Planes have not been "up" for a couple of weeks, so let's go fly !
....I spent 1/2 hour on this wonder...alone....when it was in Long Beach, in America, under the dome....spooky but historic !
...luv these buggars..."not" a plane and "not" a boat...but BOTH !!
....one of the best..
....707 hybrid
....aaahhhhh the BLACKBIRD....whooshin' in the dead of night....you beaut !!
>>2738345
its an A-12 Oxcart, the slightly lighter, slightly faster, higher flying predecessor to the SR-71 Blackbird
>>2738396
wake up you shit your pants in yugoslavia
aaahhhh...the boat that can fly
I got gigs of this shit
>>2739767
>>2739768
>>2739769
>>2739771
>>2739773
>>2739775
>>2739776
>>2739778
>>2739780
>>2739781
>>2739784
>>2739785
>>2739787
>>2739791
>>2739794
>>2739797
>>2739799
>>2739800
>>2739801
>>2739806
>>2739812
>>2739816
>>2739818
>>2739821
>>2739826
>>2738330
>>2738379
Kelly Johnson approves of this shit.
>>2739767
Post that shit holmes.
>>2738182
Reno airshow
>>2738192
>>2738182
Looks under fed from this angle.
>>2739841
I did, i replied to myself every new one!
>>2739828
>>2738182
Why are there aircrafts around my anus?
>>2740160
Here's some aircraft anus for you as compromise.
>>2740031
>>2739840
>>2738182
Fleet Week
>>2739769
totally heard the jurassic park theme in my head when i saw this pic
>>2740811
>>2746077
>>2738330
Not the A-12. The nose is wrong.
>>2746152
you are incorrect
http://www.habu.org/a-12/06932.html
>>2746340
follow-up to this
>>2751071
People that day must have expected a lot from this plane.
>>2751259
probably
>>2751259
It's identified as a drone at the Air and Space Museum here in Seattle...
>>2752861
I think anon was referring to the F-111 pic in the post he replied to
>>2752906
>>2765314
muh dick
>>2739797
MOAR
>>2738182
Two of these three P-51's have been lost to crashes: Janie and Big Beautiful Doll. The owner/pilot of BBDoll was a fatality.
>>2769281
not him, but
>>2738197
Technically not an aircraft, anon.
>>2773102
This is a plane.
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/registration.php?p=RF-32767
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-200
>>2744489
Thunderbirds are go!
>>2746333
B-17's always make me think of the movie Heavy Metal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZlBre8lOeQ
>>2739775
Meme plane
>>2788774
What is that even supposed to mean
>>2788812
>expensive plane
>literally any other plane is superior
>can't do anything good enough to be considered for the price
This is a shining example of the military industrial complex creating failed weapon systems
>>2788845
Still being tested and improved upon.
The process of determining an airframe's true limitations is a long one.
It takes time for pilots to gain familiarity and trust in new planes as well.
Give it a few years, and it will be outperforming everything out there.
>>2739794
F-35B Boondoggle
This plane will _never_ utilize the vertical landing or take-off feature in combat, as doing so decreases the payload so much while using excessive fuel, it renders the effort pointless.
Like the AV-8 Harrier before it, the only time you’re going to see it actually being done is at airshows…
>>2790143
You need to to land on LHD and LHA class ships since they don't have long runways.
>>2790143
It was standard practice to land Harriers vertically in the Royal Navy.
>>2790145
>You need to to land on LHD and LHA class ships since they don't have long runways.
That's what the 10 Navy supercarriers are for.
>>2790153
>It was standard practice to land Harriers vertically in the Royal Navy.
No it wasn't, the Harrier used short take-off via a ski ramp and landed conventionally.
>>2788845
>expensive plane
Yeah R&D with electronic warfare isn't cheap, but it is the future
>Literally any other plane is superior
With respect to what? It was designed for a specific mission in which no other aircraft is capable of fulfilling (stealth A-G strike + BVR AA capable)
>can't do anything good enough to be considered for the price
It just entered service, how can you judge a brand new plane in such a time frame?
>>2790159
>land conventionally
Standard procedure for the Harrier is to perform a landing using vectored thrust and a low airspeed. The low aspect ratio wings require a very high conventional landing speed, and with the gear configuration it has, that becomes difficult. The only time a conventional landing is used is when there is a malfunction with the nozzles or for training purposes.
>>2790159
LHD and LHA class ships have a different role than a carrier.
