|
Phy posted:Just don't do any negative-g maneuvers while Grigor's on the pot or do a positive-G maneuver and help him out
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
joat mon posted:Scottish. What brain would combine a plane with a train? (sort of works in a scottish accent) The speed of a train with noise and fuel consumption of a plane. Cannae complain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 09:29
|
|
|
Mr.Peabody posted:The red nav light on an aircraft is on the left wing, and it's positioned in such a way that it wouldn't be visible on the top of the wing. So either it's a filter or it's the sensitivity of the CMOS. It wasn't really a long exposure shot, but at a high enough altitude you don't really need as long of an exposure as long as your lens is large enough due to the limited amount of atmospheric diffraction. I believe the red light is probably the reflection of the top anti-collision beacon on the fuselage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 14:07
|
|
|
Ola posted:What brain would combine a plane with a train? (sort of works in a scottish accent) A genius, and christ that would sound amazing. I saw some F-18s today above my house doing some maneuvers (live in the Lockyer valley in QLD, Australia where the Amberly squadrons have some of their restricted airspace). About the third time in 20~ years we've seen them (1st for me, dad's seen the twice before). Was a beautiful sight, no pictures though. If they still going for the rest of the week, I'll try to get some pictures.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
Ola posted:What brain would combine a plane with a train? (sort of works in a scottish accent) You could always go, you know... even crazier:  Or Russianer! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 16:54
|
|
|
the elusive Ekranotram spotted in the wild
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Cygni posted:Or Russianer! Not believing that's Russian until you show me where the giant missiles come out of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
Cygni posted:You could always go, you know... even crazier: So here's how I understand it: turbine engines are used in planes because they are a good tradeoff between mass and reliability, and take an efficiency hit due to a lower compression ratio than a reciprocating piston engine. Since trainz don't have to climb to 30,000 feet, and don't crash into the ocean under an engine failure, they use big heavy reciprocating engines that are reliable due to being overbuilt relative to an aero engine. Make sense?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 21:43
|
|
|
Sexual Lorax posted:Not believing that's Russian until you show me where the giant missiles come out of it. Not believing it's Russian until you show me the high pressure steam pipes and dangerous interlocking gears
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 22:15
|
|
|
BonzoESC posted:So here's how I understand it: turbine engines are used in planes because they are a good tradeoff between mass and reliability, and take an efficiency hit due to a lower compression ratio than a reciprocating piston engine. Since trainz don't have to climb to 30,000 feet, and don't crash into the ocean under an engine failure, they use big heavy reciprocating engines that are reliable due to being overbuilt relative to an aero engine. No. Because that's not how it works. Turbines are used in jets becasue they're run at high throttle settings for long periods. They get compression ratios upwards of 100:1. They have huge bypass ratios, and get really good BSFC. When throttled back, jets can get down to 2:1 or lower compression ratios, leading to really really lovely fuel usage. Piston engines are used in trains becasue they have decent BSFC at part throttle as well as full throttle. Near idle diesels have very good BSFC because they run very, very lean. Just like a jet. The reasons diesels have good fuel economy, are also why diesels need turbocharging to reach the same power levels that spark ignition motors get naturally aspirated. using jet thrust to power a train is just stupid. I'd need to look up the physics on it again, but small jets are not very good at transferring their energy to the surrounding environment, large slow streams of air do a much better job. Or in the case of a train, PTO and a gearbox.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 22:50
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:using jet thrust to power a train is just stupid. I'd need to look up the physics on it again, but small jets are not very good at transferring their energy to the surrounding environment, large slow streams of air do a much better job. Yeah that's why turboprops and turbofans are A Thing for airliners.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:using jet thrust to power a train is just stupid. I'd need to look up the physics on it again, but small jets are not very good at transferring their energy to the surrounding environment, large slow streams of air do a much better job. Or in the case of a train, PTO and a gearbox. I agree, although I don't think a turbine powering a generator for a train instead of a big recip diesel would necessarily be a ridiculous idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 01:40
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:or do a positive-G maneuver and help him out 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 02:41
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I agree, although I don't think a turbine powering a generator for a train instead of a big recip diesel would necessarily be a ridiculous idea. This was a thing...I'm pretty sure there was some discussion of it in the train thread a while back. Short version is that they were actually pretty economical to operate despite their high fuel consumption because they used Bunker C, which did not have any other major uses. When Bunker C began to be used in the manufacture of plastics, the price went up, the locomotives became too expensive to operate, and they were removed from service.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 02:57
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I agree, although I don't think a turbine powering a generator for a train instead of a big recip diesel would necessarily be a ridiculous idea. The original TGV prototype locomotive was powered with a gas turbine, but they switched to electric for the production vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 05:22
|
|
|
MrChips posted:joint Russia-India project The corruption alone will probably be worth $25 million an airframe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I agree, although I don't think a turbine powering a generator for a train instead of a big recip diesel would necessarily be a ridiculous idea. The UP turbines were limited both by the mechanical technology of the day, and the control electronics. They were lots of relays, and I'm not even sure if they had tubes! A modern turbine would do the job a lot better. IIRC they had 20 notch throttles. However, we have an entrenched technology, that would be virtually imposable to get around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:The corruption alone will probably be worth $25 million an airframe. so about 50 million less than the corruption cost on the F22? Sounds like an ok deal...
