-  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]

Subject   (new thread)
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Images greater than 300x300 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 685 unique user posts.

  • Blotter updated: 2017-02-04 Show/Hide Show All

Patches and Stickers for sale here

File 146955149770.jpg - (308.66KB , 894x1600 , ss Udvar 000.jpg )
21058 No. 21058 ID: 9dcda2 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]

> The Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, also called the Udvar-Hazy Center, is the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's annex at Washington Dulles International Airport in the Chantilly area of Fairfax County, Virginia, United States

I checked out the Udvar-Hazy Center. Pretty damn cool. I got a little emotional around the Space Shuttle Discovery. I wasn't trying to document the whole museum, I just snapped some pictures of cool stuff. (With a specific interest in engines.)
114 posts and 101 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21329 ID: ec7ed1
File 147545540436.jpg - (235.05KB , 1800x1184 , UK WW2 De Havilland DH98 Mosquito B_ Mk_ 35 manufa.jpg )
Mosquito Markings
Just before D-Day (the June 6, 1944, invasion of France), black and white stripes were applied almost overnight to a vast majority of U.S. and British aircraft to clearly identify them during the Normandy landings. In the rush to mark all the aircraft, masking and spraying sometimes gave way to more expeditious method of painting them by hand.

Invasion stripes, like the ones being applied by the ground crewman in the museum's exhibit, would have completely encircled the wings and fuselage. The 25th Bombardment Group adopted a red tail for their Mosquitoes in August 1944 and removed the invasion stripes from the upper wing and upper fuselage surfaces in September 1944.
>> No. 21330 ID: ec7ed1
File 147545543387.jpg - (253.56KB , 1600x1004 , UK WW2 De Havilland DH98 Mosquito B Mk_ 35.jpg )
Armament: 4,000 lbs. of bombs in bomber version
Engines: Two Rolls-Royce Merlins of 1,690 hp each
Maximum speed: 415 mph
Cruising speed: 276 mph
Range: 1,955 miles
Ceiling: 42,000 ft.
Span: 54 ft. 2 in.
Length: 40 ft. 6 in.
Height: 12 ft. 6 in.
Weight: 23,000 lbs. loaded
>> No. 21331 ID: ec7ed1
File 147545549788.jpg - (3.47MB , 2400x1800 , UK WW2 De Havilland DH98 Mosquito B_ Mk_ 35 cockpi.jpg )
De Havilland DH 98 cockpit in the WWII Gallery at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force.
>> No. 21332 ID: ec7ed1
File 147545562341.jpg - (3.92MB , 2400x1800 , UK WW2 De Havilland DH98 Mosquito B_ Mk_ 35 cockpi.jpg )
The Timber Terror is one of my favorite strike bombers of WW2.
>> No. 21380 ID: 9315da
File 147600534843.jpg - (2.60MB , 2736x1824 , IMG_2302modweb.jpg )

Like I said, if you get the chance, do. The place is so huge that even if you have a slight interest in space and aviation you can easily spend the entire day there.

I'm planning on visiting there again, thinking of bringing my camera tripod (they'll let you bring it in, last I checked) so I can take some decent photos with their crap lighting.

No. 21304 ID: bc78c2 hide watch quickreply [Reply]
  what the fucko
>> No. 21377 ID: a6c0d3
neat! i could have sworn that i saw one of these things in my childhood parked on the side of the road in the northeastern pennsylvania area like 25 years ago

No. 21374 ID: bc78c2 hide watch quickreply [Reply]
  still fucking cool
>> No. 21375 ID: bc78c2

File 147222795370.jpg - (84.26KB , 799x555 , camping.jpg )
21230 No. 21230 ID: 88977e hide watch quickreply [Reply]
hello there OPERATORchan

i am looking for the most practical and economic way about going about financing and purchasing a camping vehicle...

i don't need one that is very big, or expensive, or fancy... just something that is practical and economic friendly (i.e... value for money)

