flying formation you dont see everyday

**Modulistic** · 06-11-2006, 05:11 AM

pretty bad ass

**Trouble maker** · 06-11-2006, 07:11 AM

NICE........

**Trouble maker** · 06-11-2006, 07:16 AM

That makes me miss my ultralight airplane that I had to sell!I had a lot of work into that plane...I will buy another after I mend....

**Trouble maker** · 06-11-2006, 07:17 AM

They had to slow way down for that P51,but that was a bad ass plane for its time!

**MarkuzLS1** · 06-12-2006, 08:43 AM

WTF were a P-51, an F-4, an F-16, and an F-22 all flying that close together for?

**norm43a** · 06-12-2006, 08:52 AM

Depth can be decieving, especially when taking pictures with the sky as a backdrop.

**FuxOnTheFirstDate** · 06-12-2006, 09:38 AM

I bet its to signify a timeline of our air force's aircraft. It also brings to light how much our technology has advanced over the past century. Going from the P-51 to an F-22 is like going from a Model T to a new ZO6.

What I wonder though is this: With our bad ass technology, why do we still rely so heavily on our ground troops? We've got missiles that can hit a target the size of a desk top PC from 700 miles away, yet we keep getting troops killed? I don't get it I guess.

**third_shift|studios** · 06-12-2006, 10:50 AM

ground troops are the intelligence that lets us know where that target is. all the satellites and radars in the world can't see through buildings.

**MarkuzLS1** · 06-13-2006, 05:17 AM

Originally Posted by norm43a

Depth can be decieving, especially when taking pictures with the sky as a backdrop.

Yeah...I'd like to see it from a few more angles. That one just looks funny.

**toneloc60** · 06-13-2006, 06:20 AM

Originally Posted by FuxOnTheFirstDate

What I wonder though is this: With our bad ass technology, why do we still rely so heavily on our ground troops? We've got missiles that can hit a target the size of a desk top PC from 700 miles away, yet we keep getting troops killed? I don't get it I guess.

"...you may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life -- but if you desire to defend it, protect it, and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground, the way the Roman Legions did, by putting your young men into the mud."

T.R. Fehrenbach
This Kind of War

**FuxOnTheFirstDate** · 06-13-2006, 06:35 AM

I guess you're right. But why can't we keep them safer? With our bullet/bomb proofing technology those IEDs on the road shouldn't do shit to our vehicles. Our night vision and infrared technology should help us more than it apparently is. Why can't we use small robots with cameras on them like they do with building collapses and stuff and continuously record what the robot sees? That way if a wanted terrorist "kills" the robot we'll have footage of him and know where to call in the air strike. Its not like the government doesn't have the cash to do this for us. I bet they'd do it if their children were the ones going into buildings. They would much rather have a robot do it then.

**toneloc60** · 06-13-2006, 06:53 AM

Originally Posted by FuxOnTheFirstDate

I guess you're right. But why can't we keep them safer? With our bullet/bomb proofing technology those IEDs on the road shouldn't do shit to our vehicles. Our night vision and infrared technology should help us more than it apparently is. Why can't we use small robots with cameras on them like they do with building collapses and stuff and continuously record what the robot sees? That way if a wanted terrorist "kills" the robot we'll have footage of him and know where to call in the air strike. Its not like the government doesn't have the cash to do this for us. I bet they'd do it if their children were the ones going into buildings. They would much rather have a robot do it then.

I'm not an advocate for how the government spends money. I think they waste a lot of money. Just look at the huge wastes going to the UN, welfare, public education, grants for anything you can think of, subsidizing housing, continually helping failing companies like the airlines and what not are just a few examples of areas that money could be cut or at least cut back. But you know that anything you suggested would be a hike in our taxes.

I want you to know, however, I honestly believe there aren't any war monger politicians in this country who have a blaitant disregard for our servicemember's lives. And that whole bit about people in a position not risking their children, well, you're absolutely wrong.

My Command Sergeant Major is a man in a position that could have definitely kept his son out of harms way. However, we buried his son two days after Mother's Day this year. He'd been in Iraq for a total of 10 days when he was killed by an IED.

Freedom is not free. There are many who know the cost all too well. I refuse to believe that anyone in office has lost touch with that. I perform military honors at many funerals and their are often politicians in attendence. I don't care for politics, but that doesn't mean I'm going to bash politicians either.

I'm glad you brought this up though. It makes me happy to know that people I've never met are concerned with the well being of myself and my fellow military brethren. Just keep in mind our country was built on a system that is supposed to represent equality. Each person has a vote. If you want to inflict change, you can do so through your vote and by bringing attention to your cause. Although, this forum probably isn't going to get you far.

**FuxOnTheFirstDate** · 06-13-2006, 07:03 AM

Thats true, posting things like that in this forum won't change anything. It is accepted to talk about things of this nature here though so that is why I do it. I'm sorry about the loss of that soldier, that sucks. When I said government official's children, I meant Bush and Cheney and the people very close to them in terms of power. I'm not trying to step on any toes here but if their children were to be put in harms way, priorities would change and tax money would be better spent on how we fight instead of being spent on the items you listed above. Do you agree or do you think that things would remain the same if their kids were with you and your kids over there?

**toneloc60** · 06-13-2006, 07:57 AM

I don't know if things would change or not. It's kind of like in the movie Air Force One, the president had to make a decision because at that particular point his wife and daughter's lives were being threatened. He said, "I make this decision not as the President, but as a father." Kind of the same deal.

I don't envy the position politicians have. They have to deal with having the blood of our people on their hands due to their decisions, but also have to balance a budget.

Besides, do you have any idea how much stuff some Soldiers elect to leave behind that could potentially save their lives? Watch Blackhawk down. It's true, some Soldiers remove armor plates from their gear simply because the crap is heavy. It's no fun marching in 130 degrees with an extra 80 pounds of crap that's sufficating you. Every advance in the world to protect Soldiers is just another item that they have to carry and be held accountable for. Sometimes they just feel it's not worth it to them.

I agree with your points though. They're just tough decisions to have to make.

**FuxOnTheFirstDate** · 06-13-2006, 08:04 AM

I agree. I forgot about that part in Blackhawk Down. I hope that one day we can have the body armor technology to make our troops pretty much bullet proof while allowing them to move as if they were wearing street clothes. A lot of people think I'm weird and that we should just let the soldiers do their thing but I don't feel that way. Some of the scientific geniuses around the US need to come up with some creative solutions to better protect them. Just my $0.02 I guess. I'm glad that you understand my concern though.

**Shpoone** · 06-13-2006, 04:45 PM

I know that's only U.S. planes, but if the P51 had a Spitfire next to it, I'd have to clean the monitor and keyboard off....

**bene** · 06-13-2006, 05:21 PM

Esta foto chop?

**Modulistic** · 06-13-2006, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by bene

Esta foto chop?

no es.

And that p51 had a supercharged v12. i think top speed is in the high 300s. well above stall speed of most jets.

**skewba98z28** · 06-13-2006, 05:38 PM

It looks like a Heritage Fligth at a air show. They do it all the time. The P-51 is in the 332nd fighter group colors which was a all colored pilot air group.

SOTOT · 06-13-2006, 07:14 PM

What speed of film and camera setup would alow that prop to be stopped and clear in every picture yet capture no vapor or fume trail from the jets?

I think they are RC planes (Especially since they have no ID numbers)