Really Fast Aeroplanes!

Technology
41

Pretty sure the B-2s are still in use, but you’re not going to see them brought out for combat for anything less than a nuclear war. Several reasons, though I’m not looking anything up to confirm all this:

Don’t give anyone the opportunity to prove they can shoot it down.

The whole program for them is primarily built around the fact we could keep them in the sky for a very long time with refueling, each packing 8 nuclear bombs. There’s the Whitman base and at least one “secret” base for them IIRC, and they can move them closer to a combat location, but they’re really too slow for a sudden engagement. Their conventional payload of 8 2000 lb bombs is kinda not that incredibly useful.

Oddly Russia and China spend a lot of time bragging about their land vs sea weapons as deterrents, but I would still think the B-2s represent a major “currently uncountered” threat? I think they’re still in the playbook for the US even if people are starting to be able to shoot down missiles.

1 Like
42

B-2s are still in use and have been used for quite a few conventional bombing runs in the US’s most recent wars. Their most recent publicly known bombing run was in January 2017 against some ISIS targets in Syria.

That said, Northrop-Grumman has already accepted the contract to build its effective replacement, the B-21 Raider.

1 Like
43

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKjmHXOVo04

1 Like
44

Hornet time

45

So apparently there are rumors that the USAF has dug the F-117 Nighthawk, the original stealth fighter (though technically it’s a tactical bomber, not a fighter), out of mothballs for some Middle Eastern bombing runs:

As for the reasons why they may have dug it out:

  • It can still deliver laser-guided munitions, whereas most of our other aircraft in service are limited to GPS-guided munitions. While GPS-guidance is better in most cases than laser-guidance, laser-guidance has one big advantage: it’s capable of hitting moving targets.
  • Its stealth tech is less advanced than newer stuff, so there is less fear of secrets getting into enemy hands than with the newer craft like the F-22. In fact, some have been shot down in the past and already fallen into enemy hands anyway.
  • It still has a crazy low infra-red signature due to its specially designed exhaust ports. While the B-2 also is designed for low infra-red, the F-22, F-35, etc., are not in exchange for the ability to go supersonic. The F-117 is therefore limited to subsonic flight, but subsonic is fine for the types of missions it’s designed for. In fact, rumor has it that the Air Force has a couple non-combat-ready ones still flying around to test next generation infra-red sensors due to its low signature.
1 Like
46

That sounds pretty neat. I wonder a bit about this recent news in that context, though I know nothing:

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/03/18/norway-a64852

1 Like
47

Bikenights is now Jetnights:

jn
jn1250×834 336 KB

1 Like
48

image

2 Likes
49

I see your defacto example of a really fast aeroplane is the Blue Angels. Very cool pilots and unit. Their color scheme, blue and yellow. ick.

The Canadians beat ya’ll here. The Snowbirds just look nicer. And they use our national colours to boot.

1 Like
50

Do you mean… aboot?

51

Red Arrows or gtfo

1200px-RAF_Red_Arrows_-_Rhyl_Air_Show.jpg1200×917 123 KB

2 Likes
52

43%20PM
43%20PM1476×986 294 KB

2 Likes
53

Ugly color scheme or not, that’s really fucking cool.

54

1 Like
55

Can’t let the Navy (or you furriners) have all the fun…

maxresdefault
maxresdefault1280×720 62.6 KB

56

I will add to this by informing you all about this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYGFczNMAMk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjFZe_jCKkQ

57

Virtual Flying time

58

I wonder how close they actually are. I can’t find EXIF data for that photo, but this similar one does have EXIF data attached:
Imgur

Let’s estimate it. I assume the planes are perfectly parallel to each other.
Here are the numbers we care about:
Focal length = 300mm
Camera sensor = Nikon D750

From that:
D750 pixel pitch = 5.9 microns = .0059mm

Per navy.mil, a C/D model is 56 feet long = 17,069mm.

What angle do you think they are flying relative to the camera? Without a straight-on shot this is hard to guess. Based on the wing angles 30° from perpendicular looks like a conservative estimate. cos(30°) = .866.

.866 * 17,069mm = 14,781mm

Measuring from tip of the nose to back end of the exhaust nozzles, I get 2,725px. Now we have some similar triangles to calculate. The camera gives us plane_length / distance_to_plane = plane_size_on_sensor / focal_length, or

14,781mm / distance_near = (2,725px * .0059mm/px) / 300mm

Solving for distance to the nearest plane gives 275,807mm, or 905 feet.

So how far is the farthest plane then? Nose to exhaust I measure at 2,407px. That gives us

2,407 / 905 = 2,725 / distance_far

Solving for distance to the far plane gives 1,025 feet, or 120 feet apart. Cut into thirds, that gives 40 feet center to center between each plane. Their wingspans are 45 feet tip to tip, so 22.5 centerline to wingtip. If they were in a line abreast they could touch wings. With how much they are staggered I think they’re not really in danger of that. Still pretty close!

3 Likes
59

Fun fact about the Blue Angels (and probably the Thunderbirds as well, though I haven’t confirmed this). The F/A-18s flown by the Blue Angels are literally the oldest ones in the Navy’s inventory. A side-effect of this is that they require some of the most maintenance due to their age and wear-and-tear. However, for obvious reasons, the Navy does like to keep its newer jets (not just models, but age of the individual airframes themselves) available for combat duty.

60

IIRC their C-130T is also fairly old.

TA3OA5WQXJCYNPDAACMKLIJ3E4
TA3OA5WQXJCYNPDAACMKLIJ3E41200×739 128 KB

1 Like