Jump to content

Aircraft Vs Super Thread VI

Nied

By Nied
in Hall Of The Super Topics

 Share

Recommended Posts

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
Posted

Lots of airliner news today:

1. Re: RR engines. It's the IP turbine. (Intermediate Pressure). That's unique to RR engines; PW, GE, SNECMA, Volvo, etc all have just low and high pressure ones.

5158813513_79ca725d63_z.jpg

2. In even bigger news, 787 #2 made an emergency landing in Texas a few hours ago. Fire in avionics compartment, smoke in pax cabin and cockpit. Lost primary instruments for both Capt and F/O, auto-throttles gone, was using emergency RAT for power. Deployed all slides for emergency evac on touchdown.

reddsun1 Alaska Base Survivor

reddsun1

Posted
Posted (edited)

Part of me wonders if that was a fake Video.

If it is real than that man is the worlds ballsiest man alive.

It sure doesn't appear to be faked (jet wash shakes his earphones). Note: while this bravest-of-the-brave individual is standing on the centerline of the tarmac, the pilot does appear to place the plane--and that drop tank--just barely off to the right; maybe 1-2 ft?

And yes--I'd wager this man can not pass through airport metal detectors, due to them balls of steel he's got...

Edited by reddsun1
miles316 Bridge Bunny

miles316

Posted
Posted

If the root cause is correct, looks to be an expensive month for RR.

And the wing damage on that Qantas is worrying. I presume there are supposed to be redundant systems -- what happened to those?

I guess thats good news for General Electric right have they had similar problems recently with Engine failure's.

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
Posted

I presume there are supposed to be redundant systems -- what happened to those?

Slats and leading edge flaps are not considered critical so they don't have a backup, only the trailing edge flaps do. Fokkers, CRJ's, early DC-9's don't even have any, so they're inherently not critical--much like thrust reversers, they're basically "nice to have" things that can actually royally screw you if they malfunction.

kalvasflam New Edwards Test Pilot

kalvasflam

Posted
Posted

787 grounded after fire

Well Boeing is truly cursed as far as the 787 is concerned. I can't see anything but another delay on the program at this point. That along with the slow down at Spirit in body deliveries, none of this can be any good.

Three years delay on the product to customer, plus cancellations, plus the late fees. This is a much bigger disaster than the EADS problems with A380s.

This is a golden opportunity for the A350XWB. If they hit their launch date or even is delayed by a year, they'll have an opportunity to really beat Boeing on this type.

The only thing Boeing has now is to hope that Airbus screw up massively on the A350 as well. And hope is never a good strategy.

Vepariga Pineapple Eater

Vepariga

Posted
Posted

Always surprises me in the field when something goes wrong with a engine it happens to another plane and another in the same week. Its like someone has a big 'aircraft fault week' switch and flicks it on and off now and then.

Noyhauser Pineapple Eater

Noyhauser

Posted
Posted

Who said anything about killing the JSF. I think my exact words were cost overrun and horrible procurement process. Oh yeah, and keeping F-22 production going, which was at the very least implied. :)

So instead of having one fighter with a bad procurement process and major cost overruns, lets have two? Yeah thats cost effective.

But it is dishonest to say that there were less competitors to the US in the 80s, Dassault, Sukhoi, Migs were just a few of the names that were around back then too. All you have to do to confirm that is look at the number of Mirages and Migs that's littered all over the planet.

I think its dishonest to completely ignore the cold war. How many developed western states bought migs back in the 1980s? I think the answer speaks for itself (Moreover nobody bought Mirages unless you're under a US arms embargo or you're france.)

The point is, no one can argue the fact that at the rate things are going, the F-35 costs won't be anywhere near as cheap as people originally thought, and that ongoing production of the F-22 make sense probably both from a reduction of per unit cost and air superiority point of view.

I won't though. Look back one page to what Nied Posted about the F-22 and avionics.

Moreover if I had a dime for every time someone complained about an new aerospace project being overbudget/delayed/disaster, I'd be rich. The F-35 is going to cost more than what was predicted; not surprising. Only one major procurement has avoided that fate: the Super Hornet. However given the massive size of the project its likely the costs will drop significantly once it exits LRIP.

reddsun1 Alaska Base Survivor

reddsun1

Posted
Posted (edited)

Well, if you want something cost-effective, there's always this:

Ah, poor, poor, naive Mr. Rutan. He ought to have known something like this would never appeal to the military. It's not big; it's not expensive; it's not heavy; it's not stuffed to the gills with sophisticated avionics, radar, fire-control systems and such.

