Quick guide to the F-35 JSF versions.

In article ,
Mike Marron wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

You keep conveniently snipping away all the planes such as the F-111,
Su-22, Su-24, B-1, Mig-27, Tornado. Why is that?

Because they all had their own problems, and the point was that
experimental and/or new aircraft *crash*. The F-111 was near-legendary
for development problems, for example. The B-1 had problems for
*years*.

One_BIG_difference between all those swing-wing aircraft
I mentioned above vis a vis your beloved tilt-rotor Osprey -- the
swing wing aircraft have been OPERATIONAL for *decades*
(you do understand how long a decade" is, no?) whereas
tilt-rotor designs such as your beloved Osprey have NOT been
operational and are still NOT operational to this day.

So what?

The *point*, that you keep missing, was that at similar points in their
development, they had problems, some as bad (or worse) then the Osprey.

Whether you realize it or not, Irby, you've
done LOST your "case" since, despite the fact that tilt-rotors
have been around since the early fifties...you have yet to
provide a single example of an OPERATIONAL tilt-rotor
military -OR- cvilian aircraft (V-22 or otherwise) in use
*anywhere.*

So your whole argument against tiltrotors is that nobody has ever
managed to build a good enough one before?

All-wing aircraft had been tested for years and years before the B-2,
but that was the first operational one. So by your argument, it never
worked, right?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

You keep conveniently snipping away all the planes such as the F-111,
Su-22, Su-24, B-1, Mig-27, Tornado. Why is that?

Because they all had their own problems, and the point was that
experimental and/or new aircraft *crash*. The F-111 was near-legendary
for development problems, for example. The B-1 had problems for
*years*.

One_BIG_difference between all those swing-wing aircraft
I mentioned above vis a vis your beloved tilt-rotor Osprey -- the
swing wing aircraft have been OPERATIONAL for *decades*
(you do understand how long a decade" is, no?) whereas
tilt-rotor designs such as your beloved Osprey have NOT been
operational and are still NOT operational to this day.


So what?

So what?

So WHAT???!!#$%!!

DOH!


The *point*, that you keep missing, was that at similar points in their
development, they had problems, some as bad (or worse) then the Osprey.

Once again, the point that YOU keep missing is that variable-geometry
aircraft have long ago managed to overcome their "development
problems" whereas tilt-rotor aircraft have NOT managed to overcome
their "development problems" in_spite_of the fact that tilt-rotor
aircraft designs have been around since the EARLY 1950'S!!!!

Beam me up Scotty!!!

In article ,
Mike Marron wrote:

Once again, the point that YOU keep missing is that variable-geometry
aircraft have long ago managed to overcome their "development
problems" whereas tilt-rotor aircraft have NOT managed to overcome
their "development problems" in_spite_of the fact that tilt-rotor
aircraft designs have been around since the EARLY 1950'S!!!!

You're really focused on the "we've never built one before, so it's
impssible" argument, aren't you?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Once again, the point that YOU keep missing is that variable-geometry
aircraft have long ago managed to overcome their "development
problems" whereas tilt-rotor aircraft have NOT managed to overcome
their "development problems" in_spite_of the fact that tilt-rotor
aircraft designs have been around since the EARLY 1950'S!!!!

You're really focused on the "we've never built one before, so it's
impssible" argument, aren't you?

Interesting you should mention that. These days I'm mostly focused on
flying (just added "glider" to my commercial/multi-engine/instrument
certificate today).

You can continue to focus on your keyboard/monitor, if you wish....

In article ,
Mike Marron wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:

You're really focused on the "we've never built one before, so it's
impssible" argument, aren't you?

Interesting you should mention that. These days I'm mostly focused on
flying (just added "glider" to my commercial/multi-engine/instrument
certificate today).

That's nice. Has nothing to do with the point, but I'm (honestly!)
happy for you.

You can continue to focus on your keyboard/monitor, if you wish....

Well, aside from the photography. And the bicycling. And the other
hobbies.

And especially not after I get that motorcycle I'm looking for (a friend
of a friend has a very nice old Moto Guzzi that I can pick up for a
song).

