Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[Jaustin89]

The snub nose on that radial engine plane is really throwing me; other than that I'd say it's almost dead on for an F4U Corsair.

It's definately got an inverted gull wing but the only aircraft I can find that had that wingplan and had that short a nose forward of the wing root is the A5M prototype which had fixed gear.

[Valkyrie Hunter D]

 You don't see this everyday:

More info here.

[Thom]

"We don't see you."

"Look down..."

 

Must have been an incredible sight to see in person.

[Dobber]

Awesome!

Chris

[derex3592]

Wow...Those B-52 pilots had some big.....

[renegadeleader1]

5 hours ago, Jaustin89 said:

The snub nose on that radial engine plane is really throwing me; other than that I'd say it's almost dead on for an F4U Corsair.

It's definately got an inverted gull wing but the only aircraft I can find that had that wingplan and had that short a nose forward of the wing root is the A5M prototype which had fixed gear.

I don't think it's an inverted gull wing. It only looks that way with how the wing root is shaped as it meets the fuselage. I think Sildani hit the nail on the head with KI-44. Everything matches from the shape of the wing, the stub nose radial engine, and the cannon emplacement.

 

Makes for interesting imagery and symbolism with planes from the big three Axis nations flying overhead while an allied plane sits on the ground looking up in defiance. 

[Sildani]

I didn’t even think of that symbolism, but you know, you’re right. 

[F-ZeroOne]

Yeah, looks like Sildani definitely got it. Pity in a way as the Boomerang would have been an interesting choice.  Wouldn't like to be the pilot who has to take on a Ki-44 in a Gladiator!

[F-ZeroOne]

I've been watching some videos on YouTube of people playing the flight combat simulator DCS, and noticed something interesting when people are flying the F-5E Tiger II - when the 20mm cannons are fired two little... hatches?... pop up in front of the cockpit. I'm presuming these are blast/gas deflectors, can anyone confirm and does any other fighter aircraft have a similar feature?

[Jaustin89]

Not sure where the hatches you're referring to are but looking at how the gun mounts I'd guess they're likely used to eject spent casings.

Also it's not quite the same but the F-22's gun is fully internal with a hatch that opens to allow it to fire in order to minimize radar return. I'd guess the F-35A has a similar setup.

[Shadow]

 

Edited March 6, 2020 by Shadow

[AN/ALQ128]

5 hours ago, Shadow said:

 

What a beauty.

[F-ZeroOne]

Jaustin 89, the "hatches" are directly in front of the cockpit canopy on top of the nose. Cartridge ejectors is an interesting one, but the ejection ports would be so close to the canopy and airstream possibly blowing the spent cartridges into the intakes that I have trouble believing thats their purpose. "Hatches" is perhaps the wrong term, they're more like little "spoilers".

Ah, looking at this image:

Theres two small pop-up hatches directly in front of the gun barrels, those may well be the ones - in the DCS videos they appear much nearer the cockpit canopy, because of the viewing angle.

[Jaustin89]

Looking at that I'm gonna go with pop up splitters to stabilize the airflow around the muzzles so it doesn't mess with the bullets trajectory. With the position of the guns on the nose I could easily see the airflow diverting bullets a bit without some form of correction.

Thinking about it I'm guessing that's also why most newer fighters have the gun in the wing root as the airflow is largely stable and in line with the plane's axis in that region.

[F-ZeroOne]

Thanks for the explanation! I wonder if this one is about to make a cannon firing pass, because at least in the DCS videos they only appear just as the guns are being fired...

[Shadow]

8 hours ago, AN/ALQ128 said:

What a beauty.

From what I've read, the APG-71 was ridiculously powerful. No radar among Naval aircraft came close to it until the Super Hornets were upgraded with the APG-79.

Edited March 6, 2020 by Shadow

[AN/ALQ128]

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Aerospace-Defense/Japan-s-next-gen-fighter-to-be-built-with-US-not-UK

More news on the F-3.

[M'Kyuun]

On 3/6/2020 at 7:08 AM, F-ZeroOne said:

Jaustin 89, the "hatches" are directly in front of the cockpit canopy on top of the nose. Cartridge ejectors is an interesting one, but the ejection ports would be so close to the canopy and airstream possibly blowing the spent cartridges into the intakes that I have trouble believing thats their purpose. "Hatches" is perhaps the wrong term, they're more like little "spoilers".

Ah, looking at this image:

Theres two small pop-up hatches directly in front of the gun barrels, those may well be the ones - in the DCS videos they appear much nearer the cockpit canopy, because of the viewing angle.

Interesting; that's something I've never seen before. It's similar to the retractable spoilers used in the B-1's bomb bays. Without them, I've been told, the bombs will 'float' in the bay rather than dropping out, such is the very streamlined airflow under the B-1's belly. I'd never given much thought to the wind's effects on bullets, especially since few modern American jets have their guns mounted in the nose, relying instead on side mounted Vulcans. Having them in the nose like that seems primo for aiming, but at the risk of having ejected casings striking the canopy. Apparently airflow over the nose is also a concern.

