Military Plane discussion thread - Let’s talk Fighter/Attacker planes.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Last edited:
The Un-Clit said:
Fuck yes. The AC-130 SpookyII/Spectre etc etc. is THE badass of the 'Nam era and beyond. Plz to be adding to the list, @Cedric_Eff ! If strictly 'Nam era planes are needed, the original AC-47 Spooky might have to go in it's place, but I insist on some member of the family getting repped.
Else:jaceknife:.
Click to expand...

If I'm on the ground I want those fuckers flying over me.


Puff's first significant success occurred on the night of 23–24 December 1964. An FC-47 arrived over the Special Forces outpost at Tranh Yend in the Mekong Delta just 37 minutes after an air support request, fired 4,500 rounds of ammunition, and broke the Viet Cong attack. The FC-47 was then called to support a second outpost at Trung Hung, about 20 miles (32 km) away. The aircraft again blunted the VC attack and forced a retreat. Between 15 and 26 December, all the FC-47's 16 combat sorties were successful. On 8 February 1965, an FC-47 flying over the Bong Son area of Vietnam's Central Highlands demonstrated its capabilities in the process of blunting a Viet Cong offensive. For over four hours, it fired 20,500 rounds into a Viet Cong hilltop position, killing an estimated 300 Viet Cong troops.

The early gunship trials were so successful, the second aircraft was returned to the United States early in 1965 to provide crew training. In July 1965, Headquarters USAF ordered TAC to establish an AC-47 squadron. By November 1965, a total of five aircraft were operating with the 4th Air Commando Squadron, activated in August as the first operational unit, and by the end of 1965, a total of 26 had been converted. Training Detachment 8, 1st Air Commando Wing, was subsequently established at Forbes AFB, Kansas. In Operation Big Shoot, the 4th ACS in Vietnam grew to 20 AC-47s (16 aircraft plus four reserves for attrition).

The 4th ACS deployed to Tan Son Nhut Air Base, Vietnam, on 14 November 1965. Now using the call sign "Spooky", each of its three 7.62 mm miniguns could selectively fire either 50 or 100 rounds per second.[1] Cruising in an overhead left-hand orbit at 120 knots air speed at an altitude of 3,000 feet (910 m), the gunship could put a bullet or glowing red tracer (every fifth round) bullet into every square yard of a football field-sized target in potentially less than 10 seconds.[2] And, as long as its 45-flare and 24,000-round basic load of ammunition held out, it could do this intermittently while loitering over the target for hours.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The Hawker Hunter, one of the most elegant and beautiful aircraft ever flown.

837206


837207


837209


Those blisters on the bottom were used to hold spent machine gun shells. These were known as Sabrinas after a well-endowed British pin-up girl of the time.
837211
 
EurocopterTigre said:
Why can't Illyushin make a jet attack aircraft that doesn't look exceptional?
View attachment 837040
View attachment 837041


The F-5 is way more underappreciated, at least the F-16 had extensive export sales.
Click to expand...
The F16 wasn't supposed to be allowed for export sales. The F5's progeny, the F20 was made top be the plane sold to interested countries with a less powerful radar and avionics package than the F16 but the same engine. Then Congress got pressured by General Dynamics and Israel hard to be allowed for export with a different radar and the F20 died overnight, since the F16A with a less powerful radar cost the same while being a much better aircraft across the board
 
No 50's pickup truck A-6 either. Just because they were finally retired doesn't mean they're dead.
 
No F-15 Strike Eagle? I could go on and on about it's service record but it's also the subject of a a classic video game and a giant Japanese robot that transforms into one (ok its the F-15A but still).

839036
 
Last edited:
Here's a question for the knowledgeable. Do modern, extremely expensive fighters represent more a fear of pilot casualties than an actual attempt at efficiency in war? I mean, are we grossly over valuing pilot lives? Couldn't we build dozens of mediocre jets for the cost of one F35?
 
Underestimated Nutria said:
Here's a question for the knowledgeable. Do modern, extremely expensive fighters represent more a fear of pilot casualties than an actual attempt at efficiency in war? I mean, are we grossly over valuing pilot lives? Couldn't we build dozens of mediocre jets for the cost of one F35?
Click to expand...

It takes a long time and great expense to train a pilot, and they’re not quickly or easily replaceable.

