe he should go live in Iran. :D .
pschelchshorn Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 . I can find you hud footage of a Tomcat turning and burning with a German MiG-29. Maneuverability was never an issue with the Tomcat. Hellcat I remember that. Could you share some of that footage?! The actual Intention of the MiG 29 of the German Airforce taking part in the Red Flag (and other) exercises was to enable US and allied Aircrews further fermilliarisation with the aircraft. The US armed forces have had MiGs and the like for many years, but never had the pilots that were actually trained in the east (like our ex GDR jocks). Big Plus. Flip "Imagine the reason that people hold on to hatred so stubbornly is because if the hate is removed, the pain will set in. Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
Recommended Posts