Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Naval Projects / Re: Queen Elizabeth Class (CVF) development
« Last post by Arjen on Today at 10:06:14 am »
Thales Cerebus Cerberus
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Loire and Loire-Nieuport projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 08:49:14 am »
Loire 40 :single seat lightweight fighter with 300 hp Gnome-Rhone Titan II engine.
Loire 41 :  ,,      ,,        ,,             ,,     with 500 hp Hispano-Suiza 12Mc engine.
Loire 42 :  ,,      ,,        ,,             ,,     with 420 hp Gnome-Rhone 9 Asb Jupiter VII engine.

From Le Fana 27.
Space Projects / Re: ARCA Haas 2CA rocket (SSTO with aerospike engine)
« Last post by merriman on Today at 08:21:45 am »
They keep charging along. Can't damn them for that. The model-builder part of me is enjoying this display of fabrication skills.

One rational for the linear (ramped) aerospike over the annular is its ability to produce pitch, yaw AND roll moments without moving the entire engine or engine elements, or use of dedicated roll thrusters.

Spring for the pumps, guy's! Tankage killed the X-33. Don't let the same issue kill this effort.


Close-up of LAV turret

More pics of the T7 turret (courtesy : Jacques Pienaar)
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Westland WG4 WG7 and WG8
« Last post by hesham on Today at 06:59:58 am »
Via my dear Lark,

and from Air Pictorial 2/1973,there was a full Info about WG.3,a small Info about WG.4,
and a more Info from Flightglobal.
Here part 2 on Demonstrator 3 construction

if give more information
linear Aerospike engine "Executor" is pressure fed
with propellant pressure of 20 atmosphere in tanks

means not much performance for Haas 2CA rocket
because the pressure in combustion chambers must be lower as in fuel tank.
next to that lower the pressure in propellant tanks, so lower goes performance of the Engine.

Either there increase tank pressure or take Turbo pump solution for more Payload. 
what is for hydrogen peroxide and kerosene a quite simple solution.
Naval Projects / Re: Queen Elizabeth Class (CVF) development
« Last post by Hood on Today at 06:42:39 am »
I can't say for certain on performance, but a few nations have helicopter-based AEW systems aboard their carriers. The competing Lockheed system with the Elta EL/M 2052 AESA radar would have been better but the main point was to achieve AEW at the lowest cost (perhaps the most consistent theme in land and sea-based British AEW programmes) and the existing Thales Cerebus is still very good. It was thought far cheaper to just take the kits out of the Sea Kings and put them into Merlins. The Crowsnest system should be better than the previous Sea King ASaC.7 with some processing improvements and the operators might suffer less from noise and vibration fatigue.

FOAEW's baseline was a Merlin conversion with existing Cerebus kits, the other competitors were the E-2, V-22 and Aerostat. The succeeding MASC was also a Merlin vs V-22 duel but still not ruling out a fixed-wing solution, but when MASC became Crowsnest in 2010 the fixed-wing option disappeared. It's clear that since the CTOL carrier was never a popular choice or a cost-effective conversion possibility, it realistically ruled out any fixed-wing type and since 2001 a Merlin conversion has always been the frontrunner.

I think the main gripe wasn't the selection of using existing kit, but rather that the ten HMA.1s in storage hadn't been converted instead to avoid reducing the anti-submarine Merlin fleet.

Even had the CTOL carrier gone ahead and a quartet of E-2C Hawkeye 200 or Ds been ordered, at around $180 million each and with all the non-standard logistical items it would have worked out very expensive. Also where do you get your twin-engine pilots from unless your using RAF crews? Only operating one carrier at a time in rotation removed the justification for the MOD and Treasury to spend large amounts when they can use as much existing kit as possible to reduce the equipment costs. There is persistent background noise about perhaps buying Ospreys for the carriers for COD etc., but I think that too is highly unlikely unless the RAF finds a need for some and a future Osprey AEW conversion is unlikely given the expense of the Crowsnest conversions and their relatively new status. I think the days of the Navy operating bespoke aircraft the RAF don't have are long gone.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Bristol Type-199 Tilt-Wing VTOL Project
« Last post by hesham on Today at 06:27:25 am »
Sorry Sir,

I check,it was from British Aeronautical book of 1961,you are right,the upper was the earlier.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10