World Naval Ships Forums  
VIEW ALL OF OUR CURRENT SPECIAL OFFERS HERE!

Go Back   World Naval Ships Forums > Naval History > Other Naval Topics
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Other Naval Topics Other general naval or navy-related topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-07-2016, 22:02
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelican View Post
Just to confirm someone is reading your posts GF, albeit slowly and appriciates them. Ta.
TKS Pelican, I enjoy finding these articles which perhaps others don't either have the time or inclination to do. Perhaps some might find it a bit much, but IMO there was a distinct dearth of info on the F35B, which is for the foreseeable future the main reason for CVF's existence.

Cheers
GF
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 11-07-2016, 23:29
Mitch Hinde Mitch Hinde is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Currently living in Sunbury on Thames.
Posts: 2,247
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Hi All

Can someone please remind this poor ex sparker with limited knowledge of things aviation wise, why we need the most expensive stealth fighter.

Mitch Hinde
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 12-07-2016, 08:09
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

Can someone please remind this poor ex sparker with limited knowledge of things aviation wise, why we need the most expensive stealth fighter.

Mitch Hinde

Well if you can suggest another fixed wing aircraft, that we can fly of QE in it's current configuration let us know.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 12-07-2016, 08:12
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Hi Mitch
aren't all stealth fighters expensive?
but then I should imagine there aren't that many to choose from, but as we can see them, take photo's, how "stealthy" are they?
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 12-07-2016, 08:15
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domino View Post
Hi Mitch
aren't all stealth fighters expensive?
but then I should imagine there aren't that many to choose from, but as we can see them, take photo's, how "stealthy" are they?
I take it that you are being humorous.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 12-07-2016, 17:59
Pelican's Avatar
Pelican Pelican is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,835
Exclamation Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
Update GF - have now read thru the pdf which is very enlightening regading airflow into the fan but is not intended to explain how what I called the flap but more correctly should be door or cover. When raised the a/c could well be moving forward at least at 120 kts so the 'hinges' or mechanism used must be exceptionally robust to say the least. Equally the programme controlling it must be very robust. No doubt there is a programme that takes over if the cover comes adrift as manual intervention would not be quick enough. Any further info that you discover would be appreciated.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg f35b fan cover.jpg (19.9 KB, 9 views)
__________________
H.M.S. PELICAN - GGCV - L86 U86 B294 & F 86 - WHAT I HAVE I HOLD - 1938~1958 - 'A wonderful bird is the Pelican. Its beak can hold more than its belly can.'
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 13-07-2016, 00:34
BlackBat242's Avatar
BlackBat242 BlackBat242 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,166
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

The main lift fan intake door is rated for 0 to 120+ knots at "full open" (65° open), and 120 to 200+ knots at "transition setting" (35° open).

It has been repeatedly tested in-flight at those settings and speeds.
__________________
Only a fool fights in a burning house. __ Jon A., Sgt USMC '81-'89; CV-61 USS Ranger '85-'87
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 13-07-2016, 09:40
Pelican's Avatar
Pelican Pelican is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,835
Exclamation Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackBat242 View Post
The main lift fan intake door is rated for 0 to 120+ knots at "full open" (65° open), and 120 to 200+ knots at "transition setting" (35° open).

It has been repeatedly tested in-flight at those settings and speeds.
Yes thanks BB, picked that up in the pdf - impressive but then it needs to be.
__________________
H.M.S. PELICAN - GGCV - L86 U86 B294 & F 86 - WHAT I HAVE I HOLD - 1938~1958 - 'A wonderful bird is the Pelican. Its beak can hold more than its belly can.'
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 13-07-2016, 13:13
Mitch Hinde Mitch Hinde is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Currently living in Sunbury on Thames.
Posts: 2,247
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 13-07-2016, 14:15
Pelican's Avatar
Pelican Pelican is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,835
Exclamation Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
"What Sort of Plane Do We Need?

The uncertainty about the sorts of missions the RAF and the Navy will have to fly in the future is what makes a multirole aircraft so appealing. Compared to the US, Britain is in no position to buy a fleet of specialised aircraft – between 1990 and 2014, we reduced our number of operational fast jets by more than two thirds, with smaller numbers of Typhoons and Tornados stretching to take up the slack. Of the two, the Tornados are the pressing concern – they were introduced in 1979, and the ones we still have flying are due for retirement in 2019. If we want to keep getting involved in overseas air campaigns, we need something to take their place.

The F-35 is the only so-called ‘fifth-generation’ fighter being produced in the West. The choice, then, was either to buy into the F-35, or to look for planes similar in capability to the Typhoon. The promise that makes the F-35 such an appealing purchase (at least on paper), however, is that it can do everything: air support, bombing runs, air-to-air combat – three planes for the price of one."

