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
  #21  
Old April 19th 07, 01:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 72
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION



Gordon wrote:
The man that built it donated it to the San Diego Aerospace Museum in
approximately 1982 -- I have a photo of myself with it in September
1983 in the library of the museum.

Now that's interesting, as the movie probably dated from the late 70's.
Did they film a porn movie at his house?
It was obviously the one from the movie; it was about three feet in
length, silver, and of the early MiG-21F type.
It was mounted flat on the wall, topside outwards IIRC.

v/r
Gordon

Seka? Did you really just invoke the name of Seka?? You are talking
to a fan of KEISHA, a *real* woman!


Aunt Peg. You can tell she's really enjoying it all.

Pat
  #22  
Old April 21st 07, 05:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Tankfixer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

In article .com,
mumbled
The F-14, F-15 MiG-29 and Su-27 series all look a LOT alike in motion
to most people. MiG-21 and the F-4 look virtually identical in
flight.


The Mig21 and the F4 look almost identical in flight ?
I'm sure that is a suprise to any number of USAF and USN fighter pilots.


OPEN THIS FILE AT HOME, NOT AT WORK!!!


Why not at work ?


MIKE

from Secrecy News
www.fas.org

VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION (FOUO)

You do know what FOUO means ?


See "Visual Aircraft
Recognition," U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-01.80, January 2006 (413


I guess I should put my 1983 copy up for historical purposes


--
--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
  #23  
Old April 21st 07, 06:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
DDAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

---------
In article et, Tankfixer
wrote:

from Secrecy News www.fas.org

VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION (FOUO)

You do know what FOUO means ?


See "Visual Aircraft
Recognition," U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-01.80, January 2006 (413


I guess I should put my 1983 copy up for historical purposes


In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide concerning the
dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide needlessly
restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being accurate.



D
  #24  
Old April 22nd 07, 02:21 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Tankfixer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

In article .net,
mumbled
---------
In article et, Tankfixer
wrote:

from Secrecy News
www.fas.org

VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION (FOUO)

You do know what FOUO means ?


See "Visual Aircraft
Recognition," U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-01.80, January 2006 (413


I guess I should put my 1983 copy up for historical purposes


In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide concerning the
dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide needlessly
restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being accurate.



Needlessly restricted ?
That's odd as it can be ordered by any unit with a publications account
with USAPA


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
  #25  
Old April 22nd 07, 05:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
DDAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

----------
In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:

In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide concerning the
dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide needlessly
restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being accurate.



Needlessly restricted ?
That's odd as it can be ordered by any unit with a publications account
with USAPA


It was at least classified FOUO, possibly secret. You can look up the post
at www.fas.org and see their Secrecy and Government Bulletin.




D
  #26  
Old April 22nd 07, 06:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Fred J. McCall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 107
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

"DDAY" wrote:

:----------
:In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:
:
: In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide concerning the
: dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide needlessly
: restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being accurate.
:
:
: Needlessly restricted ?
: That's odd as it can be ordered by any unit with a publications account
: with USAPA
:
:It was at least classified FOUO,

FOUO isn't a classification.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
  #27  
Old April 22nd 07, 09:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Tankfixer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

In article . net,
mumbled
----------
In article . net, Tankfixer
wrote:

In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide concerning the
dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide needlessly
restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being accurate.



Needlessly restricted ?
That's odd as it can be ordered by any unit with a publications account
with USAPA


It was at least classified FOUO, possibly secret. You can look up the post
at
www.fas.org and see their Secrecy and Government Bulletin.

It is FOUO.
If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

You can't request classified publications from USAPA.
While FAS does at time do a pretty good job they are prone to hype
things.



--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
  #28  
Old April 23rd 07, 12:41 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Daryl Hunt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION


"Tankfixer" wrote in message
ink.net...
In article . net,
mumbled
----------
In article . net,

Tankfixer
wrote:

In a follow-up, FAS noted that there are errors in the guide

concerning the
dimensions of US aircraft. Not only was the recognition guide

needlessly
restricted, but that restriction may have prevented it from being

accurate.


Needlessly restricted ?
That's odd as it can be ordered by any unit with a publications

account
with USAPA


It was at least classified FOUO, possibly secret. You can look up the

post
at
www.fas.org and see their Secrecy and Government Bulletin.

It is FOUO.
If it were classified secret FAS would have been closed for publishing
it to the web.

You can't request classified publications from USAPA.
While FAS does at time do a pretty good job they are prone to hype
things.


The original debate was about AC Recognition. Now, you don't know a damned
thing about that so you try to move it away into your area of expertise;
trolling on a non related subject.

The fact is, you would be the first to bag a F-4 mistaking it for a Mig-21
while the AF, Navy, Marine and Army Flyers will be the last to make that
mistake. But those mistakes were made regardless. So you think it's easy?
Don't volunteer for AC Spotter for our side. You will do us better to go
over to the other side and help them.



  #29  
Old April 23rd 07, 04:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Flashnews
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

Or there were those who were never out of burner having been way to
afraid or smart to slow down -----






"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:14:56 -0700, Bill Shatzer
wrote:

Mike wrote:
The F-14, F-15 MiG-29 and Su-27 series all look a LOT alike in
motion
to most people. MiG-21 and the F-4 look virtually identical in
flight.


Nah, the F-4 is the one trailing copious amounts of smoke.

Cheers,


Believe it or not, that was a huge advantage for us in SEA. It was a
quick clue whether or not a bogie was friendly. When you've got
numerical superiority you don't mind being visible and gaining a
little protection from an over-eager shooter.

But, the smoke pretty much went away from the F-4 fleet around 1980 as
I recall. The upgraded combustion section of the J-79 came around the
same time as the wrap-around camo pattern.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com



  #30  
Old April 23rd 07, 01:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,us.military.army,sci.military.naval,rec.aviation.military.naval
Ed Rasimus[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default VISUAL AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:23:40 GMT, "Flashnews"
wrote:

Or there were those who were never out of burner having been way to
afraid or smart to slow down -----


Reheat was a good way to kill the smoke signature, but consumption,
even in min burner was way too high to give adequate endurance for the
NVN mission. And, there's always the problem that if you are running
around in reheat the rest of the formation is either way behind or way
ahead. The wingman can't do it consistently and stay with the leader,
the leader can't do it and keep his wingmen.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com
 




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 05:38 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.