Future WARTHINK 042: The Lies of DoD (The Pentagon)

The Future Battlefield and Civilian Life Demands Lies Be Discarded and Truths Acted On, PART 1: No More Bad Aerodynamic Kinetic Jeopardy

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."

--Mark Twain

Universal Human Intransigence

Garden of Eden, fallen human beings would rather remain deceived than admit THEY are fucked-up aka wrong about anything.

No Amerikans today use the term "common sense" anymore since their countrymen and women have been computer-deceived to believe a myriad of fancy lies by the Illuminati secret societies they insist on "don't exist" as the latter murders them and leaves their "all-seeing eye" 666/www symbolism calling cards in plain sight. The latest Illuminati deathvax will mass murder millions in the next 3x to 5x years by blood clots, organ failures, weakened immunity if all goes according to their Satan-inspired plans derived by directly talking to evil supernatural demons--their claim to rule over us because they are supposedly "illuminated" talking to avowed enemies of mankind. 

https://jamesbondisreal.blogspot.com/2021/12/spythink-090-illuminati-talk-to.html

Running a close 2nd place to the demon-talking Illuminati in unjustified arrogance are human pilots--"aviators" who think their Pilot, Engine, Airframes (PEA) failures don't stink--even enough to demand a PLAN B of escape parachutes:

www.combatreform.org/escape.htm

However, jet fighters crash so often ejection seats are aviator-tolerated--everyone else can crash & burn!

Aviators milking aviation inefficiencies to subsidize pampered airports with runways separates them from the non-flying, population at large whose tax and vacation and mail-order dollars funds them. Do you even know a pilot? They are off in their fantasy and sometimes tangible aerial world apart from the common people. The Illuminati insures the wonders of aviation are kept from sheeple by not teaching it in high schools which is patently absurd as America is supposed to the land of EAGLES. Sheeple nihilist cynicism was so rampant in my high school co-located to a huge MILINDCOMPLEX, they mocked our "Jets" mascot since they were allowed no "skin in the game" of flying. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my bosomy-sexy 6th grade teacher rewarding me with a flight in a Cessna 150 with a nearby Air Traffic Controller and my CAP USAFR liaison LTC mentor for inspiring me not to succumb to destructive hedonism. My years of military reform efforts are my small pay-back for their and others faith in me.

In general, sheeple refuse to admit to any wrongs in detail and correct them as if their entire civilizational house-of-cards will collapse--instead of being sturdy, wise adults not disenchanted by to-be-expected TBATE Murphy's Law and Cainite TBAM problems arising requiring Arks (technological solutions) be built. This is why to restore America from the current Amerika, we need 2x years of National Service (NS) to re-connect our population to kinetic, objective realities of REAL life.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Ia17AnJ8mqkl/

Sheeple go to the point of madness by deliberating milking and keeping solvable problems in play because it involves more Humtpy Dumpty triers than simply getting him back together aka RACKETEERING.

www.combatreform.org/RACKETTHEORYv6.0.htm

LIE #1: Wheels can somehow go where only Tracks can

www.combatreform.org/WHEELSVSTRACKS

In the western military mind, deceitful mentalism has corroded everything by dictatorial bureaucracy demanding lies be accepted by blind obedience--or else-the naked emperor on air-filled rubber tires deceitfully presented as cross-country mobile when only tracked vehicles are. Personal, direct EXPERIENCE with wheels/tracvks aka OBJECTIVE PHYSICAL REALITY means nothing to them if the boss says Strykers/Humvees/JLTVs/MAVs are mobile enough as they send milsheeple to their incineration deaths in these wheeled flaming coffins along roads/trails they must use. MILSPEEPLE refuse to admit wheeled trucks are failures and sugar-coat deaths/maimings by talk, talk, talk of the milvictim's heroism. What about the virtues of WINNING by OVERCOMING and SOLVING PROBLEMS and coming home a LIVING hero instead? Ulysesses--not Achilles.

We can half-track the over 250k U.S. ARMY trucks we have:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZaBZtgSMJQTM/

How about FLYING OVER ambushes?

