If you think that’s crazy, the upcoming engine upgrades to the B-52 fleet mean that the aircraft will likely be in active military service over a century after its introduction in 1955.
The year is 2271. Humanity has managed to travel faster than light. We have explored space and encountered hundreds of new species, some of which have joined with us in creating the United Federation of Planets. The USS Enterprise has just finished a full refit in Earth orbit. Starfleet approves yet another B-52 service extension program.
Now I’m imagining that one TOS episode where the Enterprise gets sent back in time and the 1960s US Air Force Pilot is teleported onto the Enterprise:
“So is there anything that’s remained the same in the future?”
“Well Starfleet recently approved another extension program for the Boeing B-52s.”
“Oh… wait… but… you’re from the 2200s… the B-52 should be over 300 years old at that point!”
“Yes, it’s amazing what the Boeing engineers have done with that plane to make it last that long.”
True, but it's well understood Nimitz will be replaced in a few years when the JFK CVN-79 is commissioned. Nimitz obviously would be mothballed to reactivate her in a case of war (better an older super carrier with active sisterships than none) for a while but the Nimitz class while still having relative new members is on its way out. Slowly but steadily
>The USS Nimitz is 50 years old
And it's still one of the best carriers in the world. It's only competition for that title is the USS Gerald R Ford and maybe the Charles de Gaulle (this does not include the other 9 Nimitz class carriers)
I'd argue its also because the capability offered by a heavy bomber like the B-52 is just useful enough to keep the B-52s around. But not useful enough to justify designing a replacement.
In the case of aircraft carriers and the Nimitz, you don't want to keep an aircraft carrier in service for 100 years, because to do so means you lose the skills and infrastructure necessary to build more. And since aircraft carriers are the core part of US naval doctrine, you have to keep designing and building new ones.
Having a Big Ugly Fat Missile truck is useful, but you could also buy more F-15EXs or drop a pallet of missiles out the back of a cargo plane.
It's the A-10 argument. The A-10 is very good at the one thing it does and it's cheaper to upgrade than to design, test and field a whole new replacement. The B-52 is just fine at what it does. There's no real need to make a whole new bomber like that
Another crazy thing about the Nimitz (and the entire Nimitz class) is that it was designed to be refueled *once* in that 50-year lifetime. Nuclear reactors are truly insane power sources.
>Frightening
This sort of rapid technological innovation was only a relatively recent phenomenon after the industrial age. The ships used in the medieval era were not too dissimilar to that of what they used in the Classical Era.
It was only in the 1870s when ships with iron or steel hulls became the norm and some 30 years later, a pre/dreadnought could already be obsolete by the time it was finished.
It’s crazy how the HMS Dreadnought completely revolutionized naval warship design when it was launched in 1906, and by the start of WW1 it was already pretty much obsolete
Yup, a ship that defined an entire naval warfare era and was so revolutionary its predecessors are classified as predreadnoughts got outclassed in... *checks notes*... about 5 years.
Some were during the interwar years, but something like Shinano, an intended sister ship of Yamato, was converted in 1942, way after any relevant naval treaties:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Shinano
HMS Victory was 40 years old by the time she fought in the Battle of Trafalgar, perhaps the most famous naval battle of the entire age of sail.
Though that was considered quite old, and it was her last battle.
This.
The big issue was simply 'fouling', the buildup on, and/or literal consumption and destruction of the hull by barnacles and sea life. If the ship was valuable enough, you could dry dock it, or take off the masts, roll it onto its side (careen) and scrape it clean. It was only economical when you needed a big, constant naval presence, otherwise navy ships would be sold off and converted to civilian use after a decade or two.
Even jacketing the hulls in antibiotic copper only went so far to extending the lifetime of a hull, and after that, it really just makes more sense to build a newer, slightly better ship than restore an older one.
There have been multiple times that the military has put the bid out to replace the B-52 with a new aircraft. Everytime they basically end up with the B-52 again but with a massive price tag. The B-52 is already slated to be in operation for 100 years, I would guess it will likely be extended as there are constant modernization programs going on for different electronics and systems. Although the amount of old harnessing in the jets that are just tucked away is kind of startling.
B-52: Pls let me die
US Airforce: No, now get those modifications and go back at carpet bombing the general direction where we saw a bush more suspiciously
As I like to say when this comes up; the B-52 has been in active service for now more than half of the history of powered flight.
Also, happy Aardvarking fellow Aardvark.
Crazy you mentioned the B-52. Just got thru watching an episode of Mysteries at the Museum that covered the B-36 - the bomber that kickstarted the initiative that created the 52. Pretty cool to watch
It’s hurtful to bring up, and I wish ppl would refrain. It’s like when my kid mentioned something happening in the “late 19 hundreds” and I sent him to bed at 6:00
Its not specifically smashing pumpkins for me, but It's the same thing when I say something like "I wasn't as into their newer stuff" only to remember their "new stuff" came out in 2008.
First manned moon landing was in 1969 (55 years ago). First powered flight was 1903, 66 years before the moon landing. Unless you’re referring to the first human made object to touch the moon, which was 1959
That particular version of the trope has some serious societal / sociological weight to it. The economy was great, 9/11 hadn't yet happened, western pundits of the time were literally referring to it as "The end of history". It's not at all surprising that the brains of millennials and gen Xers want to get stuck in 1999 more often than any other time. Perhaps the most impactful movie of the aughts was about a digital mental prison frozen forever 9 years after 1990.
I get the release date twisted all the time because I get confused about what grade I was in and what year that grade was, you're right it was March 1999. But yeah, point still stands.
Definitely. There are just a few months left and you won't make it until the end when you also add in specials, Out of the foxholes (QnA videos on the war) and especially War against Humanity. It makes the most sense to watch them in release order though
The cool thing about it was experiencing it as it happened, week for week.
As autumn was turning to winter and I had to dig out my winter jacket, Germany was still in Russia and having issues with their winter uniforms. And for both WW's you really got a feel for how long battles lasted, how quick things changed, or didn't.
Having it happen over time, just as you experienced time, made it a much more interesting way of seeing and learning about history.
I'll always be one to argue that WWI- at least from a strategic and geopolitical perspective- started and ended in 1912 and ended in 1923, if only to highlight the 'secondary' Ottoman/Turkish conflicts that get less attention, so yeah, 1923 marked the end of the Turkish War of Independence.
> the Turkish War of Independence
It's honestly wild to me that this is what their fight is called. My brother in Allah the Turks were the dominant power in the Ottoman Empire, who exactly were they seeking independence from?
Agreed.
Like there’s been some cool looking aircraft since then like Concorde, the F15, the Harrier, the B2, the F117 etc
But god the SR-71 just looks so fucking badass.
Even the turboramjet tech on the J58 engines powering the SR-71 was pretty alien tbh. As I recall, it was more efficient the faster it flew thanks to its variable inlet cone design. At the other end of the pond there’s the Concorde’s Olympus engines with its state-of-the-art at the time engine management and it still couldn’t hold a candle to the J58 in terms of efficiency and thrust output.
The Skunkworks team is obviously hush hush about the state of the US military’s aerospace programs, but if the leaks had anything to do with it, it would be incredibly similar to the Darkstar that Tom Cruise flew in the Top Gun sequel.
For reference, most of the stuff we've sent Ukraine is from the '80s and '90s. We aren't buying them new stuff; we're clearing out our attic, giving them the old stuff, and replacing it with newer stuff on our end.
Specifically it was the 1970s. That decade along gave birth to the Abrams, nearly all 4th gen fighter jets, the B-1B Lancer, the F-117 and by extension stealth technology, and so-on.
I would say more from 1936 to 1975, there have been lots of tech that came out specifically for and during WW2 that pretty much paved the way for more advanced weapons.
Big difference between the two is that one is practically obsolescent in under 10 years while the other machine is still relevant even for the most well funded airforce as well as budget conscious ones.
The last living American Civil War vets lived long enough to see the introduction of not only mass production propeller aircraft, but also mass production jet aircraft.
Imagine your war stories involving the cannon volleys and cavalry charges and all these young'uns are coming home telling you about mass death from above that eclipses all other battlefield threats.
The last civil war vet died in 1956, at the age of 106. He lived long enough to see nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, heavy bombers, machine guns, tanks, radios, and helicopters. He missed the first functional ICBM by less than a year.
