78ff7c No.673152
I miss this era so much. There was constant experimentation with different aircraft designs- lifting bodies, flying platforms, hover saucers, inflatable aircraft. Not to mention the space race itself.
Why can't we have this sort of experimentation now days? Why are stuck funding shit like the F-35 Deathtrap?
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
119b75 No.673153
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>673152
Because they do not want us to abandon the non-white people on Earth. They can’t into living without the white people.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
78ff7c No.673154
Just look at these planes. The only place now days that you can see something like this flying around is an Estes model rocket kit.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
857800 No.673157
>>673153
>Leave Earth.
>Spend centuries en-route to Proxima Centauri
>Work for further centuries to terraform our new home.
>Labour for at least a generation to build a respectable economic base.
>Turn our new home into a model of efficiency, productivity, sustainability, and aesthetic beauty.
>Our great-great-great-great-great (however many) great-great grandchildren decide to go back and conquer Earth.
Why? Did the adaptation to deep space and then to a xeno planet make them retarded or something?
>>673152
Put bluntly, shekels. This sort of thing is hugely expensive - remember that doing anything more than the PR friendly photoshoot of a space program is going to be even more expensive than the Apollo program. That kind of money only gets spent when it will make a significant return (in the short term) for the sociopath paying for it.
>>673152
Is there much of a combat role for extreme speed fighters? Especially when you consider the price of development, construction, operation, and maintenance. Wouldn't the money be better spent on hypervelocity air-to-air missiles - assuming you're trying to improve air force assets rather than build something that's cool as hell.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
119b75 No.673158
>>673157
Revenge because Earth government are responsible for the helghans sufferings. Toxicity have mutated their bodies and minds so they are angry at them for this shits.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
857800 No.673159
>>673158
So you intend to fuck up the terraforming and industrialisation phase?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
8ca44c No.673163
>>673154
Being born in the early 80s I can remember X-15 and X-29 being hyped as the future of air-combat.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
262867 No.673164
>>673152
Because O'Neill Space Colonies and SSTO craft are sensible solutions in the long term and thus anti-semitic.
Why kikes never considered creating a new mobile promised land in Space to seed the Universe with their filth is one thing we may perhaps never know.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
ac10f7 No.673169
>>673164
We will know when we defeat the Earth jews.
Then come the space jews and their armada.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
19653d No.673172
>>673157
>Leave Earth.
^ Why did they do this? You're retarded, they were clearly persecuted, same as the US pilgrims. So America built a superpower and then came back "home" to Britain and made it a cucked airstrip.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
19653d No.673173
>>673164
Kikes are parasites, there is no one in space to parasitize on. It's like putting a leech into an aquarium with no fish in it, it's not going to create a leech civilization, it's just going to starve to death. I'm sure if we discover aliens the kikes will be the first to form embassies and banks on their homeworld.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
857800 No.673174
>>673172
My point was why bother? In the time it takes to get from Earth to the new world, terraform, industrialise, set up, prepare, and travel back all that will be left on earth is a pile of overgrown ruins. If you want to reclaim the rock then fair enough, but that requires a moderate size security detail with each of the reclamation teams (just in case) rather than a full blown invasion fleet. If you're doing it for revenge then just take one of your interstellar troop carriers, load it up with the densest mass that can be practically sourced in that quantity, and set the autopilot to ram straight into Earth at the highest speed it can manage. Have it broadcast Psywar messages on all frequencies for a few hours/days before it hits if you want to get all dramatic about it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
40d8c2 No.673190
>>673152
>Why are stuck funding shit like the F-35 Deathtrap?
Anon they were funding the Lockheed F-104 death trap at the time.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
78ff7c No.673194
>>673190
At least it looked cool.
Is that a down facing ejection seat?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
efe6cd No.673197
>>673152
Because nowadays the western world is too busy killing itself to progress in anything that isn't a way to kill whitey, Japan is hampered by American-forced constituation and a partly brainwashed population in anything that remotely pertains to the military, and the rest of the world can't into anything beyond 80s tech.
Except Russia, I guess, but they've had a couple too many bottles of mouthwash to be of much use.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
262867 No.673201
>>673173
But they could just create some token shabbos colonies to sustain their hunger, putting holocaust memorials on every solid planetary body in the solar system and beyond is an oppurtunity they shouldn't want to pass up.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
e857f3 No.673218
>>673194
yes, they did it because the early ejection seat was too underpowered to clear the tail. among other things it ended up killing the canadian air force.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57ef28 No.673223
growing up in late 1960s and 70s, there were Hobby stores in every town selling model planes, ships, tanks, etc. Even tiny town of Conifer, CO pop about 8,000 had Hobby and Model store.