Luddite, status quo establishment losers emotionally envy-attack the M113A8 AeroGavin flying tank because they immaturely don't want the tracked armored amphibous, cross-country box--now able to fly over obstacles, bad terrain, land mines, enemies etc.--getting the credit and esteem it deserves when IT's A FUCKING INANIMATE OBJECT--not a person! How does an inanimate object receiving adulation diminish them in zero sum gamestupid? Admiration should be for its human being, clever designers--but weak humans are superficial and all they see are the obvious outward appearances of things--if even that--if they get their heads up from their self phones to look at all. It's the TomCAT F-14 that gets the adulation of men, while TomCRUISE the man-boy gets the attention of the gals making TOP GUN a delicious poison that's killed naval aviation.

https://1sttac.blogspot.com/2021/12/future-warthink-039-how-top-gun-sank-us.html

Moreover, such losertards are on the wrong side of history as mankind's aerodynamic flight powers increase daily such that today, WE CAN MAKE ANYTHING FLY. Even a fucking large rock aka a boulder--which frankly doesn't have to DO anything but be there ala Peter Sellers playing Hitler in post-WW2 exile. The aerodynamic propulsion unit aka AERO UNIT can do all the flying; the ground, air or sea vehicle detaches from it once on the Earth's surface, and the aero unit can be let there in war guarded/hid or guarded/locked in civilian normie peace or taken along by towing. 

LIE #2: You Can Always Fly and don't need to DRIVE--Even in Non-Flying Weather aka TBATE: Aerodynamic Kinetic Jeopardy (AKJ)

Civilians quickly realized their air-filled rubber tired cars/trucks CANOT go cross-country and built paved roads to pamper them and avoid facing the weakness by creating an artificial urban reality. This costs $$$ the wheeled French Army is not willing to pay so they retreat from Mali, Africa defeated by TBATE--not TBAM Islamo-rebels. Such roads aka Main Supply Routes (MSRs) would have to be picketted by troops at least within infantry battlespace control--say 1, 000 meters or 1x topographical map grid square as the British Army realized in the 1900 Boer war in southern Africa.

In WAR, start with tracks to out-maneuver foes THEN seal-off the problem's borders with WALLS; then kill/capture to drain-the-swamp of rebel malcontent bugs inside. 3D airplane leverage assists this if its efficient with wings that fold to move on the ground (DRIVE) and can operate without need of airbase FOBs with runways because the TRUTH that human beings refuse to admit is AIRCRAFT CANNOT FLY IN BAD WEATHER. What is needed is weapons systems that can FLY & DRIVE to keep moving upon the enemy. The 1st way to do this is with MUDFIGHTERS whose wings fold so they don't bump into things when moved on a trailer driven by trucks/tanks. Implications of aircraft that can drive and not need pampered, obvious air bases with runways are bitterly opposed by the arrogant aviators who would rather let 17x F-22s unable to fly that are no longer in production get destroyed by a TBATE hurricane than fold their wings so they can be put on a trailer and saved.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ndNAk5vvudE1/

It's like NSA 47 bastard child USAF doesn't want to fight like it's fellow bureaucratic prostitute USMC who now want to administratively deploy Anti-Ship Missiles (ASMs) to replay Wake island in WW2 rather than pay for in cash/egotism proper mechanization to amphibiously assault--and not be easily evicted.

In civilian PEACE, this refusal to respect TBATE bad weather tragically fire-death incinerates thousands of people--even families in crap light general aviation planes with the worst possible AKJ imbalance--too much speed in too fragile platforms and too much volatile fuel to survive impacts. An under 100 mph, electric, non-explosive fuel, aircraft with recovery parachutes and air bags in a Burnelli Blended Wing Body (BWB) structure should be able to smack into the Earth at any time and those inside not die, ever. Crash-proof planes by deliberately staying with AKJ protective limits. AeroNASCAR for everyone.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/mD9pYp4zsCi6/

When civilians can't fly due to TBATE bad weather, they should DRIVE in their AEROCARS just like the military should have AEROTANKS described previously. As much as we love the TerraFugia aerocar with obvious folded wings on the ground, it cannot be left un-attended in civilian "peacetime" life without being stolen or envy-vandalized. TerraFugias would be great for military/police roles where they are always manned like guarding the Trump border wall.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/leZQ5gfLHNWC/

The aero unit detaching and becoming a trailer is the best answer for both civilian life where its an anti-kriminal necessity and military life to keep it from being damaged when the aerotank fights on the ground.

LIE #3: BAD VTOL from Overly-Complex, TBATE Unsafe Rotary-Winged, Helicopters are somehow AOK when GOOD VTOL by Wings that Jump Fly are needed

No one on Earth is more idiotic and wasteful than the USMIL that owns, operates, crash-dies and is bankrupted by more overly-complex, TBATE unsafe helicopters than anyone else in the world. 

