F-ZeroOne Posted December 15, 2010 Posted December 15, 2010 Well, thats it for Harriers in the UK. Last "operational" mission today, which was basically a flypast of several RAF bases. No longer will airshow crowds have to worry about being deafened by Pegasus engines...
David Hingtgen Posted December 15, 2010 Posted December 15, 2010 Personally, I found an F100-229E starting up worse than a Pegasus. A Pegasus is loud, but the -229E is "piercing". It's like an explosion vs a dentist drill----one may be louder, but the other seems to go straight into your brain... As for the PAK-FA kit---I think part of it may be that the drawing "magically" has no actual cockpit behind the glass---that makes it look like there's much more open space. Is there a side-view of the actual kit? Adding in the pilot and coaming will make a big difference I bet.
Skull-1 Posted December 15, 2010 Posted December 15, 2010 Jet engines run on *MONEY*. Nothing else. And not on water for sure... Bad juju.
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Hey, water-injection defines the early jetliners. Few things cooler than a seemingly coal-powered 707 climbing out... http://www.airliners.net/photo/American-Airlines/Boeing-707-123/0541868/L/ Last airliner I can think of designed with water-injection was Northwest's DC-10's.
Skull-1 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 (edited) Hey, water-injection defines the early jetliners. Few things cooler than a seemingly coal-powered 707 climbing out... http://www.airliners.net/photo/American-Airlines/Boeing-707-123/0541868/L/ Last airliner I can think of designed with water-injection was Northwest's DC-10's. They don't run on it. That's a specific application and has to be carefully controlled. Put water in the fuel tank and forget it. Falcons are known to have fuel floats freeze and all sorts of bad stuff happen when you have water in the tanks. Game over. One of my buds had a dual flameout at altitude because of water. He almost crashed. Made the runway by a miracle dead stick at night. Edited December 16, 2010 by Skull-1
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 I thought you were referring to the Pegasus's water-injection system, when you made your "run on water" remark.
Skull-1 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 I thought you were referring to the Pegasus's water-injection system, when you made your "run on water" remark. Just addressing the notion they can "run on anything." Not really. Kerosene, Jet-Alphabet, Biofuel, etc. But even a little water will kill you depending on the motor and where the water gets introduced. "I'll be glad when they invent a ship that can fly on rice." - Jim Gordon (John Wayne) in "THE FLYING TIGERS" (1942)
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Gripens are awesome. Especially Czech ones. Very slightly NSFW in some places, but totally PG-13 at most: http://www.scribd.com/doc/30377648/211-Squadron-Kalendar-New
electric indigo Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 The T-50 kit is already out in Russia and somebody did a quick build: Taken from here
HoveringCheesecake Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 I kind of like it less, now. Fugly nose - hope it changes a little on the production version. And how is that pointy IRST on the nose stealthy?
F-ZeroOne Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Personally, I found an F100-229E starting up worse than a Pegasus. A Pegasus is loud, but the -229E is "piercing". It's like an explosion vs a dentist drill----one may be louder, but the other seems to go straight into your brain... Well, its certainly the loudest I've heard personally - I once saw a F-14 make a flyby and I don't remember that being as loud, but that could just be selective memory...
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 The IRST is a non-issue, as the PAK-FA obviously uses Plasma Stealth™. End of the British Harrier:
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Hey guys, which variant of the Harrier was best for A2A? Also...in the spirit of previous incarnations of this thread... F-18L VS F/A-18D Had the former been introduced, which would have been the best attacker for the Marines?
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Best A2A Harrier was the F/A.2 version of the Sea Harrier. For the Marines, I'd definitely go with the F/A-18D.
Vifam7 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Best A2A Harrier was the F/A.2 version of the Sea Harrier. Not the Harrier II Plus with the APG-65 radar?
David Hingtgen Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 The F/A.2's radar is newer than the APG-65, the newer version of it is the Typhoon's radar. Also, I feel the Sea Harrier is an inherently more agile version of the airframe. When it was first installed, the F/A.2's radar would have been one of the best AMRAAM-capable radars out there IIRC, surpassing most F-15/16/18's in service then. The Sea Harrier (all versions) has A2A as a primary role, Harrier II's do not.
electric indigo Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 I think I could live with all the other small inaccuracys of the Zvezda kit, but the wrong size of the cockpit is a big turn-off for me. However, there seems to be a nice resin kit around:
David Hingtgen Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Space shuttle wallpaper. Big enough to cut/trim/resize to any size you may need. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-132/hires/iss023e044629.jpg (a 90-degree rotation helps a lot) And--nobody's ever gone sledding in this fun of a manner:
Noyhauser Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I think I could live with all the other small inaccuracys of the Zvezda kit, but the wrong size of the cockpit is a big turn-off for me. However, there seems to be a nice resin kit around: I think the Canopy problem is actually related to the nose chines... they aren't nearly as defined on the kit as the aircraft, giving it a fat appearance. The canopy is probably just a reflection of the extra space that this error creates.