...perhaps one with a shower, and good AC

thank you! <3

>> No. 21231 ID: 8effed
File 147223281729.jpg - (412.69KB , 1024x768 , car, Cadillac ambulance 1974 1.jpg )
Back around 1988 or so, I bought a 1974 Cadillac ambulance for $500. I got it for an RV to go on hunting and camping trips. And it worked out! I removed the paramedic's chair, put a bed in and it was all set. That gigantic car had a 472 CID V-8 engine and a 27 gallon fuel tank. The 1975 Cadillac had a 600 lb 500 cubic inch (8.2 liter) engine.
The 1974 model year was impacted by the oil embargo of late 1973 and early 1974, which hit large cars especially hard, as fears of rationing drove people to buy smaller cars with better fuel economy.
>> No. 21232 ID: 8effed
File 147223380545.jpg - (369.70KB , 1024x706 , car, Cadillac ambulance 1974 2.jpg )
That ambulance probably weighed around 6000 pounds and probably got around 7 miles per gallon. Not a very economical car to take to the wilderness, but you could stand up in it.

I know that the EPA had only a single (not separate city/highway) MPG rating list in 1974 and I think that was the first year for it. In Thos. E. Bonsalls "Cadillac The American Standard" there is a reprint of an advertisement Cadillac sent to dealers in 1974 to run in local media, this one from Valley Cadillac. It states that the Environmental Protection Agency made a study recently of gas mileage delivered by 376 new automobiles and that the Cadillac Eldorado was found to deliver 10.4 MPG, the de Ville 8.9 MPG (I dont understand why thered be a difference), and also listed some other cars including Lincoln 7.9, Chrysler 8.4 and smaller cars like the Pontiac Le Mans at 8.4 and Oldsmobile Cutlass at 7.3. 1973 and 1974 were probably the two worst years for fuel mileage on GM cars with very restrictive emission controls which gave both poor economy and poor drivability. In 1975, all GM cars got catalytic converters which allowed the engines to perform better and give better economy. By 1976, the EPA was listing both city and highway mileage and I still have the EPA window sticker from my 76 350 4BBL (Olds engine)Cutlass which shows 15 city and 21 highway. http://forums.cadillaclasalleclub.org/index.php?topic=85736.0
>> No. 21273 ID: 5c1d8c
File 147351693336.jpg - (60.00KB , 433x300 , img_1778.jpg )
>> No. 21287 ID: 044fd0
My GF and I went on a couple road trips last year in her Prius. Didn't have a shower but with the back seat folded down it had more than enough room for her and I to sleep. Prius sucks balls in town for lack of acceleration but it's quite adequite on the interstate. Got about 65 MPG in the Florida Keys and about 55 out in Arizona and Nevada.
I also have a 94 Chevy Astro LT AWD that was formerly registered as an RV. It could fit a large futon in the back. Didn't get the best fuel economy and the 28 gallon tank was a real pain in the wallet to fill but it could cruise along at 100mph all day and no cop ever gave it a second glance. Took it to Florida a couple of times back when the AC worked. Climbed the embankment closing off the lost highway at Centralia at drove around there one time. Once drove it around for more than a month with a broken torsion bar.
>> No. 21313 ID: 9dc901

File 147162551411.jpg - (117.77KB , 1280x795 , Tu-160_(12956971034)_1.jpg )
21175 No. 21175 ID: b430d1 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
>At the end of 2016, the Russian Defense Ministry will receive the first delivery of the renewed NK-32 engines for the Tu-160M2 strategic missile-carrying bombers.

>According to the developers, the new engine will help the plane fly up to the stratosphere at an altitude of 60,000 feet.

>"The new NK-32 version can work not only as a reactive plane engine but also as a rocket engine. Thanks to this, the Tu-160M2 will be able to cruise at a height where no enemy anti-aircraft system can strike it," a source in the Russian defense industry said.

>The modernized plane's first flight will take place in 2018.