At the same time demanding obvious, pampered air bases with runways for fixed-wing aircraft that need lift to accumulate before taking-off, damning the USAF, Army and Mc to being D.O.T.G., thousands of fuel-hoggy, maintenance pampered helicopters are operated without their VTOL attaining significant war CONOPS effects of being dispersed, camouflaged, hardened from enemy detection/destruction. They can hover air assault and get creamed by enemy anti-aircraft fires:

www.combatreform.org/fries.htm

The helicopter lie-excuse for their racketeering existence is that VTOL fixed wing is too hard to do when ducted fans are the rage of fake flying car designers--ANYTHING CAN BE MADE TO FLY--even rock humans with no brains by computers. The tilt-wing and ducted fans/engines can be easily applied ending the need for runways and their defeat-inviting bases and even wheel traces on the ground to enemy air/space observation.




https://www.bitchute.com/video/BhJoG6MqMVya/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7dNPOdsDk8

The Luddite helicopter fanboys don't think they personally can pull Gs in high performance fixed-wing flight necessary to avoid being shot-down by SAMs so they'd rather more easily crash & burn from every kind of small arms fire like AK47s (AKMs) and RPGs in their rotary-wing, pussy wagons. They don't even want to fly in light tanks more valiant infantry need claiming they'll crash if one engine conks out--THEN ADD A 3rd ENGINE LIKE THE CH-53E/K does and STFU, cowards.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/foErJHZDh24B/

Our tank-less heroes are getting slaughtered just like in Beirut and Blackhawk Down! 14-hour firefights because rotorheads don't want to fly light tanks to give them COMBAT OVERMATCH. The LINNIES are causing their own martyrdom by refusing to buy Weasel 2 light tanks that fit into and RO-RO from as-is CH-47F Chinooks--LIE #1 wheels can do only what tracks can do strikes again as they are too top-heavy to fit inside. 

https://www.bitchute.com/video/vHeqmljNIp8g/

The TBAM problem of universal air/space observation/attack by PDMs and TFS demands FOB-LESS WARFARE; long-ranging, large space/weight inefficient, break-bulk transport aircraft like C-17s, C-130s, CH-47s, CH-53E/Ks cannot be easily hidden and driven like smaller MUDFIGHTERS even if their wings fold. If they were KIWI POD based, they could pick-up and drop off BATTLEBOX containers fast like our world that lives by container ships does.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/N2hlcUjCDylf/

When not flying, large transports must not be easily targeted from air/space on paved, urbanized FOBs/air bases by Air Cushion Landing Systems (ACLSes) leaving no running TO/L trace and are hidden by multi-spectral camouflage neeting.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KhpxnyJXUQ8L/

Within the 100 mile radius, TACTICAL battlespace, ground vehicle tracked tanks, MUDFIGHTERS and SFBs would fly by Aero Units like our proposed FVVLP ("FLYveeps") to evade pervasive enemy C4ISR. As much as possible, long-range ACLS transports must stay out of the tactical battlespace any longer than to drop or airland its cargoes including paratroops and paratanks. ACLS LRTAs are in fact, Long-Range Amphibious Seaplanes (LRAs) that on the water leave no obvious trace to air/space enemy spying and could be covertly loaded/refueled/armed by fast armored surface ships and transport submarines.

Lie #4 Live within CONstant Land Runway Dependent Jeopardy

A retired U.S. ARMY LTC aviator once told me when flying STOL grasshoppers which can easily TO/L from 300 foot football fields visible from 1, 000 feet AGL, he constantly notionally spotted potential emergency put-down points. Had he had a RP or VTOL means this neurotic but TBATE humble practice could be averted. 

CONstant Runway Dependent Jeopardy (CONRDJ) is magnified when flying over oceans as visibly demonstrated with Amelia Earheart's loss in 1937. Had she been in a plane with a boat hull aka SEAPLANE taken some aerodynamic drag flight performance lumps, when she and her navigator FUCKED-UP (vulgarity necessary here), NO PROBLEMO. Set down in the water before running completely out of fuel to MOTOR to shore after getting directions on the radio and/or being rescued with her Japanese base spy over-flight film intact.

https://jamesbondisreal.blogspot.com/2020/06/spythink-019-amelia-earharts-fatal.html

Even though clever design can make jet flying boat seaplanes and retracting skis just as streamlined as land planes making this moot point:

www.combatreform.org/p6mseamaster.htm

www.combatreform.org/seaplanefighters.htm

www.combatreform.org/seaplanetransports.htm

 

There is another minimalist option: enable land planes to land 1x time and float in TBATE weather/PEA and TBAM warfighting emergencies by bottom airframe shaping and water-proofing. Large delta-wings like the fabulous Vulcan bomber just need water-proofing to safely water-land as James Bond EON movie-makers demonstrated in 1965 "Thunderball".

https://www.bitchute.com/video/mgvgTDwhmzvr/

A minimalist seaplane capability (MINSC) could be also attained by clever fuel tank floats as proposed for the P-38 in WW2 to self-cross oceans eliminating ship transporting and is easily doable with the A-4's SOP 2x fuel tanks made into floats making them "HydroHawks".

https://www.bitchute.com/video/TUQrmbbvw5nu/ https://www.bitchute.com/video/rtFUA6kJ8QC5/ https://www.bitchute.com/video/29lNleARG5pd/

AKJ and CONRDJ are eliminated by folding wing, Fly/Drive (FWFD), BWB, RPs, VTOL, ACLS and MINSC.