From: http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/08/wha...-uk-buying-it/

ALIS: "Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) that gives F-35 Lightning II operators the ability to plan ahead, to maintain, to plan and sustain its systems over the life of the air vehicle. ALIS provides the IT backbone and capabilities to support current and future Warfighters across the U.S. and allied military services."

From: http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/products/ALIS.html

Security: "Nearly all of the promised capabilities of the F-35 rely on its sophisticated network of computer-based systems, both on the ground and in the plane itself. The sensors to locate and identify enemy targets, guidance systems to direct missiles and bombs, diagnostic tools to isolate defective parts and order spares, the pilot’s helmet-mounted display, and even the mission order packages all operate on computers and complicated software. As has been repeatedly proven over the years, systems like these are tempting targets for hackers. Pentagon officials have already acknowledged the F-35 program suffered a major breach when a foreign power, presumably China, hacked into an unclassified F-35 contractor computer network and stole massive technical data files.

But despite these risks, the Joint Program Office has refused to subject the program to the kind of cyber testing necessary to identify and fix vulnerabilities. As we previously reported, the JOTT created a two-part test plan to evaluate the program. The first, an internal assessment to comb through the system’s designs to identify potential problems, was only partially completed on isolated modules at Edwards Air Force Base. Even these limited tests revealed “significant deficiencies,” although the DOT&E report did not provide any details as to their nature."

The above is from a large article here: http://www.pogo.org/straus/issues/we...o-impress.html


Rolls Royce use a similar system for their engines. I have asked if it is connected to those on the Q.E. but no answer posted on the QEC thread yet.

Presumably the ALIS security problem will be solved eventually like all the other F35 problems?
And these: http://navaltoday.com/2016/07/13/us-...delayed-again/
__________________
H.M.S. PELICAN - GGCV - L86 U86 B294 & F 86 - WHAT I HAVE I HOLD - 1938~1958 - 'A wonderful bird is the Pelican. Its beak can hold more than its belly can.'

Last edited by Pelican : 13-07-2016 at 14:21. Reason: Correction & addition
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 13-07-2016, 22:49
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
in total agreement with you Mitch.
do these "reporting" modes have an on/off switch?

And let's not forget that it is fine having a SOTA radar system that can pick up incoming 450 miles away (subject to the curvature of the earth) but has anyone remembered that if a "ping" can travel & return 450 miles that it can be picked up 900 to 1000 miles away.
ISTR that the similar distance for the 984 was given as a negative and that "the enemy" knew when Eagle sailed and where she was at all times.
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 14-07-2016, 02:15
ASSAIL ASSAIL is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Darwin NT Australia
Posts: 1,335
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
If you want a 5th generation aircraft which maintains area denial around your fleet you need F 35.
If you want to the result obtained by Sadam Hussein's airforce during the Gulf Wars, stick with simple.
The RAAF has no doubts about this aircraft, the results proved by recent tactical exercises in the US have been outstanding with the F 35 proving vastly superior against F 16s and F 18s in a number of different scenarios.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 14-07-2016, 02:27
ASSAIL ASSAIL is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Darwin NT Australia
Posts: 1,335
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

https://theaviationist.com/2016/07/1...rs-every-time/

Maybe this will help your thoughts

There are other confidential reports which I've had access to which support and enhance this publicly released account
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 14-07-2016, 08:07
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

at the end of the day it isn't how well one aircraft does against another in simulated war games, or on paper, but how well the aircraft and crew do against another aircraft and crew in actuality.

It is a tri-partite thing, AIRCRAFT (including electronics). CREW, WEAPONS have to be in perfect balance.
one element slightly out of kilter can lead to losing.

Wasn't that what was said about the early T45's that made them most awesome warship of it's day (and IMO rightly so) but they appear to have been let down by SHIP element. And of course, as we have recently seen - there just aren't enough of them!!

And staying with the F35, after a real dogfight, if they have had the fuel to finish that is, where are they going to refuel - or do they just become an expensive stone in the sea?
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 14-07-2016, 14:48
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
Sorry but my modem died two days ago and have only just got back online.
Firstly we don't need an extremely sophisticated stealth aircraft for ops at sea. Your remark in regards to 'experimental' is rather dated and biased, so I disregarded that.

What we need is a modern next generation aircraft that is capable of operating from a carrier configured for VSTOL ops, so what other aircraft can do that ? So yes it is relevant.

Your second remark I take it that you mean CTOL or VSTOL, and not STOL or VSTOL is rather confusing. ALIS does NOT control every aspect of the aircafts ops. Perhaps you should read up on ALIS, and its development.

