|
Toured Kennedy Space Center yesterday. Not jets, but I think OP would approve... SSME - Space Shuttle Main Engine 375,000 lbs thrust        F-1 Engine - Saturn V 1st Stage 1,500,000 lbs thrust    
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
aswert1223 posted:Toured Kennedy Space Center yesterday. Not jets, but I think OP would approve... Awesome pictures! What has always amazed me about rocket engines is their incredible thrust compared to their (relative) small size.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:Awesome pictures! What has always amazed me about rocket engines is their incredible thrust compared to their (relative) small size. It's because there's nothing to them. In the Space Shuttle Maim Engines, two small turboshaft engines drive the fuel and oxidizer pumps, and there's a combustion chamber that most of the fuel and oxidizer are pumped to. Just the two rotating shafts for the pumps, no reciprocating parts like a car engine, and no big fan to decrease the jet velocity like an airplane engine. The downside is you need to carry both inputs to the reaction, and they're terribly inefficient in atmosphere.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 08:10
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:Space Shuttle Maim Engines Every spaceship should have maim engines. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 10:11
|
|
|
Especially the Viking mission.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 16:26
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:It's because there's nothing to them. In the Space Shuttle Maim Engines, two small turboshaft engines drive the fuel and oxidizer pumps, and there's a combustion chamber that most of the fuel and oxidizer are pumped to. Just the two rotating shafts for the pumps, no reciprocating parts like a car engine, and no big fan to decrease the jet velocity like an airplane engine. The downside is you need to carry both inputs to the reaction, and they're terribly inefficient in atmosphere. Simple as they sound, they're wildly complex. Once your cross from pressurized tanks to turbopumps things for from "tough" to "insanely hard" to get right. The pumps are high energy. You're pumping O2 with a rocket motor that's turning the pump to move it. Turbopump equipped motors have a tendency to eat themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 15:30
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:Simple as they sound, they're wildly complex. Once your cross from pressurized tanks to turbopumps things for from "tough" to "insanely hard" to get right. The pumps are high energy. You're pumping O2 with a rocket motor that's turning the pump to move it. Yeah, they're built and operated very precisely, but still conceptually simple in construction. http://www.enginehistory.org/SSME/SSME3.pdf is a pretty good document about what has to be done to start one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 16:27
|
|
|
The basics of those turbopump engines were developed by the Nazi super-science, too. Their atmosphere-skimming antipodal bomber used a turbopump-rocket setup.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
AnimalChin posted:what the fuuuuuuuuuuuck MiG-23 not good enough?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:MiG-23 not good enough? Nope Also, completely unrelated to that, here is a video one of our hangar tenants showed us at work today starring him and his MX2. It's kinda neat, then it goes off the deep end around the four minute mark. It's the first film from that production company AFAIK. There's a P-51D based here as well that they are going to try and film, if that ever happens I'll probably post it too. Forum Hussy fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Jul 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2011 07:03
|
|
|
From the Horrible Mechanical Failures thread:Plinkey posted:Here is what happens when a hangar get hit by lightning and it manages to set off the foam system while the hanger is full of planes. You just know there was at least one poor bastard in there when it happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2011 08:09
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:You just know there was at least one poor bastard in there when it happened.  . Not because of the foam itself, but because it instantly brings to mind the dissolving bubble weapon Thrush had in The Man From Uncle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2011 17:14
|
|
|
Luckily, you'd be perfectly fine even if you stood right in the middle of it. Anther post in the Failures thread brought up a similar incident at Ellsowth AFB where a test of the foam spray went a bit haywire when they were unable to turn it off and a massive hanger was filled with foam to the rafters. The dozen or so airmen inside the hanger taking measurements and phots were perfectly okay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
Someone posted a link a while back for a bunch of really awesome modern art featuring warbirds like the P-40, it was incredibly stylized and utterly badass. Does anyone have the link, I cannot find it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 17:35
|
|
|
The world's only airborne fish strike?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 20:12
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:Someone posted a link a while back for a bunch of really awesome modern art featuring warbirds like the P-40, it was incredibly stylized and utterly badass. Does anyone have the link, I cannot find it. You're probably thinking of this etsy shop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:The world's only airborne fish strike? We almost had a dog strike a few weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
I visited Wings Over the Rockies recently and took some pictures I thought this thread might want to see. These pictures have been resized, the full-sized ones are here. There are more pictures there, but I posted the best one of each plane. B-52B out in front of the museum.  A-7D Corsair II.  Cockpit of the Corsair II. You could actually get in it.  F-4E Phantom II. You could get in this one too.   A couple pictures of the plane's history, stenciled on the side of the fuselage.  B-57 Canberra. I'd never even heard of the Canberra until it came up in this thread, so it was cool to get a picture of it for you guys.  B-18 Bolo. One of the older planes there, most of the stuff they have is post WWII.  B-1A Lancer.  A variety of nuclear bombs under the belly of the Lancer.  Some kind of cruise missile, I think?  F-111 Aardvark.  F-104 Starfighter. Compared to the other fighters, it seems incredibly tiny, with really stubby wings.  F-14A Tomcat.  T-33A T-Bird.  F-105D Thunderchief. Bad picture, but it's the only one I took.  F-100D Super Sabre.  F-102A Delta Dagger.  F-86H Sabre.  All the planes have had their engines removed, which means you can see right through the Sabre.  They also had a bunch of artwork depicting various Colorado Air National Guard fighters. Argentic fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Jul 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 22:16
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:From the Horrible Mechanical Failures thread: Oh yeah, there were defiantly people in there. I wasn't around when it happened but you can see the one guy on the right of the picture that is covered in foam about up to his waist. I didn't really get to see the aftermath either other than those pictures that went around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
