Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[505thAirborne]

Amazing YF-23 pic David!

[Shadow]

Hmm dat Black Widow.

Not certain if this was posted already but Russia appears to be working on a successor to the Foxhound.

http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/05/mig-41-mig-31-replacement/

By Jacek Siminski

The Russian Armed Forces are working on the Mig-41, a new supersonic fighter based on the Mig-31 Foxhound.

According to the famous experimental pilot Anatoliy Kvochur, the MiG-41 is to be capable of reaching speeds above Mach 4, even Mach 4,3. That would make the plane faster than the (now retired) American SR-71 Blackbird. Currently, the Foxhound is capable of flying at speeds of Mach 2.8.

Nevertheless, while developing a Mach 4+ replacement for the Foxhound, the Russians will to continue the modernization program of the Foxhounds, overhauling over 100 aircraft.

MiG-31 is an interceptor based on MiG-25 Foxbat, with a combat radius of 720 km. A group of four Foxhounds is able to control an area that is 1000km wide; 190 MiG-31s are currently in service within the Russian Air Force, 100 of those are still flyable.

Jacek Siminski for TheAviationist

[electric indigo]

Somebody had the brilliant idea to combine YF-23 and F-14.

[Noyhauser]

So based on inflation, one would have to convert the F-35 price to an estimated 2020 levels, using http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/sites/default/files/faculty-research/sahr/inflation-conversion/pdf/cv2010.pdf, normalized to 2010. which yields 72.65 for the AF buy, 80.45 for the Navy Buy, 75.77 for all. Using the same methods the 2012 F-18 (a reduced lot due to the Gs) would be 65.67, that's still quite a price difference(1.10 for the AF buy,1.22 for the Navy, and 1.15 for all)

Sorry, I did not see your reply until today.

No, you don't have to "convert F-35's price to 2020 levels" because the SAR's figures are a base year of 2012. To get a 2012 price for a 2020 F-35 you simply divide $3681 million by 60 and you get, 60.8 million. Your number for the F/A-18E is also correct, however the cost has been fairly consistent over the years, though rising in more recent years (after 2012) due to what is called diminishing manufacturing sources (Basically sub-component producers discontinue production and new sources must be found and re-qualified.) Also note the "Navy buy" is an amalgamation of the C and B version buys.

One other thing you need to remember is that you actually need less F-35s to do the same job as a F/A-18E. That's even ignoring the operational effectiveness, but you don't need a twin seat version to train pilots, and the higher quality simulators means that pilots can do more training on the ground than before.

[Model-Junkie]

YF-19 looking J-20! Someone created some CG images of the J-20 with forward swept wings:

[anime52k8]

Hmm dat Black Widow.

Not certain if this was posted already but Russia appears to be working on a successor to the Foxhound.

http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/05/mig-41-mig-31-replacement/

I love Mig-31's

[Chewie]

Somebody had the brilliant idea to combine YF-23 and F-14.

I want it.

[anime52k8]

Somebody had the brilliant idea to combine YF-23 and F-14.

Somebody also watched Yukikaze right before they drew that.

[LOW_ALT]

Hmm dat Black Widow.

Not certain if this was posted already but Russia appears to be working on a successor to the Foxhound.

http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/05/mig-41-mig-31-replacement/

Is it even possible for a Russian pilot to fly at mach-4 without spilling their flask?

[F-ZeroOne]

Somebody had the brilliant idea to combine YF-23 and F-14.

Actually, there were proposals for a naval version of the ATF competition winner - not sure about the YF-23, but the projected naval F-22 would have had swing wings...

Edited March 27, 2014 by F-ZeroOne

[anime52k8]

Actually, there were proposals for a naval version of the ATF competition winner - not sure about the YF-23, but the projected naval F-22 would have had swing wings...

the navalized YF-23 would have looked... like a thing...

[electric indigo]

Canards on a proposal for an american fighter = fail.

[Model-Junkie]

Actually, there were proposals for a naval version of the ATF competition winner - not sure about the YF-23, but the projected naval F-22 would have had swing wings...

[electric indigo]

[Noyhauser]

the navalized YF-23 would have looked... like a thing...

Its interesting that NG's approach to canard's limitations in low observability is to give it a high dihedral.

[LOW_ALT]

Saw this on tumblr today (sorry if it's old news) ARCA IAR-111

[Shadow]

An Su-24 crew got bored apparently.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/04/15/russia-fighter-jet-buzzed-us-destroyer

The Pentagon says a Russian fighter jet made several passes at low altitude near a US destroyer on the weekend in the Black Sea.

Source

AAP

UPDATED 36 MINS AGO

A Russian fighter jet made several passes at low altitude near a US destroyer cruising in international waters in the Black Sea at the weekend, the Pentagon says, branding it "provocative and unprofessional".