Now there is about 3 in all SF bay area, mostly on there last legs as some fool's pet project, and they didn't close because of Internet, they closed before that due to "demographics".
In their place is slut-ware stores for Mexican thots, and at best some "gamer" stores.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
063bcd No.673262
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>673173
>I'm sure if we discover aliens the kikes will be the first to form embassies and banks on their homeworld.
I hope they don’t make the same mistake just like we did.
>>673164
They cannot survive without the host. If they did then they will last for short time then fade away.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
78ff7c No.673273
>>673218
>among other things it ended up killing the canadian air force
Why did it have such a terrible safety record anyway?
>Canada lost 46% of its F-104s (110 of 235).
wew
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673274
>>673273
Stubby wings which meant a high stall speed, and high landing speed. Coupled with the engines being very easy to flame out in poor weather due to them being very early jets pushed to their absolute limit. The plane was supposed to be a fair weather interceptor. It did poorly in Canada because the engines would flame out on takeoff due to ice ingestion. This was compounded by the plane not having on board engine starters and the downwards ejector seat at first. To save weight, the engine was started by a special truck on the runway. So once you flamed out, you were done for.
Lockheeb later made some modifications like adding a proper zero-zero seat and onboard engine starters, but then marketed it as an all weather multirole plane. The Germans then proceeded to crash them over and over again doing retarded shit like gun runs and low altitude skip bombing in bad weather.
The proof is in the article you posted. Spain didn't lose a single plane, Italy loved it and flew them into both gulf wars. The reason being that those were warmer countries with mild weather along with them using the aircraft for their intended purpose of high altitude interception. Japan and Taiwan also loved the plane and only retired them at the turn of the millennia due to lack of spare parts and NASA still flies them for high altitude research and I believe also some experiment involving launching micro sats with missiles.
TLDR: The plane was first drafted as a fair weather interceptor and should have never been flown in poor weather and in the wrong role.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
063bcd No.673275
>>673274
That is a good quality post anon.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
78ff7c No.673281
>>673274
That actually makes a lot of sense. I was wondering why there was such a disparity between the accident rate of Germany/Canada and that of Spain.
>Stubby wings which meant a high stall speed
The eternal gremlin strikes again. It seems like it's a never ending struggle to try to come up with a single body design that's stable from subsonic all the way up through supersonic.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
b6eb90 No.673288
>>673274
Yep, it was trash.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
b6eb90 No.673290
>>673288
http://www.i-f-s.nl/f-104-accidents/
Strange that it also has many accidents in a warm country like Turkroachistan?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
063bcd No.673293
>>673290
Maybe they are shit at driving the planes?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
90a816 No.673302
>>673223
Not only in murka. It was a better era.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
90a816 No.673303
>>673274
Being leering less of a coffin in warm weather did not make them less shit as a concept, especially when USAFs obsession with speed was useless since it could not even use BVR missiles.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
0a3502 No.673336
Because a bunch of intelligent white men were given massive fucking budgets and told to go crazy. Now we either don't have enough cash or have too many shitskins for real R&D to occur. Way too much fucking nance redtape as well. It was an era of progress and an era of great waste. 90% of these projects went nowhere but we learned in the process and that's where technological gains were made. Can't take on shit like that hardly anymore because you'll get lynched by your (((investors))) when your fuckoff airplane fails to turn a profit.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673341
>>673290
Did the roaches fly it as a multirole plane? Or as an interceptor? I'm willing to bet on the former.
>>673303
BVR wasn't even a concept when the aircraft was first drafted up. You needed speed to catch something when short range missiles were the peak of technology at the time. And later upgrade packages came with AIM-7 support which is BVR capable.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
1c3c20 No.673387
>>673341
So it only became useful 3 decades after it came out while doing the same thing a MiG-21 did minus the dogfighting, the ability to not overshoot targets flying slower than 600 km/h, taking off and landing without the risk of breaking the landing gears if you went 10km/h faster than the minimum required or the capacity to eject the pilot without killing him.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673423
>>673387
So where are these 1950s BVR missiles and when did the AIM-7 appear in the late 80s?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
1c3c20 No.673448
>>673423
>So where are these 1950s BVR missiles
How is this relevant? The designers made an extreme tradeoff of overall performance solely for speed and ended up with a plane that was not notably faster than conventional all-round performance designs that came couple of years later. If anything BVR missiles not existing or being widespread is an argument against F-104's existence.
>and when did the AIM-7 appear in the late 80s?
