Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Aerospace / Re: Iranian Qaher-313 "indigenous fighter jet"
« Last post by flateric on Today at 08:57:21 pm »
I've checked pictures of all the aircraft the IRIAF has (and had) in service, but I've found none matching with the landing gear of the Qaher. Closest thing I've found for the main gears seems to be the design of the Fajr F.3 gears, but again, it's similar but not a match.
Interestingly, a thought dawned on me while looking at the pictures: the Qaher has no doors for its frontal landing gear ;D
It had actually but they are closed (kinda opened in FLG leg transition _may be_)
Aerospace / Re: Iranian Qaher-313 "indigenous fighter jet"
« Last post by DWG on Today at 08:42:39 pm »
I've been staring at the wing-chine junction in the video as it taxis past at the 33s and 40s marks, and particularly at the camera pan along the length at 1:46s. It's not as bad as I first thought, the canard keeps getting in the way and misleading my eye as to the edge of the chine, but it does look like the chine merges into the wing an inch or two above the forward-most part of that fat leading edge, apparently creating an interesting little niche between the two. The airflow and RCS issues around that must be interesting (in the Chinese rather than Persian sense of the word).

The detail finish of the cockpit bow at 2:41 is also interesting, it almost looks like you could hook a fingertip under it at the top of the arch.

Two related observations to the actual in-motion shots. Compare the stability of the 313 with other recent sets of taxi trials (X-2, JC-31, J-20, T-50). There is very little rocking of the aircraft with respect to the undercarriage legs, there's a tiny touch of roll as it rounds that turn, and I think the nose dips fractionally at one point, but it's significantly less than for other aircraft at a supposedly similar stage of development, which I suspect argues for a very light structure that simply doesn't generate the momentum to compress the gears. And related to that, I don't see any movement of any of the flight control surfaces at all. The rudders are mentioned in the Janes article, but the canards don't appear to move either. It's difficult to see detail with black on black, but I'd expect at least some motion if the FCS was active.

Turning to the cockpit, I hope they've found room to squeeze in a second HDD in comparison to the mock-up. Because with no HUD or HMS, and the HDD therefore the primary flight instrumentation, trying to fly the aircraft while simultaneously looking at the imagery from the EO turret, and at any radar imagery, is going to be an interesting juggling task.

I don't think we can reject it outright, but it's clear that what it is, and what it was built up to be, are two very different things.
Airbus for a hypersonic aircraft. Horizontal tails on takeoff rotate during flight to become vertical tails. Reminiscent of Rutan Spaceship One?
Interesting Websites / Re: Stingray's Rotorcraft Forum
« Last post by AeroFranz on Today at 07:34:56 pm »
I have enjoyed your contributions and appreciated your enthusiasm over the past years.
I'm sad that you feel that your website did not succeed, but I wouldn't be hard on yourself. You set out to do something hard. Worse would have been to sit around and not do anything. Hell, i don't dare putting up a website, the amount of work required scares me!
For what it's worth, even though i was not a member, i often ended up on your site when researching rotorcraft topics, so you obviously had collected a lot of valuable information!
Regardless of what you decide to do with your website, i hope you will stick around with us on SPF. And if you don't, i wish you the best of luck with whatever interest you decide to pursue. I think you will be successful because you seem to put a lot of effort and work in what you do.

best wishes from your SPF pal Aerofranz
Me neither, certainly not maximum deflection. Maybe some pilots can weigh on this, but typically you get more drag than lift at the higher deflections; moderate deflections are used instead. My ballpark guess: 15 degrees?
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: VTOL On Demand Mobility
« Last post by AeroFranz on Today at 07:15:02 pm »
They've also gone through several iterations. They've given up on that retractable canard which characterized the early concepts. I guess they realized that with the cg in the middle, and the wing in the back, they still need lift in the nose to make things work. Their latest iteration looks somewhat closer to the XV-24A.
Aerospace / Re: Iranian Qaher-313 "indigenous fighter jet"
« Last post by galgot on Today at 06:24:42 pm »
Good read, thank you.
Thanks a lot!! I think you are absolutely right. :D
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: VTOL On Demand Mobility
« Last post by Sundog on Today at 04:40:33 pm »
I'm also kind of annoyed they call their ducted fans "Jets".

Yeah, that was the first thing I noticed as well. It sure doesn't look like the Brayton Cycle to me. ;)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10