Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
The old A-12 stealth attack plain the navy caned in 1991 has finally been legally terminated. Northrup Grumman will finally have to pay back several billion dollars to the Government.

Link, please. This is some very interesting news, and would like to see the specifics.

Posted
Yep I was referring more to the hiding of the compressor face with the F-35 reference-- and possibly the coating of the inlet with RAM. Either way the J-10B would be an impressive improvement over the baseline J-10.

Edit: Another view of the J-10 showing E/O and targeting pods on the inlet chin ala F-16 style. I'm not sure whether these are indigenous or Israeli-made/derived.

May be I'm a little late and someone else has already commented, this thing looks a bit like the F-16XL, and more realistically, this thing looks like its way overloaded with munitions. A single engine plane carrying that many LGB and I think they are AAMs just seem... slow.

Posted

Compared to the missiles, those must be fairly small (long and skinny) bombs. Certainly nothing compared to a 2000-pounder.

Posted (edited)
The old A-12 stealth attack plain the navy caned in 1991 has finally been legally terminated. Northrup Grumman will finally have to pay back several billion dollars to the Government.

I don't think Northrup-Grumman were responsible for the A-12, so I don't see why they'd owe the government anything.

Edited by Phyrox
Posted
The old A-12 stealth attack plain the navy caned in 1991 has finally been legally terminated. Northrup Grumman will finally have to pay back several billion dollars to the Government.

Don't you mean Boeing and General Dynamics?

Posted
The old A-12 stealth attack plain the navy caned in 1991 has finally been legally terminated. Northrup Grumman will finally have to pay back several billion dollars to the Government.

That's what you get for reading the Sun or the Star for aviation news.

Posted (edited)

www.defencetech.org is the sight were I Learned about the ruling by the US federal court of appeals.

The United States navy gave the company a large sum of money for the development of the A-12 with interest Its like three billion dollars.

Edited by miles316
Posted (edited)

That's nice, but Northrop Grumman has nothing to do with the A-12. It was a McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics project.

That's why I asked 'Don't you mean Boeing and General Dynamics?' (seeing as Boeing acquired McDonnell Douglas in 1997) :D

Edited by Bowen
Posted (edited)
That's nice, but Northrop Grumman has nothing to do with the A-12. It was a McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics project.

That's why I asked 'Don't you mean Boeing and General Dynamics?' (seeing as Boeing acquired McDonnell Douglas in 1997) :D

Your right I did not check my details sorry.

They have to repay 2.8 billion dollars back to the government.

Edited by miles316
Posted
What's inside a VIP A380:

custom_1244168597695_article-0-053533AA000005DC-696_964x515.jpg

WANT! Although I'm not sure those virtual prayer mats are strictly Halal.

Posted
WANT! Although I'm not sure those virtual prayer mats are strictly Halal.

What, no toilets though? :p

Guess you have to cross your legs and hold it, or perhaps you're supposed to pee in the 'well being pool'. :D

Graham

Posted

Primarily addressed to David Hingtgen, but anybody else in the know feel free to answer.

1) For the F-15SE, has it been announced if it would be up-engined to allow super cruise?

2) Would the engines used in the F-22 even fit the F-15SE?

3) Has it been announced if the F-15SE would have 3D thrust vectoring?

Graham

Posted

Graham---No to all 3. But, we did recently see the new Sienar Systems helmet for F-22 pilots:

PS to Sharky---see the YF-23? XB-70?

Posted (edited)
Graham---No to all 3. But, we did recently see the new Sienar Systems helmet for F-22 pilots:

Yes! Can it detects a Porkins? ^_^

Anyway, I always wondered why is the cockpit so tight... Is it for the pilot's safety?

Edited by shiroikaze
Posted
Yes! Can it detects a Porkins? ^_^

Anyway, I always wondered why is the cockpit so tight... Is it for the pilot's safety?

More for performance reasons. The bigger the cockpit the bigger you need to make the nose which means more drag and weight, and a less effective fighter. The cockpits on nearly all fighters are about as big as they can be made.

Posted

I'm not sure if this warrants a new thread, but this thread doesn't quite feel right either... still, it did travel through the air for a bit, and its just too cool not to mention:

http://www.haynes.co.uk/Press/Releases_HTM...ess_release.htm

I'm not sure if you have "Haynes" manuals in the US. They're something of a British institution, the motor vehicle reference guide for people who used to pimp their rides before pimping your ride was something people did. They basically told you how to take your Mk. IV Ford Cortina to bits and hopefully put it back together again before the wife divorced you for getting all those oil stains on the carpets. If they didn't have a book that covered your car model, you should perhaps have checked again to make sure you hadn't bought a cow instead. More recently, and seeing which way the internets wind was blowing, they've been branching out into "novelty" releases like this...

Posted (edited)
I'm not sure if you have "Haynes" manuals in the US. They're something of a British institution, the motor vehicle reference guide for people who used to pimp their rides before pimping your ride was something people did. They basically told you how to take your Mk. IV Ford Cortina to bits and hopefully put it back together again before the wife divorced you for getting all those oil stains on the carpets. If they didn't have a book that covered your car model, you should perhaps have checked again to make sure you hadn't bought a cow instead. More recently, and seeing which way the internets wind was blowing, they've been branching out into "novelty" releases like this...