Argentic posted:I visited Wings Over the Rockies recently and took some pictures I thought this thread might want to see. The whole gallery is here, I'll try to post the best of each plane. the [timg] tag just makes it scale the picture, it doesn't actually reduce the size. They look small, but that's still 11 megs of images. What I'm saying, is you're crushing peoples browsers and their internet connections. Nice pictures. Post the small versions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 22:39
|
|
|
Y'all might want to take a look at the Oshkosh promo video, if you are making plans for the next couple weeks. It is more fun than this video makes it look. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J86NG-c7JwA&feature=player_embedded So, yeah, a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:the [timg] tag just makes it scale the picture, it doesn't actually reduce the size. They look small, but that's still 11 megs of images. What I'm saying, is you're crushing peoples browsers and their internet connections. poo poo, I didn't realize. Fixing that now. EDIT: Okay, fixed. Went from 2816x2112 to 640x480. Argentic fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Jul 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2011 23:00
|
|
|
Thanks :-) Those are some great shots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2011 03:40
|
|
|
Godholio posted:We almost had a dog strike a few weeks ago. We rear-ended a goose once in a Cessna 210. At 12K.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2011 07:58
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:We rear-ended a goose once in a Cessna 210. At 12K. Not a fan of geese.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2011 14:39
|
|
|
Godholio posted:We almost had a dog strike a few weeks ago. Ever had a coyote strike? Yeah, that happened a couple weeks ago to one of our Archers. They kind of blend in with concrete runways 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2011 06:53
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Not a fan of geese. Ah, CVR transcripts - enough to put you off commercial flying.  http://www.tailstrike.com/050770.htm
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2011 09:35
|
|
|
Argentic posted:
It has insanely high wing-loading, on the order of 514 kg/m^2. For comparison, the Eurofighter is 311 kg/m^2 and the 747 is 740 kg/m^2. In other news, number of Tomcats in the world may have dropped by one more: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2011 06:44
|
|
|
At first I thought there was an R2 unit in the back of that F-14.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2011 14:18
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Y'all might want to take a look at the Oshkosh promo video, if you are making plans for the next couple weeks. It is more fun than this video makes it look. Seriously, check the show out if you're even slightly inclined 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2011 23:15
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:At first I thought there was an R2 unit in the back of that F-14. Heh, they kept running out of RIOs so they just started using astromech droids instead!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 00:50
|
|
|
Argentic posted:
That's a CALCM, either an AGM-86C or -D. Can't tell the difference based on shape alone because there are no external differences between the -C and -D models, just the standard blast/frag warhead with the -C and a penetrator warhead on the -D. That's how it looks in its stowage configuration, as it is loaded on the B-52 pylons. Once it's launched, wings snap out and the tail surfaces flip down. You can also see a B61 nuclear bomb shape in the left side of the picture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 07:47
|
|
|
My great-uncle was an engineer at Martin during the 40s, 50s, and 60s. Here are a couple of his projects: Martin XB-51 bomber:  Three GE jet engines, 10,000 pounds of bombs, and 8 20mm cannon. The XB-51 was almost as fast as an F-86 and faster than an F-84. The prototypes ran away from their chase planes on a couple occasions. The XB-51 pioneered the rotating bomb bay door. Instead of conventional doors that extended into the slipstream and caused drag, the bombs were mounted to the inside surface of the door. The door simply rotated on its axis and the weapons were exposed and ready to deploy.  The XB-51 lost out to the English Electric Canberra in USAF trials. Despite having fantastic low-level performance, the XB-51 was lacking in range and endurance. Both prototypes were eventually lost in crashes. Martin XP6M SeaMaster:  The SeaMaster would have been the USN's nuclear delivery vehicle until the Polaris missile became available. It had the same rotating bomb bay door as the XB-51. The SeaMaster was a victim of budget cuts and a giant temper tantrum by SAC and the USAF (who pitched a fit when they learned that the P6M was nuclear-capable).
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:Martin XP6M SeaMaster: I read somewhere that the plan for the seamaster was to hide them at little coral atolls and stuff with submarine seaplane tenders, constantly flying around from hidden bay to hidden bay. What a fuckin' assignment that would have been. Flying around in a seaplane with nukes, hanging out in coral atolls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 17:42
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:Martin XP6M SeaMaster: If you get a chance to dig around the family archives for any seamaster stuff, put it up. I love that airplane. I also had a family friend who was a test engineer on that program. Not quite a good enough family friend that I could go rooting through his goodie-chest when he died though... Would have loved to get copies of some of the pictures on his office walls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 04:10
|
|
|
I could easily watch a full non-edited work day at the Merlin factory. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0b2_1310169635
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 09:46
|
|
|
I've always had a soft spot for Naval aviation. My grandfather got to ride in a PBY Catalina from Kwajalein to Hawaii right after WWII, and the A-6 is a personal favorite from my model airplane days. Getting all those beautiful curves just right was a lot of fun. The Navy had a lot of crazy concepts that never really went into full scale production or have seen a modern analogue. Like the Sea Dart. They even thought about launching these supersonic hydro-skis from submarines: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 10:19
|
|
|
Beep beep, 767 coming through!quote:BOSTON -- The crash between two airliners on a taxiway at Boston's Logan International Airport was upgraded from an "incident" to an "accident" on Friday by federal investigators, prompting the involvement of the National Transportation Safety Board. Second time this year one of Delta's contract operators got clobbered by a bigger plane.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 13:20
|
|
|
I didn't expect it to have cut almost completely through the tail, wow. Edit: Also, the woman with neck pain. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
Rutan's final project is a Flying Car. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blog...mentId=blogDest
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 15:32
|
|