[slide]

On 3/6/2020 at 9:08 AM, F-ZeroOne said:

Jaustin 89, the "hatches" are directly in front of the cockpit canopy on top of the nose. Cartridge ejectors is an interesting one, but the ejection ports would be so close to the canopy and airstream possibly blowing the spent cartridges into the intakes that I have trouble believing thats their purpose. "Hatches" is perhaps the wrong term, they're more like little "spoilers".

Ah, looking at this image:

Theres two small pop-up hatches directly in front of the gun barrels, those may well be the ones - in the DCS videos they appear much nearer the cockpit canopy, because of the viewing angle.

they're not shell deflectors, they're blast deflectors, to make sure the windscreen/intakes dont get all gunsmokey.

the spent casing chutes are on the bottom.

[electric indigo]

Actually, they are little warning signs that pop up to recommend you not to stand in the line of fire:

[M'Kyuun]

Fighter designs are always so impressive for how much stuff they pack into small areas. It makes them a royal PITA to work on, but you have to admire the folks that design and build these amazing machines. A tip o' the hat to the maintenance folks that keep them flying.

[Valkyrie Hunter D]

Find a Tomcat near you (or Tomcat crash site) with this handy map.

[slide]

Virtual Burning Lake Airshow is happening on Twitch if anyone is interested:

 

[Valkyrie Driver]

On 3/8/2020 at 11:43 PM, slide said:

they're not shell deflectors, they're blast deflectors, to make sure the windscreen/intakes dont get all gunsmokey.

the spent casing chutes are on the bottom.

Came here to say this. Though I think that the idea is less to keep the gun smoke away from the canopy, and more to direct it away from the engine intakes.

 

if you’ll recall the A-10 prototypes had issues with flameouts due to gun exhaust entering the intakes.

[AN/ALQ128]

Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant and Bell Valor V280  chosen to move forward in the FLRAA competition (choosing the successor for the UH-60).

https://defbrief.com/2020/03/17/bell-sikorsky-boeing-advance-to-next-stage-of-us-armys-flraa-competition/

[F-ZeroOne]

Well, one is a pretty sleek-looking, futuristic craft and the other is clearly advanced but a bit more conventional looking... wait, where have I heard that one before?

[Thom]

Well, gotta say I love those tilt-rotors!

[anime52k8]

The Sikorsky-boeing looks like a long lost concept design from the 1970's. kind of cool but not as sexy as the Bell.

[slide]

 

[M'Kyuun]

On 3/21/2020 at 3:13 PM, Thom said:

Well, gotta say I love those tilt-rotors!

You and me both. As much maintenance is required to keep a tilt-rotor operational, that Boeing design looks nightmarish.  Bell made some improvements over the Osprey with this design as well, so they took the lessons learned and applied them to the Valor.  I hope they get the contract.

On 3/21/2020 at 6:30 PM, anime52k8 said:

The Sikorsky-boeing looks like a long lost concept design from the 1970's. kind of cool but not as sexy as the Bell.

Not in the slightest.  Other than the pusher prop, it's reminiscent of Russian helicopters, as they seem to favor the coaxial rotors design. But yeah, it kinda looks like a step backwards, technology wise. 

[AN/ALQ128]

Sierra Technical is working on a target drone called the 5GAT, intended to simulate 5th gen fighters.

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/sierra-technical-unveils-faster-and-more-manoeuvrable-stealth-uav/136192.article

[electric indigo]

10 million is considered "low-cost"? 

[M'Kyuun]

In today's dollars, and given the the costs of materials, equipment, and other resources, $10 mil is low cost, especially for govt/military projects. A little out of my budget, though. What's really disturbing to me is that that drone was developed to be a stealth target drone intended to be shot down by the AF, and that $10m is considered low cost for that purpose. 

I was watching the new season of Mega Machines last night, and they featured a 'flying car' concept in development by a British startup called Vertical Aerospace. More akin to a human-sized drone than the Spinner from Blade Runner, it's nonetheless a rather interesting aircraft that could prove revolutionary if they can bring it to a mass production stage. Anyway, the guy who started the company worked on F-1 racing cars, and applied those technologies to this project. He also recruited people from all over in the aviation industry to work for him. While it may not have the glitz of fighter aircraft, tech heads would probably be interested, as they're bringing a lot of cool technologies together to make it work. One aspect I thought was really cool was that all 12 props on their newest project are produced by a company in England that makes wooden props for older aircraft. They CAD milled the props due to their complex shape. It was pretty neat.

[electric indigo]

4 hours ago, M'Kyuun said:

What's really disturbing to me is that that drone was developed to be a stealth target drone intended to be shot down by the AF, and that $10m is considered low cost for that purpose.

That's what I meant. Add another million for the AIM-120, and it's a pretty expensive fireworks from my perspective.

For comparison: An F-16 seems to start at $19m per unit...

[AN/ALQ128]

43 minutes ago, electric indigo said:

That's what I meant. Add another million for the AIM-120, and it's a pretty expensive fireworks from my perspective.

For comparison: An F-16 seems to start at $19m per unit...

Yes, but a QF-16 won't be able to simulate a stealth threat from a peer state.