|
EasilyConfused posted:
There's an A1C who got done polishing the nose cones on the bombs and was like, "gently caress it, I got time." edit: Snipe tax: 
Murgos fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Feb 9, 2021 |
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
NightGyr posted:Is that an AGM or targeting pod? I think it's probably a reconnaissance pod, since the CF-104 was cleared to carry one, and it's about the right size
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:30
|
|
|
That was a very good post
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
Big shocker, NTSB final report is Kobe helicopter was spatial disorientation, flew VFR into clouds, "get there itis", etc. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-02-09/pilot-in-kobe-bryant-helicopter-crash-disoriented-ntsb-says https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20210209.aspx
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 21:42
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Good god, the Crusader is tiny. A Sparrow looks like a Harpoon Those aren’t Crusaders or Sparrows, they’re A-7s carrying HARMs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
Murgos posted:There's an A1C who got done polishing the nose cones on the bombs and was like, "gently caress it, I got time." I'm sure the others do this to, but this is several conflicting loads. You can't have both a rotatory launcher (big guy in the middle) and JDAMs both in the bay at the same time. Or both an ALCM pylon ( on the cars under the wings) and a Heavy Stores beam (on the wings)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
I think it's just showing potential load out options. Not a specific load out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:35
|
|
|
Charles posted:Big shocker, NTSB final report is Kobe helicopter was spatial disorientation, flew VFR into clouds, "get there itis", etc. I'm generally against leaping to conclusions, but in this case, welp, the exact thing that they determined happened, was the thing that everyone expected from day one. Sometimes everything is just what it seems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:58
|
|
|
Invalido posted:I just saw this electric helicopter that to my untrained eyes looks less stupid: So, erhh, how will this provide yaw control in case of a power failure?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:So, erhh, how will this provide yaw control in case of a power failure? Hmm good point that makes it a single point of failure. We should look how it's done on mechanical tail rotors which have redunda...oh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I'm generally against leaping to conclusions, but in this case, welp, the exact thing that they determined happened, was the thing that everyone expected from day one. Sometimes everything is just what it seems. Yeah, premature speculation is dumb, but, ehhh. I didn't know (or just forgot) the detail about the helicopter descending while saying they're climbing, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
Ola posted:Hmm good point that makes it a single point of failure. We should look how it's done on mechanical tail rotors which have redunda...oh. No. With an electric tail rotor independent of the main rotor, you end up with 2 failures if you lose power: Main rotor and tail rotor control. On a mechanical tail rotor, if you lose power, you still have tail rotor control. Total tail rotor failures are very rare, but even so, they can be dealt with...more common failure is tail rotor control aka jammed pedal, which is usually more easily dealt with. On a helicopter like that in the video, all this will be even more pronounced as it will have virtually no keel effect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 00:14
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:No. With an electric tail rotor independent of the main rotor, you end up with 2 failures if you lose power: Main rotor and tail rotor control. Tail rotor failures are common enough. It needn't fall off, just a tiny part in the complicated control linkage can fail and that's it. t's a single point of failure which has killed lots of people and yet it hasn't been a reason to dismiss helicopters, certainly not from the experimental stage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
Ola posted:Tail rotor failures are common enough. It needn't fall off, just a tiny part in the complicated control linkage can fail and that's it. t's a single point of failure which has killed lots of people and yet it hasn't been a reason to dismiss helicopters, certainly not from the experimental stage. Something like ~15 incidents per 1 million flying hours. 45% of those is the tail hitting something (or something hitting the tail). I'd call that pretty rare. Also again..in the electrical solution above, a loss of power means autorations suddenly become an awful lot harder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 01:21
|
|
|
Ola posted:Tail rotor failures are common enough. It needn't fall off, just a tiny part in the complicated control linkage can fail and that's it. t's a single point of failure which has killed lots of people and yet it hasn't been a reason to dismiss helicopters, certainly not from the experimental stage. Okay but look up the incidence of tail rotor failures vs. loss-of-power incidents. Even with a dead engine, an autorotating helicopter still has yaw control. That electric one does not. Yes, this probably decreases the chance of the tail rotor failing independently, but it guarantees that the tail rotor fails if power is lost. Which is more common? e: that'll teach me to leave a reply window open for two hours
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 02:34
|
|
|
Y'all are arguing over whether the shark bites out of hunger or curiosity. Helicopters remain an affront to God, in either case.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:34
|
|
|
How the Iranians roll:
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 06:10
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:How the Iranians roll: They'd have to use internal stores in their new top of the line stealth fighter though. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 06:27
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:They'd have to use internal stores in their new top of the line stealth fighter though. Don't forget this marvel of modern technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESA_Shahed_285
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 06:47
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Something like ~15 incidents per 1 million flying hours. 45% of those is the tail hitting something (or something hitting the tail). My first point, yeah but normal helicopters also have weak spots. But my main point, it's a dude that built a drat electric helicopter. It's not a formal suggestion for the future of flight that we are supposed to vote over. Ola fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Feb 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 06:49