The whole aircraft carrier flat top poorly executed by having a superstructure island preventing large right wings (pun hahaha) from landing is a naval form of CONRDJ.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/E6D8RWwNNf7o/

The Midway Myth mania has damned the USN as a whole into a fatal seaplane-less, vulnerable TIN can VPFX existence that will explode one day into the USS Indianapolis fiasco on steroids.

www.combatreform.org/midwaymyth.htm

Thousands of MILSHEEPLE will die from TBATE salt water and weather exposure and sharks eating them.   

www.combatreform.org/abandonshiphopetodie.htm

Again, civilian nihilist normies having no skin in national defense have left naval warfare to TOP GUN racketeers which could cost us our super power status and our very existence. So much for 2x oceans protecting us!

Desperation solutions are to conduct flight tests to ascertain a F-35B VTOL capability on the fan decks of all our TIN CAN surface ship destroyers, frigates and cruisers ASAP since the handful of stupid carriers will be kept out of enemy ballistic ASM range lest quickly destroyed with decks awash in fuel, bomb-laden aircraft aka USS Forrestal fire in 1967.

www.combatreform.org/seaplanefighters.htm

The perfect answer of unmanned/manned ski and/or VTOL seaplane fighters will take $1B and 10x years we don't have--but we should start work on it.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/2MpArjDGAE58/

LIE #6: It's AOK to administratively deploy marines with ASMs to snipe at enemy ships that can't combined-arms warfight to prevent eviction with no escape to Japan or Australia?

NSA 47 bastard child HQMC (USMC) has given up on amphibious warfare requiring humble adults that can maintain/operate combined arms weaponry and engineering tools for administratively deploying these teenagers with ASMs to islands the Japanese have agreed to give us in event of CHICOM threatening democratic Taiwan.

https://youtu.be/smSWx-zbZFM

The Taiwanese have successfully held off CHICOM eviction of hugely important nearby islands by the COMBAT OVERMATCH of light tanks. A smart USMC would obtain as many M113A4 Super Gavins with 30mm autocannon/ATGM retracting weapons stations that RO-RO from their CH-53K King Stallions.

Human decency and common sense (I know nihilist Amerika lack these) demands there be a PLAN B to escape to Japan or even Australia where buxom babes await as long as you show you've taken the deathjab so your remaining 3x to 5x years can at least be sexhappy as per the 1958 movie, "On the Beach". HQMC should secretly buy a squadron of 12x Japanese Shin Meiwa US-2 LRAs and develop an inflatoplane WIG craft that transports a pair of enlisted gyrenes to a nearby Allied Nation Operating Base (ANOB).

https://www.bitchute.com/video/WsxVn7d658lg/

Make the inflato-WIG computer flown if enlisted pilot egotism that might with a flight suit get them laid with Meg Ryans is sooo damn intolerable. No wings = no sex. Paramarines that can parachute drop into ASM blocking positions would solve forced abstinence as well as eliminating need for 3, 000 foot Assault Landings Zones (ALZs) for C-130s to airland. Such obvious ASM blocking points will invite TFS so mechanical burrowing and multi-spectral camouflage is needed to be detailed in PART 2.  

LIE #5: Large Fighter-Bombers-for-Everything, the USAF Delusion Feeding Everything they Do

In WW2, the Nazi German Luftwaffe was cursed by the failure of their large, long-range, twin-engined Me110s unable to prevail in Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) aka dogfighting against more nimble single-engined RAF Hurricanes and Spitfires in the 1940 Battle of Britain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_110

The Messerschmitt Bf 110, often known unofficially as the Me 110,[2] is a twin-engine Zerstörer (Destroyer, heavy fighter), fighter-bomber (Jagdbomber or Jabo), and night fighter (Nachtjäger) developed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s and used by the Luftwaffe during World War II. Hermann Göring was a proponent of the Bf 110, believing its heavy armament, speed, and range would make the Bf 110 the Luftwaffe’s premier offensive fighter. Early variants were armed with two MG FF 20 mm cannon, four 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 machine guns, and one 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 15 machine gun for defence (later variants would replace the MG FFs with MG 151s and the rear gunner station would be armed with the twin-barreled MG 81Z). Development work on an improved type to replace the Bf 110 - the Messerschmitt Me 210 - began before the war started, but its teething troubles resulted in the Bf 110 soldiering on until the end of the war in various roles. Its intended replacements, the aforementioned Me 210 and the significantly improved Me 410 Hornisse never fully replaced the Bf 110.

The Bf 110 served with considerable success in the early campaigns in Poland, Norway and France. The primary weakness of the Bf 110 was its lack of maneuverability, although this could be mitigated with better tactics. This weakness was exploited by the RAF when Bf 110s were flown as close escort to German bombers during the Battle of Britain. When British bombers began targeting German territory with nightly raids, some Bf 110-equipped units were converted to night fighters, a role to which the aircraft was well suited. After the Battle of Britain the Bf 110 enjoyed a successful period as an air superiority fighter and strike aircraft in other theatres and defended Germany from strategic air attack by day against the USAAF's 8th Air Force, until an American change in fighter tactics rendered them increasingly vulnerable to developing American air supremacy over the Reich as 1944 began.

During the Balkans and North African campaigns and on the Eastern Front, it rendered valuable ground support to the German Army as a potent fighter-bomber. Later in the war, it was developed into a formidable radar-equipped night fighter, becoming the main night-fighting aircraft of the Luftwaffe. Most of the German night fighter aces flew the Bf 110 at some point during their combat careers and the top night fighter ace, Major Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer, flew it exclusively and claimed 121 victories in 164 sorties.[3]

****

The Me110's long range was impressively demonstrated by Nazi 2IC Rudolph Hess duped by Commander Ian Fleming's naval intelligence tricks into flying one to Scotland with a peace overture resulting his life imprisonment into the 1980s to guarantee his silence over WW2's real Illuminati instigations. Martin Bormann replaced him as Nazi 2IC holding all their stolen loot in Swiss banks resulting in Commander Fleming leading commandos to rescue him from Berlin in 1945 to get $1B that later funded the British atomic bomb.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/jHwnQ76xxh4P/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/yWlveSIJEbJv/

The question is why was the 2x-engined, 2x 1, 000 hp Me110 WITHOUT COUNTER-ROTATING PROPS a failure in ACM against single-engine fighters when the twin-engined, 2x 1, 400 hp P-38 WITH COUNTER-ROTATING PROPS could shoot-down Zeros more maneuverable than Spifires?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning

The Lockheed P-38 Lightning is an American single-seated, twin piston-engined fighter aircraft that was used during World War II. Developed for the United States Army Air Corps by the Lockheed Corporation, the P-38 incorporated a distinctive twin boom design with a central nacelle containing the cockpit and armament. Allied propaganda claimed it had been nicknamed the fork-tailed devil (German: der Gabelschwanz-Teufel) by the Luftwaffe and "two planes, one pilot" by the Japanese.[4] Along with its use as a general fighter, the P-38 was used in various aerial combat roles, including as a highly effective fighter-bomber, a night fighter, and as a long-range escort fighter when equipped with drop tanks.[5] The P-38 was also used as a bomber-pathfinder, guiding streams of medium and heavy bombers; or even other P-38s, equipped with bombs, to their targets.[6] Used in the aerial reconnaissance role, the P-38 accounted for 90% of the aerial film captured over Europe.[7]

The P-38 was used most successfully in the Pacific Theater of Operations and the China-Burma-India Theater of Operations as the aircraft of America's top aces, Richard Bong (40 victories), Thomas McGuire (38 victories), and Charles H. MacDonald (27 victories). In the South West Pacific Theater, the P-38 was the primary long-range fighter of United States Army Air Forces until the introduction of large numbers of P-51D Mustangs toward the end of the war.[8][page needed] Unusual for a fighter engine power was boosted by turbosuperchargers giving the P-38 good high-altitude performance, making it one of the earliest Allied fighters capable of performing well at high altitudes. The exhaust was muffled by the turbosuperchargers, making the P-38's operation relatively quiet. [9] It was extremely forgiving and could be mishandled in many ways, but the rate of roll in the early versions was too low for it to excel as a dogfighter.[10] The P-38 was the only American fighter aircraft in large-scale production throughout American involvement in the war, from the Attack on Pearl Harbor to Victory over Japan Day.[11]

