To elaborate, the Tu-160 goes up to Mach 3 (the B1B couldn't even break mach 2), also the Tu-160 has a much larger bomb load (75000 vs 88000 lbs of bombs)Trotskygrad wrote:
B1B is NOT comparable to the Tu-160, get it right.
What can't be found anywhere else on the net? The point is to talk it amongst the bf2s community. 90% of every bit of information posted here can be found elsewhere. If I really wanted to learn about JohnGalt then I would just (re)read Atlas Shrugged... or head over to HotAir.comJohnG@lt wrote:
It's nothing but spam. If I cared, I would go to wikipedia myself.Kmarion wrote:
I have no problem with anyone posting a genuine topic about a specific aircraft.
hmmmKmarion wrote:
What can't be found anywhere else on the net? The point is to talk it amongst the bf2s community. 90% of every bit of information posted here can be found elsewhere. If I really wanted to learn about JohnGalt then I would just (re)read Atlas Shrugged... or head over to HotAir.comJohnG@lt wrote:
It's nothing but spam. If I cared, I would go to wikipedia myself.Kmarion wrote:
I have no problem with anyone posting a genuine topic about a specific aircraft.
savvy?
Damn John you just got Ktold.Dauntless wrote:
hmmmKmarion wrote:
What can't be found anywhere else on the net? The point is to talk it amongst the bf2s community. 90% of every bit of information posted here can be found elsewhere. If I really wanted to learn about JohnGalt then I would just (re)read Atlas Shrugged... or head over to HotAir.comJohnG@lt wrote:
It's nothing but spam. If I cared, I would go to wikipedia myself.
savvy?
If you read above, I said the tail of the B-1 is comparable to the tail of the tu-160. READ.Trotskygrad wrote:
To elaborate, the Tu-160 goes up to Mach 3 (the B1B couldn't even break mach 2), also the Tu-160 has a much larger bomb load (75000 vs 88000 lbs of bombs)Trotskygrad wrote:
B1B is NOT comparable to the Tu-160, get it right.
Also, it's range is 11,998 km vs. 12,300 km for the Tu-160
lastly, the Tu-160 produces 220,400 lbs of thrust vs. a measly 123,120 lbs for the B1B.
Not comparable.
Oh and about Tanks, the S-Tank > ALL
#1: The thing you're talking about is called the elevator, not the tail.pace51 wrote:
If you read above, I said the tail of the B-1 is comparable to the tail of the tu-160. READ.Trotskygrad wrote:
To elaborate, the Tu-160 goes up to Mach 3 (the B1B couldn't even break mach 2), also the Tu-160 has a much larger bomb load (75000 vs 88000 lbs of bombs)Trotskygrad wrote:
B1B is NOT comparable to the Tu-160, get it right.
Also, it's range is 11,998 km vs. 12,300 km for the Tu-160
lastly, the Tu-160 produces 220,400 lbs of thrust vs. a measly 123,120 lbs for the B1B.
Not comparable.
Oh and about Tanks, the S-Tank > ALL
Kmarion wrote:
What can't be found anywhere else on the net? The point is to talk it amongst the bf2s community. 90% of every bit of information posted here can be found elsewhere. If I really wanted to learn about JohnGalt then I would just (re)read Atlas Shrugged... or head over to HotAir.comJohnG@lt wrote:
It's nothing but spam. If I cared, I would go to wikipedia myself.Kmarion wrote:
I have no problem with anyone posting a genuine topic about a specific aircraft.
savvy?
Look again. The B-1B is no longer nuclear capable. It is conventional only. Has been that way for several years.pace51 wrote:
B-1A- Nuclear
B-1B Can carry nuclear munitions
Look, I even said its a strategic bomber
Tu-160 is not even conventional yet. Closest thing to convention it's dropped is the FOABFEOS wrote:
Look again. The B-1B is no longer nuclear capable. It is conventional only. Has been that way for several years.pace51 wrote:
B-1A- Nuclear
B-1B Can carry nuclear munitions
Look, I even said its a strategic bomber
Strategic is a type of mission, not a type of aircraft.
...or history, as I remember, but here you are, having clicked.1927 wrote:
I havent got the slightest interest in planes.
yes to stick up for Pace more than anything, Ive only read the bits where people are having a go at him.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
...or history, as I remember, but here you are, having clicked.1927 wrote:
I havent got the slightest interest in planes.
When I was stationed at Hill AFB, we lived about 1/2 mile from the flight line. One took off at full AB. Thought the house was going to come apart.Dilbert_X wrote:
Airshow pic, thats the loudest plane I've ever seen.
As are the flaps.
heh, we still see the f-16's in and out of hill. i remember when castle afb had the b-52's, those were loud.FEOS wrote:
When I was stationed at Hill AFB, we lived about 1/2 mile from the flight line.
never seen one in flight. but my pic is still better
It was transient, to use the range. IIRC, there were Harriers and A-10s there during that same time period (likely an exercise).burnzz wrote:
heh, we still see the f-16's in and out of hill. i remember when castle afb had the b-52's, those were loud.FEOS wrote:
When I was stationed at Hill AFB, we lived about 1/2 mile from the flight line.
Really no comparison at all, though. Turboprops get pwned by 4 F-16 engines, noise-wise.pace51 wrote:
Speaking of loud, C-130's aren't very quiet either. :big_smile:
