• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    572 months ago

    It’s important to cover the eyes of birds when transporting them so they think it’s night and sleep through their journey.

  • aramis87
    link
    fedilink
    252 months ago

    I’m delighted we’re sending these over to Ukraine (though it should have been done a long time ago).

    Question: the F-16s are planes. Is there some reason we’re loading them onto other planes for transport instead of flying them over?

    • @BatrickPateman
      link
      212 months ago

      Ease of transfer (one pilot vs multiple for a looooong flight, probably no refuel on the Antonow, and if so it eats less specialised stuff than the F-16s) and maybe even fuel efficiency, I would guess.

      Also, one cargo plane raises less eye brows than a flock of fighters.

      • @ItWasTheDNS
        link
        32 months ago

        AN-124’s are extremely inefficient - it’s probably stopping 2-3 times on route, but still easier to arrange than flying each plane.

          • @ItWasTheDNS
            link
            22 months ago

            Back across the US - Portland Maine is a popular tech stop for the AN124’s and then probably someplace in the UK

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 months ago

        Both aircraft types will almost certainly be running Jet A1, or whatever the military version of it is.

    • @Dicska
      link
      162 months ago

      The others here answered everything already, I just would like to use one analogy: 6 sports cars on a trailer.

    • Zoidsberg
      link
      fedilink
      162 months ago

      Same reason new cars aren’t driven from the port to the dealership.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The maximum range for the F16 in “ferry” mode (max fuel, no weapons, pee before takeoff) is something like 4000km. The distance from Belfast (Maine) to Belfast (the original) is 4500km.

      That would mean air to air refueling, which is expensive and risky. It would put major wear on the planes, which are not the newest to start with. And unlike the Antonov, the F16 comes with neither legroom nor bathrooms.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        82 months ago

        pee before takeoff)

        Iirc the factor that limited early nuclear submarines the most from continuous dives was the toilets, they have limited storage for sewage and it turns out that draining those with a greater outside pressure is a pretty difficult task, at least if you want to stay undetected.

        Now that they have figured that out the limiting factor is food.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          51 month ago

          You didn’t explain how they sorted it out so I’m assuming compost toilets or some form of slow torpedo that makes it look like the sub is pooing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        the F16 comes with neither legroom nor bathrooms.

        But at maximum speed, it could in theory cover the 4500km in just over 2h (but probably with worse fuel economy and less range)

        • @dlatch
          link
          61 month ago

          There’s no way it can get anywhere near that range at full speed. Fighters need to use afterburners to get up to max speed, and F16s run out of fuel in about 10 minutes when using afterburner.

    • WilshireOP
      link
      fedilink
      62 months ago

      It’s safer for long distances, plus they won’t have to worry about refueling.

      • RubberDuck
        link
        72 months ago

        That, and 6x the flight hours for a F16 is expensive. The flight hours with accompanied wear and tear are better used over Ukraine.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    152 months ago

    Oh hell yeah, are we pulling some stuff out of AMARG? I didn’t realize we were doing that!! Thought it was just a handful of European countries donating airframes they were decommissioning.

        • @SkyezOpen
          link
          22 months ago

          I’ve seem what happens to shit that sits for a while. It breaks in ways beyond comprehension.

          • Vanon
            link
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I have, too. Maybe I’m still in denial over this dark magic, but I still think just about anything can be successfully stored, using proper tested procedures. Regarding fluids, fuel, batteries, tires, etc. Can’t imagine how complicated it is for a million dollar fighter jet, though. But they’re probably built tough, and not full of cheap materials that disintegrate (unlike my old car).

  • Jay
    link
    fedilink
    English
    152 months ago

    *Some assembly required. Batteries not included.