Tango01 | 15 Jun 2014 10:59 p.m. PST |
"There's no bomber quite like a Backfire. In many ways, Russia's Tu-22M3 is a Cold War throwback. An intermediate-range, variable-geometry machine, the Tupolev design really gave NATO planners headaches in the 1970s and '80s. If the Cold War had turned hot, Tu-22Ms would have attacked high-profile targets including American aircraft carrier battle groups in the Mediterranean and Atlantic. The bombers also would have struck European ports and key airfields, with the aim of severing supply routes to the U.S. Today, the Backfire is the only supersonic bomber in its class. And until quite recently, the outwardly archaic warplane seemed likely to fade away. However, with tensions ratcheting up in the Black Sea and Baltic regions, the Tu-22M3 has suddenly become a whole lot more relevant
" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Glenn Harvey | 16 Jun 2014 4:32 a.m. PST |
I for one really enjoy Tango's posts, I don't read them all, just like I don't read all the other posts by various others. I do resent the animosity shown toward Tango I feel its unwarranted, @passiveagressive (nice anonymous name) would you prefer 26 posts in one go, or them evenly spread over the day? |
20thmaine | 16 Jun 2014 4:39 a.m. PST |
Where are those darn stormtroopers when you need 'em ? |
dbander123 | 16 Jun 2014 4:39 a.m. PST |
I agree with Glenn. Tango's research many times duplicates what I already know. However that same thing is true of many of the posts. It is the gem that counts. |
Feet up now | 16 Jun 2014 5:18 a.m. PST |
The KV – 1 of the bomber airways ,old but not to be ignored. Bit gutted about this post aswell . I wanted to be one of the first to reply but alas Tangos stalker fanboys get in again. I now have to ignore and scan past these prolific posts to get to the cool kids answers :( |
Mardaddy | 16 Jun 2014 6:17 a.m. PST |
My post is not about supporting or not supporting a particular member. It was meant as bone tossed to someone who is new and may not know the history. Occasionally, I have found a gem in there w/Tango's posts as well. I gotta say, though – When a members screenname has become a verb used within the site, there might be an issue after all. Has nothing to do with Tango personally, I don't know him, he does not know me, sure he's a fine gent all in all; no animosity on my part. A little frustration with the duplication, but no ill will. |
Maddaz111 | 16 Jun 2014 6:19 a.m. PST |
I do not know why Tango chooses to "hammer in" 26 posts, I am only glad that he does find the Gems that I might miss. ( I don't have time in my hectic life to search out via google or other search engines things I Know nothing about
I cant say to google give me everything tango might find,) I am glad we have Tango, and I am glad I have free will to ignore the posts that have nothing that I am interested in! |
Tango01 | 16 Jun 2014 10:55 a.m. PST |
Many thanks for your support guys!. Mardaddy
any bad feeling from my part. I respect your opinion. passiveaggressive
take it easy, and you'll get used.(smile). Amicalement Armand |
Patrick Sexton | 16 Jun 2014 1:42 p.m. PST |
"There's no bomber quite like a Backfire" Well, maybe the B-1? |
Deadone | 16 Jun 2014 4:49 p.m. PST |
"There's no bomber quite like a Backfire"Well, maybe the B-1? My first thought too! But it's typical of American pages like War Is Boring, The Strategy Page and the Aviationist which don't bother with objective or accurate reporting. |
nvdoyle | 16 Jun 2014 9:39 p.m. PST |
Backfire + Shipwreck = Very Bad Day. |
Garand | 17 Jun 2014 12:16 p.m. PST |
Technically the B-1 does not have a gun position in the tail (hence "Backfire")
:) Damon. |
Lion in the Stars | 17 Jun 2014 12:21 p.m. PST |
One Backfire+Shipwreck, probably not. A couple regiments of Backfires, however
|