When was the F-104 retrofitted with AIM-7 capacity? Because intuitively it does not seem much likely that it was Sparrow-capable before the F-16 was.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6dac1b No.673538
>>673281
>single body design
>perfectly stable at all speeds
its literally impossible m8, that's why the manual specifies a 'flight envelope' which is all the speeds and attitudes you can fly at and not stall the wing.
All airframe designs trade off performance in one area to increase it in another. One good example is leading edge slats on many planes. They weigh more, and add lots of drag, but increase lift and decrease the minimum speed(and thus landing distance) a lot too. So you don't see leading edge slats on jets which gotta go fast, but you do see them on bush planes which need the short landing roll and don't care about the speed losses.
This same thinking applies to every single external detail of the plane; wing sweep, foil design, landing gear placement, hardpoints, normal tail vs t-tail vs v-tail, even seemingly irrelevant details like the exact hinge position and mechanisms of the flaps/ailerons have a huge effect on the planes overall aerodynamic performance.
To make things worse, the rules for what is 'aerodynamic' change as you get into transonic speeds, then again at supersonic, then again at mach 5, which is why the x-15 maxed out there, and why the space shuttle had a blunt nose.
tl;dr literally everything you see on a plane(even including the paint) comes with positives and negatives.
>>673274
>fair weather only fighter plane
>1960
lol
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673546
>>673448
>I can't see the advantage to having a fast interceptor at a time where the primary way to deliver nuclear weapons was with bombers and the extent of air to air weapons is literally only short range missiles and guns
You're a special brand of fucking retarded aren't you?
>a missile that has been around since the early 60s must have been put on a plane from the 50s in the early 80s because that's when the final version of that missile came around
You should stop.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
353c11 No.673618
>>673546
>>I can't see the advantage to having a fast interceptor at a time where the primary way to deliver nuclear weapons was with bombers and the extent of air to air weapons is literally only short range missiles and guns
MiG-21 did the same and it did not need a timezone to make a 90^ turn, neither did it have to fly all the way back to the bomber's tail every time it failed to shoot down a bomber (which was inevitable with early AIM-9B variants and 20mm strafes) and that's completely ignoring all-aspect missiles would not be a thing for decades and that almost all strategic bombers had tail-guns . F-104 only redeeming value in what you are describing was its rate of climb which was greatly countered by its near inability to take off without rocket assistance.
pic related, probably much more efficient anti-bomber strategy
Why the fuck is it so hard for you to admit the F-104 was just typical lockheeb moneygrab and that the concept of a flying pencil with barely any wing and no turning capacity whatsoever was retarded for a Sidewinder/Vulcan armed platform?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
353c11 No.673621
>>673546
>>a missile that has been around since the early 60s must have been put on a plane from the 50s in the early 80s because that's when the final version of that missile came around
>You should stop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter#Safety_record
ctrf+f: AIM-7
>The final production version of the fighter model was the F-104S, an all-weather interceptor designed by Aeritalia for the Italian Air Force, and equipped with radar-guided AIM-7 Sparrow missiles.
>In the late 1960s, Lockheed developed a more advanced version of the Starfighter, the F-104S, for use by the Italian Air Force as an all-weather interceptor. The F-104S received a NASARR R21-G with a moving target indication and a continuous-wave radar illuminator for semi-active radar homing missiles, including the AIM-7 Sparrow and Selenia Aspide.
>246 Italian versions were produced by FIAT (one aircraft crashed prior to delivery and is often not included in the total number built). Forty aircraft were delivered to the Turkish Air Force and the rest to the Italian Air Force (Aeronautica Militare Italiana).[90] The F-104S was upgraded for the interception role, adding the NASARR R-21G/H radar with moving-target indicator and continuous-wave illuminator for semi-active radar homing missiles (initially the AIM-7 Sparrow)
tl;dr:
out of all NATO countries that were forced the aluminum tube down their throat, only pastaniggers and turdroaches were assed to upgrade up to AIM-7 capable standards
Get bent, Moishe.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673746
>>673618
So what kind of magical missiles and guns did the Mig-21 have that allowed it to get kills on B-52s from all angles and every pass? Why are we assuming that the AIM-9 and 20mm vulcan are insufficient weapons for air to air when they are still in wide spread use? Are you trying to imply early side winders would be unable to hit a giant, slow moving TU-95 but a K-5 or a K-13, a literal reverse engineered AIM-9B down the the same max range, which was the longest reach the MiG got until the 70s would take down a B-52 in one pass?
>>673621
>haha, see!? they didn't retrofit the F-104 to use AIM-7s until the 60s!
