my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Real Military Discussions   » Air Defense, Weapons, Platforms   » Which air force has the world's best maintainence? (Page 2)

 
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
 
Author Topic: Which air force has the world's best maintainence?
Skoonj
Member
Member # 80

posted 06-17-2000 07:26 AM     Profile for Skoonj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Envelope: "Yes, but was it airworthy? We can allow it wasn't ready for United Airlines.

Be honest now, didn't it have a kind of funky charm to it?"

I guess it had to be airworthy. It got there, didn't it? About the funky charm, that's what I thought when I first saw it. By the time I got close that funky charm was replaced by amazement that they made people fly that bucket of bolts.

Skoonj

------------------
Excelsior, Fathead!
--Jean Shepherd



Posts: 541 | From: Naples, Florida, United States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Scout
Member
Member # 657

posted 06-17-2000 09:34 AM     Profile for Scout   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
My girlfriend's dad was a navigator in Romanian Air Force and later on an ATC in Bucarest International for quite a long time. When I asked him how Soviet civvie birds fared against western built, he said that from ATC point of view they were considered safer - they had more power available at any given moment, so that you could instruct them to do climbs and dives your average Boeing would have structural failure from.

Still, I travel quite frequently and having seen a lot of Russian made passenger aircraft from outside, I'm terrified of the moment I will have to take flight in one.

I'd say that US military has best maintanince of their birds, but after having USMC MH-53 "drop" its gear assembly almost on top of gas station along main Israeli highway two months ago, I'll refrain from issuing such a decisive statement. IAF maintanance has its own share of fuc*k-ups. I remember one of my friends telling me of finding a whole wrench in the air intake of F-15C a few minutes before take-off. Whenever a job becomes routine, f*uck ups are begging to happen...

Cheers,
Scout



Posts: 715 | From: Israel | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
FlyBoyA10
Member
Member # 5196

posted 06-18-2000 12:31 PM     Profile for FlyBoyA10   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
As to my understading that the canada still has the F80 shooting star (I dought this but I heard it) in it's fleet, now that is something if it dose. But Russia has to be the wrost because I saw pictures of russian airprots were the had old Air frams just lieing next to the plane is survice. They even invented special slots that cover the intake vent so that during taxixg the plane dosen't suck up any depery on the runway. the planes themslefs were hafe rusted and I sware (from what I can tell from the PBS special) that the pilots belive that they have the best system in the world.

------------------
Flyboy


Posts: 30 | From: USA | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Envelope
Member
Member # 275

posted 06-18-2000 05:09 PM     Profile for Envelope   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I remember that PBS special. One of the points made by the program was that part of what makes an airplane work is its ability to operate independent of its environment. If you have to go out of your way to create a special environment, like a super clean runway, to operate the aircraft, this actually decreases the effectiveness of its operations.

Airworthyness is an objective standard for an airplane independent of its state of repair. If an airplane is rusty and clunky but still able to operate effectively and safely, then esthetic appeal has no bearing on the merits of the aircraft. Being clean and neat doesn't tell the whole story. Does Russian aircraft bear up better under lack of repair? That would be the important question to answer.


Posts: 2057 | From: Davis, CA, USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Zed
Member
Member # 64

posted 06-19-2000 02:15 AM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
"As to my understading that the canada still has the F80 shooting star..."

so does Iran, in the form of the T-33, and they don't get spares; but they are still operational, what does that say?

Z


Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
_ALEX_
unregistered

posted 06-19-2000 07:02 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
> But Russia has to be the wrost

As long as West, East and Central Africa exists on the globe (and AFAIK it was still there yesterday), nothing can be "the worst" in any other part of the world


IP: Logged
JamesP
Member
Member # 4131

posted 06-21-2000 07:18 AM     Profile for JamesP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hi all,

The Air Force with the Best Maintenance Record is undeniably, and unfortunately, the Royal New Zealand Air Force.

What other Nation could keep such clapped out pieces of crap flying.

Regards James


Posts: 87 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Zed
Member
Member # 64

posted 06-21-2000 10:17 AM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
...err..Iran?
Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
JamesP
Member
Member # 4131

posted 06-22-2000 08:08 AM     Profile for JamesP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hi Zed,

At least a Tomcat's worth keeping in the air, would you say the same for a Skyhawk

Regards James


Posts: 87 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Zed
Member
Member # 64

posted 06-22-2000 12:27 PM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
...those guys still have operational Kaman HH-43 Huskies...thats a '40 helicopter, that the US stopped using over two decades ago. Hey don't you guys use PC-7s to train, like them, or was that the auzzies?

Z


Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
bob671
Member
Member # 5165

posted 06-22-2000 06:25 PM     Profile for bob671   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Neither of us. Australia uses PC-9, New Zealand has CT-4 for basic training.
Posts: 263 | From: Canberra, Australia | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Zed
Member
Member # 64

posted 06-23-2000 02:21 AM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thanks for the info...i know ssomeone there had something similar..tell me, what is the difference between the PC-7 & -9?

Z


Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
bob671
Member
Member # 5165

posted 06-23-2000 06:21 AM     Profile for bob671   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
The PC-9 is very similar to the PC-7 in appearence, but its engine is more than twice as powerful, and first flew in 1984. The Raytheon T-6A Texan II is a development of the PC-9 with a different engine and structural changes. It's still quite similar in appearence though.
Posts: 263 | From: Canberra, Australia | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Zed
Member
Member # 64

posted 06-23-2000 06:55 AM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Ah i see, that is probably the point of my confusion.

Thanks

Z


Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
 

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved