HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rfauteux@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert Fauteux)
Subject: Re: AFROTC or USAF ?
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Distribution: usa
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:40:04 GMT

trujillo@optima.UUCP (Clorinda Trujillo) writes:

>the Gold Bar program.  If I get that, I will go active duty almost
>immediately and spend the first year doing recruiting.  However, since
>that is a highly selective program...

     Well, remember that you have just as good a chance as anyone else. 
If not, computer work shouldn't be too bad.  A friend of mine got his
degree in Information Services, and is now working at Randolph in 
MPC (always nice to know someone there!).   He likes what he is doing,
and he says that he is meeting alot of great people.  He is one of our
pilot candidates who lost his slot, then got it back "deferred".  They
are supposed to be sending him within the next few months (he is getting
close to the age limit), and in a way he wishes he could stay at MPC and
finish out the tour before beginning UPT.  But he's not complaining ...
he says it's been a great opportunity.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     /    /    ____/ __  __/  | Robert A. Fauteux <rfauteux@rtfm.acs.uci.edu>
    /    /    /         /     | Office of Academic Computing, UC Irvine
   /    /    /         /      |-----------------------------------------------
  /    /    /         /       | "An anteater??!!
______/  ______/  ______/     |  ...now what the hell kind of mascot is that?"
From: James_Zuchelli@qm.claris.com (James Zuchelli)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Airshows At Edwards And Moffett
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:10:08 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Claris Corp


(deleted) >
> >Rob> Also an Aurora low pass, low speed fly by.
> >
> >Yeah, right.  They're going to let me ride in it, too.
> >
(deleted)

Maybe someone could get a skywriting plane and modify its smoke machine to 
make diamond shaped puffs and fly over at 20,000 ft.  That should give 
everyone a thrill (especially the military people.)

James Zuchelli
------------------
The above is my personal opinion and not that of Claris Corp. or my employer.
From: davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu (Stimpson J. Cat)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: F/A-18E/F bad idea?
Date: 14 Oct 92 09:21:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: sumax.5392
Organization: Seattle University, Seattle WA

In article <1992Oct14.32242.18011@ms.uky.edu> randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) writes:
>You wrote ....
>
>As a related aside, how do you justify the F-18E/F vs. a QuickStrike
>F-14 Tomcat?  The F-14 mod had a *GUARANTEED* price LESS than the
>F-18.  It also has significant payload and range advantages over the
>F-18.
>
>I write ...
>
>Really.  Is this in comparason to ungrading the F-14's or is this
>whole new F-14's.  Do you know any numbers?
>
>-Thanks
>
>-Randy



	In 1991, Grumman stated it would be willing to commit to
fixed prices for the Quickstrike F-14 through fiscal year 1997. It would
build them for $43.8 million, at a production rate of 12 F-14Ds per year.
At a rate of 24 per year, it would build them for $27.9 million in FY1990
dollars. I don't know if the former figure is given in constant 1990
dollars. These are all-new aircraft, not rebuilds.

	The F/A 18 E/F should be able to carry 4 X 1000lb bombs, 2 AIM 9Ls
and 2 X 330 gal. fuel tanks, for a operational radius of 400 nautical miles.
The Quickstrike F-14 can carry the same load for a range of 460 nm. The
F-14 can carry 8 X 1000 pounders for a range of 400 nm, whereas the F/A 18E/F
range falls to 265 nm. It would have a ingress and egress speed 200 knots
faster than the F/A 18 E/F, using the same mission profile. 

	An F-14 carrying four AIM-54's and 4 AMRAAM's flies faster than
a F/A 18 clean. The drop tanks for the F-14 are conformal- thus it can
carry them without manuvering restrictions. The bombs can be carried 
conformally in the tunnel between the engines/intakes. When used in the
fleet defense role, given a mission with the following profile:

	Cruise to station at best speed, loiter for 90 minutes. Attack at
Mach 1.35 and fight for 1 minute, return at best speed,hold for 20 minutes,
and land with 5% fuel reserves.

	The F/A 18 E/F cannot even do this unless speed is reduced to Mach 
1.2 and external tanks are dropped. It would then have a radius of 260 nm.
The F14D can operate at 350 nm *without* dropping its tanks, using this
mission profile.

	The F/A 18 is cheaper, but apparently much of the cost savings
come from the fact the F/A 18 production line is kept open, by buying
210 F/A 18 C's until the E/F is ready. 

	These figures and information come from the March 1992 issue
of Airpower Magazine. This article claims the price differential
bewtween the two is $1.52 million. Considering the vastly superior
capability of the F-14, this seems, IMHO, a reasonable price to pay.



				David L. Yee
			email to:davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Airshows At Edwards And Moffett
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:00:44 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <rob.718330646@blacks> rob@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Rob Fatland) writes:
>Also an Aurora low pass, low speed fly by.

How boring.  Who wants to see an Aurora going *slow*? :-)  (Aside from the
Aviation Leak photographers, that is...)
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Military career?
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:47:06 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <70684@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt3144b@prism.gatech.EDU (Sonny) writes:
>I am very interested in becomming a military pilot and I
>have a few questions:
>
>  1.  What is the age and visual requirements for USAF, USN, and USMC.

The bottom line right now is that supply of qualified candidates exceeds
demand, so if you aren't quite young with perfect vision, forget it.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
From: cmraman@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Focused on Infinity)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Moffett Airshow
Date: 16 Oct 1992 07:21:23 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


I just talked to my mother, who works in Sunnyvale.
She said, "I love the Blue Angels, but after having them fly practice over
us yesterday and today, I understand why people hate them."
Nevertheless, she'll probably be there on Saturday, same as me. (though the
likelihood of us actually *seeing* each other is low as we're coming from
different locations.)

-- 
..___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___...
Marc Reeve
cmraman@ucscb.ucsc.edu	cmraman@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us
"Dragon with matches loose on the town
Takes a whole pail of water just to cool him down."

Naturally my opinions are unheard by UCSC, as it is a bureaucratic monolith.
From: rfauteux@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert Fauteux)
Subject: Re: ROTC Delays (was Re: AFROTC or USAF ?)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Distribution: usa
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:47:48 GMT

prang@ssc-vax.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja) writes:

>Me?  Engineer.  Got commissioned, then got orders to report in just two
>months.

     Well, I don't know if I'd want to go in just 2 months, but 16 kind
of sucks (pardon the expression).  So, did you go to Flight Training?


>"Mr. Wanttaja, you scored 98% in both
> the pilot and navigator tests.  We'd
> like to give you a scholarship."

     Hehe.  I wish it was like that when I took that test...  :-)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     /    /    ____/ __  __/  | Robert A. Fauteux <rfauteux@rtfm.acs.uci.edu>
    /    /    /         /     | Office of Academic Computing, UC Irvine
   /    /    /         /      |-----------------------------------------------
  /    /    /         /       | "An anteater??!!
______/  ______/  ______/     |  ...now what the hell kind of mascot is that?"

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: hards4@evans.ee.adfa.oz.au (Brad Hards)
Subject: Re: Aurora (was Re: Airshows At Edwards And Moffett)
Organization: University College UNSW ADFA Australia
	<Bvrx9B.E5x@zoo.toronto.edu>
	<1992Oct9.020701.5413@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 08:18:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.020701.5413@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> q1hl@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Nameless CS Student) writes:

   I missed the original post, but have to wonder if maybe the Aurora
   expected to attend the airshow isn't the Canadian Forces Lockheed
   CP-140 Aurora, our main Anti-Submarine Warfare / Arctic + Offshore
   Patrol aircraft.  You know it as the P-3 Orion in the U.S.
The original post had nothing to do with this. Might be a good story
to try though: "Come to my airshow and see the Lockheed Aurora". :)
Incidentally, it is probably more accurate to say that the CP-140 is
closer to the S-3, since in maritime patrol, the airframe is arguably
the least significant part, whilst the ASW and ESM gear (which I am
pretty sure is directly from the S-3) is what makes the difference.

Whilst on ASW (amazing how the topic got from from a high speed recon
aircraft to this), where and when is the next Fincastle competition?

---
Brad Hards     EE4 - Australian Defence Force Academy      hards4@ee.adfa.oz.au
             "If it is stupid, and it works, it isn't stupid"
Disclaimer: If any of the above agrees with the opinions of ADFA or the RAAF,
                        it is purely coincidental.
From: danmcd@cs.arizona.edu (Daniel L. McDonald)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Another GIF/JPEG/etc. request...
Summary: ATF pix.
Keywords: GIF JPEC F-22 F-23
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:11:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

I remember seeing a nice GIF of a YF-23 some months back.  I can't remember
where I obtained it from.

I'm looking for that picture, plus any other pictures of both Advanced Tactical
Fighter candidates, especially the YF-22.

Sorry to ask this again, but the sys. admins don't keep old articles for very
long.

--
Dan McDonald    |Internet: danmcd@cs.arizona.edu, UUCP: ..!uunet!arizona!danmcd
U. of Arizona   |BITNET: danmcd%cs.arizona.edu@arizona.BITNET
Computer Science| "All of us get lost in the darkness,
Graduate Student|  dreamers learn to steer by the stars." - Rush (N. Peart)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: pettypi@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Carl Pettypiece)
Subject: Re: Aurora?
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:57:47 GMT

In article <mcewin.718504374@neptune> mcewin@convex.com (Bill McEwin) writes:
>easmith@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Eric A Smith) writes:
>
>>Can someone give me a little bit of information on the Aurora?  I've never
>>heard of it.  Reply via e-mail please...save network bandwidth. Thanks in
>>advance!
>
>Just for interest, everyone seems to forget that the Canadians have an
>Aurora also.  That is the name of their ASW aircraft also called the
>CP-140.  It uses basically the same Lockheed airframe as the US P-3C, but
>has completely different and, in many cases, more advanced avionics and
>crew compartment layout.  The original order of 20 or so were built in
>Burbank in the late 70's.
>
>
But it should be pointed out that these Canadian Lockheed Auroras
have never been officially observed flying at high supersonic
speeds over California.  Who'd have guessed that the old Electra
airliner could go that fast!

BTW, for the humour impaired (-: (-:


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Pettypiece (pettypi@gaul.csd.uwo.ca)        Disclaimer:  Hell, I don't
Department of Computer Science                   even know if these are MY
University of Western Ontario                    opinions!
From: rfauteux@orion.oac.uci.edu (Robert Fauteux)
Subject: Re: AFROTC or USAF ?
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Distribution: usa
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:27:49 GMT

mconrad@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (|<azie) writes:

>   GIVE IT UP!  In the last four years none of our "future pilots" haven't 
>gotten to go to UPT, they have had to take other jobs and defer traingin for x 
>number of years.  In talking with some current AF officers (not the cadre!), 
>they say you have a better chance to fly if you get out of ROTC and join a 
>guard unit that is being moved because of base closure, budget cuts etc. etc.  
>I just got my new AF mag & it said that now even academy cadet pilot slots are 
>being slashed.  Now if this is any sign of the future, we have no hope.  [well 
>feamales may have a slight hope :) ]  As it is even for reg. AF jobs there is a 
>LONG wait.  Long enough for some of my pals who graduated in May to get a 
>masters!!   

     I couldn't disagree with you more.  Period.  You are missing the whole
point.  Yes, times are tough.  Yes, there are less slots available than there
were a few years ago.  Yes, there are no "guarantees".  This means that you
actually have to *work* for what you want to accomplish.  And work 
harder.  This means that those people who aren't willing to put in the time
and effort won't get the opportunities, while those that do will. 

     As for "well, females may have a slight hope", this shouldn't make one
bit of difference.  If you are willing to put in the effort, you should
get the reward.  Force cuts don't make it impossible to get where you want
to go, it just seperates those who *really* want it from those who don't.

     Just because the water is starting to rise doesn't necessarily mean you
jump ship...


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     /    /    ____/ __  __/  | Robert A. Fauteux <rfauteux@rtfm.acs.uci.edu>
    /    /    /         /     | Office of Academic Computing, UC Irvine
   /    /    /         /      |-----------------------------------------------
  /    /    /         /       | "An anteater??!!
______/  ______/  ______/     |  ...now what the hell kind of mascot is that?"

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: edhresko@eos.ncsu.edu (ERIC DAVID HRESKO)
Subject: Re: math relationship?
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Distribution: rec.aviation
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:11:08 GMT

	Here are several different relationships relating true and calibrated airspeeds depending on what you have measured
V0=true airspeed
Ve=The equivelant airspeed is the speed at sea level
   densities for which the dynamic pressure is the same as at the actual speed
   and density conditions.  When compressibility can be neglected, Ve=Vc
Vc=Calibrated airspeed, the speed read on a perfect airspeed indicator with zero   instrument error using a static source that recores true ambient air pressurePt=total pressure, the static pressure when V0 = 0
P0=free stream pressure
rhoS=sea level standard density
rho=local density

V0=sqrt((2*(Pt-P0))/rho)
    relates true speed with total pressure, free stream pressure and density

Vc=sqru((2*(Pt-P0))/rhoS)
    calculates calibrated airspeed

Ve=V0*sqrt(rho/rhoS)

V0=Ve*sqrt(rhoS/rho)

Hope this helps.  A good book for a non totally theoretical intro to flight is 

Fundimentals of Flight
Richard S. Shevell
Prentice Hall, Inc
ISBN 0-13-339060-8

This is the book we use in our aerospace engineering dept for the introductory aero course.  I got a lot out of it...
 

-- 


Eric

******************************************************************************
Eric Hresko		* Mail:  edhresko@eos.ncsu.edu                       * 
Kanki House of Steaks   * Voice: (why would you want to call?) 1-919-821-5168*
Dishwasher 2nd Class    * HK Rules!!! (But a FAL will do in a pinch)         *
DISCLAIMER:  I don't wear sandals, eat granola, or tiptoe thru the Tulips    *
******************************************************************************
From: albert@sc.hp.com (Albert Alcorn)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Moffett Airshow
Date: 15 Oct 92 23:53:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Semiconductor Test Systems
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

I saw a C-5 flying in. 

In previous years, most all of the NASA planes were on display (U-2,
Harrier, Cargo, QRSA, T-38) and the Harrier flew.

The P-3s (of course) are there, usually a flight demonstration.

Some sort of high performance jet usually flies (F-14, F-16, F-15, F-18).

And usually, parajumpers, choppers, bi-plane, glider, or something along this
line.

And then the Blues close the show.

Albert "Just taking a guess" Alcorn
From: jem3@pyuxf.uucp (25312-mc killop)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Cargo planes as Bombers
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:22:13 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ

In article <1992Oct14.125941@usho72.hou281.chevron.com> hhtra@usho72.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock) writes:
>
> Air Force Magazine always has such stories of valor and humor every
> year or so.  I'll dig through the back issues and look.  I think the 
> current issue has something about C-117's taking over the "Puff the
> Magic Dragon" (?) role from the C-47's.
>
> I remember one about C-117's being used with all sorts of bombs from
> 50 - 2000 lbs and simply rolling them off the ramp.  I think they 
> were used mostly for harassment, mostly at night.  CEP was something
> like 1 mile! 

Are you sure that it was a C-117 or the Dollar Nineteen (C-119)
that I used to work on?  The Dollar Nineteen (I think it was worth
that) was the only aircraft I ever heard of that a pilot could not
make a touch-and-go in.  Thank God the C-130 replaced it!
From: rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: REBEL AIR CORP
Date: 16 Oct 92 17:32:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The MATRIX BBS - Birmingham, AL - 205-323-2016
Reply-To: rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins) 

Thought I'd pass this on from down here.

The REBEL AIR CORP is forming up and seeking new members.

They're looking for pilots, mechanics and aviation specialists and
non-specialists.

Goal: to Acquire, Restore, and Fly WWII vintage and modern military
aircraft.

For more information contact :Paul Hamm (205) 365-9102

Meetings 1st Monday of each month Prattville Airport, Prattville Alabama
                                                                                                                      
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Subject: CHARTER: rec.aviation.military
Followup-To: rec.aviation.misc
Reply-To: geoff@peck.com
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:23:07 GMT

Welcome to rec.aviation.military.  This message, and companion messages
like it, will be posted to each of the new rec.aviation.* groups weekly
through the end of November, to allow people to view the charters of each
newsgroup and better understand where to post articles.

The charter of rec.aviation.military is:

****************************************************************************
*   Postings related to military aircraft, both historical, present, and   *
*   rumored; military aircraft technology; military aircraft actions and   *
*   incidents.  Not intended to compete with sci.military, this group      *
*   simply provides a legitimate home for the many military postings       *
*   which already exist on rec.aviation.                                   *
****************************************************************************

There are now a thirteen separate subgroups on rec.aviation; if the charter
above doesn't match the content of the article you're posting (or you're
following up), please consider one of the other groups as a more
appropriate forum:

    announce (MOD)    military      piloting        soaring
    answers  (MOD)    misc          products        stories (MOD)
    homebuilt         owning        simulators      student
    ifr 

A common question is "what should I do if an article spans the charters of
two or more groups?"  The answer is cross-posting.  If you have an article
which clearly crosses the boundaries of several groups, you should post a
**single** copy of the article to **all* of the groups.  Don't post
separate copies to each group.  Most modern newsreaders will display the
article exactly once to the reader -- in the first group in which it is
encountered and read.

If you feel that the replies should be directed to a subset of the groups
to which you are submitting your post, be sure to include a line of the
form "Followup-to: groupname" in the header of your message.  See the
header of this message for an example.

If you are replying to a cross-posted article and your reply is germane to
only a subset of the original groups, please ensure that you check the
Newsgroups: line to remove unnecessary groups.  If the reply is germane to
all the groups in which the article was originally posted, try to ensure
that all the groups are listed in the Newsgroups: line.  Some older
newsreaders cause a reply to go only to the group which is currently being
read.

Use cross-posting sparingly.  If an article "90% belongs" in one group and
"10% belongs" in another, post it only to the first group.

						Geoff
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: q1hl@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Nameless CS Student)
Subject: Aurora (was Re: Airshows At Edwards And Moffett)
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:07:01 GMT

In article <Bvrx9B.E5x@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <rob.718330646@blacks> rob@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Rob Fatland) writes:
>>Also an Aurora low pass, low speed fly by.
>
>How boring.  Who wants to see an Aurora going *slow*? :-)  (Aside from the
>Aviation Leak photographers, that is...)

I missed the original post, but have to wonder if maybe the Aurora
expected to attend the airshow isn't the Canadian Forces Lockheed
CP-140 Aurora, our main Anti-Submarine Warfare / Arctic + Offshore
Patrol aircraft.  You know it as the P-3 Orion in the U.S.
-- 
Chris
From: dyrda@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (The Conservative)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Aurora?
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:27:37 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

>In article <1992Oct8.035747.13747@julian.uwo.ca> pettypi@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Carl Pettypiece) writes:
>>In article <mcewin.718504374@neptune> mcewin@convex.com (Bill McEwin) writes:
>>easmith@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Eric A Smith) writes:
>>
>>>Can someone give me a little bit of information on the Aurora?  I've never
>>>heard of it.  Reply via e-mail please...save network bandwidth. Thanks in
>>>advance!
>>
>>Just for interest, everyone seems to forget that the Canadians have an
>>Aurora also.  That is the name of their ASW aircraft also called the
>>CP-140.  It uses basically the same Lockheed airframe as the US P-3C, but
>>has completely different and, in many cases, more advanced avionics and
>>crew compartment layout.  The original order of 20 or so were built in
>>Burbank in the late 70's.
>>
>>
>But it should be pointed out that these Canadian Lockheed Auroras
>have never been officially observed flying at high supersonic
>speeds over California.  Who'd have guessed that the old Electra
>airliner could go that fast!

 Nor do they cause seimographs to register severe waves of disturbances.
Popular Mechanics had an article on this some time back and I remember
there artist rendering having the plane looking like a boomerang!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Richard Dyrda                    | " They counted on America to be  
Idaho National Engr. Laboratory  |   passive, they counted wrong!!" 
c/o School of Nuclear Engineering| 
    Purdue University            |      President Ronald Reagan 
(208) 526-4050                   |        after bombing Libya 
=-=-=-=-= JFK, LBJ, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton =-=-=-=-=
                  ... and for Liz!! H Hubert Hunphrey