Steve Davies
-
Posts
898 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Steve Davies
-
-
RainmanOriginally posted by Rainman A-10:Anyway, unless you've been there it might be wise not to judge what you see in a brief WSV clip.
I agree with that 100%. I know that i haven't been there, and that I never will; by virtue of that, I can't possibly know what it's like or why decisions are made/not made.
However, the free world (at least, the UK and US) is being judged by the rest of the world, and the Muslim world in particular, on the basis of the clips shown by the media and on the 'net. As such, it's right and proper that the media asks questions - the problem occurs when the military is unable or unwilling to answer them. That's my beef with this clip.
As for capturing guys without killing them, I have seen F-15E WSV where it's been done. Based on what you're saying these might be the exception to the rule, but I still think that the US PR machine should be releasing said WSV to the media to balance the argument.
I appeciate you sharing your experiences. Like SATCOM's, they're very enlightening.
-
Cobalt
So, if you're not saying that they were fair game because they remained in the city, what exactly are you saying?
As for PID/CDE, it's a *legal* requirement of coalition forces, and is one of the things that makes *us* different from *them*. Again, I don't see what your point is.
Perhaps you can explain?
SATCOM
Interesting post. It explains a few things. Thanks.
[ 21. April 2006, 05:26: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
Jason
I know you weren't suggesting it was good PR, it was more me just thinking aloud .
-
Jason
This clip has been subject to a range of valid questions regarding the PID and CDE of the people that were dropped on. In the interviews I've seen with USAF spokespeople, no convincing answer has been given that explains how the FAC(A), TAC(P) or whoever could have ID'd them as hostile. I've heard the story that they came out of a house known to harbour insurgents, and that the group were aggressively approaching an Army checkpoint, but neither of these 'facts' has been publicly acknowledged by the armed forces, AFAIK.
I'm not privy to the ROE, but if they were anything like OIF in March 2003, then there is also a question mark over how the pilot conducted his own PID and CDE. Whilst it's entirely possible that this strike was warranted and perfectly legitimate (and I would prefer to give the benefit of the doubt), I don't think it's a great example to use to demonstrate the work that coalition forces are doing out there.
I'd prefer to see the military release tapes of F-15Es and F-16s pinpointing insurgents with lasers to allow them to be apprehended by NVG-equipped soldiers, or the clip of several insurgents caught burying weapons by an F-15E and then being apprehended single-handedly by a US SF trooper. Just my view, but I’ve been fortunate enough to see these videos and believe they'd serve the US and the coalition much better as a PR tool... not to mention that they're probably far more representative of what's going on out there.
-
Genuine question:
Do the pilots driving the chase car have to take any advanced driving course beforehand?
-
Anyone know if this is hosted anywhere else? I get about 5 seconds of video and then the stream stops.
TIA
-
MIxOriginally posted by trailmix:i think you will LOVE this one:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/oh_my_god.htm
~mix
Just about the best low-fly clip out there!
Depending on who you speak to, that incident is characterised as either superb flying, or downright dangerous flying! I can't make-up my mind as to which!
-
Hoser
I was actually trying to recall as much as I could from my own limited knowledge of the Hornet! . EDIT: Maybe I should stick to talking about real aeroplanes from now on .
AoA
So is the carret at the bottom an angle of bank indicator? Oh, and where's the ghost FPM?!
[ 10. April 2006, 10:29: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
That looks more like the angle of bank indicator, not the RATR.Originally posted by BeerMan:Plus if that triangle at the bottom of the picture is the RATR its not even close. Don't know all the symbology of a Super Hornet HUD but it looks a little odd. Hacker, Toro, Hoser...thoughts?
My guess would be that the RATR is the little square box above the centre of the gun pipper.
-
It's always present, no matter what master mode is selected.Originally posted by BeerMan:And if his Master Arm is in safe, why is there a gun cross present?
-
Makes sense to me. It means that there's absolutely no room for error, and it prevents incidents like those in the 80s and 90s when friendly aircraft flying DACT and BFM actually shot eachother down. The Super Bug doesn't have a Sim mode like the Viper, and what's more, you don't need Master Arm on when there's a witness mark at the top of the HUD confirming that the firing circuitry has been energised.Originally posted by BeerMan:So the Hornet is gunning the Raptor with his Master Arm in safe? That dosen't make any sense...
