Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Turns out, one of the TB's intended engines has survived:
:o Lockheed should definitely stick to designing aircraft.  Even for the era, those are some of the worst FA uniforms I've ever seen...
So, no appreciation for Pucci, then?  I'd rather see this than the outfits I saw on a Virgin America flight from a few years ago.  At that time, I was wondering who these people in '80s workout clothes were helping people with their carry on bags.

I enjoyed seeing these again, particularly the close up shot on the Lockheed SST.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Fairchild M-185F
« Last post by famvburg on Today at 07:47:31 am »
IIRC, they were B-47 engines, pylons and nacelles.
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Projects in Switzerland
« Last post by hesham on Today at 05:38:03 am »
Very nice Info dear Kuno,

and we are thirsty for more Projects.
Space Projects / Re: Manned "Cloudbase" in Venus Atmosphere
« Last post by Archibald on Today at 05:00:15 am »
Now that's interesting. Well I suppose the main drawback is Venus gravity pull, which is as bad as Earth, since they are the same size and mass. The huge issue would be to get the processed phosphorus out of Venus gravity well.  It is a giant PITA on Earth for any SSTO, and it must be the exact, same giant PITA on Venus.

Going from a Venus floating cloudbase station to Venus orbit or escape is very similar to air-launching a planetary probe on Earth. Balloons or aircraft substract less than 1 km/s of delta-v, but escaping from the planet takes 11 km/s, plus that's logarithm, not decimal, so far worse than "11 times", closer from 15 or 20 times the energy.

It essentially boils down to
7.7 km/s from Earth surface to Earth orbit, minus drag and gravity losses (balloons change nothing compared to surface), so +1.5 km/s, total 9.2 km/s. Then that's Earth orbit, Earth escape is 11.2 km/s, so that's +2 km/s.
Venus has the exact same issue - the delta-v must be extremely similar since, while Venus is a little smaller than Earth, its atmosphere is thick chicken soup so drag losses must be worse than Earth.

As much as I like HAVOC sheer coolness factor, the huge issue would be for the crew capsule to lift-off from the zeppelin and to accelerate to Venus escape velocity - 11 km/s or bust ! A manned capsule is one hell of a heavy thing (20 000 to 50 000 pounds) and the rocket to launch it to 11 km/s is pretty huge, and the whole thing hangs on a Zeppelin ? Really ?
Admittedly, airships have far more lift on Venus than Earth because the atmosphere is extremely dense. But if one compare with Stratolaunch, then you need some kind of "Stratolaunch Zeppelin" to launch a 250 mt ton rocket, Delta II size, with a 12 000 pound capsule (and 12 000 pounds is a Soyuz-size capsule, very very small). And then, not even sure it can even reach Venus orbit, minus escape velocity.
Naval Projects / Re: III Reich Aircraft Carrier Projects
« Last post by Hood on Today at 03:35:07 am »
As far as I know the second Graf Zeppelin class carrier would have been identical to the first ship, probably including the 1942 modifications made to Graf Zeppelin (Atlantic bow, revised 2.4m wide bulges above roll keel).
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Projects in Switzerland
« Last post by Kuno on Yesterday at 10:17:54 pm »

The same was the case fro the Pilatus SB-2. The completed project was actually sold to Pilatus who then built it (but only once).

Here I have to correct my earlier statement: It was not the case that the project "SB-2" was sold to Pilatus.

The aircraft was designed and developped by the "Studienbüro für Spezialflugzeuge" at ETHZ on order of the Swiss Civil Aviation
The "Studienbüro" signed a contract with Pilatus for the construction, building and testing of the aircraft
The amount considerd for all those works was not enough... and as I understand now, not all the invoices of Pilauts were paid in the end... this may be the reason why sometimes we read that Pilatus had "bought" the project.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Fairchild M-185F
« Last post by riggerrob on Yesterday at 02:28:23 pm »
Fairchild test-flew a similar engine configuration when they modified a C-123 to XC-123A configuration by installing a pair of GE J47 turbojets under each wing with each pair of engines twinned in a single nacelle.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10