>According to Russian air force chief Viktor Bondarev, the Defense Ministry plans to buy about 50 Tu-160M2 planes.
55 posts and 40 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21295 ID: 8f9c57
File 147415368472.jpg - (608.78KB , 1500x998 , US A-10 Thunderbolt II Warthog boneyard 3.jpg )
But the A-6 has been retired. Along with the F-117. And the Air Force has been in an ongoing controversy in retiring the A-10. The Air Force’s latest retirement schedule, unveiled in its latest budget request for FY17, begins divesting the A-10s in FY18. The last A-10 would be sent to the boneyard in FY22. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/04/25/house-legislation-restricts--10-retirement/83508968/
>> No. 21296 ID: ad2b13
Aside of heavy payload that's kind of why it makes for a great example. This was before stealth, so you can think of it as a pre-stealth stealth bomber.

The most modern example of a bomber using speed, storms and terrain for "stealth" would be F-15E, or that new Sukhoi bomber.
>> No. 21298 ID: 63313b
File 14743524825.jpg - (335.03KB , 1024x909 , LAP-render-top.jpg )
If we're on the old stealth vs. terrain cover debate...why not both? Apparently a low-altitude penetrator version of the B-2 was under consideration at one point in its development.

>rocket engine
Is that a translation error? I would expect a hybrid turbo-ramjet like the SR-71 had.
>> No. 21299 ID: b86cd3
Imagine modern air combat as playing flashlight tag in a field at night. You can turn on your flashlight (radar) to try and find other players, but they in turn see your light (EM emissions). Low-observability technology is represented by some players wearing ninja suits while others wear reflective vests.
>> No. 21300 ID: 9723b1
Erm I think the point is to cut costs so more platforms can be produced with a lower tech base. Any total war scenario is going to involve nukes, and nukes will crash your tech base pretty fast.

Although I don't think the A-6 guy is talking about that, he's just being pedantic about the comparison.

Modern stealth is only effective in a narrow band, called the X band. It's not effective in other bands of radar, such as those used by ground, shipborne or AWACS search, tracking and interrogation radars. Or in infrared, which is becoming distressingly common and depressingly sophisticated. Or passive radar... once that comes in it's pretty much over for stealth forever.

No. 8774 ID: a8a5cc hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
  >The US Navy has completed the first ever catapult launch of the Northrop Grumman X-47B unmanned combat air system demonstrator (UCAS-D) aircraft at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, earlier today. Apparently it went very well, the Navy sent over this video of the launch earlier this evening.

>The catapult shot is a crucial step towards the jet's initial sea-trials, which are expected next year (the X-47B that's on Truman right now is merely doing deck-handling exercises). The sea-trials will involve catapult launches, arrested recoveries and having the X-47B fly the pattern around the "boat" while coordinating with carrier's air traffic controllers. The idea behind the UCAS-D is to prove that an autonomous unmanned aircraft can safely operate at sea onboard a carrier.

>If the X-47B fails, the prospects for the follow-on Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft program would dim markedly. The Navy is counting on the X-47B to pave the way for that program.


Pretty fucking cool.
86 posts and 61 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21055 ID: 1e7925

Lots of talk about this at work. The AI mostly improved on the existing AI opponent, it's not really OMG TERMINATOR AI thing.

The U Cincinnati article is a little less hype-y. The linked white paper comes across as an infomercial for the guys' fuzzy logic algorithm.


>> No. 21056 ID: 396316
Yeah no shit it doesn't require a lot of processing power to calculate vectors in a completely controlled environment, I've been getting my ass kicked by AI since ace combat two.

It's when it gets into uncontrolled environments that things get a lot more complicated.

Instead of having every grid point mapped in a computer and every moving object accounted for, in a real world the AI would have to collect data and build a HIGHLY IMPERFECT picture of the world around it. For example there would be no way to predict and react to simple things like enemy flak blowing up near or a sensor going out.

