Time Magazine article

Real aviation things here. News, items of interest, information, questions, etc!

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby Chris_F » Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:53 am

[quote]I've heard a couple Marine pilots talk about it, and they love it.
Chris_F
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 5:59 pm

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby Layne. » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:24 am

That's the problem... it is good! Ask all the people that have rode in one and survived and they would of loved it i bet!
I think it is a marvellous invention and has gone very far and will go further... that marin guy is right  :) It is much faster than a helicopter and much more maneuvarible (damn spelling!) :)  Heaps of aviation machines have crashed... SO WHAT! a v-22 crashes and now everyone hates it besides the few people who think it is a wicked and very inventive machine!

I say keep it alive!

P.S: The F-14 costed heaps for the Navy but basicly no one hates it! But this seems to be diffrent to the V-22 Chris_F not pointing any fingers except this one pointing at you ;D
Also walking would be much slower and impossible.
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 | 22" LED Monitor (1920x1080) | AMD Phenom II x4 970 Black Edition~3.5Ghz | 4gb RAM | ATI Radeon 6850 1gb | 1Tb HDD

[img]http://www.simviation.com/phpupload/uploads/1302666610.
User avatar
Layne.
Major
Major
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 9:17 pm
Location: Australia, Victoria, Melbourne

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby DaveSims » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:30 am

The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.  Just imagine if the modern media had been around when the Wright brothers flew.   ::)
User avatar
DaveSims
Major
Major
 
Posts: 2350
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 2:59 am
Location: Clear Lake, Iowa

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby spitfire boy » Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:10 pm

[quote]The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.
Image


[center]
User avatar
spitfire boy
Major
Major
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 4:46 pm
Location: Wherever you think I'm not

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby Chris_F » Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:38 am

[quote]The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.
Last edited by Chris_F on Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Chris_F
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1364
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 5:59 pm

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby DaveSims » Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:14 am

[quote][quote]The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.
User avatar
DaveSims
Major
Major
 
Posts: 2350
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 2:59 am
Location: Clear Lake, Iowa

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby Mushroom_Farmer » Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:56 am

[quote]The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.
Image

"We're just sitting here trying to put our PCjrs in a pile and burn them. And the damn things won't burn. That's the only thing IBM did right with it - they made i
User avatar
Mushroom_Farmer
Major
Major
 
Posts: 1633
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 11:54 pm
Location: Indiana, USA

Re: Time Magazine article

Postby spitfire boy » Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:49 pm

[quote][quote]The reason the V-22 has taken so much longer to develop than the F-22 or any conventional aircraft is that it is a new technology all together.
Last edited by spitfire boy on Sat Oct 20, 2007 2:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image


[center]
User avatar
spitfire boy
Major
Major
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 4:46 pm
Location: Wherever you think I'm not

Previous

Return to Real Aviation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 580 guests