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 11:19
|
|
|
Hey jerks if you're awake RIGHT NOW you can watch a live feed of the Международный авиационно-космический салон airshow courtesy of the Russian government / Russia Today: http://rt.com/on-air/maks-2011-air-show/ They're currently showing off the A380 doing some wicked tight banked turns. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 11:29
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:To be fair, "inferior" might be a bit harsh...both the Wildcat and P-40 could more than hold their own provided they were in the hands of any semi-competent pilot who knew not to get in a turning fight with fighters (Zero with the IJN and Ki-43 with the JAAF) that had a tighter turning radius than almost anything else in the war. Read a book by a P40 pilot who said they eventually learned how to fight the Zero. Other than trying a high-g pullout at low altitude, which is a bit desperate and only a measure of last resort, apparently the Zero had a terrible roll rate and the P40 a very good one, so an experienced Warhawk pilot could lead a zero quite easily in a stern chase or even out turn inside it from a head on or offset pass, as long as he could see which way the zero was trying to roll. The P40 could be pulling max g while the Zero was still rolling. Assuming adequate energy and the P40 not being too high or too low. If the zero fought in the vertical or you were caught too low, I guess you would be hosed. Of course early war in Malaya, the Philippines, Indonesia etc. with the AAC on the defensive, outnumbered and little or no reliable radar coverage, that would often happen. In the same situation, Hurricanes and Spitfires flown in many cases by experienced combat pilots also got superfucked and they mostly ended up dead or in POW camps. Think a lot of it was a combination of inexperience or, for the experienced, being outnumbered by a bunch of very competent Japanese pilots who'd spent 3 or 4 years fighting over China. Obviously having a better plane would have helped as well, but supposedly the Warhawk could do the job, even against competent pilots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 13:47
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:Hey jerks if you're awake RIGHT NOW you can watch a live feed of the Международный авиационно-космический салон airshow courtesy of the Russian government / Russia Today: http://rt.com/on-air/maks-2011-air-show/ Excellent! Watching now. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:04
|
|
|
As always, the pilot matters a whole lot more than the airframe. There's a really good passage in Saburo Sakai's autobiography when he went back to combat after getting shot in the eye and was going 1 on 16 in his Zero vs F6Fs - he managed to a) not get shot down in a running 30 minute fight at those odds and b) not get shot at all. He remarked that the F6F was an undoubtedly superior aircraft but the pilots weren't up to his level and didn't adapt well to his maneuvering, hence survivability. Of course that is an extreme example since Sakai was one of the most talented pilots of the war. During the above combat he was blind in one eye.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:08
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:As always, the pilot matters a whole lot more than the airframe. One eye you say? I have an explanation... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 14:13
|
|
|
In trying to get a good picture of this license plate, I must have accidentally scared the guy, as he pulled into an empty church parking lot.  I circled around and he rolled his window down, I told him he was a certified badass.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 16:08
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:
You saying that about someone driving a Camry Hybrid actually means quite a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 16:29
|
|
|
My grandfather had first flight in a few different Sabre and Super Sabre variants, as well as a good number of air kills and ground kills in P-47s and P-51s in world war 2. I sit at a desk. Keeping the family lineage strong!