Also a lot more important is the ability to decide where the pilot fits in the overall tactical, strategic and even political landscape. If he shoots down that Israeli jet will the pilot be starting a thermonuclear war? Is that passenger jet out of Iran a simple airliner or a converted chemical weapons delivery system, and how to make a value judgement?
>> No. 21141 ID: 30f399
File 146960469072.jpg - (750.24KB , 1500x828 , US UAV X-47B Northrop-Grumman J-UCAS RC bomber 5.jpg )
The AI would build an imperfect picture of the world around it, like how human pilots do, but people can make sound judgments based on common sense and experience (difficult to quantify and translate into a computer program), but an AI could just ignore things that are not threats or concerning to the mission. Such as being mindful of areas it is not supposed to enter, the ground or navigational hazards, or threats such as enemy radar, anti-aircraft artillery or missiles. When fighting an aerial dogfight, the AI could be programmed to concentrate on the most pressing concerns in order of importance, such as enemy aircraft, flak and SAMs.
And as for predicting the trajectory of enemy flak, that would be the AI's forte as long as its sensors are effective (and the sensors it is sharing with its network). If the AI indeed thinks and reacts with logical decisions hundreds of times faster than a human can, it could weave through flak and obstructions like an ace in the prosecution of its mission.
And determining who to attack, the AI would be governed by the rules of engagement, just like human pilots are, but the AI might make unfortunate judgment calls.
>> No. 21142 ID: 30f399
File 146960622757.jpg - (163.20KB , 1600x1143 , US bomb AIM-9X Sidewinder missile by Raytheon 1.jpg )
Now imagine if such sophistication could be imparted to missiles. If the missile's sensors are precise enough to correctly identify the enemy aircraft it was locked on to, the missile's AI might be effective in ignoring counter-measures and predicting the aircraft's movements to plot the best course to destroy the aircraft.
- US Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder missile.
>> No. 21143 ID: 30f399
File 146960631447.jpg - (90.17KB , 1152x722 , US bomb AIM-9X Sidewinder missile seeker head 2.jpg )
"You're not fooling anyone, flyboy."

File 146023209316.jpg - (173.88KB , 800x600 , My BJ40.jpg )
20439 No. 20439 ID: cad48c hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
So after much thought, I've decided to sell off the BJ40 I was working on. While I enjoy the hell out of the cantankerous bastard, it's not really a viable option for my daily driver needs for a couple reasons -- most notably, finding parts is a pain in the ass and only going to get worse.

So now I'm in the market for something new and looking for ideas. I'm looking for a 4WD SUV (or much less preferably pickup), probably mid/full-sized. While I like the capacity of a pickup, it rains enough here and I find utility in having capacity for 3-4 people that the enclosed space of a SUV is likely a better tradeoff. Having said that, I do want to be able to chuck a range day's worth of gear in the back without much trouble. Most of my driving will be on paved roads/highways, but I want to be able to get offroad easily enough, though obviously I'm willing to give up crazy extreme rock-crawling ability in the name of practical road driving.

So far this has lead me to look at 4Runners, newer Land Cruisers, and XTerras. I've got about 10K to throw at this, can wiggle a bit. Here's my real problem though -- I'd prefer a diesel, but the American market seems to hate them outside of absurdly large pickups.

Anyone have any other ideas?
29 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20723 ID: 2a7fd5
File 14665070696.jpg - (56.77KB , 506x286 , WHYWHYWHY.jpg )

>Swapping Japanese or American lel simplicity for overengineered euroshit
Pic related.

>Wanting to pay the euroshit tax on top of the diesel parts tax
Pic related.

If you absolutely WANT to pay a premium on parts and have a bad time working on your own vehicle, why not go for a Mercedes OM617 or OM601? Hell, in >>20685 it looks like there might even be room for an OM617 (the straight-5) in there.