Many of the British order of 524 Lightning IIs were fitted with stronger F-10 Allison engines as they became available, and all were given wing pylons for fuel tanks or bombs. The upgraded aircraft were deployed to the Pacific as USAAC F-5A reconnaissance or P-38G fighter models, the latter used with great effect to shoot down Admiral Yamamoto in April 1943. Robert Petit's G model named "Miss Virginia" was on that mission, borrowed by Rex Barber, who was later credited with the kill. Petit had already used "Miss Virginia" to defeat two Nakajima A6M2-N "Rufe" floatplanes in February and to heavily damage a Japanese submarine chaser in March, which he mistakenly claimed as a destroyer sunk. Murray "Jim" Shubin used a less powerful F model he named "Oriole" to down five confirmed and possibly six Zeros over Guadalcanal in June 1943 to become ace in a day.[60]

The P-38 was credited with destroying more Japanese aircraft than any other USAAF fighter.[3] While the P-38 could not out-turn the A6M Zero and most other Japanese fighters when flying below 200 mph (320 km/h), its superior speed coupled with a good rate of climb meant that it could use energy tactics, making multiple high-speed passes at its target. In addition, its tightly grouped guns were even more deadly to lightly armored Japanese warplanes than to German aircraft. The concentrated, parallel stream of bullets allowed aerial victory at much longer distances than fighters carrying wing guns. Dick Bong, the United States' highest-scoring World War II air ace (40 victories in P-38s), flew directly at his targets to ensure he hit them, in some cases flying through the debris of his target (and on one occasion colliding with an enemy aircraft which was claimed as a "probable" victory). The twin Allison engines performed admirably in the Pacific.

In the Pacific theater, the P-38 downed over 1,800 Japanese aircraft, with more than 100 pilots becoming aces by downing five or more enemy aircraft.[104] American fuel supplies contributed to a better engine performance and maintenance record, and range was increased with leaner mixtures. In the second half of 1944, the P-38L pilots out of Dutch New Guinea were flying 950 mi (1,530 km), fighting for 15 minutes and returning to base.[108] Such long legs were invaluable until the P-47N and P-51D entered service.

The strategic bombing proponents within the USAAF, called the Bomber Mafia by their ideological opponents, had established in the early 1930s a policy against research to create long-range fighters, which they thought would not be practical; this kind of research was not to compete for bomber resources. Aircraft manufacturers understood that they would not be rewarded if they installed subsystems on their fighters to enable them to carry drop tanks to provide more fuel for extended range. Lieutenant Kelsey, acting against this policy, risked his career in late 1941 when he convinced Lockheed to incorporate such subsystems in the P-38E model, without putting his request in writing. Kelsey possibly was responding to Colonel George William Goddard's observation that the U.S. sorely needed a high-speed, long-range photo reconnaissance plane. Along with a change order specifying some P-38Es be produced without guns, but with photo reconnaissance cameras, to be designated the F-4-1-LO, Lockheed began working out the problems of drop-tank design and incorporation. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, eventually about 100 P-38Es were sent to a modification center near Dallas, Texas, or to the new Lockheed assembly plant B-6 (today the Burbank Airport), to be fitted with four K-17 aerial photography cameras. All of these aircraft were also modified to be able to carry drop tanks. P-38Fs were modified, as well. Every Lightning from the P-38G onward was capable of being fitted with drop tanks straight off the assembly line.[62]

In March 1942, General Arnold made an off-hand comment that the U.S. could avoid the German U-boat menace by flying fighters to the U.K. (rather than packing them onto ships). President Roosevelt pressed the point, emphasizing his interest in the solution. Arnold was likely aware of the flying radius extension work being done on the P-38, which by this time had seen success with small drop tanks in the range of 150 to 165 U.S. gal (570 to 620 L), the difference in capacity being the result of subcontractor production variation. Arnold ordered further tests with larger drop tanks in the range of 300 to 310 U.S. gal (1,100 to 1,200 L); the results were reported by Kelsey as providing the P-38 with a 2,500-mile (4,000 km) ferrying range.[62] Because of available supply, the smaller drop tanks were used to fly Lightnings to the U.K., the plan called Operation BOLERO.

Led by two Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses, the first seven P-38s, each carrying two small drop tanks, left Presque Isle Army Air Field on 23 June 1942 for RAF Heathfield in Scotland. Their first refueling stop was made in far northeast Canada at Goose Bay. The second stop was a rough airstrip in Greenland called Bluie West One, and the third refueling stop was in Iceland at Keflavik. Other P-38s followed this route with some lost in mishaps, usually due to poor weather, low visibility, radio difficulties, and navigational errors. Nearly 200 of the P-38Fs (and a few modified Es) were successfully flown across the Atlantic in July–August 1942, making the P-38 the first USAAF fighter to reach Britain and the first fighter ever to be delivered across the Atlantic under its own power.[63] Kelsey himself piloted one of the Lightnings, landing in Scotland on 25 July.[64]

****

IMHO, the P-38's handed engine problem could have been solved and greater flight performance attained by pusher-pull configuration as proposed in our P-38X:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QBM8-P0Mjg

Moreover, powerful 2x cannon armament in front of the twin booms set to converge would have compensated for losing the nose armament concentration with the benefits of no 1x engine-out asymmetric thrust and handed engines complications. An ejection seat was needed in the twin-tail P-38 regardless out its engine configuration.  