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:During the above combat he was blind in one eye. You can't mention this and not talk about how he lost his eye Wikipedia posted:Although in agony from his injuries (he had a serious head wound from a bullet that had passed through his skull and the right side of his brain, leaving the entire left side of his body paralyzed, and was left blind in one eye) Sakai managed to fly his damaged Zero in a four-hour, 47-minute flight over 560 nmi (1,040 km; 640 mi) back to his base on Rabaul, using familiar volcanic peaks as guides. When he attempted to land at the airfield he nearly crashed into a line of parked Zeros but, after circling four times, and with the fuel gauge reading empty, he put his Zero down on the runway on his second attempt. After landing, he insisted on making his mission report to his superior officer before collapsing. His squadron mate Hiroyoshi Nishizawa drove him, as quickly but as gently as possible, to the surgeon. Sakai was evacuated to Japan on 12 August, where he endured a long surgery without anesthesia. The surgery repaired some of the damage to his head, but was unable to restore full vision to his right eye. Nishizawa visited Sakai while he was recuperating in the Yokosuka hospital in Japan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 20:42
|
|
|
Cygni posted:My grandfather had first flight in a few different Sabre and Super Sabre variants, as well as a good number of air kills and ground kills in P-47s and P-51s in world war 2. We have weirdly similar attitudes. My grandpa fought in most of the hot poo poo in Korea, my dad built 427 full injected modifieds....I have long hair and work at an auto auction. Livin' the American Dream.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 21:30
|
|
|
Mother of God.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:the elusive Ekranotram spotted in the wild Crazy russian things are some of the best things.  http://englishrussia.com/2010/03/12/ekranoplan/ Some great pics of where the Ekranoplane is now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2011 02:56
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:Mother of God. Get that filthy pornography off my screen. That dirty, sexy... I'll be back in a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:Mother of God. I'll...uh...I'll be in my bunk... Mr. Despair posted:Crazy russian things are some of the best things. I really, really want to bring the Ekranoplan from Russia to the tiny little lake that my in-laws have their lakehouse on. Mostly I want it so I can lob Sunburns into Michigan Speedway on racedays to quiet those idiots down so I can chill in my hammock with my beer in peace.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2011 03:59
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:Hey jerks if you're awake RIGHT NOW you can watch a live feed of the Международный авиационно-космический салон airshow courtesy of the Russian government / Russia Today: http://rt.com/on-air/maks-2011-air-show/ English Russia have a great collection of photos: http://englishrussia.com/2011/08/15/getting-ready-to-host-the-air-show-max-2011/ http://englishrussia.com/2011/08/18/grandiose-air-show-max-2011/ http://englishrussia.com/2011/08/22/grandiose-air-show-max-2011-part-2/ Very surprised to see the US presence, F-15 and A-10s!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 15:23
|
|
|
Here's a SU-35S doing some nifty flying: http://youtu.be/ZRV-c4s5vMo 1:49 is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 15:27
|
|
|
ack! posted:Here's a SU-35S doing some nifty flying: Huh, I guess they really didn't lose much maneuverability by dropping the canards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 16:36
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:or do a positive-G maneuver and help him out Just don't pull too hard, or he may not be able to strain enough to keep from blacking out while wedged into the shitter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 16:48
|
|
|
In slightly less awesome acrobatics news the RAF's Red Arrows team have been grounded after one of them crashed and the pilot was killed this weekend  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-14605914Here's them being awesome with a huge bloody watermark 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 16:56
|
|
|
Man, the Red Arrows crash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RuoZ0WVvVw) looks eerily similar to the Blue Angels crash a couple years ago (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpniTVq4R38). Tight right turn at low altitude.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:Mother of God.  61-7962 SR-71A Imperial War Museum Duxford
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:31 |
|
|
JingleBells posted:Very surprised to see the US presence, F-15 and A-10s! Wow, agreed. Didn't expect that. The F-15E and F-16 Block 50 make sense because we're still trying to sell em and the C5 and KC-10 were probably how they got their stuff there, but the A-10 was a surprise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2011 23:04
|
|