Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[Dobber]

7 hours ago, David Hingtgen said:

The entire world will be disappointed if it doesn't have a "roaring howl" sound though, and just goes more like "buzzzzzzzzz". 

I was thinking the same thing. The engineers should just incorporate a device that makes the sound....similar to how the Germans gave the Stuka the dive siren. 

Chris

[Sildani]

You’re quite right. I’m sure they have top people working on it right now. 

Edited November 25, 2018 by Sildani

[slide]

4 hours ago, Sildani said:

You’re quite right. I’m sure they have top people working on it right now. 

[F-ZeroOne]

Reportedly Japan is going to work on converting the Izumo-class "destroyers" to be F-35B capable, and possibly buy up to a hundred F-35As and Bs (in addition to the 42 already ordered):

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/Japan-to-order-100-more-F-35-fighters-from-US

Edited November 27, 2018 by F-ZeroOne

[Chronocidal]

On ‎11‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 1:46 PM, AN/ALQ128 said:

First flight for ion-drive aircraft.

Been going around the news for the past two days.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07477-9

I don't want to be too much of a naysayer, but have they even conceptually worked out the necessary upscaling of this mechanism to support anything approaching a human payload?  Very frankly speaking, I can power a glider with a rubber band for just as long as that prototype flew, and that doesn't need a 20,000 volt battery. 

They need to get over the "we made an airplane!" buzz, and produce an engine.  The rest will fall into place once they have something that produces enough thrust to out-perform all the other purely electric engines that already exist, and don't require massive networks of high-voltage lines to function.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's cool that they can produce an engine that uses no moving parts, but without more information on the performance envelope of the technology, it's hard to know whether it'll be the next quantum leap in propulsion, or if you'll need to be lugging around a nuclear reactor to sustain enough voltage to lift a marketable payload.

[Sildani]

Well, you have to start somewhere. 

[kalvasflam]

21 hours ago, F-ZeroOne said:

Reportedly Japan is going to work on converting the Izumo-class "destroyers" to be F-35B capable, and possibly buy up to a hundred F-35As and Bs (in addition to the 42 already ordered):

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/Japan-to-order-100-more-F-35-fighters-from-US

Woohooo, I'm sure in the near past, someone at Lockheed did a happy dance.

[Chronocidal]

Can't argue there.  

I think I'm mostly just looking at this and thinking how impractical that sort of propulsion system might be on a large-scale for an aircraft, and then getting this really weird picture of using it on sailing vessels as a way to essentially produce your own wind... and then I'm having flashbacks to "Treasure Planet."   It might be a good way to power blimps, really, since it needs a fairly large structure.

What gets me is that this isn't new technology.  It's been around since the 1920s.  The theoretical limits of something producing force in that manner are pretty well known, and have been studied for a long time.  It's most efficient at producing a low thrust over a very large area, and any significant thrust generation could very well take millions of volts.  I feel like if this was really viable as a propulsion system, it would have received more attention by now. 

I'm always slightly skeptical when someone revisits an old concept like this.  Part of me wonders if large scale application of this sort of system would be detrimental to the environment in some unforeseen way, and negate the benefit of not using fossil fuels, kind of like the claim some people have made that the production of electric vehicle batteries on a large scale could be more harmful to the environment than the gasoline engines they're replacing.

Another part of me kind of goes with the Ian Malcolm-esque "You were so busy figuring out if you could, you never stopped to ask if you should" school of thinking, but from a technological standpoint.  Any time you can apply the phrase "But no one's every tried it that way before!", you need to pause and ask the question:  "Is there a good reason no one's ever done it that way before?"  

Edited November 28, 2018 by Chronocidal

[AN/ALQ128]

On 11/27/2018 at 11:55 AM, F-ZeroOne said:

Reportedly Japan is going to work on converting the Izumo-class "destroyers" to be F-35B capable, and possibly buy up to a hundred F-35As and Bs (in addition to the 42 already ordered):

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/Japan-to-order-100-more-F-35-fighters-from-US

Excellent news. Should give the PRC some trouble if they ever decide to go hot.

[Sildani]

Depends if the J-20 and H-20 stealth bomber (below) are all they’re cracked up to be or not. 

 

[Vifam7]

On 11/27/2018 at 2:55 PM, F-ZeroOne said:

Reportedly Japan is going to work on converting the Izumo-class "destroyers" to be F-35B capable, and possibly buy up to a hundred F-35As and Bs (in addition to the 42 already ordered):

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/Japan-to-order-100-more-F-35-fighters-from-US

And this what the carrier destroyer might look like once converted for F-35B use.

Kinda reminds me of RN's former Invincible-class carriers.

[F-ZeroOne]

On that note, "Turn around when possible":

https://www.adsadvance.co.uk/f-35-makes-milestone-reverse-landing-on-hms-queen-elizabeth.html

Try doing that with "cats and traps"!

Edited November 30, 2018 by F-ZeroOne

[AN/ALQ128]

USMC Harriers might be getting HMCS sometime in the future.

https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=2750036c6f3aa2f0e5b05b9dfffcd747&tab=core&_cview=0

[David Hingtgen]

On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 6:00 AM, Sildani said:

Well, you have to start somewhere. 

IIRC, Whittle's very first jet engine had around 600lbs of thrust.  I've always considered that remarkably impressive---that basically the first "proof of concept" had enough power to actually be usable in a (small) plane. 

[AN/ALQ128]

Japan is slated to carry out life extending upgrades to their F-15J's.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/japan-aerospace/2018/11/30/us-government-boeing-to-help-japan-upgrade-missile-electronic-warfare-capabilities-for-f-15-jets/?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=Socialflow+DFN&utm_medium=social

[electric indigo]

needs more missiles...

