|
The x-31: A U.S. government test plane used to develop thrust vectoring. This was done in the 1980s, before the JSF, before the F-22, before the Su-37. It used three paddles sitting around the jet nozzle to redirect the thrust and control the plane's attitude; it has no conventional control surfaces (aside from ailerons for roll control. It's like if you took a car, got rid of the steering rack and pointed where you want to go using nothing but torque steer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA8QXenJzgA Also, completely unrelated: 
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2010 09:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
durabrand107 posted:I was a crew chief on F-16s. I've always had a thing for the F-16, it's hard to say why. Something about the whole thing being perfect 45 and 90 degree angles when viewed from above, I think. It just LOOKS the way a fighter should: small, sleek and bristling with various armaments. The shape of the vertical stabilizer, the ventral fins, the bubble canopy, all of it appealed to me when I was about 7, and it's held a soft spot in my heart ever since.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2010 07:53
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I would love to http://aviationtrivia.info/documents/xf84_h.wav
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2010 20:57
|
|
|
The Comet is beautiful forever.VikingSkull posted:As I learned today, he saw one of like 54. The 6 engine one you're thinking of is even larger than that. To expand on this, picture the AN-124. Now add fuselage sections, wing root extensions, longer wingspan, beefed-up suspension, twin vertical stabilizers, and remove the rear door and ramp. BAM! An-225. And I'm not exaggerating, that's literally what Antonov did for the 225, they stuck the required mods into the 124's blueprints, handed it to the engineers and said "Build this." One was built, deactivated after Buran's cancellation, then reactivated in 2001 for ultra-heavy-lift duty; another was half finished when the first was mothballed, then brought out to be finished in 06, a project which seems to have been abandoned.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2010 00:49
|
|
|
You call that madness? I got one better. Remember our old friend, the Convair XFY-1 Pogo? Take that propeller, move it to the center of the fuselage, make it the length (and take the place) of the wings, spin with rockets and ramjets and you've got yourself the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel, one of the many lunatic designs to come out of Nazi Germany during the end phases of the war. This one never even made it to the prototype phase, but just the concept of it is pure Nazi engineer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2010 05:13
|
|
|
orange lime posted:Zero pilot protection, rotor directly above your head, inability to bail out in an emergency. Basically all they have going for them is the autorotation and low CG. The rotor's not all that dangerous, if it snaps it'll just fly away at a tangent to its rotation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2010 11:21
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:One of my favourite 747 pics:
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2010 20:51
|
|
|
joat mon posted:One 75mm cannon in the nose  The solution to all problems: PUT MORE GUNS ON IT!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2010 04:38
|
|
|
The Electronaut posted:Looking through some footage and thought this would fit in, a couple radials on an old warbird. That's me coming out the bomb bay... That is badass as gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2010 03:19
|
|
|
tripsevens posted:
Awesome.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2010 01:30
|
|
|
Hey guys i heard saab tried making cars at one point, c/d?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2010 07:10
|
|
|
Most solutions would seem to require a built-in rocket, yes. However, it would be along the lines of STS's OMS rockets, rather than the main engines and their attendant giant fuckoff fuel tank. Fairly small since they only need to be used for a short time, and within a single operating regime (vacuum). Basically, the SCRamjet would get you enough speed to reach apogee, then the rocket would be used for the final speed boost to raise perigee above the atmosphere. If something as big and obsolete as the shuttle can carry fuel for those maneuvers, a smaller, lighter spacecraft should have no trouble with it. That said, we could see a rocket-powered orbiter powered aloft by scramjet boosters that then seperate and
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 20:28
|
|
|
Glad to hear the pilot survived. Also, I know it's been done to death in this thread, but that first shot really drives home just how drat big modern fighters are. The pilot is dwarfed by his machine, and the F-18 family isn't even all that huge.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2010 02:46
|
|
|
Saw a V-22 hovering around Orlando on Friday. Looked like it was headed toward ORL. Was there some event I don't know about that would give it cause to be here?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Oh yeah for sure, but there is some wiggle room there. Flying between the rudders and landing on a "runway" hardly wider than the aircraft you're piloting. Well to be fair, I'd imagine the carrier plane could probably match speeds so the approaching craft is only landing at a few miles per hour relative speed. Practically a VTOL landing, really.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 05:37
|
|
as gently caress on a whole other level
|
So at the risk of exposing my lack of knowledge, what is GK?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Don't planes have wifi these days anyways? Even if it's crucial to maintain communications for businessmen or whatever, I can't really see the need for people to use phones specifically. Bad reception or no, you know people would try anyway if it was allowed, including that awesome thing where they yell into the phone to make the connection better. I don't wanna be stuck on a plane for 4+ hours surrounded by that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