I found out the hard way that the Haynes manual on the Halfords discount bin was 4.95 quid but the tools and gubbins you need to carry out half the work in there would pay for insurance on an 19 yr old Student's XR3i/R5 GT/205 Gti/Astra GTE back in the 90s.

Edited by Retracting Head Ter Ter
Posted

I love Haynes manuals, but that one is hard to swallow, let's face it Haynes manuals are so good because they dissamble the car to get all their information, somehow I doubt they did that with a LEM.

Posted

At DH & Graham. Actually, the F-119, with the vector exhaust removed, could fit in the F-15's engine bays, but hooking them up would require major rework.

Posted
I love Haynes manuals, but that one is hard to swallow, let's face it Haynes manuals are so good because they dissamble the car to get all their information, somehow I doubt they did that with a LEM.

Oh, of course they didn't. Everyone knows the LEM was made of cardboard and tin foil, like all the other props... ;) (just to be clear, I am joking!).

Posted

I cannot find ANYWHERE that lists the diameter of the F119, all I could find were comments from people saying they were more than the F100. Length-wise they'd fit, but I figured the diameter was greater based on comments and pics.

Posted (edited)
F-15 Silent Eagle video (official):

That was cool

Anyway , Sorry for talking amongst "Aviation" experts here compared to me ... :wacko::mellow:

( I am, so way below "amateur enthusiast" in aviation that i will probably redefine amateur :(:blink::unsure: )

but, why do i think there could be a potential "Macross" like designation scenario happening here. ^_^

etc...

F22A = VF-1S

F15E Silent Eagle = VF-1J

and the average F15's = VF-1A

Edited by altermodes
Posted
but, why do i think there could be a potential "Macross" like designation scenario happening here. ^_^

etc...

F22A = VF-1S

F15E Silent Eagle = VF-1J

and the average F15's = VF-1A

Not really, I could explain why but I'm way too sleepy right now.

Posted

Just some little news bits for those who haven't heard. It looks to be confirmed that the F-22 and C-17 assembly lines will shut down in 2010 with final numbers of airframes coming to 183 for the Raptor and 205 for the Globemaster. The VH-71 is also looking like it might soon get the ax as it is far over cost. The USAF's CSAR-X was terminated as well. This comes from Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

And it looks like there are more problems for the A400M, here is a bit of what they said-

On March 30 Airbus Chief Executive Officer Tom Ender Stated that: "under the current conditions we cannot build the plane" His interview was quickly followed up by an EADS press statement saying that: "The group reaffirms that the contract signed in 2003 does not provide the necessary conditions for the successful development of the program, firstly because of unrealistic timetable, and secondly because the commercial nature of the contract dose not fit the reality of a military program containing high technological risks".

All this above was from AIR INTERNATIONAL Vol.76 No5

Now to me the A400M thing sounds like they told people that they could built a military aircraft using commercial methods to get a cheaper aircraft, faster than a normal military program could and now they found out that they can't and are blaming the contract. If the contract was unfair, why did they sign it? I haven't been following the whole A400M too much but am going to do some digging to get up to speed, but if anyone would toss in their take on things that would be great.

Posted (edited)
Primarily addressed to David Hingtgen, but anybody else in the know feel free to answer.

1) For the F-15SE, has it been announced if it would be up-engined to allow super cruise?

Graham

It looks that as of now they are saying the SE can supercruse with just the 'side bays' as they are calling them (FAST Packs sounds even better now ^_^ ) or be able to reach Mach 2.5, which they say is not possible with external stores.

No word if new engines or just due to flying clean yet.

Edited by hobbes221
Posted
Just some little news bits for those who haven't heard. It looks to be confirmed that the F-22 and C-17 assembly lines will shut down in 2010 with final numbers of airframes coming to 183 for the Raptor and 205 for the Globemaster. The VH-71 is also looking like it might soon get the ax as it is far over cost. The USAF's CSAR-X was terminated as well. This comes from Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

And it looks like there are more problems for the A400M, here is a bit of what they said-

On March 30 Airbus Chief Executive Officer Tom Ender Stated that: "under the current conditions we cannot build the plane" His interview was quickly followed up by an EADS press statement saying that: "The group reaffirms that the contract signed in 2003 does not provide the necessary conditions for the successful development of the program, firstly because of unrealistic timetable, and secondly because the commercial nature of the contract dose not fit the reality of a military program containing high technological risks".

All this above was from AIR INTERNATIONAL Vol.76 No5

Now to me the A400M thing sounds like they told people that they could built a military aircraft using commercial methods to get a cheaper aircraft, faster than a normal military program could and now they found out that they can't and are blaming the contract. If the contract was unfair, why did they sign it? I haven't been following the whole A400M too much but am going to do some digging to get up to speed, but if anyone would toss in their take on things that would be great.

Not so fast. It's also looking like congress might keep the VH-71A while scrapping the hyper costly mini-Air-Force-One VH-71B. If the A400 is in as deep trouble as it looks that might keep the C-17 line open as A400 customers would likely buy it instead.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...