jump to navigation

Flightline Friday November 13, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Flightline Friday, foolishness, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, technology.
trackback

I’ve been feeling the Flightline Fridays have been a bit repetitive for a while, but I really don’t have much queued up for today other than yet another video on the F-20 (I never get tired of those) and some really cool pics of the Tomcat. I’m really hoping to do a post next week on British post-war naval aviation.  All kinds of interesting things to talk about there if I can find the time.  The Brits did quite a bit with not very much money, even though Labor wrecked it all in 1966.

Anyway, I really like this video on the F-20 because it’s got some awesome cockpit shots.  I’ve related in the past that I have long been fascinated by cockpit design.  How to convey vital information – life and death information – in the clearest, most easily understandable way possible is a great technical challenge. I really like cockpits from the late 60s-early 80s when electronic displays were first being introduced and pilot situation awareness was taken as the highest priority.  I think we’ve gone too far now, using electronics just because “we” can, actually reducing the effectiveness of the instrumentation.

I think the F-20 had one of the best combinations of traditional analog gauges and electronic displays.  A HUD coupled with a digitally-presented radar display and an electronic armament panel really amps up effectiveness, and is an enormous leap ahead of having to look down to the bottom of the instrument panel, in combat, to flip switches and rotate dials as had to be done on the F-4 Phantom. But I’m not sure that an electronic artificial horizon and heading indicator is any better than an analog one, and I think it’s a lot easier to read a row of vertical tape, seeing in a millisecond-glance that all are in the green, rather than trying to decipher multiple numeric readouts on an LCD screen.

Anyway, really cool footage (to me, heh) from 2:30 – 5:10 of the F-20 cockpit, mostly from the simulator but that’s just fine:

You can even see spikes on the threat warning indicator.

Now some pics I found on the F-14 I thought worth sharing. Most all of these pics are of the VF-31 Tomcatters, my favorite Navy squadron because I love the Felix the Cat graphic:

untitled (1)

JvB002

JvB064

JvB055

A US Navy (USN) F-14D Tomcat standard fleet fighter aircraft (Aircraft number 100), Fighter Squadron 31 (VF-31, ÒTomcattersÓ), makes a near-supersonic low-level fly-by above the USN Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier, USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71), while the USS ROOSEVELT is participating in a Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) with the USN Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier, USS DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69) in the Atlantic Ocean (AOC).

You can just make out the Battle ‘E’ in Felix’s bomb, awarded for most proficient squadron during the course of a year, in this case 2005, I believe.

f14

Now you can really see the Battle ‘E.’ Only the “CAG” bird – the squadron commander’s aircraft- receives bring paint markings in the Navy anymore. The rest get very subdued paint schemes for reduced visibility.

f-14d-tomcat-wings-over-miami-3

nose_art___gotcha____baby_by_haafasst

The AIM-54/F-14 combination provided a unique capability until the F-22 entered the scene.  The AIM-54 had a nominal range in excess of 100 miles, though it was usually only used at about half that range.  The F-22 with AIM-120D entering service has similar performance.

Only the Tomcat carried the nearly 1-ton AIM-54, a truly huge air-to-air missile:

Aircraft Nose Art From WWII

Great stuff

Painted on the drop tanks of VF-31 aircraft as they completed the final Tomcat cruise.  They let their feelings be known regarding their replacement aircraft:

f_14_drop_tank_logo_by_shelbs2-d2z1wnu

Comments

1. Lou - November 15, 2015

**No you moron. Fidelity to Rome is fidelity to the deposit of faith in the catechism. Not the people. **

You mean the catechism that teaches “THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON” and the Virtue of “CHARITY”? The same Catechism that probably forbids calling people “morons”?

**Fidelity to Rome is fidelity to the deposit of faith in the catechism. Not the people. Fidelity to the Chair of Peter. Not a person enthroned who attempts to steer his people away from it.**

The call to “Fidelity”! It started with a few kook priests and Carol McKinley telling people not to follow them, but to follow the local ordinary (Cardinal Law) who carries the authority of Rome here in Boston.

Then they took away Cardinal Law..and replaced him with Bishop O’Malley. Carol Mckinley had high hopes, but soon found out that O’Malley wasn’t to Carol’s liking. Carol told people, he’s only a Bishop…makes sure you are following a Price of the Church…a Cardinal! They are the only ones that carry the authority from Rome….not just any “Bishop”.

They, guess what? They made O’Malley a CARDINAL! (Just like CARDINAL Law! SO he must carry the authority of Rome to Boston, no?)

But…we quickly found out that even a Cardinal Archbishop….a “Prince of the Church” didn’t have enough authority for Carol. Now, she claimed “Fidelity” to the Pope…not Bishops, not priests, not Pastors, not Cardinals.

THEN..The pope retires…and is replaced by another Pope. And quickly Carol McKinley finds out that possibly she has been wrong all along…and her claim of “Fidelity” as just a “cover” to follow only her own desires and really not submit to any authority. So much for “Fidelity”, eh?

All this talk of “Fidelity”…had to change, because it became clear that she was only Faithful to her own thoughts and ideas. She had “Fidelity” to anyone that agreed with her. With all her blogging and busybody work, she realized one thing…that, in effect…SHE wanted to be a pastor, a bishop, a cardinal…SHE wants to be the Pope! The arbiter of what is allowed, what isn’t. Carol wants to be the disciplinarian! All this is at odds with someone who claims to follow Spiritual Authority and has “Fidelity”.

So we have seen through the veneer of, so called, “Fidelity. (Notice the old “Magisterial Fidelity” blog has gone fallow.) We have already pointed out that this claim of fidelity to the Catechism is flawed as well, calling people names, etc., no talk of charity, respect or the worth of the individual The fidelity to the Catechism is only in effect when she agrees with it.

I don’t see any indication that the Catechisms teaching of humility and pride are being adhered to. Do you?

I Think we’ve pointed out the fallacy of Carol McKinley’s “Fidelity”.

As far as Magisterial or the Magisterium, Carol here is a refresher course:

“In Catholicism, the Magisterium is the authority that lays down what is the authentic teaching of the Church. For the Catholic Church, that authority is vested UNIQUELY in the POPE and the BISHOPS who are in communion with him.”

Sorry Charlie….err…Carol.

Get on thy knees and meditate of the teachings of Humility and Pride.

Tantumblogo - November 16, 2015

I have no idea what you’re talking about, but please don’t call people morons.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: