Defensive Carry banner

41 - 57 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts
I'm way too crooked to ever be straightened out. Thinking back to going from AK to Korea with some A-10s, I don't recall unloading the 30mm for the flight nor do I recall uploading live ammo upon landing. But my memory of things 35 years ago can be a bit hazy. Two fuel tanks and a travel pod under the wings. Any full ammo downloaded from an A-10 has to be replaced with empty casings to keep the aircraft from setting on its tail.
i'm not talking about guns. 500 rounds of 20mm carried internally in an A-7 or an F-16 is not going to impact the aircraft weight significantly, and won't affect the drag. but hanging unnecessary stuff on the wings is a serious detriment to getting across the ocean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
I can remember a couple TDYs where we had to use JP-5 or JP-8, can't remember which, and the jet troops would have to change the fuel control adjustment a couple of clicks. I never had to recalibrate the FQ indicators as they self adjusted. According to the -1 manual, those old J-57s would run on about anything from kerosene to diesel fuel in an emergency situation.
We never worried about that in the Buff, but I recall coming across those graphs while at Little Rock during C-130E training and asking my A/C, "Seriously? This sucker will burn straight gasoline?" to which he replied, "We could run it on farts if we could figure out how to store 'em."

If I recall correctly, the T56-A-7 would burn anything from pure kerosene to pure gasoline and everything in between.

I don't recall that it could burn alcohol. Anyone know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,863 Posts
I suspect alcohol would not produce the power needed to fly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: since9 and msgt/ret

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,455 Posts
We never worried about that in the Buff, but I recall coming across those graphs while at Little Rock during C-130E training and asking my A/C, "Seriously? This sucker will burn straight gasoline?" to which he replied, "We could run it on farts if we could figure out how to store 'em."

If I recall correctly, the T56-A-7 would burn anything from pure kerosene to pure gasoline and everything in between.

I don't recall that it could burn alcohol. Anyone know?
The C-123Ks I worked on in Vietnam were equipped with two Pratt & Whitney R-2800 radials and two J-85 jets, the only fuel used was 115/145 AVGAS. Basically if it is liquid and flammable a jet engine will run on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: since9

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
back in my day, in fighters, JP-5 was an alternate fuel; okay for use if you couldn't get JP-4. i don't remember ever flying with JP-5, although that could be wrong. my understanding is that since i left the service, the AF has gone to JP-8. higher flash point, so less risk from small arms fire
Somewhere, I slept. Looks like the US Air Force phased out old stinky JP-8 and went to Jet A.

Article

Another article
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,274 Posts
So when are pilots going to become obsolete?
I love new technology, but there is just something reassuring about an aviator in control
Drones don't get nervous, frightened, or tired. There will always be pilots for combat aircraft I believe due to the nature of aerial combat. But the more menial functions like aerial refueling and cargo delivery might best be served by autonomous drones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msgt/ret

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Drones don't get nervous, frightened, or tired. There will always be pilots for combat aircraft I believe due to the nature of aerial combat. But the more menial functions like aerial refueling and cargo delivery might best be served by autonomous drones.
We already have autonomous drones that control the aircraft. They're called "autopilots," and they do indeed greatly reduce pilot fatigue.

They're managed by the pilots. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,486 Posts
Drones don't get nervous, frightened, or tired. There will always be pilots for combat aircraft I believe due to the nature of aerial combat. But the more menial functions like aerial refueling and cargo delivery might best be served by autonomous drones.
AI drone may have 'hunted down' and killed soldiers in Libya with no human input
We already have autonomous drones that control the aircraft. They're called "autopilots," and they do indeed greatly reduce pilot fatigue.

They're managed by the pilots. :D
"Listen, and understand. That terminator is out there, it cant be bargained with, it cant be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop...EVER, until you are dead! "
Kyle Reese, "The Terminator"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
AI drone may have 'hunted down' and killed soldiers in Libya with no human input

"Listen, and understand. That terminator is out there, it cant be bargained with, it cant be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop...EVER, until you are dead! "
You bring up a good point. What happens when AI decides it wants to die? Will it adhere to Asimov's Laws of Robotics? Or will it figure out a way to ignore them?


Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"
  • A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  • A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  • A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,486 Posts
You bring up a good point. What happens when AI decides it wants to die? Will it adhere to Asimov's Laws of Robotics? Or will it figure out a way to ignore them?


Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"
  • A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  • A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  • A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
No true AI could be compelled to adhere to Azimov's "laws". Just like no human can be compelled to be an Altruist.
Really, I wouldn't be as concerned with an AI that wanted to kill itself as much as I would be about one that really wanted to live. Just as with humans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,177 Posts
You bring up a good point. What happens when AI decides it wants to die? Will it adhere to Asimov's Laws of Robotics? Or will it figure out a way to ignore them?


Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"
  • A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  • A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  • A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
What if it is robot created by the Democrats? Like AOC, only smart.
 
41 - 57 of 57 Posts
Top