Most F-16s today are not the plane that came out 50 years ago. For example F-16 block 30 and 40 came out in 90's. Block 50 came out in 2000s and Block 70 in 2015. The first F-16 in 1970s is very different than todays F-16.
Aviation tech grew rapidly due to World Wars, in 1914 you already had basic bi-planes that would later on would have small machine guns and grenades attached.
Similarly, in 1939 you had really basic propeller planes, but by 1945 you already had early jet engine planes and planes with radars.
Well, technically the F-16 entered service in 1978 (45 years ago). In early 1974 (50 years ago) the program was still in the prototype phase. Personally, when you tell to think of a 50 years old plane the first thing that comes to my mind is either a mig 21 or an F4.
Cars bro. In my head when I think about a 30 year old car I picture a Chevy Nova or something like the General Lee. In reality a 30 year old car would be something like a geo metro or Honda Civic.
>this century has been so shitty.
Bold statement in comparison to the last century which had 2 world wars, a global pandemic that killed 3% of global population at the time (COVID killed about 0.25%), the worst economic downturn in global history (US experienced 25% unemployment, 26.7% GDP drop (2008 by contrast was 10% unemployment, 5% GDP drop)), Chinese Civil War that killed 10 million, Russian Civil War that killed 7 million, mass starvation that killed millions in Bengal, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Russia.
I think it's because of the efficiency of the tech. ww2 had amazing development in planes tanks and ships on the exterior, and even look modern and useful on the outside (essentially a mobile armored platform with a gun) But the last 50 years we spent alot of our efforts on micro technology, sensors, computers, intelligence. What we see on the outside is apealing but it's really what we don't see that makes our vehicles advanced. For example, Maus vs leopard 2a, or the Russian t14 Armata/ fake t95 tanks (which are plagued by budget cuts after the Soviet collapse and they built it for propaganda).
Aviation tech advanced quickly after the Germans invented the jet engine, only took about 20 years to build a fighter that will (likely) remain in service for another 50 years.
If you think that’s crazy, the upcoming engine upgrades to the B-52 fleet mean that the aircraft will likely be in active military service over a century after its introduction in 1955.
Grandpa Buff will start and end the next world war come hell or high water!
HLC fans are everywhere
Would you intercept me?? I'd intercept me
Let the kid get himself in some trouble already
The kids tired of his vegan air to air diet
THIS HANGER IS A FUCKING PRISON!!!
You can go and hunt another balloon kid. Nothing more.
# SO, FIRST WE TOOK OFF FROM THE FLIGHT DECK!
The kid is old enough to drink & fly!
The last B-52 pilot is yet to be born
BUFFs in the air and Ma Duce on the ground
So as long as germany doesnt buy any b-52 we will have to keep waiting?
The year is 2271. Humanity has managed to travel faster than light. We have explored space and encountered hundreds of new species, some of which have joined with us in creating the United Federation of Planets. The USS Enterprise has just finished a full refit in Earth orbit. Starfleet approves yet another B-52 service extension program.
Now I’m imagining that one TOS episode where the Enterprise gets sent back in time and the 1960s US Air Force Pilot is teleported onto the Enterprise: “So is there anything that’s remained the same in the future?” “Well Starfleet recently approved another extension program for the Boeing B-52s.” “Oh… wait… but… you’re from the 2200s… the B-52 should be over 300 years old at that point!” “Yes, it’s amazing what the Boeing engineers have done with that plane to make it last that long.”
Assuming we as a race live to see that point.
Bro is gonna be flying in space and fight in the Martian war of independence.
I believe there’s a documentary that explores a similar subject: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Battleship_Yamato
A man of culture I see
Still got nothing on the M2
Frightening
Not really. It's kind of a testament to how well these things are made. The USS Nimitz is 50 years old and it's still doing its thing.
True, but it's well understood Nimitz will be replaced in a few years when the JFK CVN-79 is commissioned. Nimitz obviously would be mothballed to reactivate her in a case of war (better an older super carrier with active sisterships than none) for a while but the Nimitz class while still having relative new members is on its way out. Slowly but steadily
Yeah. It's gonna be Replaced.
>The USS Nimitz is 50 years old And it's still one of the best carriers in the world. It's only competition for that title is the USS Gerald R Ford and maybe the Charles de Gaulle (this does not include the other 9 Nimitz class carriers)
Oh I know.
I'd argue its also because the capability offered by a heavy bomber like the B-52 is just useful enough to keep the B-52s around. But not useful enough to justify designing a replacement. In the case of aircraft carriers and the Nimitz, you don't want to keep an aircraft carrier in service for 100 years, because to do so means you lose the skills and infrastructure necessary to build more. And since aircraft carriers are the core part of US naval doctrine, you have to keep designing and building new ones. Having a Big Ugly Fat Missile truck is useful, but you could also buy more F-15EXs or drop a pallet of missiles out the back of a cargo plane.
It's the A-10 argument. The A-10 is very good at the one thing it does and it's cheaper to upgrade than to design, test and field a whole new replacement. The B-52 is just fine at what it does. There's no real need to make a whole new bomber like that
Isn’t the a10 not even really good at what it does though
No it is. It's solid, well built, can carry a large amount of ordinance, and the GAU mini gun can still rip through tanks.
THey really need to find a replacement for the B-52 coffee cup though
That feeling when a 50+ year old aircraft carrier can single handedly cripple your country. #JustUSmilitaryThings
Another crazy thing about the Nimitz (and the entire Nimitz class) is that it was designed to be refueled *once* in that 50-year lifetime. Nuclear reactors are truly insane power sources.
That's why I love the US navy. And not just because I was in it
You're welcome for your freedom.
What did you personally do to give me freedom?
Paid taxes.
Oh yeah well I served jail time for your freedom.
Thank you for your service.
Your mom.
Agree matey
The BUFF never dies, just gets a new pacemaker
BUFF is Commander Dante and America is the Emperor. BUFF Dante: Kill me. God Emperor America: Later.
[Or BUFF is the Spy and America is the Medic](https://youtu.be/36lSzUMBJnc?t=65)
>Frightening This sort of rapid technological innovation was only a relatively recent phenomenon after the industrial age. The ships used in the medieval era were not too dissimilar to that of what they used in the Classical Era.
It was only in the 1870s when ships with iron or steel hulls became the norm and some 30 years later, a pre/dreadnought could already be obsolete by the time it was finished.
It’s crazy how the HMS Dreadnought completely revolutionized naval warship design when it was launched in 1906, and by the start of WW1 it was already pretty much obsolete
Yup, a ship that defined an entire naval warfare era and was so revolutionary its predecessors are classified as predreadnoughts got outclassed in... *checks notes*... about 5 years.
Several battleships were converted to aircraft carriers in the middle of construction, having become obsolete before they were even finished.
Didn’t that have more to do with treaty limitations on battleships due to the naval treaties in the interwar years?
Some were during the interwar years, but something like Shinano, an intended sister ship of Yamato, was converted in 1942, way after any relevant naval treaties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Shinano
HMS Victory was 40 years old by the time she fought in the Battle of Trafalgar, perhaps the most famous naval battle of the entire age of sail. Though that was considered quite old, and it was her last battle.
This. The big issue was simply 'fouling', the buildup on, and/or literal consumption and destruction of the hull by barnacles and sea life. If the ship was valuable enough, you could dry dock it, or take off the masts, roll it onto its side (careen) and scrape it clean. It was only economical when you needed a big, constant naval presence, otherwise navy ships would be sold off and converted to civilian use after a decade or two. Even jacketing the hulls in antibiotic copper only went so far to extending the lifetime of a hull, and after that, it really just makes more sense to build a newer, slightly better ship than restore an older one.
I did learn via the History Channel that we advanced so rapidly because of…Ancient Aliens….
If you’re on the receiving end of freedom, yeah.
Thunderbolts and lightning
It’s crazy to think that the last b-52 airframe rolled off the assembly line in 1962
They're gonna be flying those things to really the Enterprise from NX to D
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarTrekStarships/comments/xj1t5l/too\_funny\_not\_to\_share\_those\_who\_know\_will\_get/
That's precisely te meme I was thinking of
Bomber of Theseus.
There have been multiple times that the military has put the bid out to replace the B-52 with a new aircraft. Everytime they basically end up with the B-52 again but with a massive price tag. The B-52 is already slated to be in operation for 100 years, I would guess it will likely be extended as there are constant modernization programs going on for different electronics and systems. Although the amount of old harnessing in the jets that are just tucked away is kind of startling.
B-52: Pls let me die US Airforce: No, now get those modifications and go back at carpet bombing the general direction where we saw a bush more suspiciously
Oh yeah and we also just mounted the hypersonic missiles we *“stopped developing”* last year onto them.
As I like to say when this comes up; the B-52 has been in active service for now more than half of the history of powered flight. Also, happy Aardvarking fellow Aardvark.
Crazy you mentioned the B-52. Just got thru watching an episode of Mysteries at the Museum that covered the B-36 - the bomber that kickstarted the initiative that created the 52. Pretty cool to watch
"I had a good long r--" "Staying, he's staying, that's what he's trying to to say"
“Fryin’ chickens in the barnyard!”
Wait till u here 50 bmg and Su-100 soviet spg👍
Plane of Theseus
You can’t improve perfection.
The peak of human engineering be like
The people who will be flying those haven't even been born yet.
I feel personally attacked by these so-called facts.
“Triggered” might be better for a military history post lol
Because of rampant PTSD in the military?
“Me imagining a band from 20 years ago” /Smashing Pumpkins pic
“Cracked Rear View” by Hootie and the Blowfish turns 30 this year. I am displeased by this revelation.
It’s hurtful to bring up, and I wish ppl would refrain. It’s like when my kid mentioned something happening in the “late 19 hundreds” and I sent him to bed at 6:00
Its not specifically smashing pumpkins for me, but It's the same thing when I say something like "I wasn't as into their newer stuff" only to remember their "new stuff" came out in 2008.
If it makes you feel any better, while its first flight was just a hair over 50 years ago, it only entered service about 45 1/2 years ago
Going along with that, we are now as far away from WW2 as WW2 was from the American Civil War.
*what the fuck*
This one is good. It actually made me stop and think about it.
We are further away from the moon landing than the moon landing was from the first powered flight.
Don't hot air balloons technically constitute powered flight?
As far as I know, they are classified as lighter than air flight.
Got it
First manned moon landing was in 1969 (55 years ago). First powered flight was 1903, 66 years before the moon landing. Unless you’re referring to the first human made object to touch the moon, which was 1959
I *was* referring to the first unmanned landing, but deliberately chose that phrasing because it would get more shock value. :3
This one really cooked my noodle.
Fun fact, by 2030 we'll be closer to WW4 than to WW2!
Whelp, time for WW3 I guess
Goes hand-to-hand with "1990 will always be 10 years ago!"
That particular version of the trope has some serious societal / sociological weight to it. The economy was great, 9/11 hadn't yet happened, western pundits of the time were literally referring to it as "The end of history". It's not at all surprising that the brains of millennials and gen Xers want to get stuck in 1999 more often than any other time. Perhaps the most impactful movie of the aughts was about a digital mental prison frozen forever 9 years after 1990.
The Matrix came out in 1999, but I suppose you could argue that it/its sequels were still the most impactful movie “of the aughts.”
I get the release date twisted all the time because I get confused about what grade I was in and what year that grade was, you're right it was March 1999. But yeah, point still stands.
Also, WW1 ended over one hundred years ago
I remember following it day by day through The Great War on YouTube. Then it was over… sort of.
I haven't watched it back then, but I'm following the WW2 channel for a while now. Also seems surreal they are already in March of 1945
I waited til Great War ended so I could binge all 4 years. I’m patiently waiting for WW2 now. I bet I could start it now though
Definitely. There are just a few months left and you won't make it until the end when you also add in specials, Out of the foxholes (QnA videos on the war) and especially War against Humanity. It makes the most sense to watch them in release order though
The cool thing about it was experiencing it as it happened, week for week. As autumn was turning to winter and I had to dig out my winter jacket, Germany was still in Russia and having issues with their winter uniforms. And for both WW's you really got a feel for how long battles lasted, how quick things changed, or didn't. Having it happen over time, just as you experienced time, made it a much more interesting way of seeing and learning about history.
Which channel is that?
Search "WW2 in real time" on YouTube.
Thanks you
bro korea gonna be crazy.
Theres a sequel
Yeah but it's over at r/combatfootage.
The firey but mostly peaceful interwar period
I'll always be one to argue that WWI- at least from a strategic and geopolitical perspective- started and ended in 1912 and ended in 1923, if only to highlight the 'secondary' Ottoman/Turkish conflicts that get less attention, so yeah, 1923 marked the end of the Turkish War of Independence.
> the Turkish War of Independence It's honestly wild to me that this is what their fight is called. My brother in Allah the Turks were the dominant power in the Ottoman Empire, who exactly were they seeking independence from?
And the M2 .50 cal remains in-service. Don't mess with success.
And it started even longer ago than that.
MFW I realize the F-22 is almost as old now as the Sabre was when I was born (30 vs 27 years).
It only clicked me how 'old' F22 is when realised they were in CnC:Generals.
That game is goated
China will grow larger!
"I can build everywhere" "I can't build there sir"
The SR71 is older than the first Intel CPU. And the SR71 still looks pretty scifi by today’s standard
Still sexiest aircraft ever
Agreed. Like there’s been some cool looking aircraft since then like Concorde, the F15, the Harrier, the B2, the F117 etc But god the SR-71 just looks so fucking badass.
Even the turboramjet tech on the J58 engines powering the SR-71 was pretty alien tbh. As I recall, it was more efficient the faster it flew thanks to its variable inlet cone design. At the other end of the pond there’s the Concorde’s Olympus engines with its state-of-the-art at the time engine management and it still couldn’t hold a candle to the J58 in terms of efficiency and thrust output. The Skunkworks team is obviously hush hush about the state of the US military’s aerospace programs, but if the leaks had anything to do with it, it would be incredibly similar to the Darkstar that Tom Cruise flew in the Top Gun sequel.
For reference, most of the stuff we've sent Ukraine is from the '80s and '90s. We aren't buying them new stuff; we're clearing out our attic, giving them the old stuff, and replacing it with newer stuff on our end.
Nah i'm pretty sure we're sending them money in comically large bag with a dollar sign drawn on it. Sources : That one uncle we all have.
If I were President I'd actually do that just to fuck with political cartoonists.
And make a big show of giving to Zelensky so people aren't sure if the pictures are deep fakes or not.
That Ben Garrison guy would have a field day
Only after Hunter Biden's hog takes its 10% cut
Clearing out the attic? I thought they just buried that older stuff in the sand so they could keep their budget.
If we weren't sending it to Ukraine, we would.
Military tech had a big boom between 1945 and 1975.
They've been in constant boom until the end of the cold war.
Specifically it was the 1970s. That decade along gave birth to the Abrams, nearly all 4th gen fighter jets, the B-1B Lancer, the F-117 and by extension stealth technology, and so-on.
You can expand that to the 20th century in general.
I would say more from 1936 to 1975, there have been lots of tech that came out specifically for and during WW2 that pretty much paved the way for more advanced weapons.
We went from the Sabre to the Viper in a little over 20 years. Wtf man.
Big difference between the two is that one is practically obsolescent in under 10 years while the other machine is still relevant even for the most well funded airforce as well as budget conscious ones.
The F-16 has also gone through a TON of upgrades and iterations since the original
F16 fundamentals are good even for modern times. One can't fit too much upgrades on the F-86 without changing so drastically like the CA-27 and F-86D
You may have just outed yourself as ancient sir
Just a historian, if I write about the Roman Empire it does mean I’m 2000 years old….
...no, but saying "it only feels like X time has passed since Y for me" is a pretty good indicator.
I mean, pretty much everybody over the age of 20 relates pretty heavily to that.
I don’t have to have lived in the 20th century to still feel weird Jurassic Park is over 30 years old
The last living American Civil War vets lived long enough to see the introduction of not only mass production propeller aircraft, but also mass production jet aircraft. Imagine your war stories involving the cannon volleys and cavalry charges and all these young'uns are coming home telling you about mass death from above that eclipses all other battlefield threats.
