wg13 Told you! Count yourself lucky - you only had a couple of posts binned, I was sent to the sin bin for a week. Perhaps the "Falkland" naming system needs to be employed - "stills" !!

Just watched that steely eyed aviator awaiting the order to deliver shock and awe to the bad guy in the video link. A PR mans wet dream. Nice to see that external fuel tanks are jet propelled to ensure that they clear the airframe. Lets hope all the bad guys shave their heads, mind you I think the guy on the SAM battery was rather cooler than the pilot, 'least he wasn't running away bravely. Having been fairly neutral about Typhoon over the years I am not sure how this video exploits its capability over current ac (never mind the much vaunted argument about the next generation) in the interdictor/close air support role (except it cost a lot so must be good). As far as I could see the weapons hung on the aircraft are v effective, on this evidence perhaps we could take a short cut and miss out a very expensive airframe?

Referring back to the original photos on this thread, I should point-out (for anyone who doesn't realise) that the Typhoon isn't nearly as close to the ramp as it looks. The image is merely an effect of using a telephoto lens, from a vantage point further back in the Hercules.:)

... but it was very close, nonetheless. I saw it with eyes. My eyes. This bit of flying happened over my house in Cleethorpes and was widely discussed on various websites at the time, as well as making a few inches in the local Grimsby rag, *ahem* newspaper, as the town's mortals called the old bill in their droves (7) to report a 'near miss'.

Those 'in the know' at the time concluded on said various websites that the Typhoon was the first to respond to a request from the mother ship to inspect a problem.

Turns out they were just guessing (as per) and it was in fact this scheduled PR jint.

And who noticed that Scorcher One didnt use any guns, so not quite multi role perhaps :rolleyes:

Gets coat and awaits incoming concrete.

Ah the gun, funny about that, it was always wanted by all countries and when they pay for an aircraft the gun is included in that price. After the first production aircraft was being used by the RAF the UK decided they did not want it on a cost basis, i.e. ammunition, servicing, spares etc. so asked for it to be removed. The cost of designing a replacement ballast weight at the delivery stage of the aircraft and some costs through life was prohibitive, or so I was led to believe, although I cannot say with all certainty that the gun is staying on RAF aircraft. For all those who used to harmonise the guns, particularly on the Tornado, should be glad to know it is way easier on Typhoon, all be it the equipment needs a manual handling assessment before it is used.

Sorry thought I would add this link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...03/ntyph03.xml

keep up ex rigger, this is last years news.... to some tune too.

Nice PR ... that'll get em running to the CIO's to sign up :rolleyes:

Absoulte bollox cockpit symbology though :p


*referring to the video that is*

the_flying_cop

I know, I was answering the comment about the gun from clicker. This 'news' was bandied around from the end of 2004 and through 2005.

Going back to the photo, wouldnt the jet have slats down at that AOA/speed to keep station on the C130's ramp?

Spectre. If you look at some of the other photos in the link in the 1st post you will see that they are.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...3&d=1168458000

Have to agree, very distant from reality - I'd put it at about 11 to 14 year old level. Mind you, a lot of the stuff, if you didn't know about it, would probably look 'realistic'.

:-)

Ray

"SATELLITES HAVE CONFIRMED PRECISE LOCATION OF COMMAND AND CONTROL CENTRE, WEAPON SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATION ASSETS

I think I see a small flaw...

R

I don't think so. This looks like one of the photos taken a Sqn Ldr in the advertising dept of IofR who went up in the Herc with the filmcrew that took the air to air shots for the recent(ish) TV campaign (the one with the Typhoon flying over various ground features which were digitally altered to look like image relating to various trades). You can sse some of the film crew and their kit at the left of the photo.

Going back to the original picture, don't you find it touching that they have got two projects that entered service later than anticipated in the same shot.

If you look at the Exif data for the original photo; It would appear that the Typhoon must have been pretty close - check focal length of the lens!


[Image]
Make = Canon
Model = Canon DIGITAL IXUS v
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 180
Y Resolution = 180
Resolution Unit = inch
Date Time = 2004-12-06 16:11:30
YCbCr Positioning = centered
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 196
[Camera]
Exif Version = Version 2.0
Date Time Original = 2004-12-06 16:11:30
Date Time Digitized = 2004-12-06 16:11:30
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Shutter Speed Value = 7.97 TV
Aperture Value = 4 AV
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Focal Length = 10.81mm
Maker Note = 322 Byte
User Comment =
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 1200
Exif Image Height = 1600
Focal Plane X Resolution = 12096.774
Focal Plane Y Resolution = 12135.922
Focal Plane Resolution Unit = inch
[Thumbnail Info]
Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
X Resolution = 180
Y Resolution = 180
Resolution Unit = inch
JPEG Interchange Format = Offset: 1174
JPEG Interchange Format Length = Length: 6557
[Thumbnail]
Thumbnail = 120 x 160
[MakerNote (Canon)]
Camera Settings 1 = 76, 2, 0, 3, 3, 0, 0, 4, 65535, 65535, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 1, 0, 0, 65535, 65535, 346, 173, 32, 128, 215, 65535, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 65535, 0, 1024, 1600
0002 = 2, 346, 247, 330
Camera Settings 2 = 52, 0, 0, 0, 128, 255, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, 0, 0, 12295, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
Image Type = IMG:DIGITAL IXUS v JPEG
Firmware Version = Firmware Version 00.00
Image Number = 1313124
Owner Name =

It's not so much the focal length as the multiplication factor. Depending on the size of the IXUS' sensor compared to 35mm film we can work out what that 10.81mm focal length is equivalent to.
A quick googling shows the IXUS v zooms to an equivalent 70mm - not a long telephoto, but still longer than a standard and with some perspective compression.

10.81mm on a regular camera would be a fisheye. Even on an APS-C format sensor it'd be a very wide angle, but compacts have much smaller sensors.

The Typhoon isn't all that close. I can't see any reflection of the Herc's ducksbill or tailplane in the canopy, just blue sky.
I've seen a Harvard closer :eek:

Adobe????
 

nothing to do with adobe a decent size telephoto allowing enormous depth of field does the trick!
:ok:

even tho this one seems to have been taken by a moderate size 35mmm equiv!

A telephoto fore-shortens the image, thats why is appears closer, but it has a fairly limited depth of field. A wide angle lens has a greater depth of field which is why focussing isn't that critical on small compacts. :8