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:They'd have to use internal stores in their new top of the line stealth fighter though. Every time I see those pics I think of my early model airplane days where I would get a big gluey thumbprint on the canopy of a fighter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 07:04
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1QxzT_0mBo Here's an (simulated) engine failure in the hover. He stomps pretty hard on the right pedal, but it does nothing...which is fine, because he's not moving, but if this was taxing, he would be in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 08:58
|
|
|
A "power failure" (or even "engine failure") as we think of it in regular helicopters can be an engine failure or an electrical failure I guess, but it's obviously not given that the same traditional failure modes apply when you swap architecture completely. If the battery stops outputting power, an autorotating main motor can give power to the tailrotor. It's also possible to have an emergency pack or cell isolation circuitry to provide tail rotor power. And if simply the main motor fails, the tail rotor is entirely unaffected. Fundamentally, electric helicopters could do that. In this specific case, a homemade experimental which will decapitate a forgetful exiting pilot, uh-huh no it's not thoroughly engineered and I'm sure they're happy internet discussion persons can chip in and point that out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 09:15
|
|
|
The dude wrote in the comment section that the tail assembly has its own battery pack. I'm not sure if that makes things more or less safe - it depends entirely on how its done I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 11:18
|
|
|
Invalido posted:The dude wrote in the comment section that the tail assembly has its own battery pack. I'm not sure if that makes things more or less safe - it depends entirely on how its done I suppose. I enjoy how volatile batteries are to temperature change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 12:05
|
|
|
Ola posted:Hmm good point that makes it a single point of failure. We should look how it's done on mechanical tail rotors which have redunda...oh. but also: Godholio posted:Y'all are arguing over whether the shark bites out of hunger or curiosity. Helicopters remain an affront to God, in either case. Invalido posted:The dude wrote in the comment section that the tail assembly has its own battery pack. I'm not sure if that makes things more or less safe - it depends entirely on how its done I suppose. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Feb 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 13:49
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:I enjoy how volatile batteries are to temperature change. Use a thermal battery for emergencies? I don’t know how battery composition changes affect performance over temperature but I’d be surprised if this can’t be solved with COTS equipment. Spacecraft batteries seem to work okay across temperature extremes you don’t see terrestrially.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 13:53
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You still have yaw control with 0 power on a conventional helo during autorotation, HTH I didn't say you didn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 14:00
|
|
|
Homemade multi rotor tail thruster with no aerodynamic or mechanical backup is gonna be a no from me dawg. There are probably some unmanned use cases where a separate electric anti torque drive could make sense, but I don’t want to ride in em.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 14:07
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Spacecraft batteries seem to work okay across temperature extremes you don’t see terrestrially. On big spacecraft they are both heated and cooled to make sure they operate in a pretty temperate temperature range for the whole life of the satellite.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 14:29
|
|
|
Krogort posted:On big spacecraft they are both heated and cooled to make sure they operate in a pretty temperate temperature range for the whole life of the satellite. Between -30 and 61C...
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 15:28
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Between -30 and 61C...
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 15:35
|
|
|
Krogort posted:On big spacecraft they are both heated and cooled to make sure they operate in a pretty temperate temperature range for the whole life of the satellite. What heats/cools the battery that heats/cools the main battery 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 15:46
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Those aren’t Crusaders or Sparrows, they’re A-7s carrying HARMs. I had to google the A-7 to find out how it was different from the Crusader  Interesting fact about the A-4: it was designed by the same engineer, Ed Heinemann, who designed the Dauntless dive bomber. Heinmann was a *self-taught* aerospace engineer who's formal education was being a draftsman.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:Current speculation on homebuiltaircraft is that his automotive ECU may have saved the engine from grenading itself by going into a limp mode. He runs the thing nearly dry and isn't even planning to tear down the engine for inspection. He's going to fly again on an engine I'd hesitate to take on a freeway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
So who dies first, Jerry, electric helicopter guy or ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpmTWL_Cyug (he's going to a glacier lake at 17,000 feet with floats so obviously he needs NOS) e: what's that other kitplane guy who refuses to take advice? My money is on him actually Ola fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Feb 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
I knew someone with NOS on a Lancair that he raced at Reno. He didn't blow up his engine (a Continental six cylinder, as I recall), but he did run HUGE bottles because people running NOS don't usually run it full throttle for minutes at a time. It put him a step ahead of the non-turbo competition, but way behind the 600HP twin turbo Lancair that dominates his class. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK-lw58ekGg is footage of Vince before he got the NOS bottles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:35
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:They'd have to use internal stores in their new top of the line stealth fighter though. I still can't get over how much that canopy looks like the canopy of Revell model jets I built as a kid and smeared glue all over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
NOS to go faster at an actual race  NOS to do high altitude STOL nonsense 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
e.pilot posted:NOS to go faster at an actual race The LED which lights up the purge steam is the icing on the cake. It's all car tuner aesthetics applied to his niche interest, with a touch of engineering porn. "Safety is always the most important, and being highly visible is great for safety. Therefore, covering the wings with these ultra reflective, carbon fiber effect, Monster energy drink decals..."
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 19:11
|
|