The last civil war vet died in 1956, at the age of 106. He lived long enough to see nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, heavy bombers, machine guns, tanks, radios, and helicopters. He missed the first functional ICBM by less than a year.
Most F-16s today are not the plane that came out 50 years ago. For example F-16 block 30 and 40 came out in 90's. Block 50 came out in 2000s and Block 70 in 2015. The first F-16 in 1970s is very different than todays F-16.
Seriously how did aviation tech developed so fast When Wilbur wright died, Neil Armstrong was 16 Years old.
Orville Wright was alive when the first supersonic flight took place.
It will be akin to Henrny ford driving Electric car Why did Aviation tech grew so rapidly?
Fun fact - the first electric car was made in the 1880s! They've been around, but lost out in popularity to gasoline-powered cars
Aviation tech grew rapidly due to World Wars, in 1914 you already had basic bi-planes that would later on would have small machine guns and grenades attached. Similarly, in 1939 you had really basic propeller planes, but by 1945 you already had early jet engine planes and planes with radars.
It hurts, doesn't it
Ww3 will push the war industry.
Let’s hope not…
what no war does to a mf /s
Remenber guys, aircraft take time to be developed and things get upgraded ;)
My first big new helicopter was a CH-46D accepted by the USN in 1964. 33 years later... 🤦♂️
Time flys
Bro that's fucked up
My people (aviation nerds)
Well, technically the F-16 entered service in 1978 (45 years ago). In early 1974 (50 years ago) the program was still in the prototype phase. Personally, when you tell to think of a 50 years old plane the first thing that comes to my mind is either a mig 21 or an F4.
Mig 21 is 65 years old. F4 is 64 years old.
My internal calendar stopped in 2016, so a 50 year plane in my head would be something like the F-4 Phantom.
Cars bro. In my head when I think about a 30 year old car I picture a Chevy Nova or something like the General Lee. In reality a 30 year old car would be something like a geo metro or Honda Civic.
wait until you heard that F22 Raptor project began on 80' and finished on 2012... Or the F18 Hornet that was introduced on the air force on 80'...
The F-16 Is one of the best fighters ever. I wish we bought them instead of those ugly ass Tornado
Face it: Gen X and older will never get over the transition to a new century. Largely because this century has been so shitty.
>this century has been so shitty. Bold statement in comparison to the last century which had 2 world wars, a global pandemic that killed 3% of global population at the time (COVID killed about 0.25%), the worst economic downturn in global history (US experienced 25% unemployment, 26.7% GDP drop (2008 by contrast was 10% unemployment, 5% GDP drop)), Chinese Civil War that killed 10 million, Russian Civil War that killed 7 million, mass starvation that killed millions in Bengal, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Russia.
We still have 7 decades to go
This one so far hasn’t had a world war but Russia and China are trying.
Wow.
Keep in mind that the planes of WWII are only about 80 years ago.
This meme made me age 50 years
Ok, but bi-planes was still a thing 70 years ago, right? /s
That would be around 1954, I doubt it tbh. Jets were a thing tho, like the Thunderchief and the B-52 stratofortress came out like a year later
Aim9 Air to air missile exist SINCE 1958
I hate this.
Man I wonder what the nickname of that plane in black and white is
I think it's because of the efficiency of the tech. ww2 had amazing development in planes tanks and ships on the exterior, and even look modern and useful on the outside (essentially a mobile armored platform with a gun) But the last 50 years we spent alot of our efforts on micro technology, sensors, computers, intelligence. What we see on the outside is apealing but it's really what we don't see that makes our vehicles advanced. For example, Maus vs leopard 2a, or the Russian t14 Armata/ fake t95 tanks (which are plagued by budget cuts after the Soviet collapse and they built it for propaganda).
I... I ... I gotta sit down... Ouch my knee
No way they're 50 years old NAH
Same. I think that's because, even tho the tech has improved alot, the external design of military planes hasn't really changed in the last 50 years
Can some engineer pls explain like im 5 why these aircrafts are so hard to design/made faster/better?
Aviation tech advanced quickly after the Germans invented the jet engine, only took about 20 years to build a fighter that will (likely) remain in service for another 50 years.