A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old May 4th 07, 09:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Paul J. Adam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

In message , Vince
writes
Jack Linthicum wrote:
Dumb, thinking something obvious when it wasn't. Lots of books
published after the author dies.


I can't find Jackson as anything


I've got a very good work called "Air War over Korea" by a Robert
Jackson, though I picked it up second-hand in a sale in Chichester town
hall (and it's at work so I can't give more details instantly) No idea
whether it was published before or after his death, or indeed whether
the author has died yet or not (hope not, it was a good book)

--
The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its
warriors, will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done
by fools.
-Thucydides


Paul J. Adam - mainbox{at}jrwlynch[dot]demon(dot)codotuk
  #182  
Old May 4th 07, 09:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Jack Linthicum
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 301
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

On May 4, 4:32 pm, "Paul J. Adam" wrote:
In message , Vince
writes

Jack Linthicum wrote:
Dumb, thinking something obvious when it wasn't. Lots of books
published after the author dies.


I can't find Jackson as anything


I've got a very good work called "Air War over Korea" by a Robert
Jackson, though I picked it up second-hand in a sale in Chichester town
hall (and it's at work so I can't give more details instantly) No idea
whether it was published before or after his death, or indeed whether
the author has died yet or not (hope not, it was a good book)

--
The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its
warriors, will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done
by fools.
-Thucydides

Paul J. Adam - mainbox{at}jrwlynch[dot]demon(dot)codotuk


The reference is in High Cold War: Strategic Reconnaissance and the
Electronic Intelligence War , Haynes, 1998

  #183  
Old May 5th 07, 05:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Tankfixer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

In article ,
mumbled
Tankfixer wrote:
In article ,
mumbled
TMOliver wrote:
"Vince" wrote ...

Spies get shot at all the time
Doesn't make it a "battlefield"
they were CIA flights

I guess they forgot to tell you that those VFP-62 pilots were in Navy flight
suits flying USNavy a/c - big bright stars and all - out of NAS Key West,
JAX or off CVA decks.

TMO


the U-2 flights were cia


Yes, but did they take the photo's of the SA-2 sites from under 500 feet
and in excess of 700 mph ?

No, they didn't


that is correct, but not the point of the discussion


It was in a previous part about the low level flights by both USAF
RF-101 and USN RF-8


the Military is much better equipped and focused on battlefield
reconnaissance than the CIA

The U-2 was overwhelmingly a CIA project at that time.
Part of the reason was that CIA missions violated the domestic or
municipal law of the countries we were overflying. A U-2 pilot on an
overflight was a spy and could be shot quite legally. No one could be
"ordered" on such a mission.

The low level flights were different. They were clearly belligerent
acts by the US armed forces. As an act of war, anyone shot down was a
POW.

Vince




--
--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
  #184  
Old July 6th 07, 03:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Richard Casady
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 47
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

On 3 May 2007 08:25:08 -0700, Jack Linthicum
wrote:

On May 3, 10:55 am, "TMOliver" wrote:
"Daryl Hunt" wrote ...


A quick and logical explanation for the death of the P-38, P-4 and P-5
was the birth of the U-2. Hardly likely that two such systems,
especially with the U-2's superior altitude performance, would co-
exist.


If you double the altitude you have to double the size of the lens[s]
to maintain the same resolution in the image. Low is more detailed.

Casady


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
US aviation hero receives RP recognition [email protected] General Aviation 0 November 30th 06 02:14 AM
"Going for the Visual" O. Sami Saydjari Instrument Flight Rules 101 May 18th 04 05:08 AM
Face-recognition on UAV's Eric Moore Military Aviation 3 April 15th 04 03:18 PM
Visual Appr. Stuart King Instrument Flight Rules 15 September 17th 03 08:36 PM
Qn: Casein Glue recognition Vassilios Mazis Soaring 0 August 20th 03 10:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.