Amazing, so you agree with what I said with it being a 60s thing and not a fucking 80s thing. You sure showed me.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d46a5e No.673776
>>673746
>So what kind of magical missiles and guns did the Mig-21 have that allowed it to get kills on B-52s from all angles and every pass?
The ability to put itself to desirable angles, stay behind them and actually evade tail-gun fire. With it's abysmal lift the F-104's not only could not make course corrections as easily as its contemporaries like MiG-21, Mirage III or even the fucking boat the F-4, but its stall speed was nearly as high as the Tu-95's cruising speed at such altitudes.
>Why are we assuming that the AIM-9 and 20mm vulcan are insufficient weapons for air to air when they are still in wide spread use?
Never said they are, stupid, but they are short-range weapons and back then the AIM-9 wasn't all aspect and that makes it completely incomparable to its modern variants and firing protocol. You absolutely had to fire the AIM-9B at the foes' ass. And don't forget the reason the Russians had AA-2 in the first place was because of an early AIM-9 malfunction that allowed a chink MiG return to base with a perfectly reverse-engineerable nearly intact Sidewinder stuck on its ass.
>which was the longest reach the MiG got until the 70s would take down a B-52 in one pass?
The MiGs being unable to reliably shoot down B-52 while having copypasted AIM-9 doesn't work in favor of your non-argument.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d46a5e No.673781
>>673746
>Amazing, so you agree with what I said with it being a 60s thing and not a fucking 80s thing. You sure showed me.
>a couple of italian ones had it installed at 1969
>a 60's thing
Gee, I wonder why out of the 15 countries that had the F-104 only two, its original developer not included, were assed to slightly modernize it? Maybe because they were the only countries that had the near entirety of their combat aircraft fleet consisted by F-104s?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.673875
>>673776
I'm assuming you're IP hopping, but the last post said that a Mig would not have to get behind a bomber unlike an F-104. This is clearly not the case as you said yourself that the missile tech of the day was incapable of doing such a thing. The most effective way to kill a bomber and not get hit in the process is also done by making a pass on it, not sitting behind it matching its speed so I don't understand why stall speed is important here. The quicker you fire your missiles and pass the tail's cone of fire, the less likely it is that the bomber will score hits on you with its tail gun. And again with the shortcomings of the AIM-9B. Literally all missiles of that era were like that as you said yourself again. Its not IDEAL, but its literally the best chance anyone had at stopping a bomber at the time that wasn't a NIKE Hercules.
>>673781
Because it had short legs so it was mainly useful as an Interceptor for countries that bordered the East bloc once longer range aircraft came into production?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c5b690 No.673926
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6a7f04 No.673928
>>673875
> but the last post said that a Mig would not have to get behind a bomber unlike an F-104
Would not have to get behind TWICE because of an overshoot because it's stall speed isn't 500km/h like the F-104.
>The most effective way to kill a bomber and not get hit in the process is also done by making a pass on it, not sitting behind it matching its speed
You have a point there but that's something everything else could do it, still it's better to not go behind it TWICE because you could not approach from ideal position in the first place.
>not sitting behind it matching its speed so I don't understand why stall speed is important here
because cutting tight energy bleeding turns is vital for reaching fire position against someone's ass targeting 20mm lead farts at you
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
76376c No.674111
>>673928
Your "twice" quote is pulled completely out of your ass. There is no reason you can't dump two missiles into the target to insure it drops on one pass. The higher the speed you approach a bomber, the more lead the tail gun will have to adjust for from the most minute corrections made by the attacking plane. Pulling a tight turn while still inside the bomber's cone of fire is a great way to massively increase the surface area of your plane and get filled with holes.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
262867 No.674121
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>674111
High speed is a meme when your plane is so much of a special needs piggu it can't do repeat diagonal slice attacks without passing through multiple time zones in the process.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6a7f04 No.674140
>>674111
>>674121
What the kraut said. You NEVER engage into a gunfight against a rotating turret, if you try to take out a bomber with guns you don't do it from its six. The point is two fire your two primitive heat-seekers while staying barely outside the range of the tail gun, something gottagofastfags have an issue of doing.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
8a7724 No.674972
I'm so happy that we're posed to go back to this era of space exploration. The Right Stuff is probably the movie I find most inspirational. Extremely excited for the new moon/mars missions NASA has planned.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
544f7c No.675044
>>674972
What if kikes remake The Right Stuff for the current year audience?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
1a4365 No.675125
>>675044
Isn't that basically what they did with about that movie with the strong black wimminz?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
1a4365 No.675126
>>675044
They'd probably also portray Alan Shepherd as a gay twink too or something
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
5f8ece No.675132
>>675125
they didn't go as far as having them pilot the rocket though.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.