The end of the Top Gun Era

Originally posted by stumason
We're supposed to learn metric According to Europe), but for some reason we still all learn Imperial too. No wonder we're so confused when they demand we buy our bananas in kilos......

I'm have european and American so I can understand both systems(although it is confusing as hell).

And since I'm obsessed with a game that uses the metric system, it tends to help.

Anyways, the problems are that there are two different systems, and that divides the world even more, this should all be unified under one universal language, one universal system.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by DRAGON27

Originally posted by stgeorge
there is a large lathe,on a large US ship. It just sits there,the old timers say as ballast.It was never used. This is the USS Enterprise I believe.
It is too big to remove.Some say the ship was built around it in the yard.
Why? Who knows. But a lathe even can concievably create a spark or flame and...what does the machinist or millwright do when there is nothing to make? Much too valuable in the ship yards.
They also said the hull interiour looks like a "patchwork quilt" as plates are welded on as it corrodes or it strikes something.
Indeed a breech was created when it ran into a walrus,and this was in the North Atlantic.Don't ask what it was doing there...

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]

you are full of @%&$. from your statement im sure you have not been on the USS Enterprise for any other Navy ship.
well maybe one thats in the dead fleet in the James River.

you dont know that the hull of a CVN has to take the impact of 5 torpedos
to protect the reactor's (thats 2) or in the Enterprise's case 8 reactors.
what was the Enterprise doing in the atlantic. its not do do for a overhull till 2008

[edit on 4-9-2004 by DRAGON27]

The goal of modern anti-ship torpedoes isn't to hit the hull, but to detonate underneath the ship making a gigantic cavity of air under the ship's hull. Ship's are not designed to support their entire weight at the stern and the bow, so the ship essentially cracks in half for a split second.

If a supercarrier takes a strong explosion to its rotors and the driveshaft and tumblers are damaged, that's a way easier way to put it out of action than sinking it. I've never seen a carrier launching jets without being underway. I'm not sure it's safe to do it as the carrier can't point itself into the wind.

Originally posted by taibunsuu

Originally posted by DRAGON27

Originally posted by stgeorge
there is a large lathe,on a large US ship. It just sits there,the old timers say as ballast.It was never used. This is the USS Enterprise I believe.
It is too big to remove.Some say the ship was built around it in the yard.
Why? Who knows. But a lathe even can concievably create a spark or flame and...what does the machinist or millwright do when there is nothing to make? Much too valuable in the ship yards.
They also said the hull interiour looks like a "patchwork quilt" as plates are welded on as it corrodes or it strikes something.
Indeed a breech was created when it ran into a walrus,and this was in the North Atlantic.Don't ask what it was doing there...

[edit on 27-8-2004 by stgeorge]

you are full of @%&$. from your statement im sure you have not been on the USS Enterprise for any other Navy ship.
well maybe one thats in the dead fleet in the James River.

you dont know that the hull of a CVN has to take the impact of 5 torpedos
to protect the reactor's (thats 2) or in the Enterprise's case 8 reactors.
what was the Enterprise doing in the atlantic. its not do do for a overhull till 2008

[edit on 4-9-2004 by DRAGON27]

The goal of modern anti-ship torpedoes isn't to hit the hull, but to detonate underneath the ship making a gigantic cavity of air under the ship's hull. Ship's are not designed to support their entire weight at the stern and the bow, so the ship essentially cracks in half for a split second.

If a supercarrier takes a strong explosion to its rotors and the driveshaft and tumblers are damaged, that's a way easier way to put it out of action than sinking it. I've never seen a carrier launching jets without being underway. I'm not sure it's safe to do it as the carrier can't point itself into the wind.

i was replying to stgeogre about the condetion of the Enterprise because I worked on her when she was in for overhull at Newport News Shipyard.
i not saying your wrong or she is imune to attack because shes not. you could put her on the bottom with a dumb bomb in the right place.

i see.

yeah sailors who work on ships usually have much more realistic understanding of how they can sink than people who just see them on tv.

im not a sailor im a ship builder

Ok how about I clarify something things about the Enterprise. Just so everybody knows the USS Enterprise is the only ship in the Enterprise class. Its size and performance are very similar to those of a Nimitz class with the exception that it has as Dragon27 said eight reactors instead of 2. If you went abord a Nimitz and then the Enterprise you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless you saw the markings or reactors. Heres the Navy's webpage on carriers.Carriers

Damn this breaks my hart the F-14 is one of the Best jets ever. It has everything its fast agile carries a lot of weapons and missiles it has the best radar 2nd only to the raptor it can track 24 targets simultaneously and fire on 6 of them at the same time. Its getting old so I can see why it needs to be replaced but to replace it with the F/A-18 is stupid the F/A-18 wouldn't last 2 seconds against an F-14. If its replaced it should be by a fighter equal or better than it not some mediocre jet!!!