The ALH in that Xterra is somewhat better than earlier engines. For one, they run the oil pump on a chain from the crankshaft, and the vacuum pump off the end of the camshaft, as opposed to running an extra jackshaft like on the 1.6IDI and the first gen TDI. But, it does run the water pump off the (already stressed) timing belt. Since it's a diesel, it's an interference engine.
The Mercedes engines are chain timed, and they run the water pump from an accessory drive belt.

So, you've got your swap. That costs $7000+. And you get 30+MPG. Great. A 1.6L automatic Sidekick gets about 30 MPG, and they can be found for $2000-4000.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 21029 ID: f2112f
File 146656461964.jpg - (14.46KB , 480x270 , 12189770_10153817033884758_365100022701893514_n.jpg )

He used to be married to OM617's but moved to TDI's. He explained why once but I don't remember enough details not to butcher the reasoning. It doesn't cost him $7000 to do the swap, that's what he sells them for.

Pic is a TDI Jetta towing a Pathfinder. That turned some heads.
>> No. 21041 ID: cad48c
Probably just going to stick to my 4Runner plan, put another 200K on whatever I find, and when it finally wears the fuck out maybe I'll have enough banked to get something interesting. Maybe we'll see some interesting diesels in the market by then that aren't a total pain in the dick.
>> No. 21043 ID: f87148
File 146670344793.jpg - (53.17KB , 344x257 , land_rover_tdi.jpg )
This thread inspired me to finally do a bit of searching regarding something that's been lurking in the far back recesses of my mind for years now, and ohhh shit, there's someone who actually does this commercially!

>> No. 21054 ID: d23ffe
I've been looking around for the same. I like my expedition, but I'd prefer a diesel.

Jeep made a Liberty with a diesel for a while, rare but you can find them.

No Amarok yet, but the Touareg and mid size VW have been available for a while, both in diesel with 4wd.

The EPA is horribly out of control. When the nation was being crippled by near $4/gal gas. The EPA was fining the crap out fuel companies for failure to meet impossible standards, which was adding something like another 20 cents per gallon, that's border line economic treason.

While economy doesn't directly equal lower emissions. It can greatly reduce the footprint. Every unit of gas from the crude coming out of the ground to evaporation at the pump increases polution. Not to mention meeting the standards often leads to poor mpg, which is self defeating.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

File 146654336437.jpg - (709.83KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_091352.jpg )
20725 No. 20725 ID: d5e5a4 hide watch quickreply [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]
Visited the National Museum of the USAF in Dayton OH last week.
The place is huge, and they just opened up their 4th hangar to the public, full of X-planes. Admission is free. I spent 6 hours there, and didn't even come close to putting a dent in stuff to see and read about.

Most pics are presented without comment.
298 posts and 298 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21026 ID: d5e5a4
File 14665519176.jpg - (716.42KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_114519.jpg )
>> No. 21027 ID: d5e5a4
File 146655195143.jpg - (606.13KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_115242.jpg )
>> No. 21030 ID: f2112f
File 146656504564.jpg - (73.19KB , 960x720 , 13445682_1264206026953290_4014710712259818109_n.jpg )

Shiny... I need to go there one of these days. Today started the Sentimental Journey Fly-in in Lock Haven, The C-54 Spirit of Freedom is there again this year. I will of course be abusing my free access to take all the pictures.
>> No. 21034 ID: bf2165
Hey! You're in my neck of the woods. I still havn't been to see the 4th hanger, I really need to do that.
>> No. 21057 ID: 9dcda2
A little late, but cool shit man.

File 146630795778.jpg - (117.75KB , 768x516 , NAPO-Su-34-2.jpg )
20703 No. 20703 ID: 9723b1 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Su-34's were sent to bomb terrorists over Syria on Friday, and carried out a strike.

The terrorists called Obama for help to block the Russians until they could re-arm. Obama ordered F-18s scrambled to intercept and endanger the Su-34s without firing on them.

Su-34s successfully evaded the F-18s wtf? isn't F-18 a fighter? until the F-18s had to return for refueling.