Having 2x jet engines close together seemed to have deluded the USAF with its 1943 North Africa FBFE mentality that a long-range heavy fighter with lots of fuel could ACM dogfight beat smaller, lighter single-seat fighters with home field advantage of already being there; the F-4 losses against MIG-17s and 21s over North Vietnam contradict this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elkCBFE4u1M

The drop tank and in-flight refuel tankers to keep tactical fighter-bomber "lawn darts" in the air failed to geostrategically bomb North Vietnam into submission with 10, 000 bomb loads so B-52 heavy bombers with 80, 000 pound bomb loads finally got the enemy to quit.

Is the 2x engined F-15 the new P-38?

The perfect F-15 Eagle 100 to none loss rate combat record demands an explanation as to whether it can out-ACM dogfight single-engined fighters or not? The F-14 could not despite all the TOP GUN DISinfo. 1st, the F-15 flies HIGHER and FASTER than others so it swats down MIGs with long-range, radar guided AAMs that finally worked with AIM-120 AMRAAMs. Next, it has high energy maneuver advantage diving down on MIGs like the P-38s did. What does RED FLAG show about F-15 versus say F-5s in turning dogfights? Can it do the Cobra maneuver?

From a common sense perspective, something bigger and larger is going to be less maneuverable than something smaller and lighter, all other factors equal. 

It also seems common sense that the still-in-production, F-15 should be upgraded with folding wings, Vectored Thrust Canards (VTCs) and prudent stealth shaping/coverings to maximize its ACM and enable STOL operations form covert land bases and have over 1, 000 mile combat radiuses so USN stupid carriers can contribute to battles and not hide like the German surface fleet did in WW1/WW2. Lift fans/jets to make Sea Eagles VTOL are another possibility.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/kQui9E8tYSrq/

Such F-15NXwhatever Sea Eagles should have a rear seater, enlisted back-up pilot/observer who can guard against enemy MIG attacks by rearward firing AAMs and/or lasers if the later can work. R2D2 from "Star Wars", normies.

Another country in dire CHICOM straits (pun intended) is Australia which has bought absurd, short-range, single-engined F-35As and no VSTOL Bs for its 2x carriers which have skil jumps for them. I'm not convinced the single engined, F-35 smallness equates to it being ACM dogfight superior in flight performance to a Chinese J15 with canards if the latter can get to Oz by ski jump carrier, air refueling etc.

For the sake of argument, let's ASS U ME the F-35 has the defensive advantage like a Spitfire/Hurricane to do to the CHICOMs like the Germans got in the 1940 Battle of Britain.

HOW do we get F-35As to defensive battlespaces far away from Oz?

Parasite them. I know a derogatory word. Platform them there on Airborne Aircraft Carriers (AACs).

www.combatreform.org/airborneaircraftcarriers.htm

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lATs7wo03SsD/

The Boeing 747 is available and with a flat top "deck" and twin tails like the aerospace plane Shuttle shuttler had could launch/recover 2x F-35As aka a leader & wingman. The mother AAC carries the dangerous & non-sexy fuel for the long ranges needed over the Indo-Pacific. 

The problem with the 747 needs 6, 000 foot runways and is itself difficult to hide from air/space surveillance.

Therefore, we propose a twin-tail, Shin Meiwa LRASes be obtained to each launch & possibly air-recover a F-35A to create a 24/7/365 continuous outer air defensive barrier PATROL guarding Oz that when in "REST" mode lands on the water leaving no telltale trace for enemy air/space surveillance.

YES, it's fucking something new.

A NEW idea.

Imagine that! This generation actually doing something never done before taking on DEATH risks.

Summary/Conclusion

TNW = Tracks Not Wheels

FWFD = Folding Wings; Fly & Drive

ACLS = Air Cushion Landing Systems land anywhere land/sea

BWB = Blended Wing Body, crash-resistant planes

VTOL = Vertical Take-Off & Landing by Fixed Wing aircraft with Ducted and/or jet fans--NOT HELICOPTERS!