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Interesting you should mention that. These days I'm mostly focused on
flying (just added "glider" to my commercial/multi-engine/instrument
certificate today).

That's nice. Has nothing to do with the point, but I'm (honestly!)
happy for you.

Well you keep going off on your "bloody" tangential tirades so I
just figured "if ya' can't beat 'em..."

You can continue to focus on your keyboard/monitor, if you wish....

Well, aside from the photography. And the bicycling. And the other
hobbies.

And especially not after I get that motorcycle I'm looking for (a friend
of a friend has a very nice old Moto Guzzi that I can pick up for a
song).

Sounds like we have similiar interests (except at best, I'm just a
mediocre photographer). IIRC, you're in the Orlando area, no?
Tell ya what, if you're interested I'll fly my pterodactyl "bird of
prey" over to Orlando from Clearwater someday (or you can drive
over to Clearwater) and we can fly and shoot some pictures/video
in my trike if ya want. It would sure beat the hell outta' arguing on
Usenet as it's such a "bloody" waste of time, agree?

Feel free to call or email any time: 727-443-6951, pegasus912 at
tampabay dot rr dot com.

In article ,
Mike Marron wrote:

Sounds like we have similiar interests (except at best, I'm just a
mediocre photographer). IIRC, you're in the Orlando area, no?
Tell ya what, if you're interested I'll fly my pterodactyl "bird of
prey" over to Orlando from Clearwater someday (or you can drive
over to Clearwater) and we can fly and shoot some pictures/video
in my trike if ya want. It would sure beat the hell outta' arguing on
Usenet as it's such a "bloody" waste of time, agree?

I live about a half mile from Orlando Executive.

If I still have my medium format by then, you might get some *good* pics
out of it.

Feel free to call or email any time: 727-443-6951, pegasus912 at
tampabay dot rr dot com.

We'll see how timing works out the spring sometime...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:
Mike Marron wrote:

Sounds like we have similiar interests (except at best, I'm just a
mediocre photographer). IIRC, you're in the Orlando area, no?
Tell ya what, if you're interested I'll fly my pterodactyl "bird of
prey" over to Orlando from Clearwater someday (or you can drive
over to Clearwater) and we can fly and shoot some pictures/video
in my trike if ya want. It would sure beat the hell outta' arguing on
Usenet as it's such a "bloody" waste of time, agree?

I live about a half mile from Orlando Executive.

Orlando Exec huh? Shot many an ILS into ORL's Rwy 7 as a charter
jockey in Cessna 210's. Interesting approach because at the outer
marker you're within spitting distance of the tall buildings downtown
as you soar directly over the tops of the thousands of poor slobs
trapped in gridlock on the East-West expressway and I-4.

If I still have my medium format by then, you might get some *good*
pics out of it.

OK. I've got tons of halfway decent pics already but could always
use some *good* pics. What I'd really like is to have someone like
yourself make some cool videos that I could convert to mpegs and
share with family and friends.

Feel free to call or email any time: 727-443-6951, pegasus912 at
tampabay dot rr dot com.

We'll see how timing works out the spring sometime...

44 days and counting to Sun 'n Fun 2004....

Harry Andreas wrote:
In article . net,
"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

The 27mm has been replaced by a 25mm Gatling. And the gun pack goes
on a conformal stealthy belly pod, not in the weapon bay.

The gun stays in the right wing root for the A model.

For planes that have to use an add-on gun, it goes under the belly, not in
the weapon bay. Happy now?

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
nk.net...
John Keeney wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
news

capability (what the heck is "S/VTOL"?) to allow them to both
provide air

An olden days description of a plane that could do
Short take-offs or landings
or
Vertical take-offs or landings.

The usual abbreviation for this was the other way around--V/STOL.

Yep, usual was V/STOL or VSTOL as you say.
There was some use of S/VTOL (or SVTOL,
it *was* a long time ago) though. I have a feeling
they represented some difference but I'm at a
loss to say what it would have been unless it
was a preferred mode bias.