[kalvasflam]

8 hours ago, electric indigo said:

needs more missiles...

Amen, an Itano Circus needs at least 24 missiles, that thing is 6 short. 

And by the way, the top of the plane is completely empty.

[electric indigo]

Maybe the missiles shoot missiles?

[Sildani]

If so, I demand they be called AIM-130X-HBIT

[David Hingtgen]

Not having the center tank is almost unheard of I think, for an intercept load-out like that----you can consume the fuel just in takeoff and climb/acceleration, then ditch it and have no drag penalty as you start hitting Mach 2+.   But without one---you'll probably be at bingo fuel 30 secs after you start mixing it up.

[kalvasflam]

5 hours ago, David Hingtgen said:

Not having the center tank is almost unheard of I think, for an intercept load-out like that----you can consume the fuel just in takeoff and climb/acceleration, then ditch it and have no drag penalty as you start hitting Mach 2+.   But without one---you'll probably be at bingo fuel 30 secs after you start mixing it up.

That's why you have tankers.  If I recall correctly, there are quite  few situations (especially in carrier operations) where attack aircraft launch with their full bomb load, get up to altitude and re-tank before proceeding on their missions.  That's why the JASDF has four KC767 near Tokyo.    So, it's not unreasonable to not have the centerline drop tank.  Besides, those -15 looks like they have conformal tanks.

[sketchley]

6 hours ago, David Hingtgen said:

Not having the center tank is almost unheard of I think, for an intercept load-out like that----you can consume the fuel just in takeoff and climb/acceleration, then ditch it and have no drag penalty as you start hitting Mach 2+.   But without one---you'll probably be at bingo fuel 30 secs after you start mixing it up.

There are also the political aspects to take into consideration.  Without a centre tank, it's a lot easier for domestic politics, as well as international relations, as they can say the lack of a tank means it's a dedicated defensive fighter.

Though, my impression is that it is literally becoming a missile truck for the more forward deployed F-35.

[David Hingtgen]

Gah, I forgot the CFT's, despite looking at them 30 secs earlier to see how the missile pylon-adapters were mounted.   

Well then, they might actually have decent fuel.  Still, 1 tank for 2 missiles seems a poor trade IMHO. 

[kalvasflam]

14 minutes ago, David Hingtgen said:

1 tank for 2 missiles seems a poor trade IMHO. 

Yeah, the frigging F-14s had 4xPhoenixes under centerline, and those were a lot bigger than puny AMRAAMs, in fact,  the AIM-54 were almost as big as the drop tanks the F-14s carried.     For shame...

 

Edited December 2, 2018 by kalvasflam

[Sildani]

That’s a whole lotta freedom hanging under that F-15...

[AN/ALQ128]

7 hours ago, David Hingtgen said:

Gah, I forgot the CFT's, despite looking at them 30 secs earlier to see how the missile pylon-adapters were mounted.   

Well then, they might actually have decent fuel.  Still, 1 tank for 2 missiles seems a poor trade IMHO. 

Its probably just Boeing trying to grab some attention with a flashy loadout. I bet when the Japanese finally finish upgrading, they'll still leave space for a drop tank or two.

[F-ZeroOne]

Ah, please ignore, misread someone making the same point I was.

Edited December 2, 2018 by F-ZeroOne

[Thom]

On 12/1/2018 at 12:38 PM, kalvasflam said:

And by the way, the top of the plane is completely empty.

Needs room for the fast packs!

[Chronocidal]

22 hours ago, Thom said:

Needs room for the fast packs!

But they're already loaded.   The F-15 is where the term FAST-pack came from, as I recall, since it means Fuel And Sensor Tactical Pack.  They're the bulging add-ons mounted beneath the wings.

Of course, if they're going forward with the other upgrades proposed for the F-15, there may be even more missiles stored in those, but I seriously doubt they would put AIM-120s both internally and externally on those packs.

What they should do is load it up with those 4-pack AMRAAM pods shown earlier, and then mount a UCAV on top for extra thrust.  

I'd actually be curious to see how many missiles an F-14 could have carried if it was fully packed though, just from a pure payload standpoint, and ignoring the aerodynamic limitations of mounting missiles everywhere.  One of the early prototypes tested a load of at least 14 bombs on the belly, which I'm assuming were 500 lbs each. 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Chronocidal

[Shadow]

The only F-14 airshow demo you'll get outside of Iran. My ears ached with joy.

 

[F-ZeroOne]

In what is likely to be a watershed moment for civil aviation, a drone has caused travel chaos at Londons Gatwick airport from late evening yesterday well into today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46640033

[Thom]

Seriously hope they charge the drone operator for every hour that the airport is closed.

[Sildani]

How do we know it’s not the government flying them to close the airport to inconvenience enough people so that they push through anti-drone laws to prevent free flight and unregistered ownership?

[Thom]

Now that's just conspiracy talk! (where's my sarcasm emoji?) But seriously, this is even worse than someone with a laser pen shining into airplane cockpits. We know what happens when something the size of a bird gets ingested into an engine.

[F-ZeroOne]

The runway reopened this morning, disruption is expected to take until at least tomorrow to clear. Unless its changed since I last checked, the perpetrator remains at large. The maximum penalty under current UK law for this sort of act is up to 5 years in prison, there may well be a rethink about the penalties.

As far as government conspiracies go - a UK politician in parliament was explaining how guard dogs barking scares away drones from prisons, does that sound like someone who could engineer such a plan to you?

Edited December 21, 2018 by F-ZeroOne