The incident comes amid the most serious rupture in relations between Moscow and the West since the Cold War over Russia's actions in Ukraine.

Colonel Steven Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said: "On April 12, a Russian Su-24 made numerous close-range, low-altitude passes in the vicinity of the USS Donald Cook, while the Cook was conducting operations in international waters in the western Black Sea.

"The aircraft did not respond to multiple queries and warnings from Donald Cook. The event ended without incident after approximately 90 minutes."

He added: "This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with international protocols and previous agreements on a professional interaction between our militaries."

The plane "appeared to be unarmed", Warren said.

[mechaninac]

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye...

[David Hingtgen]

After the Iranian A300 incident, I assume nothing short of being fired upon would have actually gotten a response from a US destroyer.

[David Hingtgen]

Iran's really going all-out with their fake carrier:

Jolly Rogers and I think the Diamondbacks.

[Shadow]

Like to see some fake VF-1s thrown on aswell.

After the Iranian A300 incident, I assume nothing short of being fired upon would have actually gotten a response from a US destroyer.

Plus the Fencer (maybe an Su-24MR) wasn't carrying anything on it apparently. Read a story somewhere of a Tu-95 buzzing the mast of an aircraft carrier once also.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Shadow

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Is it even possible for a Russian pilot to fly at mach-4 without spilling their flask?

You know how it goes; "In Russia, Flask spill you".

Iran's really going all-out with their fake carrier:

Jolly Rogers and I think the Diamondbacks.

WTF, for target practice? I never heard of this yet. Are those F-5s on the port deck edge?

[derex3592]

Iran's really going all-out with their fake carrier:

Jolly Rogers and I think the Diamondbacks.

BAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Dobber]

It is amazing the amount of time and money Iran must be wasting on this crap. Does anyone actually believe this??

Chris

[F-ZeroOne]

Supposedly its for a movie, rather than a special operations mission or such. Of course, that could just be the cover story... Anyone else notice that one of those jets on deck has a rather familiar logo on the rudder...?

[Shadow]

So Iran is going to film its own version of Top Gun with IRIAF F-14s and we have a fake carrier prop piece/target.

[Dobber]

Supposedly its for a movie, rather than a special operations mission or such. Of course, that could just be the cover story... Anyone else notice that one of those jets on deck has a rather familiar logo on the rudder...?

David did in his original post under the picture.

Chris

[Shadow]

Ah, so Ukraine still has a number of Mig-29s left.

[F-ZeroOne]

David did in his original post under the picture.

Chris

Yes, he did - sorry, I missed it when I originally posted.

[Nekko Basara]

Ah, so Ukraine still has a number of Mig-29s left.

And they're as smoky as ever.

[F-ZeroOne]

Theres been some discussion about the UK acquiring the P-8 to fufill the maritime patrol gap left by the retirement of the Nimrod; looking at pictures of the P-8 the thing that struck me is that it seems to have an absolutely massive rudder. I know the P-8 is based on the 737 and that appears to have a similar-size rudder, but I'm not overly familiar with civil airliners, so is a rudder that size unusual? Is there a reason for it? Or is it just a trick of perspective?

[miles316]

Theres been some discussion about the UK acquiring the P-8 to fufill the maritime patrol gap left by the retirement of the Nimrod; looking at pictures of the P-8 the thing that struck me is that it seems to have an absolutely massive rudder. I know the P-8 is based on the 737 and that appears to have a similar-size rudder, but I'm not overly familiar with civil airliners, so is a rudder that size unusual? Is there a reason for it? Or is it just a trick of perspective?

Both the P-8 posiden and the 737 have the same size verticle tail I bevieve most large jet aircraft have larger verticle tails reletive to other aircraft.

[David Hingtgen]

I'm guessing part of it is due to the desire to have a single tailfin design for all 737NG variants. The -600 would be the only variant that really NEEDS that big of a fin (for sufficient rudder effectiveness on the shorter moment arm), but due to how unpopular the -600 became, it's kind of a waste for the -700 and longer variants to "carry around" a fin that large when such a small percentage of the fleet needs it.

Had Boeing known the -600's eventual (lack of)production, they probably would have made a smaller basic fin size optimized for the -700/800, and made the -600 use an extension/fillet etc.

::googles:: Dang, it's worse than I thought---the -600 is barely 1% of the production run, and no longer in the catalog---with thousands more of the other variants to be built. Yeah, the -600 probably wasn't worth the effort/cost to design it---not so much in and of itself, but of its effects on the other family members needing to compromise their designs to maintain compatibility.

[F-ZeroOne]

Okay, thanks for that David.

[LOW_ALT]