In 1941 Japan’s naval pilots were the best trained pilots in the world. By 1944 pretty much all of them were dead, and the navy could’t replace them fast enough since the Japanese pilot training program was such a long and rigorous process (pilots were considered not combat worthy until they received a year of aviation training after they were assigned to a fleet squadron. So by the last 2 years of the war the Japs were so desperate for pilots they rushed young aviation recruits through with minimal training and flight time. Which led to air battles like the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot.
 
Underestimated Nutria said:
Here's a question for the knowledgeable. Do modern, extremely expensive fighters represent more a fear of pilot casualties than an actual attempt at efficiency in war? I mean, are we grossly over valuing pilot lives? Couldn't we build dozens of mediocre jets for the cost of one F35?
Click to expand...

Mediocre jets would die in droves before ever seeing their objectives and targets. Modern SAM and AAA systems are meat grinders waiting to happen against anyone and anything that is well prepared and equipped to survive them. Pilots need to be able to "think" the airplane at the same time they're flying it and fighting in it.

A 3 minute BFM dogfight in a training environment is exhausting. I've ran marathons, swam 3 miles in choppy ocean, put a roof on in the desert sun and chased my toddler for a full day before carrying him about 2 and a half hours at Disneyland. All of those events felt comparable to doing 2 quick, but balls out engagements in a T45 once after the other.

It's the physical demands of the G forces and constantly moving your head and neck to see the enemy, the strain of your eyes and abdominals as you try to keep blood in your dome, the poorly regulated body temps you get in a glass bubble that's 25k ft above the ground and the inevitable need to piss you feel after a few moments of the g suit squeezing your stomach and thighs.

Then there's the mental math you're doing about fuel, performance at speed and angle of attack all while wondering which tactic you're going to need to attempt based on where you want to try and force the other guy and still not run in to him.

Then throw in combat stress, the fact that the pilot needs to win this fight abs press on to a target and maintain radio communications with everyone else that's going to be excitedly yelling in his ear while all of this happens around him to try and paint a better picture of tactical awareness.

Good pilots lives aren't overvalued, they're completely worth every cent invested in them to make sure they can make 16 tons of steel and lead as deadly to the enemy as they can possibly be.
 
The F35 lack of dog fight ability I feel is symptomatic of the wests general decline. We're fat, we're lazy, we're building state of the art money suckholes that can't compete with Russian jets for half the price and we're race mixing.

Our greatest strength, our minds and our innovation has been lost.
 
Underestimated Nutria said:
Here's a question for the knowledgeable. Do modern, extremely expensive fighters represent more a fear of pilot casualties than an actual attempt at efficiency in war? I mean, are we grossly over valuing pilot lives? Couldn't we build dozens of mediocre jets for the cost of one F35?
Click to expand...
No, because of opportunity cost. Purely for the sake of argument(not a soldier lol) if you have a mission and your carrier/airbase has room, resources, and manpower to maintain however many planes, do you want those valuable spaces and assets taken up by less capable planes, or would you want each one to be the best possible plane you can obtain?
 
Mister Qwerty said:
In 1941 Japan’s naval pilots were the best trained pilots in the world. By 1944 pretty much all of them were dead, and the navy could’t replace them fast enough since the Japanese pilot training program was such a long and rigorous process (pilots were considered not combat worthy until they received a year of aviation training after they were assigned to a fleet squadron. So by the last 2 years of the war the Japs were so desperate for pilots they rushed young aviation recruits through with minimal training and flight time. Which led to air battles like the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot.
Click to expand...
You forgot to include how crippled the Japanese were. Yes, their pilots used kamikaze tactics; but they were going through an shortage of resources, delays in aircraft production, and more importantly, excluding self-sealing fuel tanks and armor for their planes.
 
@Cedric_Eff , I can't change my vote. Not sure how much control you have over the poll, but if you can please change my vote from the F-111 to the AC-47 Spooky. Thanks, fam!
 
Love the rough beauty of the early jets. The De Havilland Vampire, used by the good guys in the Rhodesian Bush War..
840015

and the Saab Tunnan, as used by the bad guys (Swedes) in the Congo.
840027

The three British V-Bombers, which came a little later (roughly contemperous with early B-52s), are also very special.
840030

Painted in the later low level camouflage, they remind me of the cover art on science fiction magazines from that time period. The less ambitious 'Valiant' from the three was the only one to go to war until the Falklands Liberation in 1982, when a series of extremely long range raids conducted by single Vulcan bombers supported by upwards of ten Victor tankers refuelling each other convinced the Argentinian government of the time to send their fighter forces back to defend the homeland.
840038

The only Murrican bomber that comes close is the XB-70. Not put into production. Very sad!
840056
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom