PPRuNe Forums - Search Results
PPRuNe Forums

Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Search Forums
Reload this Page >

Search Results

Register
FAQ
Calendar
Wikiposts
Today's Posts
Search
Vendor Directory
Search: Posts Made By: Squirrel 41
Showing results 1 to 17 of 17
Search took 0.00 seconds.
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Apr 2014, 21:09
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Engines, Tuc, Wensleydale et al, Many thanks...

Engines, Tuc, Wensleydale et al,

Many thanks for such an informative (if depressing) review. I have two questions (or had, It's Life Jim 208 has asked the one about "When?").

The second is what...
Forum: Military Aviation
25th Dec 2013, 12:17
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

They'd be considered combatants under Geneva law...

They'd be considered combatants under Geneva law - (banter aside) they are clearly making a material contribution to combat operations.

Merry Christmas to all, including the Geese. Hope you get...
Forum: Military Aviation
14th Nov 2013, 21:30
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Leon - many thanks!

Leon - many thanks!
Forum: Military Aviation
13th Nov 2013, 21:58
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Dumb question time. Are the engines /...

Dumb question time.

Are the engines / engines + pylons interchangeable with the E-3Ds?

S41
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Nov 2013, 17:55
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Chug, I'm an outsider when it come to the...

Chug,

I'm an outsider when it come to the engineering points, but such a system mirroring AAIB / CAA / JAA seems very much in the RAF's own interests (NB, the Service's interests are not...
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Nov 2013, 15:58
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Chugalug2, Many thanks for this- the Mull of...

Chugalug2,

Many thanks for this- the Mull of Kintyre was before my time, so I hadn't appreciated that it didn't have a compliant RTS. Let's hope that they get it right from here on in.

S41
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Nov 2013, 15:48
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

JTO- What an informative post. Thank-you! ...

JTO-

What an informative post. Thank-you!



It always struck me that KC-135s are more Trigger's Broom than any other current aircraft I can think of - started life as a J-57 powered derivate...
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Nov 2013, 14:31
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

JTO - Thanks, very interesting. But surely...

JTO -

Thanks, very interesting. But surely this must have been known (or at least have been knowable) at the time that we decided to go down the RJ route? Presumably, the pressure on CAS is to get...
Forum: Military Aviation
3rd Nov 2013, 13:24
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

NoVANav, Many thanks for that - helpful. RIP...

NoVANav,

Many thanks for that - helpful. RIP RIVET AMBER.

But I'm still at a loss why the RAF can't / won't read across the USAF's RC-135 clearance. Given the insanity of things over here at...
Forum: Military Aviation
1st Nov 2013, 17:26
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

NoVANav said: Completely agree that...

NoVANav said:



Completely agree that the UK should read it the USAF RTS across, but weren't there some problems with the tails (hence the use of ex-airline 707 tails)? And on a pedantic point,...
Forum: Military Aviation
31st Oct 2013, 13:33
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Forgive me for being stupid, but is anyone...

Forgive me for being stupid, but is anyone empowered to read across the USAF RTS to the RAF? I seem to recall being told that this was what happened with the C-17, and was the reason/excuse for 99...
Forum: Military Aviation
31st Oct 2013, 10:53
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Willard - That AIN piece...

Willard -

That AIN piece (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/2013-10-30/rivet-joint-airworthiness-questioned-uk-maa?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter) states that the USAF are intending...
Forum: Military Aviation
23rd Jan 2013, 20:16
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

The correct question is BEagle's - why the hell...

The correct question is BEagle's - why the hell didn't we specify booms on the A330 tankers? It would've supported the E-3Ds, C-17s and now the Rivet Joints. More importantly, it would have provided...
Forum: Military Aviation
7th Jan 2013, 02:14
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

SGC wrote: Airseekers! (Hat,...

SGC wrote:



Airseekers!

(Hat, coat, etc)

S41
Forum: Military Aviation
27th Dec 2012, 17:30
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

WW - thanks, I wasn't sure whether to trust...

WW - thanks, I wasn't sure whether to trust wikipedia on this. So, Washington II to support Lightning II? Or Chuck to support Dave?

S41
Forum: Military Aviation
27th Dec 2012, 16:57
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

Given the Boeing lineage, and the final roles of...

Given the Boeing lineage, and the final roles of the 192 Sqn examples, perhaps RIVET JOINT should be Washington II?

I'm not sure if the last Washington B1s were still on strength when 192 was...
Forum: Military Aviation
27th Dec 2012, 14:48
Replies: 927
Views: 423,930
Posted By Squirrel 41

PT wrote: ....SENTER (of attention)? ...

PT wrote:



....SENTER (of attention)?

(Hat, coat, etc...)

S41
Showing results 1 to 17 of 17


 
Forum Jump

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.