Weren't they talking about using lasers from sattelites back in the 80s when Reagan was touting star wars? Man, we believed anything in the 80s.
Printable View
Weren't they talking about using lasers from sattelites back in the 80s when Reagan was touting star wars? Man, we believed anything in the 80s.
Current talks say within ten years laser weaponry should be to the point where it can be mounted in a stripped down DC-10.. presto, instant airborne anti-missile defense. I don't know how development is going, but it seems like a good system.
That's the government for you, the DC-10 has been obsolete for about two decades, but they're going to mount weaponry on one.Quote:
Originally Posted by timeshifter
the DC 10 is obsolete? They just now retired the A-10. THAT was obsolete. A prop-engine fighter. The dc-10 is a great plane for its use. They mainly use it for troop transport nowadays though. And i have heard it is quite an experience getting transported (e.g. airsick). It always was a decent design. You could shoot one full of holes big enough to put your fist through and it could still fly. Try that with the stealth bomber.
I think we are talking about different planes. The DC-10 that I was talking about was the three engine jet with the third engine mounted about half way up the tail. It was one of the largest passenger planes, and got a certain amount of notoriety after an engine fell off of one of them and they were involved in a couple bad crashes back in the late 70's early 80's. You still see a few around, but they have been retired from virtually every air fleet.
As for the A-10, there's another one of those, too.
They may be obsolete as passenger planes, but they're still widely used in cargo fleets.
The DC-10 is a workhorse plane, built to haul stuff. Keep in mind the F-14 Tomcats were JUST retired from service, and they've been around for 30 years. The F-16 Falcons are still widely used, and they're just as old. A good plane never really dies, it just gets replaced... sometimes, not even that much.
I thought the reason they were retired was because the engines were now so inefficient relative to modern engines that the cost per mile was too high to justify the planes. Of course, if you already have them, then the cost of replacing them would factor into the equation.
But we are all talking about the same plane with the DC-10? Certainly we are not with the A-10, because the ones that fly around here don't seem to have props.
No one said they were the same plane. We said it was another ancient plane that was just now getting retired.
The A-10 Warthog... nice plane, no props. Unique shape. Not sure if it's retired yet or not, but it's a gunship. It's designed to make air raids. Hit and run, if you will. But it's still an old jet.
The Falcon is still around because they've been able to keep it upgraded and fighting with modern standards.
The DC-10 is still used as a trans-oceanic jet, if I'm not mistaken.
Believe me the us military isn't concerned about engine efficiency. If they were they would be putting turbo-props on everything. 6x the efficiency of a standard Jet.
The DC 10 is so old it's got an outside toilet.
what does that mean? A toilet on the wing?
You want old try the B-52, it first entered service in 1955 and is still being used today 50+ years later. Some say its operational life can be extended to 2040 which would be around 90 years of service.
X