Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: A-4X
« Last post by ZacYates on Today at 01:01:39 pm »
From a modelers forum. However, they do not reveal the origination of the idea.
User ysi_maniac is fond of creating drawings like this - don't place much faith in them being in any way official, just his own imagination.
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-20 news, pictures, analysis Part III
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 11:10:27 am »
None of the production aircraft appears to have noticeable canopy tint or actual EOTS apertures. Perhaps those items are not finished in their development?

There were quite a few F-35s built before they got actual EOTS as I recall as well. 2017 definitely looks tinted. 2016 as well.

Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-20 news, pictures, analysis Part III
« Last post by Steven on Today at 10:54:34 am »
None of the production aircraft appears to have noticeable canopy tint or actual EOTS apertures. Perhaps those items are not finished in their development?
Gordon Kent, Top Hook, 2002

United States

USS Thomas Jefferson (CVN-??)
Nimitz Class
Details as per the real ships.

USS Fort Klock (CG-??)
Ticonderoga Class Cruiser
Details as per the real ships.

Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer
Details as per the real ships.


Various Warships


Various Warships

Plot summary: A Chinese controlled mole steals something very important from the US Government and the chase is on to catch him before it can be passed on, even as the Chinese Government starts making moves that could lead to WWIII.

Note: The authors name is actually the pseudonym of a father/son writing team. The story takes place over an unspecified period in 1999. The novel that follows, "Hostile Contact" appears to start shortly after the end of this novel so it is also set in 1999.
Designation Systems / Re: Beriev aircraft
« Last post by hesham on Today at 08:24:06 am »
The Beriev MS series;

MS-1   was MBR-2-M-34
MS-2   was MBR-5
MS-3   was KOR-1
MS-4   was MDR-5
MS-5   was MDR-5
MS-6   was MDR-5-2-M87
MS-7   -----?
MS-8   was MBR-7
MS-9   was KOR-2
Aerospace / Re: NEW DARPA VTOL X-Prize
« Last post by jsport on Today at 08:06:39 am »
Not arguing anything you state it is your biz, but to reinforce over a wing into and then out of a prop is cleaner in CFD.

No, not even close. If you have some data to back this assertion it would be revolutionary.
The operative word is 'cleaner' based on spacing (simple 5th grade stuff) than prop in front of wing which was clearly shown in the previous CFD posting. Props disturb plenty when they are in the front. Which universe are we living in here.

Let us please return to the original title of this tread. This DARPA program as no military relevance since there is no LO, no high dynamic maneuver or efficient VTOL fans or reasonable endurance provided by only fuels not hybrid system. Again bureaucracy/ academics distraction rather operational relevance. 
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Burnelli projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 07:36:29 am »
Ok, it's a pity.
Couldn't find it via reverse picture search, too, but the big two bladed props
and the big wheels make me think of a rubber band powered model ...

Yes my dear Jemiba,

and maybe it was belonged to postwar,just my suggesting ?.
Alternative History and Future Speculation / The Scimitar FAW scenario
« Last post by zen on Today at 07:21:12 am »
This scenario is to work on how to proceed with the Scimitar FAW, Type 556 to NR/A.38 of which one example was ordered in 23 Sept 1954 XH451, canceled in April 1955.

This machine is notable for the following.

29" AI.18B, coupled with dual computer for Firestreak and Red Dean.
twin 30mm ADEN cannon.
Reheated RA.24R Avons.

Length 58.5ft
Span 37.17ft
Wing Area 478sqft
MTOW (carrier?) Long range fighter (two drop tanks, two guns, two Firestreak) 41,852lb.
Climb sea level 43,600ft/min
Speed sea level 690mph
Service ceiling 52,150ft

Obviously this would mean killing off the DH110 - Sea Vixen.
But to draw in required funds and capacity to make sense of this properly I suspect later marks of RAF Javelin would have to be sacrificed, at least the 80 FAW 7 that went straight to storage in 1956 because of being superseeded by FAW.8.
Possibly the mk6 needs to be sacrificed from 1957.
And certainly the 'Thin Wing' development.

Experimentation on a possible mixed powerplant variant, using a rocket motor in the tail would be explored and ultimately abandoned.

To further fund developments and make this a compromise between both RAF and RN, it seems logical the RN would have to give up on NA.39, funding instead a Strike derivative of the Type 556, such as the Type 564, albeit with reheat to make the machine more able to get off a Carrier's deck (though likely at the sacrifice of full fuel and a need to tank before the mission).
We can assume all marks come with a fully blown wing.

We can fairly easily conceive of the mkII comprising RB.106, AI.18C and Red Hebe.
As surely as we can envision an alternative using Spey's and AI.23. The latter element potentially permitting a further development as a true multirole machine.

FAA FAW mkI = 119.
RAF FAW mkI = 33+80-ish so approximately 113.
FAA S mkI = 76 to 100 (Scimitar F1 number and original order number)
RAF S mkI = 70 to 100 (F4 number and a notional figure for MRI).
FAA mkII = (circa 1965-67) 14 from the mkI run end, 15 newbuild, 67 conversions.
FAA S mkII = 84 (Buccaneer number).
RAF S mkII = 150 (P1154 and Jaguar scale number)

alternative path
Having both funded varients of the Scimitar FAW, a 'common' aircraft program is agreed circa 1958-1960 and so something approximate to the two seater Type 576 is set on as the solution, comprising reheated Avon RB.146's, AI.23 and nuclear strike facilities.

Scimitar F(G)R mk II.
RAF = 70 initial, with a further 80 post TSR.2 cancelation, potential further order of a mkIII.
FAA = 140 in total.

Assuming either of these scenario's go forward, several things result.
1. Red Dean is taken to service and likely either improved marks of this or a successor SARH AAM.
2. Sea Vixen, Buccaneer, and later Jaguar are the major casualties. With the addition of later marks of Javelin.
3. common successor program is put back to the later 1970s, though initially this would be the early 1970s. This obviates any rush to OR.346, removes the F4 from both RN and RAF needs.

Beyond this therefore the question is over exports.
Sea Vixen, Javelin, and bar a few to South Africa the Buccaneer did not achieve export success.
But can we say the same of these Scimitars?
I would presume a possible rival bid to the Saudis to EE's Lightning.
Alternative History and Future Speculation / Re: Q-band Tartar for the RN
« Last post by zen on Today at 07:15:52 am »
Should we not consider the Tartar County  and a 'Bristol' successor instead first?

Or perhaps the Type 12 with mk22 launcher?

That said could we not have seen a real 'common hull frigate' developed? Q-band Tartar is a medium to SHORAD system really.

However its plausible that if coupled with purchase of a AShM use-able from the mk16 or mk22 launcher that this could be applied to a notional Type 21. But at what cost?

One option is a 'lightweight' version of the Q-band system, closer possibly to the 'lightweight' Sea Wolf system (about 5tons). I suspect with the mk22 launcher.
Under such conditions a 'new' missile based on Sparrow would further reduce weight and be marketed as the replacement for older Q-band Tartar and Sea Cat systems.
Kew Air 2/4123

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10