[edit on 14-9-2004 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Damn this breaks my hart the F-14 is one of the Best jets ever. It has everything its fast agile carrier a lot of weapons and missiles it has the best radar 2 only to the raptor it can track 24 targets simultaneously and fire on 6 of them at the same time. Its getting old so I can see why it needs to be replaced but to replace it with the F/A-18 is stupid the F/A-18 wouldn't last 2 seconds against an F-14. If its replaced it should be by a fighter equal or better than it not some mediocre jet!!!

You've obviously never flown in an aircraft.

neither have I, so I won't say which one is better due to experience because I have none, but I am trying to get experience.

I can see you are not a pilot and you talk more than you take in, if you have at all bothered to hear what pilots have to say about the two aircraft, they would say that the F/A-18 Hornet or Superhornet are almost if not equally as good as the F-14 Tomcat.

They are both very amazing aircraft, I do not think anyone is doubting that, but really, you should ask around from people with first hand experience which one they would prefer flying in.

And if the F/A-18 was less than the F-14, why doesn't the F-14 have its own Airshow? The Blue Angels are all F/A-18 Hornets and they perform extroadinarily well.

Shattered OUT...

Well, at least Iran is keeping F-14s in service!

You have to admit, Tomcat looks pretty cool with desert camo.

Originally posted by cyberdude78
If you went abord a Nimitz and then the Enterprise you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless you saw the markings or reactors.

Or recognise it from any warship.

Schematics are "little" too big to "cut n paste" here so:
www.globalsecurity.org...
www.globalsecurity.org...

www.globalsecurity.org...
www.globalsecurity.org...





www.globalsecurity.org...

Well, at least Iran is keeping F-14s in service!

Those pics are over 30 ears old, Iran doesn't have any operational F-14 now if they do they cant fire their missiles thanks to the ingenious sabotaging. And desert cammo looks like someone took a all over them

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Well, at least Iran is keeping F-14s in service!

Those pics are over 30 ears old, Iran doesn't have any operational F-14 now if they do they cant fire their missiles thanks to the ingenious sabotaging. And desert cammo looks like someone took a all over them

Sorry you have to be insulting and wrong at the same time, but if that's the way you feel more power to you.

insulting? nope I call it truthful and straight up honest. Wrong ?can you prove me wrong or you just make false allegations.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
insulting? nope I call it truthful and straight up honest. Wrong ?can you prove me wrong or you just make false allegations.

Wow. I've never seen so much anger in somebody!

U.S. Army considers anger-troubled people a nuisance, you know that?

Anger are you serious you haven�t even seen me angry. But you might next time zcheng starts posting. and all human beings get angry if you don�t something is wrong with you or your not human..

Originally posted by WestPoint23
But you might next time zcheng starts posting.

HA the great westy cant take chinese insults!

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by WestPoint23
But you might next time zcheng starts posting.

HA the great westy cant take chinese insults!

I can't get enough of this WestPoint23! He eclipses Bush in terms of unintentional humor!

insulting? nope I call it truthful and straight up honest. Wrong ?can you prove me wrong or you just make false allegations.

I can prove you wrong Westy, like every other time I do it... I keep doing it because i enjoy it, it gives me a sick sense of satisfaction watching you squirm... Check out this thread and my post, it might enlighten you as to the state of the F-14 in the IRIAF...

Westpoint being proved wrong again......

My post is near the bottom, can't miss it, as it is full of your BS, which i had to quote as it is pure comic genius.

Westpoint, there is nothing wrong with the F-14 Tomcat, it is an outstanding aircraft that deserves the applause, in my opinion, you just want to see more high tech stealth aircraft produced.

Well guess what, the world is not about clean enterprise, if it were we would be living in a world without battle.

Unfortunately that is not the case here, so I will say this, the F-14 Tomcat is an outstanding aircraft and deserves the applause, the F-22 Raptors have yet to prove their worth.

I know there was no mention of F-22 raptors, but I have the feeling that is where this conversation is headed.

So until an aircraft has actually been put into battle, we cannot say that it will be the best of the best.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by stumason

insulting? nope I call it truthful and straight up honest. Wrong ?can you prove me wrong or you just make false allegations.

I can prove you wrong Westy, like every other time I do it... I keep doing it because i enjoy it, it gives me a sick sense of satisfaction watching you squirm... Check out this thread and my post, it might enlighten you as to the state of the F-14 in the IRIAF...

Westpoint being proved wrong again......

My post is near the bottom, can't miss it, as it is full of your BS, which i had to quote as it is pure comic genius.

I remember almost every thread in the weaponry forum has a post like this. Well if were done picking on Westpoint23 (even if it is fun) how about getting back to the F-14.

Its still pretty sad seeing such an excellent fighter being taken out of service. Makes me wonder how the USN plans on replacing the AIM-54. Of course there had been rumors that a navalizied version was being produced. This would replace the F-14 and the JSF would replace the F-18. Can't believe the USN won't stretch the F-14's retirement until it gets a proper replacement instead of the equivlent to a made in China fighter (no offense to China).