>>2790171
>Standard procedure for the Harrier is to perform a landing using vectored thrust and a low airspeed.
i.e. NOT vertically.
>>2790173
>LHD and LHA class ships have a different role than a carrier.
Exactly and that role isn't as a pretend supercarrier.
There is no reason for the F-35 Boondoggle, as there is no reason for the Marines to have their own fixed wing carrier airforce because that's the Navy's job.
>>2790193
As someone who served on an LHD and has seen Harriers land they do land vertically. They come in about 20ft above the deck and then come down and cut the engine about 5-10 feet off deck. Also the role of an LHD is to support its MEU with medical, supplies and air support. This includes fixed wing air craft.
>>2790193
Not vertically, but not without the assistance of vectored thrust
i.e. not conventionally
I know we got a lot of this bird up already, but, can there ever be enough again?
>>2790201
you have to keep into account that the fricking ship is moving. On land, the thing starts AND lands vertically if needed.
>>2792621
>can there ever be enough again?
no there cannot
>>2788850
ha iv just been looking for a descent image of him...good find sir
4" max lift
unbelievable
>>2738379
>>2738407
>>2739781
>>2739844
>>2740914
Great thread.
>>2798565
best wallpaper.
>>2798567
SUPER
CRITICAL
>>2798570
>>2798658
>>2798659
>>2798565
the design somehow reminds me of this shit (the future as seen in the 50s):
>»Longnecks« flying through stratosphere
>Nuclear operated planes will be very big.
>On one hand this is due technical, on the other hand economical reasons.
>They will be the real long-distance planes of the future.
>>2798570
Boy I do love supercritical wings
>>2738192
The B-36 was even more impressive to me in person.
>>2796537
Germans testing a Messerschmitt Bf 109, 1935
>>2802453
>The motto on the eagle behind the plane says: “Das deutsche Volk wird sich durch die Eroberung der Luft seinen ihm gebührenden Platz in der Welt erzwingen”. Translated, it would be: “The German people will, though conquest of the sky, force its duly place in the world“.
>>2790193
>no reason for the Marines to have their own fixed wing carrier airforce because that's the Navy's job
This is the most stupid thing I've read in quite a while.
>>2807075
Yeah they're huge, amazing they fly
>>2790081
>>2790170
You should really put down that crack pipe. The 23 was by far the superior aircraft, in every respect. It was due to the Military Industrial Complex of which >>2788845 speaks that the 22 was even considered to be the next ATF. Politics & corruption gave us this abomination, not superior technology.
>>2807092
Cosigning this!
>>2775276
Why the "pusher" props on this model?
none of you can fly
>>2823400
This thread can
This Harrier is launching from the USS Kearsarge for an attack on Libya. Clearly short take off / vertical landing is useful for actual missions. And it will be even better in an aircraft with longer range, more useful hardpoints (the Harrier only has one in a strike role), and an overwhelming electronic systems advantage.
>>2738182
>dont ban me
>>2835519
>>2738182
ALL that can't FLY !
>>2839709
>>2841391
Great pic, source? Location?
>>2841562
>Boeing_B.727F_DHL_Tail_Li(...).jpg
Kingman Airport (Arizona)
>>2841668
Thanks!
Cessna A-37 Dragonfly
>>2842871
Heeeeeeeeeeey... I WAS THERE ONLY A FEW WEEKS AGO.
They have all sorts of goodies. (but also quite biased.)
The War Remnants Museum, Ho chi minh. Vietnam. they have changed a fair bit though.
>>2842911
lucky u it's nice to see militaria firsthand
>>2854624
At least this design ensures no one in the cockpit throws trash out the window..
>>2856122
well...and the STOL stuff, of course
BUFF ENOUGH /hr/?
>>2856580
>>2790193
Looks like some civvy who's never served in the military talking out of his ass.
What happened to this thread?
>>2867056
> What happened to this thread?
got derailed like the whole page
>>2867056
http://archive.4plebs.org/hr/thread/2738182/#2868631
The 737 MAX
She's brand new.
>>2873500
looks wireless just download the Apt
>>2873511
I have no idea how to decode whatever you're trying to communicate.
>>2873523
>whatever
>>2873523
image? A place for anybody fascinated with flight to post and discuss links to ... (i.redd.it)
>>2873538
damnation that music >>2873526
this thread makes the fact that I spend every day in an office in front of a computer seem like an incredibly bad idea...
>>2874375
Life is what you make of it. Some people are content with a life at a desk staring at a computer. Are you?
>>2874454
Being this retorical....