What concerns Australia has over ALIS is their problem, I am happy with the agreement (as far as I understand it) that the UK has with the US over this matter.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 14-07-2016, 14:56
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domino View Post
at the end of the day it isn't how well one aircraft does against another in simulated war games, or on paper, but how well the aircraft and crew do against another aircraft and crew in actuality.

It is a tri-partite thing, AIRCRAFT (including electronics). CREW, WEAPONS have to be in perfect balance.
one element slightly out of kilter can lead to losing.

Wasn't that what was said about the early T45's that made them most awesome warship of it's day (and IMO rightly so) but they appear to have been let down by SHIP element. And of course, as we have recently seen - there just aren't enough of them!!

And staying with the F35, after a real dogfight, if they have had the fuel to finish that is, where are they going to refuel - or do they just become an expensive stone in the sea?
Short answer, F35 was never designed to carry out dogfights. End of.

Comparing them with T45 is ridiculous.

In actuality the vast majority of plans go straight out the window.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 14-07-2016, 16:23
TCC TCC is offline
Commodore
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 954
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde View Post
Hi All

I am perfectly serious with my question. Why do we need an extremely sophisticated experimental stealth aircraft for operations at sea. Regrdless of whether it is STOL or VSTOL. Especially one that incorporates a flight management system,ALIS, that controls every aspect of the aircrafts operations and reports back to its manufacturer, in this case Lockheed Martin, exactly what the aircraft is doing. The Australians have already voiced concern about the system and are querying exactly what operational information is being transferred by data link to a private company?

Mitch Hinde
As someone else said, because that's all there is and B, to have the neccesary systems interface commonality with UK and US forces. All the last conflicts have been undertaken with allies and as the US has the most technology and assets (Read as Satelites) one would need to operate with their mission-based data-link systems.

Why do you need 5th Gen aircraft? Because Russia, China and other nations have developed them. And out of all the types of aircraft mission, wouldn't those over the sea depend on stealth the most? There being no hills or valleys to hide in.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 14-07-2016, 17:08
Domino Domino is offline
Lieutenant-Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Southern Spain
Posts: 382
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruntfuttock View Post
Short answer, F35 was never designed to carry out dogfights. End of.

Comparing them with T45 is ridiculous.

In actuality the vast majority of plans go straight out the window.
If you read very carefully http://www.airforce-technology.com/p...-ctol-variant/
it says
Quote:
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) or F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft.
Quote:
The F-35A will replace the USAF's F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters and will supersede A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft by 2028. It is also expected to replace F-15 fighters. It addition, the F-35A will complement the F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter.
Quote:
F-35 aircraft is designed mainly as a low-visibility aircraft with air-to-ground attack and air-to-air combat capabilities. Turning agility of the aircraft is nine times the force of gravity."]The F-35A CTOL variant of the F-35 aircraft is designed mainly as a low-visibility aircraft with air-to-ground attack and air-to-air combat capabilities. Turning agility of the aircraft is nine times the force of gravity.
And you tell the world that an aircraft with all that advertised "fighter" capability with a turning agility of 9 times the force of gravity isn't a fighter and won't take part in dogfights. Probably just sit on a cloud and throw bricks.

As I said, the T45 is an awesome warship, but has/is being let down my one of the three elements. It only takes a small "wobble" of one of the F35 elements to end up with a loss. And as the T45 is supposed to be working as part of the carrier defence along with the F35 they are supposed to be capable of working together within the Carrier Group. Or there will be a carrier and perhaps a nation that becomes a loss.

Yes in actuality the vast majority of plans go out the window - but when you have spent £billions on ships and aircraft you had better have one that works, or the flexibility to be able to be able to respond. That is called WAR.

have a good evening
__________________
Regards
Dom

take a large single malt and chill out
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 14-07-2016, 22:01
gruntfuttock gruntfuttock is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: nottingham
Posts: 1,052
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

I said the F35 wasn't designed to engage in dogfights, and it wasn't. The whole idea for its being is to engage an enemy at distance before said enemy even sees it.

If it ends up in a dogfight, it has failed to do its job. No it won't as you put it stand on a cloud, and throw bricks.

It will stand off at distance, and throw BVR missiles.

By the way its designation is a 'Strike Fighter' the definition of which is :-

"In current military parlance, a strike fighter is a multirole combat aircraft designed to operate primarily in the air-to-surface attack role while also incorporating certain performance characteristics of a fighter aircraft."