-
And I suppose if it really was Kabul the exhaust flux would have set off all the mines in the overrun, too!
I have some nice screen grabs from the vid. Will post them tomorrow.
-
Short clip of Harrier GR7 doing tactical departure at Kabul, or wherever.
Work safe if your speakers are turned-off.
-
dmeg
Thanks for educating this civilian .
-
As an outsider... It's interesting to note that on the board there is one thread that states explicitly and by implication that it would be nice if only pilots made the rank of General; and another concurrent thread blasting non-flying members of the air force for apathy.
If the former attitude is prevalent in the Air Force, then can you really expect the latter not to follow closely? I am sure that this is a huge over-simplification of matters, but as an outsider, I wonder if it is one of the causes?
-
Oh, and the Marines don't have the Super Bug. I am told by someone much wiser than me about such matters that that they're hanging on for the JSF. Could it have been that the Super Hornet demo pilot (Ricardo Whateverhisnameis) threw you with his desert flight suit?
-
TT
I have that video as a 50MB file on my PC.
It's a Lockmart pilot demoing a Danish Viper at Le Bourget. He does not to do three *flat spins*. He does two loaded, maximum deflection rolls and recovers at just under 500' AGL. That's completely different from what you're saying.
-
Finally! Thanks for chiming in .Originally posted by F16PilotMD:Interesting reading. The reason you are told not to step on the seat is that, with the 30 degree recline, part of the weight "pulls" aft on the seat cover as it "slides" down the incline. This will tear the cover at the front. If the seat were upright like the Eagle or Hog, that wouldn't happen. It happened EARLY in the Viper's life and became a "rule".
And now you know...the rest of the story..........Goodday.
-
Hoser
I thought the same thing. It would be even harder in the back of the B/D/E model jets.
-
It's an accumulative fatigue issue - at least, that's what I am being told through PM. I understand that it's a matter of a pilot's arse spreading his weight evenly accross a wide surface area of seat vs. that weight all being carried by his/her foot to a much smaller surface area. Obviously, the former is acceptable, the latter is not.Originally posted by Matt Damon:That fiberglass thing doesn't make sense. Why would a seat that is degigned to rocket itself and the pilot out of the aircraft at a huge number of Gs going to break if you step on it?
Word is that the same rule might well be coming to the Eagle world at some point in the not-too-distant future!
-
Thanks for all the responses, serious or otherwise.
One person PM'd me to say that the ACES II in the F-16 has problems with the seat plate cracking. That tallys with what's been said here and elsewhere. If true, I can now sleep easy at night.
-
Does that make Eagle Crew Chiefs the dirty slackers of the MX world, then? They're more than happy to let you stomp all over their seat cushions. Then again, maybe they wash theirs, but Viper CCs don't? That would make Viper CCs the dirty slackers of the MX world.
[ 16. March 2006, 16:33: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
This is a pretty cool test to see who does, and who does not, have a life.
-
Apologies in advance for the anal question. Hit the back button on your browser now if you have a life.
When the T-Birds pilots do their robotic dancing to the jet, up the ladder and then into the jet, they momentarily stand on the seat. My question is: on the two occasions I have flown in the back of the F-16, I've been told never to stand on the seat. Looking around the ramp it's clear it's not just because I am a fat bastard that I've been told that, because everyone else has to do the contortionist’s entry and exit from the Viper 'pit, too. So, how come the T-Birds can do it?
Incidentally, the only reason I was ever given was that the F-16's ACES II has a fibreglass seat pan. I didn't buy it because I'd have assumed the F-15's seat does too, and there are no problems with standing on that. Any ideas?
Classic Thread - CSAF congratulates CAP cadet
in General Discussion
Posted
How come her and her sister have almost asd many (medal) ribbons as Moseley?
M2
Nice call on the Girl Scout reference. Whoever wrote it needs to be taken outside and shot.