The Su-34s then completed their bombing run and finised off not only the remaining terrorists, but also their logistics services that were in the process of rearming the terrorists safe in the knowledge that F-18s protected them.

5 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20714 ID: 0d59ae
It doesn't matter if they're pro or anti-ISIS, if they are destabilizing the country though terror, they are islamic terrorists. From Syrian government point of view, every armed group in the country killing civilians is a bad one. It doesn't matter if the group is Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS or FSA, all are islamic terrorists bent on subverting the legitimate rule of law.

This is why Russia doesn't make a distinction when bombing any group that isn't the Syrian government in Syria, there's no fucking point. All of these groups are organized criminals at the very least.

>Even the Kurdish communists have started getting called "terrorists" by non-Turkish pro-Syrian media after they pushed ISIS out of northern Iraq and blitzkried into Syria.
Certain Kurdish factions have decided that if they cannot make a state in Turkey, they will make a state in weakened Syria. To this end they have resorted to terrorism and allying with other forces destabilizing Syria.

Calling certain Kurdish factions terrorists is calling a spade a spade, it is not politicized language, it is a fact. However not all Kurds have decided on this course of action and Syrian media is so far being careful about distinguishing between the groups.
>> No. 20715 ID: b430d1
File 146645745494.jpg - (32.50KB , 469x463 , 140649141794.jpg )
(this is what fascist enablers actually believe.)
>> No. 20716 ID: 3b6910
What the fuck are you doing? This isn't the designated shitposting board, get the fuck out.
>> No. 20718 ID: ebb4ba
It is when Sergei drinks more than his vodka ration and posts his "Obama is literally ISIS hitler, thank putin that putin is protecting the world" in /v/ rather than /n/
>> No. 20722 ID: 369bd6
File 146649563192.jpg - (63.09KB , 265x335 , 64399074.jpg )
Cease shitting up /v/ please.

File 146206272345.jpg - (32.19KB , 800x533 , rvwqjvtrmuxax3mgusr6.jpg )
20561 No. 20561 ID: 369bd6 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Thoughts on the Mitsubishi X-2 Shinshin?
Old specifications from 2008 set some lofty goals, it might be interesting to see how this develops. Also it just seems so small in comparison to most twin engine fighters or even the F-35. It had its first flight on the 22nd of April.
13 posts and 7 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20577 ID: 94b3dd
File 146216383968.jpg - (413.38KB , 1600x900 , Japan Mitsubishi X-2 Shinshin (Spirit of the Heart.jpg )
>> No. 20580 ID: 8be205
The J-31 is a clone of the F-35. Lockheed admits to having had design data copied from internal project design servers early on in the F-35 development process after contract awarding. The design of the J-31 is almost completely copy-pasted from the early F-35 work.


>On 21 April 2009, media reports, citing Pentagon sources, said that during 2007 and 2008, spies downloaded several terabytes of data related to the F-35's design and electronics systems, potentially compromising the aircraft and aiding the development of defense systems against it.

Funny how that coincides with the rough timeline needed for development on a prototype plane, such that by 2012, we have the unveiling of the Shenyang J-31.
>> No. 20582 ID: 3b6910
Shinshin is likelier the clone of the pre-JSF, pre X-35 design that LockMart had. When LockMart got to the drawing board their stealth submission didn't have internal bays and was twin engined. Basically a simplified micro F-22 with similar performance. So that seems to fit.

J-31... possibly. J-22 is clearly a MiG-1.44 airframe with the F-35 stealth skin and composite control surfaces, so it seems the Chinese did have some F-35 data. It's not out of the question that they would apply this data to the J-31.
>> No. 20583 ID: 6e9258
>includes all four Kuril Islands
>includes Senkaku islands
Somebody's really asking to get his ass whooped.
>> No. 20697 ID: 6f2c2c
So stealthy they fly directly above Russian AA.

Delete post []
Report post
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]