Article

2007-10-29

Posted by Fred 2007-10-29 00:00|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 Just wanted to say that your posters Frank G and Red Dawg are the ones who lost credibility on this string with the stupid strawmen they posted in response to my comments. I did not equate the AN-2 with a modern weapon of war, I simply responded to some moronically ill-informed ridicule from these flakes.

Frank asked Gee "Lord Piltdown". perhaps you'd be willing to pilot or paricipate in this flying coffin?

Why would my unwillingness to fly this plane into denied airspace be relevant, Frank? Does a threat consist only of methodology that we are personally willing to use ourselves? We can quit worrying about suicide bombers in that case.

As for spinning it into an "active war-piece," neither of you responded to my points against your mockery. Why is this so much more vulnerable than a chopper, which you presumably still regard as an "active war-piece?"

By the way, Dawg, I didn't claim that these equalled the C-130 and C-27, I just pointed out that the AN-2s are probably not so much more vulnerable as to be useless in the relevant scenario.
You deny this but you can't seem to cite any reasons. Is 300 knots really better than 100 in the face of "modern AAA systems" (not a term an informed observer would use, btw)? Pulse-doppler radar doesn't see it that way, if it can see at all against masking terrain (lots of hills in Korea).
Citing ceiling as an advantage in the postulated type of operation is proof positive that you have no idea how this works. As for counter-measures, most of these are directed at systems that are marginal in this environment anyway.

If your wheels are in the weeds and you're masked by terrain, it would be foolish to turn on a radar jammer and mark your location.
IRCM is a different story but it needn't be so good if you have 1/20th the IR signature of a more modern aircraft.

Neither of you responded with anything like facts or informed analysis, you just ramped up your original stupid comments and added some insults in the process.

I think it's because that's all you can do. I suggest you stay with something you are qualified to judge, like Kimmie's hairstyle.

Posted by Lord Piltdown 2007-10-29 01:19|| 2007-10-29 01:19|| Front Page Top

#2 ROLF Mr Piltdown,

Ima gonna look at Sabrinas Cantilevered Chest.. you can re-read this!

Posted by Red Dawg">Red Dawg 2007-10-29 01:28|| 2007-10-29 01:28|| Front Page Top

#3 I'll bet I could probably hang from those. Definitely if allowed to use my hands. :-0

Posted by gorb 2007-10-29 01:39|| 2007-10-29 01:39|| Front Page Top

#4 Neither of you responded with anything like facts or informed analysis, you just ramped up your original stupid comments and added some insults in the process.

Heaven forefend that such a thing has ever before happened at this site.

Posted by Henry M. Robert">Henry M. Robert 2007-10-29 02:59|| 2007-10-29 02:59|| Front Page Top

#5 That's how it happens, sometimes, often enough for reasons completely unrelated to the actual conversation. Let it go, dear Lord Piltdown, please. We read your worth from the entirety of your posts, not someone's responses in a single thread. And certainly I found the entire conversation very educational. ;-)

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2007-10-29 05:51|| 2007-10-29 05:51|| Front Page Top

#6 boy, that thread was so important to me that I forgot about it and had to go back and reread it, just to see what you were whining about

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-10-29 06:47|| 2007-10-29 06:47|| Front Page Top

#7 Excuse me, Sabrina and I are busy, can you taks your conversation...BOING...never mind.

Posted by wxjames 2007-10-29 07:24|| 2007-10-29 07:24|| Front Page Top

#8 Liberty. Equality. Fecundity.

Posted by Excalibur 2007-10-29 08:47|| 2007-10-29 08:47|| Front Page Top

#9 I must be missing some of the nuances in the discussion of Sabrina. Sabrina's attire does have some note worthy engineering.

Posted by JohnQC 2007-10-29 12:28|| 2007-10-29 12:28|| Front Page Top

#10 I think these two Sabrina's are the same. I do have some others...

Posted by 3dc 2007-10-29 12:53|| 2007-10-29 12:53|| Front Page Top

#11 Yikes, 3dc! I wasn't ready for that and nearly lost my eyeballs. Be a little more careful next time.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-10-29 14:01|| 2007-10-29 14:01|| Front Page Top

#12 BAD, BAD, BAD DAWG! Bad, bad Frank! AN-tooooz are cool. Got one. Of course it's a simulated one but what the heck. Set up right it stalls at about 30 kts. You can take it off in half the length of the Nimitz. :> I wonder if there's a float-plane version.

Posted by Thomas Woof 2007-10-29 16:51|| 2007-10-29 16:51|| Front Page Top

#13 The word, jutting comes to mind!

Posted by Natural Law 2007-10-29 19:16|| 2007-10-29 19:16|| Front Page Top

#14 I wonder if there's a float-plane version.

Yes. And Sabrina has the pontoons.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-10-29 19:18|| 2007-10-29 19:18|| Front Page Top

23:37 Thiling Sinatra6488
23:29 Zenster
23:26 Zenster
23:19 Zenster
22:45 Zenster
22:43 Frank G
22:40 Legolas
22:36 Frank G
22:36 Pappy
22:27 Frank G
22:26 Pappy
22:21 Pappy
22:20 Zenster
22:19 Anonymoose
22:16 Zenster
22:13 Glegum Tojo3338
22:09 Anonymoose
22:00 Chuck Simmins
22:00 Fester Hupung4453
21:59 Procopius2k
21:56 Anonymoose
21:54 Fester Hupung4453
21:31 Zenster
21:29 trailing wife