Think it mentions a titanium tub for pilot protection? But the rest of the airframe doesn't look like it would take much punishment. Almost like the disposable-razor of attack aircraft design.

ed: LOL! 1:48 - you can see the damned thing SLOW DOWN from the recoil when it fires its gatling! Keep yer finger on that trigger too long, and you might stall! :p

Edited by reddsun1
miles316 Bridge Bunny

miles316

Posted
Posted

Well, if you want something cost-effective, there's always this:

Ah, poor, poor, naive Mr. Rutan. He ought to have known something like this would never appeal to the military. It's not big; it's not expensive; it's not heavy; it's not stuffed to the gills with sophisticated avionics, radar, fire-control systems and such.

Think it mentions a titanium tub for pilot protection? But the rest of the airframe doesn't look like it would take much punishment. Almost like the disposable-razor of attack aircraft design.

ed: LOL! 1:48 - you can see the damned thing SLOW DOWN from the recoil when it fires its gatling! Keep yer finger on that trigger too long, and you might stall! :p

"it's the Vibe the plane that was suposed to win the War" Iroin Egal III

The plane the stinking Nazi Drug kingpin Bastard used to escape to wards the end of the Film but Chape beat him.

Vifam7 New Edwards Test Pilot

Vifam7

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ah, poor, poor, naive Mr. Rutan. He ought to have known something like this would never appeal to the military. It's not big; it's not expensive; it's not heavy; it's not stuffed to the gills with sophisticated avionics, radar, fire-control systems and such.

Think it mentions a titanium tub for pilot protection? But the rest of the airframe doesn't look like it would take much punishment. Almost like the disposable-razor of attack aircraft design.

ed: LOL! 1:48 - you can see the damned thing SLOW DOWN from the recoil when it fires its gatling! Keep yer finger on that trigger too long, and you might stall! :p

By the time it was fully developed, I would imagine it would've been up-armored, up-engined, and up-sized. :)

I think the ARES was a good idea. Probably more suited and cost-effective to the CAS role than the F-35B. Particularly for COIN missions in low-intensity wars, like Afghantistan.

Edited by Vifam7
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Galactic Diva

Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0

Posted
Posted

Well, if you want something cost-effective, there's always this:

Ah, poor, poor, naive Mr. Rutan. He ought to have known something like this would never appeal to the military. It's not big; it's not expensive; it's not heavy; it's not stuffed to the gills with sophisticated avionics, radar, fire-control systems and such. Think it mentions a titanium tub for pilot protection? But the rest of the airframe doesn't look like it would take much punishment. Almost like the disposable-razor of attack aircraft design.ed: LOL! 1:48 - you can see the damned thing SLOW DOWN from the recoil when it fires its gatling! Keep yer finger on that trigger too long, and you might stall! :p

Wow..that is beast, I remember that thing from Iron Eagle III. It looks like it might be a good successor to the A-4 Skyhawk in the Aggressor role. It's small, agile, possibly hard to see, and looks pretty manueverable.

By the time it was fully developed, I would imagine it would've been up-armored, up-engined, and up-sized. :)I think the ARES was a good idea. Probably more suited and cost-effective to the CAS role than the F-35B. Particularly for COIN missions in low-intensity wars, like Afghantistan.

Hmm..I wonder if it would do better than the OV-10 Bronco in COIN?

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
Posted

Qantas A380 had more damage than thought. May need a new wing. Which is basically unprecedented AFAIK. But this is Qantas--they like their "no airframe loss" record, and they will (and they HAVE) spend more than the plane is worth to repair it.

Warmaker Pineapple Eater

Warmaker

Posted
Posted

If you like the OV-10 you might like this article My link

How about the 'ol A-1 Skyraider? :)

I've read off and on about using props for low intensity conflicts / COIN. I recall even a while back the idea of getting such aircraft for the Iraqi Air Force as low cost, interim plane suited for what was going on out there. Not sure how far that idea went.

kalvasflam New Edwards Test Pilot

kalvasflam

Posted
Posted

So instead of having one fighter with a bad procurement process and major cost overruns, lets have two? Yeah thats cost effective.

So, instead of having a costed down average where lessons have been learned, let's just pretend we never learned anything, and proceed to make the same mistake again. What are you? A member of Congress?

I think its dishonest to completely ignore the cold war. How many developed western states bought migs back in the 1980s? I think the answer speaks for itself (Moreover nobody bought Mirages unless you're under a US arms embargo or you're france.)

No, they bought Jaguars, Tornadoes, Harriers instead. And don't be so Eurocentric. The Western states weren't the only one buying fighters, or do you want to pretend to ignore the rest of the world?

I won't though. Look back one page to what Nied Posted about the F-22 and avionics.