reddsun1 Posted December 19, 2010 Posted December 19, 2010 (edited) Anybody ever seen this film: Dark Blue World? This looks like it's actually a very good movie (Czechoslovakian?) that's pretty much flown under the radar since 2001 . This is a pretty good scene. Can't help but wonder if it's based on some pilots' recounts of actual events? From what I've seen on youtube, the aerial sequences put Pearl Harbor to shame. But that ain't saying much--Pearl Harbor was damn near disgraceful, with its lame over-the-top unbelievable CGI, and its casual disregard for historical events and the people who lived them. *glares disdainfully in direction of Michael Bay* You call that gung-fu? It isn't worth a sh*t! Who the hell's your teacher? I wouldn't pay 'im to wipe my arse! ed: 0:48 - LOL! the sfx for the train AAA gun is the 9mm pistol sound from DOOM! They should have known: leave the ground work to jockeys in non-Merlin powered mounts! Edited December 19, 2010 by reddsun1
Ghost Train Posted December 19, 2010 Posted December 19, 2010 From what I've seen on youtube, the aerial sequences put Pearl Harbor to shame. But that ain't saying much--Pearl Harbor was damn near disgraceful, with its lame over-the-top unbelievable CGI, and its casual disregard for historical events and the people who lived them. *glares disdainfully in direction of Michael Bay* You call that gung-fu? It isn't worth a sh*t! Who the hell's your teacher? I wouldn't pay 'im to wipe my arse! ed: 0:48 - LOL! the sfx for the train AAA gun is the 9mm pistol sound from DOOM! They should have known: leave the ground work to jockeys in non-Merlin powered mounts! Interesting movie, definitely want to see it. I do agree with you that Pearl harbor was rather unremarkable and was trying to hard to add stuff for dramatic effect (which it failed to achieve) - the most awesome of which is Ben Affleck leaving for England on a train. I rate the made for TV Tuskegee airmen film to be superior than Pearl Harbor despite not having a mega-million special effects budget. Switching topics back to the "Canards make everything cool" subject, I found these pics of what was supposed to be the original Japanese design for its FS-X program, whose ultimate product is the F-2. This reveals a much different design than the current "slightly larger" F-16 body of the F-2 - featuring a delta + canards configuration similar to the EF / Gripen / Rafale. Source: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?150493-Japan-Self-Defense-Forces/page45
Noyhauser Posted December 20, 2010 Posted December 20, 2010 Anybody ever seen this film: Dark Blue World? This looks like it's actually a very good movie (Czechoslovakian?) that's pretty much flown under the radar since 2001 . This is a pretty good scene. Can't help but wonder if it's based on some pilots' recounts of actual events? From what I've seen on youtube, the aerial sequences put Pearl Harbor to shame. But that ain't saying much--Pearl Harbor was damn near disgraceful, with its lame over-the-top unbelievable CGI, and its casual disregard for historical events and the people who lived them. *glares disdainfully in direction of Michael Bay* You call that gung-fu? It isn't worth a sh*t! Who the hell's your teacher? I wouldn't pay 'im to wipe my arse! ed: 0:48 - LOL! the sfx for the train AAA gun is the 9mm pistol sound from DOOM! They should have known: leave the ground work to jockeys in non-Merlin powered mounts! I've heard of this film from my family members... apparently its pretty good. Basically the Czechoslovaks expats formed a crack flying squadron in the RAF (As did the Poles), flying in some of the most critical battles of the war. Its got a heroic bent to it. The tragedy was that they were shunned and ostracized when the communist takeover occurred in 1948. Now these men are treated like national heroes.
F-ZeroOne Posted December 20, 2010 Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) I'm not sure if the Czech and Polish squadrons were specifically formed as "crack" squadrons, but they did have one invaluable trait that certainly made them pretty damn good - experience. That put them one up on many RAF pilots who often had plenty of flying experience but not so much fighting experience (they also had a rather obvious hatred for their opponents, and this may have encouraged many of them to invoke one of the principles of that eras air-to-air combat - get closer!). They were so good that the RAF became a bit suspicious about their claims during the Battle of Britain, and sent a RAF observer up with them during action to find out. Upon return, its said he rather shakily pointed out that "What they claimed, they did indeed get!". Edited December 20, 2010 by F-ZeroOne
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted December 21, 2010 Posted December 21, 2010 (edited) http://jalopnik.com/5715336/how-to-fly-the-harrier-jump-jet/gallery/?skyline=true&s=i Harrier manual! Edited December 21, 2010 by Retracting Head Ter Ter
kalvasflam Posted December 22, 2010 Posted December 22, 2010 The Business of 787 This is a very interesting read from flight global for those who are interested in the business of the 787. As everyone knows, the program has been a complete disaster given the 3 year delay in getting the launch customer. One would say that this was far far worse than Airbus's nightmare with the A380. But this article sheds some very interesting light on just how big and complete a disaster the 787 is for Boeing. It makes one wonder if Boeing commercial aircraft might survive this disaster. Hopefully they do a better job with the next version of the 737.