I also have not read anywhere that the F35 is replacing the F15. In fact the US is upgrading it's F15's, and is hoping to get funding to purchase more of them.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 14-07-2016, 22:23
Pelican's Avatar
Pelican Pelican is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,835
Exclamation Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

INFORMATION

The following may be or interest:
There are some updates here: https://www.f35.com/

An F35 pilot explains what it’s like to fly a 5th Gen fighter:
https://twitter.com/thef35/status/753564537702363137
__________________
H.M.S. PELICAN - GGCV - L86 U86 B294 & F 86 - WHAT I HAVE I HOLD - 1938~1958 - 'A wonderful bird is the Pelican. Its beak can hold more than its belly can.'
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 14-07-2016, 22:49
harry.gibbon's Avatar
harry.gibbon harry.gibbon is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 7,854
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelican View Post
INFORMATION

An F35 pilot explains what it’s like to fly a 5th Gen fighter:
https://twitter.com/thef35/status/753564537702363137
Thanks David, I got the gist of that except between 2.35 to 2.43 (approx) in the video, when the graphics suggested the F35 was no longer stealthy - because the plane appears to be scanning multiple air targets with onboard radar emissions.

Was my understanding correct?


Little h
__________________

GFXU - HMS Falmouth in Falmouth Bay

Last edited by harry.gibbon : 14-07-2016 at 23:06.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 14-07-2016, 23:15
ASSAIL ASSAIL is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Darwin NT Australia
Posts: 1,335
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry.gibbon View Post
Thanks David, I got the gist of that except between 2.35 to 2.43 (approx) in the video, when the graphics suggested the F35 was no longer stealthy - because the plane appears to be scanning multiple air targets with onboard radar emissions.

Was my understanding correct?


Little h
Or...using third party targeting info from multiple sources while remaining passive.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 14-07-2016, 23:47
harry.gibbon's Avatar
harry.gibbon harry.gibbon is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 7,854
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASSAIL View Post
Or...using third party targeting info from multiple sources while remaining passive.
Yep I got that possibility but the difficulty arises from the commentary versus the graphics. Earlier in the video it indicates the extensive use of Data Link info and that section was followed by a section entitled RADAR immediately after which the graphics suggests active transmissions emanating from the aircraft ... not exactly (or no longer inferring) the use of third party targeting info being fed to the aircraft.

I would have expected something like the appearance of target highlighting on the displays were it from external sources via data link(s), rather than the superimposition of 'beams' emanating from the aircraft.

Other than the above the short video was fine.

Arising from the video is the thought that; this new thread and the QEC carrier thread have an absence of any info relating to whether there is any intention to use the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) system on the QEC carriers and UK F35B's.


Little h
__________________

GFXU - HMS Falmouth in Falmouth Bay

Last edited by harry.gibbon : 15-07-2016 at 00:20.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 15-07-2016, 07:21
BlackBat242's Avatar
BlackBat242 BlackBat242 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,166
Default Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

The APG-81 radar of the F-35, like the APG-77 of the F-22A, is a "Low Probability of Intercept" (LPI) radar.

They are capable of changing the direction, power and shape of the radar beam very rapidly, so they can acquire target data, and in the meantime minimize the chance that the radar signal is detected or tracked.
__________________
Only a fool fights in a burning house. __ Jon A., Sgt USMC '81-'89; CV-61 USS Ranger '85-'87
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 15-07-2016, 09:10
Pelican's Avatar
Pelican Pelican is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,835
Exclamation Re: Lockheed Martin F35B Lightning II

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry.gibbon View Post
Thanks David, I got the gist of that except between 2.35 to 2.43 (approx) in the video, when the graphics suggested the F35 was no longer stealthy - because the plane appears to be scanning multiple air targets with onboard radar emissions.

Was my understanding correct?


Little h
Can't assist Harry. Will leave it to you experts. However, these days always at the back of my mind are P.R.? Spin? Doctoring as we used to call it. But in this case I would suggest that the video will stand up to the scrutiny of modern military pilots.
__________________
H.M.S. PELICAN - GGCV - L86 U86 B294 & F 86 - WHAT I HAVE I HOLD - 1938~1958 - 'A wonderful bird is the Pelican. Its beak can hold more than its belly can.'
Reply With Quote
Reply



Ship Search by Name : Advanced Search
Random Timeline Entry : 22nd January 1943 : HMS Loch Killin : Lt.Cdr. Stanley Darling, RANVR Assumed Command

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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
HMS Lightning and HMS Lookout TallPaul91 Royal Navy Ships and Crews 18 05-01-2018 20:41
HMS Martin G44 geekgirl101 Royal Navy Ships and Crews 5 21-10-2010 06:46
Lightning/Staunch/Victoria mossie Royal Navy Ships and Crews 0 29-07-2010 19:58
HMS Lightning jbc1 Royal Navy Ships and Crews 4 25-01-2008 22:51


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:33.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.