Moreover if I had a dime for every time someone complained about an new aerospace project being overbudget/delayed/disaster, I'd be rich. The F-35 is going to cost more than what was predicted; not surprising. Only one major procurement has avoided that fate: the Super Hornet. However given the massive size of the project its likely the costs will drop significantly once it exits LRIP.

"the costs will drop significantly once it exits LRIP," replace LRIP with some other acronym and I can just ask the question, where have I heard that before. Wait, isn't the -22 out of that "LRIP" stage? So, you probably have a point there, but that just means it's better to keep up the production on the -22.

Anyway, we're gonna go round and round on this, and neither of us will ever move from our position. The -22 is a better superiority fighter, and you can adapt that into other roles, it's just a bit harder to do that with the -35.

Onto something more interesting next. Where is the Chinese Stealth fighter?

"it's the Vibe the plane that was suposed to win the War" Iroin Egal III

The plane the stinking Nazi Drug kingpin Bastard used to escape to wards the end of the Film but Chape beat him.

I've seen that plane before... in the 90s... I think it was on GI Joe.

Yo Joe... or something like that.

Nied Bridge Bunny

Nied

Posted
  • Author
Posted

"the costs will drop significantly once it exits LRIP," replace LRIP with some other acronym and I can just ask the question, where have I heard that before. Wait, isn't the -22 out of that "LRIP" stage? So, you probably have a point there, but that just means it's better to keep up the production on the -22.

Anyway, we're gonna go round and round on this, and neither of us will ever move from our position. The -22 is a better superiority fighter, and you can adapt that into other roles, it's just a bit harder to do that with the -35.

The costs for the F-22 did drop once it exited LRIP, but that's not it's problem. The problem as I've been saying is it's tied to an outdated computer system that makes it incredibly difficult and expensive to integrate new weapons or sensors. That's why it still can't retarget JDAMs on the fly, that's why they still haven't integrated AIM-9Xs, and it's why they still haven't gotten a proper datalink set up. It may be an excellent air superiority platform, but how true will that be in 20 years when it's still struggling to integrate missiles built after 1995? You could rip out the computer and try and integrate one based on the F-35's as Lockheed has proposed, but it would utterly annihilate your cost saving argument (Lockheed won't even disclosed a price tag for the project, only that it's "significant").

David Hingtgen Super Dimension Member

David Hingtgen

Posted
Posted

Well, the MOST colorful ones are just plain fugly/gaudy IMHO. :) (that includes all versions of Chippy Ho--that plane is a disgrace)

But for colorful yet good-looking:

vfa-131red3_2.jpg

VFA-131blue.jpg

vfa-131_2002_4.jpg

VFA-113_3.jpg

VFA-105CVN75.jpg

VFA-83_164201.jpg

VFA-81_4.jpg

VFA-25_01_2.jpg

VFA-151_4.jpg

Graham Super Dimension Member

Graham

Posted
Posted

Confused by various articles/posts I've read recently regarding the F-22.

So does the F-22 actually have a working datalink or not?

Graham

Retracting Head Ter Ter Bridge Bunny

Retracting Head Ter Ter

Posted
Posted

Confused by various articles/posts I've read recently regarding the F-22.

So does the F-22 actually have a working datalink or not?

Graham

It does. But it links only to other F-22s. So it won't share with say, an F-15E or even ground controllers. I think the USAF is working on it though. Think Northup-Grumman is working on it. Some thingmagik called BCAN or sumthing.

Nied Bridge Bunny

Nied

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Confused by various articles/posts I've read recently regarding the F-22.

So does the F-22 actually have a working datalink or not?

Graham

Retracting Head Ter Ter is right, the F-22 has a datalink that can share a limited amount of information with other F-22s but nothing else. It doesn't have a working Link 16 terminal, so it can't pass or receive information with any allied forces like AWACS or troops on the ground, it's completely cut off from the network. It was feared that a Link 16 transmission could give away an F-22 so it was left out entirely. Later on when the omission became more glaring it was planned to integrate a receive terminal only so that it could at least get information from other assets on the network however software integration issues and technological progression ended up killing that idea.

The current plan is to replace the Link 16 standard entirely with something called MADL (Multifunction Advanced Data Link). MADL is being designed from the ground up to be capable of Low Probability of Intercept modes so that it can be used in stealth platforms. The F-35 will have a MADL terminal built in when it reaches operation, and the plan was to have the F-22 flying with it before that. However the same software integration issues that have repeatedly plagued the F-22 cropped up again and MADL integration has repeatedly blown past it's cost projections and schedule, now there is real doubt that the Raptor will ever get MADL.

Edited by Nied
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...