Yup, shame about the square windows. Thats where the stress fractures started, that made them fall apart. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I think you'll find that your supierior armour is yet another British invention called Choban armour. So named after the town in Surrey where the military have a big R& D place.
I think you will find it was the DeHavilland "Comet" . British. Oh and the jet engine, that was British as well Actually no the Canadians had the first civilian jet plane in 1949, the UK was the first to put into service...I'm pretty sure.
No idea why you're asking in this thread, but whatever. You don't hear much about it because most of it is still classified, but I'll tell you what I can. Chobham armor consists of three layers: A foundation layer of rolled homogeneous steel armor plate about two inches thick, which provides foundation for absorption of kinetic energy, and keeps the vehicle structurally strong A honeycomb lattice of alloy, the cells of which are filled with a ceramic compound about three inches thick. This lattice breaks up the plasma jet from HEAT warheads, lowering the pressure and path of the jet so that it doesn't penetrate the steel foundation A superficial layer of steel half an inch thick or so, which protects the ceramic substrate from small stuff like rifle fire and such. Additionally, the M1-HA tanks replace the steel exterior with an inch or so of depleted Uranium plating, which is incredibly dense and strong, but also very heavy - adding eight tons to vehicle weight total. We don't have many HA's fitted though, because of the weight, and also because Chobham has proven to be damn near indestructible on the battlefield. I use the M1 Abrams as an example here, but this applies equally to the British Challenger, since Chobham is a British creation (and a hearty thanks be to the Germans for the unmatched Rheinmetall M256 smoothbore 120mm cannon too).
So by saying its a cilvilian jet is implying that it was in service in 1949 then? The Comets first flight was 27 july 1949, and its first commercial flight was on 2 may 1952. ( london to Jo'burg) Any idea what the Canadian plane was? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You have no idea what you are talking about the USA government were being a bunch of pigs(sort of like how they are today) I hope I'm not offending you because only an American would stand up for the Americans. The USA had a lot of influence over the Canadian government. The Us even went as far as blackmailing Canada saying "if we you dont buy the BOMARK missile then we will install them just south of your border and shoot Thr Russian bombers down over your cities". you see what I mean? like what kind of morons say somethinglike that?
The USA had a lot of influence over the Canadian government. If so much influence, why then did Canada refuse to join the US in Iraq? Why will Canada not join in missile defence? The list goes on and on...
I should think Canada just sees the US as a big friendly giant next door... Canada itself has the real beauty, culture and character, the neighbours just have the money & the power...
The Phantom sucked, If you want to talk interceptors The Mig 25 Foxbat appeared in 1965. and was much more advanced (aerodynamically) than the Avro arrow... and than the F-111. Not to mention being completely superior to the phantom in any characteristic... the mig 25's would make runs over israel to piss off the radar stations and cruise back to base at mach 2.6+ while the phantom lagged behind barely pulling to mach 2.1 and needing engine repair appon landing. although the mig 25's radar system was less developed at the time, it still could rape any western interceptor of the time, and was most deffinately the dominant aircraft of it's day. and it was one good looking plane Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! F111: max speed: mach 2.5 , Ceiling: about 18000 meters. Mig 25: max speed: mach 3.2 , Ceiling about 35000 meters. (in 4 minutes) Phantom f4: max speed: mach 2.1, Ceiling about 16500 meters. Avro arrow 1 max speed: mach 1.5, ceiling about 16500 meters. Avro arrow 3 max speed: mach 2.5 , ceiling about 18000 meters. And Im not even mentioning the soviet bomber capable of mach 2.8 in 1950: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The S100 was never mass manufactured but several copies exist, the nose drops down for landing and retracts again during super sonic flight.
Stokes isnt the T 90 fitted with somthing similar to chobham armor... I think instead of DU its tungsten and titanium alloy though... but ye chobham is amazing stuff.
Anyone heard of the British TSR-2? That was an entirely indigenous, cutting-edge supersonic fighter-bomber developed for the RAF in the 1960s - then scrapped to save money after only 2 prototypes were completed. There's still controversy about that. If it had gone into mass production, some TSR-2s might still be flying operationally today.
The S100 was half the size of its american equivalent the B70 ... which did not meet its requirements and was scraped by the americans. as for price it was very cheap compared to any of its ocunterparts, and due to a socialist government price would not be a big problem, I suspect the reason it was scrapped is that it was very hard to fly at the time... but its development led to the Tu-160 blackjack which is a very good present indeed. the british TSR 2 was a very nice plane, not particularly due to speed as it had a top speed of mach 2.25, and a relatively low ceiling, what made it out standing was the electronics. the radar was atleast 10 years ahead of its time, and the missile launch and piloting machinery was atleast 5 years ahead. even today I would prefer one to the harrier any day, even though the tsr 2 was a high speed interceptor/bomber, due to the slanted wing edges it could still manouver very well. I still prefer the mig 25 though...
Also to give the americans some credit... in 1965 when the tsr2 was being canceled, the americans were testing the XB 70 , which acheived mach2.8 the paint came off in high stress areas though... Funny thing is its still around.. and is being encorporated by nasa.. only now as a mach 3 version. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It was/is used to test Compression lift to this day... and I love the wingtips which fold down up to 65 degrees... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Canada itself has the real beauty, culture and character... Don't you mean a complete lack of culture and character? Canada defines the word, 'bland.'
Perhaps in places like Hamilton. Visit the remote areas, where hockey is still a religion. Or Vancouver, where travelling through the different districts is like visiting countries thousands of miles apart, with completely unique customs and cultures. And scenery to boot.....
Or Vancouver, where travelling through the different districts is like visiting countries thousands of miles apart, with completely unique customs and cultures. Those are not cultures inherent to Canada but cultures from other countries. Canada has no culture.
