Article- Navalizing The Raptor

[XP67_Moonbat]

http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/251/

 

[sferrin]

Airpower Australia. :

 

[Abraham Gubler]

If you ever needed an excuse not to trust the ‘analysis’ of Air Power Australia their proposal to convert the nose gear bay doors to lifting surfaces on the F-22 is all you need… I wonder how well stressed this non load bearing area of the aircraft is to hanging 2-4 tonnes from it!

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

kinda odd seeing something hanging in the nose :-\

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Wasn't the variable sweep wing configuration of the Lockheed NATF proposal the only realistic possibility of a navalized version of Lockheed's ATF? I would love to see some sort of modern day NATF type aircraft, but clearly it would take more than this.

But while were looking at this "option", lets just have Northrop produce the F-23A with a tailhook slapped onto it instead.

 

[flateric]

Airpower Australia. :

...going from analysis to stavattysis

 

[Stargazer]

I found the comparison between the navalized F-22 and the F-14D quite interesting...

Size Comparison of F/A-22N Sea Raptor and F-14A Tomcat (NASA/C. Kopp)

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Well I thought we needed a good laugh.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Airpower Australia. :

...going from analysis to stavattysis

LOL

 

[Just call me Ray]

I found the comparison between the navalized F-22 and the F-14D quite interesting...

Yes, it means that Carlo's expertise in aeronautics is about on par with all the fanboys I have to argue with on the RPG sites :

...which would explain quite a bit (why he has so many fanboys, for starters)

 

[SOC]

Yes, it means that Carlo's expertise in aeronautics is about on par with all the fanboys I have to argue with on the RPG sites :

...which would explain quite a bit (why he has so many fanboys, for starters)

Except he didn't write this:

Authors: WGCDR Chris Mills, AM, BSc, MSc(AFIT), RAAF (Retd) and Peter Goon, BEng (Mech), FTE (USNTPS)

 

[sferrin]

Yes, it means that Carlo's expertise in aeronautics is about on par with all the fanboys I have to argue with on the RPG sites :

...which would explain quite a bit (why he has so many fanboys, for starters)

Except he didn't write this:

Authors: WGCDR Chris Mills, AM, BSc, MSc(AFIT), RAAF (Retd) and Peter Goon, BEng (Mech), FTE (USNTPS)

Titles don't always equate to valuable insight. Sprey and Riccioni come to mind. MacNamara. . .

 

[SOC]

You're right, of course, but the point is that you can't just dismiss it because you think it was written by someone who only provided the artwork.

 

[sferrin]

You're right, of course, but the point is that you can't just dismiss it because you think it was written by someone who only provided the artwork.

True, and Airpower Australia has a lot of interesting information. Anymore though Carlo Kopp seems so obsessed with the F-22 that it's hard to take seriously anything that group says (or posts on their site) on the F-22 or F-35 (F-35 because if it dies then, you know, Australia will get F-22s- or so he thinks.) In this case, while it wasn't Kopp that said it, he does have an agenda (as do others on both sides of the arguement).

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

regardless of the author, matter should be taken objectively imho

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Yes, it means that Carlo's expertise in aeronautics is about on par with all the fanboys I have to argue with on the RPG sites :

...which would explain quite a bit (why he has so many fanboys, for starters)

Having worked with Dr Kopp before I can assure you while he is as much an aerospace enthusiast as anyone on this forum he is not a ‘fanboy’ and is a competent radio engineer. Also his colleague at APA and the real leader of its efforts (despite the graphics copyrights) Peter Goon is a legit aviation engineer (designed a bomb bay luggage rack that while very popular with RAAF P-3 crews is far from noteworthy in the history of aersoapce). While both of them and Wg.Cdr. Chris Mills (Ret) (only qualified on ‘state of the art’ Mirage III) are very far from the Robert Wilson-Watts, Kelly Johnsons, William Boyds that they may think they are they are not amateur fanboys. Of course whatever claim to professionalism they may have has been shredded by their establishment of a cultic approach to air power analysis.

Perhaps the best analogy to describe these people and their efforts is the John Malkovich character in the Coen Brothers film ‘Burn After Reading’. This self important blow hard is denied promotion in the CIA and then declares he will write an expose book about his career. When finding out about this the CIA director asks what access he had; “only level three, who cares!”, and the only people interested in his potential revelations are a couple of retards from his gym… and it all ends badly for them.

As to their claims that everyone who disagrees with them and the entire professional aerospace community is involved in a giant conspiracy, well… Everyone with common sense should know what this means.

 

[Stargazer]

regardless of the author, matter should be taken objectively imho

Hmmm... I wouldn't quite agree with this myself. Some writers are known for their capacity to go beyond the factual aspect of things and make up stuff as they go along... others are known all over for their serious approach and accuracy... Knowing who writes an article may cause you to be biased about it, but I see it as a form of critical assessment... you need to read some authors with a pinch of salt.

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

while I'm quite aware of the way they write articles and resorting to straw man arguments, you wouldn't know if you'll eventually see some useful information

 

[GTX]

while I'm quite aware of the way they write articles and resorting to straw man arguments, you wouldn't know if you'll eventually see some useful information

If anything their writing has become stupider and stupider.

Greg