It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Here's something to think about.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:19 AM
link   
I have come to the shock realistation that the F-16 now, today, is as old as the P-51 and Griffon Spitfire were when the F-15 first appeared. Do you find that amazing 'cos I know I do.




posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
It is amazing when thought of this way. But I think this is more of a testament to the speed at which technology is progressing than the age of an aircraft. I bet if jumped back to the early 40's and looked at a spitfire we could say the same thing about it and the Wright Brothers first plane.

I mean, flight has gone from that little glider to the the F22 Raptor in about a 100 years. Thats not a long time in the grand scheme of things to make that kind of progress.

It is truly amazing



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   
But the F-16 still looks as modern as some of the stuff which is coming out now, thats what I was getting at.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
This is how it can be Waynos.

If one looks back military technology has had very long periods where it effectively 'stood still' for hundreds and even thousands of years.

Why should it be that different now just because we have been living in a time where we saw a lot of change?
Why should change be constant?


In any case whats a couple of decades in the scheme of things?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Ahhh...Well, its is an amzing plane. I have always had a soft spot for it. Look at all the Euro fighters and the new Chinese J10, they ALL look like F16 variants. If it aint broke, dont fix it!!!





E_T

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I have come to the shock realistation that the F-16 now, today, is as old as the P-51 and Griffon Spitfire were when the F-15 first appeared. Do you find that amazing 'cos I know I do.
If you keep that old then find out age of BUFFs.



total of 744 B-52s were built with the last, a B-52H, delivered in October 1962.
www.globalsecurity.org...



Updated with modern technology, the B-52 will continue into the 21st century as an important element of US forces. There is a proposal under consideration to re-engine the remaining B-52H aircraft to extend the service life. B-52 re-engine plans, if implemented, call for the B-52 to be utilized through 2025. Current engineering analysis show the B-52's life span to extend beyond the year 2040. The limiting factor of the B-52’s service life is the economic limit of the aircraft's upper wing surface, calculated to be approximately 32,500 to 37,500 flight hours. Based on the projected economic service life and forecast mishap rates, the Air Force will be unable to maintain the requirement of 62 aircraft by 2044, after 84 years in service
www.globalsecurity.org...



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   
It's all about the amount of work that was pored into the development stage of these mammoth projects and the amount of room left for growth...



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Oh, I know that ET, the Canberra is even older and still in service. I guess I was too vague with my initial post and people aren't getting my drift.

I am amazed by the similarity of the F-16, visually, to stuff that is coming out in 2005, 31 years after it flew. My point simply being that 31 years after the P-51 and 'Griffon' Spitfire appeared the F-15 existed, not much similarity there!

I guess its just a trick of the mind where you think the difference between these two classic piston fighters and the F-15, in years, must be a lot greater than the time span that separates the debut of the F-16 from today, when in fact it isn't at all.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
With the exception of stealth technology, I think most of the current research is going towards what goes inside the aircraft rather than the outside.

The systems in the new aircraft show as much advancement as the exteriors did last century.


E_T

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Montana
The systems in the new aircraft show as much advancement as the exteriors did last century.
Well... you could say that there was huge leaps in systems even in last century...
Especially considering that first bombings were made with second pilot dropping bombs with hands.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 07:44 PM
link   
E_T! first time I saw you here!

Yeah very good point Waynos!

I also agree with Montana...

I don't mind our planes not changing much, they are beautiful and i'm not looking forward to those new UCAV, MCA, FB-22 and Bird of Prey type aircraft...even though the bird of prey looked AWESOME in a profile shot and some angled shots...but what are looks? if the functionality is better in an uglier package!



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
E_T! first time I saw you here!

Yeah very good point Waynos!

I also agree with Montana...

I don't mind our planes not changing much, they are beautiful and i'm not looking forward to those new UCAV, MCA, FB-22 and Bird of Prey type aircraft...even though the bird of prey looked AWESOME in a profile shot and some angled shots...but what are looks? if the functionality is better in an uglier package!


Well, these things happen... That's why the Viper and Buff lasts so long. They focus more on the electronic and computer systems. After they has a rigid airframe that had it's own weapons delivery systems and not people throwing the weapons with their hands then they could focus on the electronics givin’ the frame had space for a beefy radar, many pylons, and room for the computers themselves.
The only real reason we (or anyone) are getting new fighters is because the improvements in stealth and reduced RCS, thrust, maintenance, and maneuverability.
It's just that these designs are finally showing their limits on upgrade potential. Since computers are ever getting smaller they could probably develop faster computers but they still won’t have sensor fusion, stealthy features, maneuverability, range, and the reduction of maintenance costs.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   
The very nature of military aircraft seems to make for a short lifespan for these planes. But there are amazing exceptions like the B-52 which E_T talked about. This June it will have been in military service for 50 years. I guess when you do your job that good in this case dropping a heck load of bombs theres no need to change it.




top topics



 
0

log in

join