richards1954
rcms1954
richards1954

You may already be aware, but in case you aren't, Tyler posted on his new site yesterday; his subpage there is called The Warzone. His newest piece will come out hopefully Monday next; from a couple of things he said in replies to comments it looks like it will be connected to North Korea. Several folk there have

You are correct, with the caveat that the F-15's and B-1's are doing totally different tasks than the A-10. The former are taking out buildings, oil refineries, troop quarters, supply depots, etc. That isn't the A-10's job, nor is it why they are being used; they are being directed against troops that are making

Come on, Slamp; use your head...the money for A-10's is in the Air Force budget, the money for helicopters to which I was referring is in the Army budget. And never shall the twain meet...if the Air Force does away with the A-10 it is not going to give that money to the Army for refurbishing Blackhawks and Apaches, or

Unfortunately for your solution of using helicopters and F-16's/F-35s as a dual platform approach to replace the A-10, our helicopter fleet is also aging and has been heavily worked for a decade or better, maintenance is becoming a big issue for that fleet. Not to mention that the Army is currently looking into ways

Chris Black’s study of the Gripen as a possible replacement for Canada’s Hornet fleets gives the following numbers: 1 1/2 Gripens for the cost of 1 Super Hornet; 2 Gripens for the cost of 1 Typhoon or Rafale; and 3 and 3/4's Gripens for the cost of 1 F-35. The cost per unit favors the Gripen; its disadvantages are its

I've always loved the Gripen; for its looks, and for its performance and capabilities. I've also argued that it makes better sense for Canada to consider the Gripen as opposed to considering the F-35, as the future multi-role fighter to replace its aging CF-18 Hornet fleet. All that aside, this is great footage, and

Exactly!! Another area that was and still is advancing by leaps and bounds is computing; and at the same time costs have fallen. My first computer, in the mid-90's, cost $1,300 and had about 5 gigs of hard drive... :o The laptop I am on right now is almost 6 years old, runs Windows 7, has 6 gigs of memory, a 2.53 G hz

I don't know, maybe it is just a difference in cultures or perspective, or maybe it's something in the water in the Eurasian area of the world; but it sure looks like they are very good at creating vehicles that are both butt-ugly and seem to be not-very-practical... http://www.carnewschina.com/2014/11/28/int…

Sorry, Russia doesn't get to decide who joins NATO. If they want to go to war over it, OK, but I hardly think that it's a good idea for either side. And as of this moment in time; Ukraine isn't part of NATO, it isn't even part of the EU. As for the treaties and agreements which you seem to think are not important;

The event you are talking about took place in 1954. However, 40 years later in 1994 in the Budapest Memorandum, Great Britain, the U.S., Ukraine, and Russia agreed that the Ukraine would transfer all of its nuclear arsenal (left over from the old Soviet days) to Russia. In exchange, Russia, the U.S. and Great

Thanks for the article and especially for the video, Tyler; it did my heart good to see a prop plane buzzing around for a while. It took me back to my childhood days at Hill AFB in Utah in the late '50's and early '60's when the majority of the planes I saw still had propellers attached to their engines. It's

I'm sorry to see her leave service in the Navy; but glad she's going out with a bang. This plane and it's predecessor the Intruder have been around for most of my life; I've always admired its ruggedness and its ability to do its job so efficiently. I read Stephen Coonts' 'Flight of the Intruder' (and then followed

She is certainly a big girl. I might have missed it in your article and if so I apologize, but does she have defensive capabilities, or are those yet to be determined? She would have to be a high value target, both for her re-fueling and re-arming capacities as well as for taking her and her helicopters and/or

In the scene you mention at 2:31 in the video, one of the bombs clearly hits the underside of the plane; you can see an immediate puff of smoke/vapor from both the bomb and the underside of the plane, a change in the bomb's trajectory, and as that bomb is exiting the screen it looked as if it had broken into two

Thanks for the article and the information; I'm going to get the book.

Another nice article, I enjoy reading your stuff. But that said, real kudos to the photographer; he had some absolutely gorgeous and very clear shots; just beautiful stuff.

Note to self: these were before my time...the first Navy carrier-based jet was the F9F Panther, 1949-1958; it was followed by the F9F-6 Cougar, 1952-1959; and the F-11 Tiger flew from 1956-1961, the Panther and Tiger were used in training naval aviators until the mid-60's and the Cougar flew with the NR until the

The following is a reply I made on Wednesday of this past week to another person who expressed doubts about single-engine jets for the navy, they were questioning if an F-18 pilot would feel secure going from a twin-engine to a single engine jet. Truth is, most of the Navy's carrier jets have been single-engine,

:( USAF or civilian contractor, it's still a loss: a loss to whatever program was involved; and most of all, a great loss to family and friends. In the past 40 years I've had too many friends in various branches of the military lose their lives serving our country. I guess the only possible consolation is that he