MINSC = Minimal Seaplane Capabilities by all if can't do ACLS or skis

VTC = Vectored Thrust Canards for SM & STOL

AAC = Airborne Aircraft Carriers  

NOTES

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-United-States-avoid-using-canards-on-its-fighter-aircraft-It-seems-to-be-a-far-more-common-feature-on-fighters-in-Europe-Russia-and-China

Aleksey Naumenko, works at Irkut Corporation

Updated Jun 1, 2020 ·

Upvoted by Adrian Kruger, Qualified pilot with a PPL, student of all things Aviation.

How is it done in Russia ...Foreplane (canard surfaces) increases the instability of the aircraft, which allows for large overloads without increasing the strength of the wing and tail unit, and reduce balancing losses during maneuvering. At large angles of attack, the foreplane improves the stability and controllability characteristics in the roll and pitch control channels, which expands the maneuvering zone permissible at angles of attack. In addition, the well-chosen scheme of the mutual arrangement of the foreplane and the bearing body, due to favorable interference, gives a much larger increase in maximum lifting force than the addition of lifting force from the foreplane itself ...Fig. Su-27Initially, the Su-27 did not have a foreplane

...Nevertheless, the use of foreplane on the Su-27 is logical, because the classic controlled stabilizer of the aircraft does not create a negative pitching moment, but a positive pitching moment — due to static instability — therefore, the stall of the flow on the stabilizer begins earlier — the stabilizer cannot create a moment. Foreplane, on the contrary, creates a negative pitching moment, therefore it is efficient in all ranges of angles of attack ...In the mid-80s, it was decided to begin the modernization of the Su-27 in the Su-27M, in order to increase the combat capabilities of the aircraft when working on ground targets. The main object of modernization was the radar. To install a new phased-array radar on the Su-27 had to increase the size of the aircraft. For this, the nose of the aircraft was extended to accommodate an antenna of a larger diameter. The nose of the aircraft, in the end, turned out to be heavier than that of the Su-27, the balance changed, etc. ...Foreplane was installed on the Su-27M, which is not typical for aircraft built according to the classical aerodynamic scheme ...Foreplane installation allowed to improve the alignment of the aircraft, increase the lifting force of the wing, improve takeoff and landing characteristics and maneuverability. At the same time, two additional suspension points appeared, the nose landing gear was strengthened and the height of the fins was increased. The airspeed tube has “disappeared

...Fig. Su-30SM (evolutionary development of the Su-30MKI export family)In the mid-90s, contracts for airplanes appeared ... Since a two-seat aircraft lost in a maneuver to a single-seat aircraft (due to the heavy nose part), when creating an export Su-30 with foreplane, the experience of foreplane with Su-27M was used ...Fig. Su-33On the naval Su-33, the foreplane primarily improves performance at high angles of attack and low speed (when starting from a “springboard”), and on the Su-30, in addition, it shifts the aerodynamic center forward, which is necessary to maintain pitching instability (due to the new radar) ...Fig. Su-34In addition, on the Su-34 foreplane performs the function of a damper when flying at a very low altitude in a disturbed surface atmosphere ...

Fig. Su-35SThe current Su-35 is a single-seat “Su-27”, with a modernized airframe and control system built on new materials, components and technologies. For the first time in Russia, composites and other modern structural materials were widely used in aircraft construction, which made it possible to do without foreplane, the drag (aerodynamic) flap was removed, and “trimmed” keels appeared ...Su-35 is easier than Su-27. In short, we returned to the original Su-27 aerodynamic design ...How to do it abroad ...When choosing one of the three aerodynamic balancing schemes, it should be borne in mind that due to the difficulty in obtaining large values of the increment of lift due to the use of wing mechanization (especially for the tailless scheme), the tailless scheme and the canard scheme for takeoff and landing are forced to go to large angles of attack. Structurally, this makes it impossible (or difficult) to use large and medium wing aspect ratio swept wings on such aircraft, since the use of such wings and large angles of attack is associated with a very high height of the nose landing gear ...As a result, for high-speed planes in the canard and tailless schemes, only small wing aspect ratio wings of a delta, gothic, ogival delta or crescent shape in plan can be used. Due to the small wing aspect ratio, such wings have low lift-to-drag ratio at subsonic flight modes ...Thus, the use of the canard and tailless schemes is advisable for aircraft in which the main flight mode is flying at supersonic speed. The usual, “classic/ normal” scheme is most appropriate for subsonic aircraft or aircraft in which the flight mode at subsonic speed prevails over supersonic flight modes ...

The Future Battlefield and Civilian Life Demands Lies Be Discarded and Truths Acted On, PART 2: Sink the Army & Air Force under Ground    

Concealment Not Being Done and Not Multi-Spectral Camouflage Enough by USMIL

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KdPj7dQ6VA6e/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/TOBbpZrRL09T/

 

Comments

Popular Posts