Rambler 1-1

That really sucks. It's too bad that as technology advances in leaps and bounds, reliability seems to take a lower priority. Kudos on keeping the dinosaur for emergencies, though.

I took a basic marksmanship class in army cadets a while back, and I think you can take that same course in the Air Cadets summer program if you apply for it. Most people go for the PERT, advanced drill or powered airframe basics courses first though, and by the time you've done those, you can usually apply for glider flight training. It was a fun course as I recall though, despite the ancient bolt-action 22s we used.

well we get the basic cadet program, where you learn drill and procedure in addition to everything you need to know about airplanes, then you can apply for the glider course when you're 16. If you pass that, you apply for the powered airframe course on 172s, which is a year of ground school followed by a summer of flying. Then you get launched straight into ROTC and your private pilot's liscense simultaniously. The nice thing is that the government pays for the courses, but they are very selective of who they take.

damn!

Yes, but they don't let you near airplanes with engines untill you're 18. Next year I get to take a glider course... woohoo

Awesome! I wish the Canadian forces would let me do that...

yeah, before google took over youtube and enforced the 10-minute video length rule, I used to watch the whole thing all the time. Here's another good one- LINK

That old Tomcat tribute video on youtube, the 10-minute one, with the Who's "Baba O'Riley". It just seems to fit. and that video that somebody posted here a while ago with either Eagles or Mirages, and the song was Pink Floyd's "Learning to Fly".

Pfft. BVR missiles... REAL pilots use guns. Or missiles with 20% reliability (AIM-9B). Besides, it's much more fun to get into a holy hairball with MiGs and Tomcats or Eagles or Hornets or what-have-you, rather then just getting a lock and killing your targets before you even see them. That's why the AIM-120 isn't used much. (*ducks and runs from things thrown by other forum members*)

My current project: Using parts from a broken joystick (my beloved Logitech Attack 3, which my kid brother killed last winter), I have planned and drawn out designs for a cessna-style control column. In short, I'm using one 300-degree rotation servo (or sensor or actuator - whatever you call it) for roll and another, albeit geared-down, for pitch. The difficult part has been working out what size a reduction gear I will need for the pitch and finding one that will work, but aside from that, my design is foolproof. The box that I have positioned all the innards in will be fairly large, to allow room for the important bits and to give me some room for modification. I also plan on mounting the buttons previously found all over the stick on the front of the box to use for flaps, ignition and what not. As soon as I have gone beyond the paper-bound scale drawings, I'll be sure to take pictures of my progress. Hopefully I'll be able to either brag about the finished project in the next couple weeks, or I'll have gained some valuable experience and be the first person to tell you how computer controls are best left to the professionals. Win-win situation, right? right?

Congratulations! Good luck with fatherhood, try to enjoy it while you can!

I would. I'd buy a Lockheed car in a second too, assuming I could afford it. But neither love nor money could make me buy a car built by a division of airbus. I don't fancy an autothrottle, self-releasing parking brake or a steering system that falls off while driving, to name a few.

Maybe it wasn't time for a dedicated air to air fighter that advanced. There haven't been any real air to air battles in some time that a modern F-16 or F-15 with a well-trained pilot couldn't handle, but air to ground fighting is always in need of the latest technology. Perhaps it would have been a better idea for Lockheed to apply the air to air capabilities and technology from the F-22 into a variant of the F-35. That would provide the U.S.A with a compitent aircraft that is relatively affordable and flexible, and the commonalities between it and the strike variants would make spares avaliability and maintenance easier. I'm still against the cancelation of the F-22, but maybe there is a better, more reasonable way to provide a new fighter.

UCAVs are good for Recon, CAS and other relatively basic missions where a human life would be put in jeopardy. But for more complex missions like interceptions, CAPs, and even some strategic strikes, it would be prudent to keep a human in the cockpit, even just as a failsafe. Perhaps one way we will have unmanned strike planes and bombers covered by manned fighters...? EDIT: that being said, let it be known that I still vote for manned planes. If only because the job of "Military Jet Pilot" is just so damn awesome.

I was in a mosquito once with my wingie in a spitfire V (Photo shoot, or an attempt at one at least...) and we spotted some Heinkels. He did a big wing-over right into me, and I had to limp back to base, only to bail out.

Holy sh!t! A couple dozen people I know are moon landing deniers, and their "leader" has used those EXACT WORDS ("Coward and liar") to describe the astronauts. to make it even funnier, on a seperate occasion, I punched that kid in the same manner as Buzz there did.

on Abbey Road?

You're fired. I have to say Mad Max. I love the way that the whole movie just builds up to the scenes with the Interceptor. Smokey and the Bandit and Bullitt are close seconds. And I LOVED the original Italian Job.

Massive high-five, Killerbee. Nice to see somebody representing the Canucks!

Subway. It's generally faster then most places (except Wendy's) and I love those giant subs with everything on them. And I don't even have to clean up the mess that I would make if I made one myself! We don't even have Jack in the Box, whatever that is. Although I remeber a place called "Fatburger" from when I went to Las Vegas. Didn't eat there, though... And I've never been to Burger King either

Many Happy Returns! Cheers!

definetly. I'm starting to think that list is all the reasons why I love airplanes and mototcycles so much...

Naw, that's just a submarine truck launching it's land trailer. Duh. Or they built the boat ramp backwards...

Let us not forget the Canadair (General Dynamics) CL-84 Dynavert. It was an early contendor in the tilt-rotor race and even preformed trials on the USS Guam in 1971. It was too small to be taken seriously as a cargo plane though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CL-84 @ Bill, yeah, the An-70 looks like the type of plane to have. Those counter-rotating propfans look like real maintenance buggers, but a nice comprimise between turboprops and jets, especially for a STOL transport.

love that terrain...