David Hingtgen Posted December 22, 2010 Posted December 22, 2010 First actual launch of a Super Hornet using electromagnetic catapult: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euLsg_viWW0 2 mins in for the launch itself.
buddhafabio Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 First actual launch of a Super Hornet using electromagnetic catapult: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euLsg_viWW0 2 mins in for the launch itself. thats cool, i thought one of the next 2 carriers were to have had it incorporated in the design though. this means its still being tested
David Hingtgen Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 USAF tanker news: "the Senate Armed Services Committee would hold hearings next month to “review the propriety of the procurement process.” What, were you expecting actual construction of planes or something? By the time they're in service (whether Boeing or Airbus) we won't NEED new tankers because our thermonuclear VF-19s have nigh-unlimited range in the atmosphere...
kalvasflam Posted December 23, 2010 Posted December 23, 2010 USAF tanker news: "the Senate Armed Services Committee would hold hearings next month to “review the propriety of the procurement process.” What, were you expecting actual construction of planes or something? By the time they're in service (whether Boeing or Airbus) we won't NEED new tankers because our thermonuclear VF-19s have nigh-unlimited range in the atmosphere... The only way tankers are ever going to happen is if the next major surge in military activities (Korea, etc) coincides with a sudden grounding of all the existing Stratotankers... and the USAF are only left with the Extenders.
Beltane70 Posted December 24, 2010 Posted December 24, 2010 First actual launch of a Super Hornet using electromagnetic catapult: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euLsg_viWW0 2 mins in for the launch itself. I always love hearing about the EMALS and was pretty excited when I saw the news earlier this afternoon. I was actually planning on posting a link to the story myself if it wasn't already posted. I have to admit that I am a bit biased since Lakehurst is only 20 minutes away from where I live. Despite passing the base everyday on my way to work, I have never seen any of the aircraft flying around there.
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted December 29, 2010 Posted December 29, 2010 http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2010-12/29/c_12929585.htm First real pic of the J-XX prototype(or J-20 according to the article)??? Looks real. Pretty fugly. Like a F-22 and F-35 mish-mash with canards.
Nied Posted December 29, 2010 Author Posted December 29, 2010 http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2010-12/29/c_12929585.htm First real pic of the J-XX prototype(or J-20 according to the article)??? Looks real. Pretty fugly. Like a F-22 and F-35 mish-mash with canards. Even better pictures. Bill Sweatman is having multiple orgasms about this even though all the stuff he keeps saying about it turns out to be untrue (It's got a lamda wing clearly it's extremely stealthy! No wait it turns out it's just a straight backed delta that's not stealthy at all. We know the Russians have sold the Chinese 117S engines, it will supercruise for sure! Well maybe we don't know that but it would be really cool if that were true right? Besides WS-10s might let it supercruise anyway! And on and on). I've already seen this pointed out elsewhere but I noticed it as soon as I saw it: it looks like nothing more than a stealthified Mig 1.44. You're right it is pretty ugly, in fact it might just be the ugliest aircraft built in the last decade (and before anyone mentions it the X-32 was build in the 90s so it doesn't count).
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted December 29, 2010 Posted December 29, 2010 Even better pictures. Bill Sweatman is having multiple orgasms about this even though all the stuff he keeps saying about it turns out to be untrue (It's got a lamda wing clearly it's extremely stealthy! No wait it turns out it's just a straight backed delta that's not stealthy at all. We know the Russians have sold the Chinese 117S engines, it will supercruise for sure! Well maybe we don't know that but it would be really cool if that were true right? Besides WS-10s might let it supercruise anyway! And on and on). I've already seen this pointed out elsewhere but I noticed it as soon as I saw it: it looks like nothing more than a stealthified Mig 1.44. You're right it is pretty ugly, in fact it might just be the ugliest aircraft built in the last decade (and before anyone mentions it the X-32 was build in the 90s so it doesn't count). I found better pics too. Only good looking view is the 1st one from dead frontal. http://bbs.tiexue.net/post_4754120_1.html Looks like a huge plane. At least 22-23m? I can already see the flame wars between the Indian and Chinese forumboys.
Lynx7725 Posted December 29, 2010 Posted December 29, 2010 Uh. Looks like a flying pancake with a sausage stuck to the front.
Ghost Train Posted December 29, 2010 Posted December 29, 2010 (edited) LOL, this is the one time (based on looks alone) I wish they borrowed more heavily from existing aircraft design . I'm wondering if ROCAF across the straits (as its the intended "audience" for the J-20) is developing its own 5G fighter. Pretty much everyone in E. Asia is on it. Japan has ATDX going for it, S. Korea has the KFX project, and PRC is developing Advanced Mobile Suits... Taiwan certainly has the technical know-how and the industrial capabilities to churn its own 5G aircraft. Edited December 29, 2010 by Ghost Train
Recommended Posts