Cygni posted:Here's somethin' pretty cool: Northrop Grumman will have a fit.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:In concept, stealthily airdropping a bunch of Abrams and spec ops dudes to go wreck poo poo is cool as gently caress. But that depends on the development and deployment of stealth reactive armor plating for the tanks.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
slidebite posted:The Hustler is right up there on my "sexy as liquid gently caress" airplanes. So what you're saying is you like big, fast delta-winged aircraft?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
Is there any reason Sled Driver isn't available as an Ebook?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:The Comet obviously didn't have them originally, they added them to the design as part of the militarization process to go from the Comet design to a Nimrod (just like they added a bomb bay, etc). Same thing with the Electra and the P-3. Whereas the E-3 did not get hardpoints added to the design as part of the militarization process. The WW2-era stuff is great, same with most of the Hornet/Super Hornet schemes (dat growler). The Digital Camo 18F is atrocious, though.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2013 07:00
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Possibly it's the GE 90 photos on this page, but those engines look tiny. They are, relatively. It's called the TF-39, they produce less than half the thrust of a GE90, and have a lower bypass ratio (8:1 vs 10:1 for the GE90) so the fan is smaller relative to the core. 747s use the similar CF-6, look at the GE90 test 747 to see the size difference: 
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Why not put 4 GE90s on a 747? Be pretty good for pure speed and GTOW (and aerobatics  ), but I imagine the thrust and improved fuel consumption would be outweighed by having 4 of them. It would probably drain the tanks faster and thus reduce range, which is a no-go on a long-range hauler.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
block51 posted:Wow, this was pretty drat entertaining. "Sidewinder". GET IT?!? Ha. I like how the Sukhoi Cobra-flipped down out of the way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Yeah pilots typically use 60% thrust for takeoff and save the other 40% for emergencies right? E: I think standard procedure on some airlines is to shut off 2 engines for short hops.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Boeing to develop SRB-powered airliner, news at 11.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The Navy flies C-130s, dunno if they did at the time though. Someone in the navy must have had experience with the greyhound or whatever COD transport hey had at the time and larger aircraft (P3?). Same difference, though -- the airmen flying cargo ships aren't necessarily the same ones with carrier ops experience. Sure, you might have a few here and there who transferred out from carrier duty for whatever reason, but it wouldn't necessarily be any different.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Needs more yakety sax.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:iirc, it sits on the runway that extends SE from Chicago/Bentley, but the camera angles usually pick it up when the cars are running through Bacharach and Gambon: Man, all the times I saw that jumbo on the show and somehow I never twigged on the engine pods. Weird how you can just not notice something like that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
Yeah but don't you see they won't be expecting you to intentionally disadvantage yourself, therefore giving you the advantage because
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
My brain initially read that as E30 and all I could think was "suspension bushings."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:We have plenty of football fields for C-130s though! Yeah but you'll wanna stick to grass fields, the rockets tend to ignite astro-turf a lot easier. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
I love that the Corsair's entire design is dictated by its horsepower. They wrapped an aluminum tube around the most powerful engine they could get, and stuck on a big fuckoff prop for max propulsion. But since the wings had to fold, the main gear had to retract rearward, meaning they couldn't be longer than the wing chord. Then the stubby landing gear couldn't give the prop enough ground clearance, so rather than start from scratch they just went "gently caress it, gullwing!"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
Daveh posted:One of the photos I took at RIAT this year while the rest of them download from the camera. It's an F16 from the Royal Netherlands Air Force. Please tell me your other shots are this good, because that's fantastic.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:it also took off from an aircraft carrier And flew a great circle from the mid-Atlantic over the north pole and down the Pacific rim to Vietnam, if I've heard correctly. Without refueling.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
Or make a nice hot cuppa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fDM9Eb16Do
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Why would the pilot even have a chute? Thankfully he did, but why? Video described it as an emergency chute, I imagine they have one stashed close by for just these sorts of situations.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Also the Soviets bought the same pen from the same manufacturer after they found out about it. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2013 07:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
invision posted:I went to Evergreen Aviation Museum to check out the Spruce Goose. I swear to god I didn't even notice it for the first ~5 minutes of being there - I thought it was just the back wall of the hangar. Here's the imgur album: Cool stuff! Is that a real Mercury (right?) capsule partway through, or just a mockup?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 05:07
|
|