Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
The Bar / Re: Re- Modern U.S. ICBM's ???
« Last post by marauder2048 on Today at 04:10:20 pm »
With the probable ascension of Adam Smith to the chairmanship of the House Armed Services Committee, we can expect to see a screeching halt to both ICBM and tactical nuclear weapons programs.

I sure as hell hope not but democrats being democrats. . . At the very least I see them holding the programs hostage to try to get more entitlement dollars to pay off their base.

Rather depends on this week's definition of "destabilizing weapon." 
User Artwork / Re: Motocar's Cutaway drawings
« Last post by Motocar on Today at 04:04:02 pm »
Cutaway Heli-Plane, author Douglas Rolfe and published in the agazine popular Mechanics edition 08-1962 and retouche by Motocar
User Artwork / Zeppelin twin pulse jet fighter
« Last post by Skyraider3D on Today at 03:22:49 pm »
Commissioned by Dan Sharp (newdeskdan) for his bookazine on Luftwaffe secret designs, which was released last spring.
Please see,30273.0.html or go to to order.
Only some sketches exist of this curious contraption, but the knowledge it was built with the use of a He 162 wing, Me 109 tailplane and As 014 engines helped making a decent reconstruction.
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: Bf-109 Versuchs- und Erprobungstrager
« Last post by Skyraider3D on Today at 03:13:49 pm »
It's out... but I'm not liking the price and reviews seem a little hesitant. A 496-page paperback?
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Various Henschel projects
« Last post by Skyraider3D on Today at 03:06:45 pm »
My various artworks of the Hs P 122.
The first two were commissioned by Dan Sharp (newdeskdan) for one of his excellent bookazines, while the last one was originally commissioned by Thomas Hitchcock for Manfred Griehl's second volume on Luftwaffe secret jet projects.
Greetings All -

From the Vought Archives, a drawing of the V-1000B.

Enjoy the day!  Mark
User Artwork / Re: Speculative/fictional Su-57 production version
« Last post by Trident on Today at 02:45:04 pm »
I believe they serve an aerodynamic purpose as well as housing the SRAAM missiles.

Yes, they are going to be accounted for in the area ruling of the overall airframe, so I assumed at least some of the spare cross sectional area is put to to beneficial use in blending the engine/intake nacelle junction into the wing root. A bit like the removal of space reserved for thrust reversers in the YF-23 nacelles led to the trough between them having a reduced depth on the EMD F-23 design.

Wasn't there a speculative naval version of the Su-57 with folding wingtips for the Shtorm carrier (I didn't notice wing-fold lines in the drawing)?

Yeah, there is a wing fold line in my drawing too though. Perhaps I should update the side and front views with dashed outlines of the outer panels in folded position to make that more obvious.

Also, from what I read the deal with the Indians fell apart because Sukhoi did not give up the codes and drawings to the aircraft's design so that India could manufacture the aircraft in India. Maybe an export version with the supercruise capable Izdelie-30 engine and serrated exhaust system.

The Izd. 30 engines are in there already, including serrated nozzles. Although I'm reasonably happy with how the colourized drawing turned out given my crude methods, I'm not experienced or skilled at making camouflage profiles. I can change the national insignia to the Indian roundel and make it a uniform grey scheme (which conveniently matches modern IAF practise) if you want, but that's about as far as I'll take it :)

The SRAAM bays are in a good place structurally... I probably wouldn't touch them.

While they possibly are not as deleterious structurally as on the F-22/J-20, due to their semi-external nature, if 1) no demand for more than 6 AAMs exists and 2) you waive the requirement to accommodate legacy LOBL missiles, SRAAM bays just become excrescent (both literally on the Su-57 and figuratively) altogether. Why bother to accept even a reduced penalty if an alternative with zero impact gets the job done just fine?

If I were imagining a late version... I think I'd go with the fancy 2d nozzel with the exhaust mixer (for IR reduction?) that was shown in a patent. Anyway, that is my 2 cents for what it is worth.

IR signature reduction is an interesting point, we're still not quite certain how the Su-57 will handle this after all (will it get that mysterious aerosol system?). For the most part, I stayed away from the nozzle question beyond adding serrations of the kind that are visible on the Izd. 30 pictures we've seen to date. Currently, the engine appears to use a tilted-axis ball-joint TVC nozzle like Izd. 117(S), but personally I'd favour Salyut's KliVT/PYBBN-type 3D solution which is potentially lighter and less complex. For IR signature reduction, I'd consider an ejector effect as discussed for advanced F110 derivatives in this GE paper:

That again would give a simple yet effective route to 3-axis TVC with reduced IR signature (relatively low number of actuators required compared to a ball-joint, lower thrust penalty than a rectangular nozzle, no aerosol storage).
Kamov has lost to Mil' Blackhawski 400+ km/h less radical contender.
Finally, the Covert Shores article on AN-1.

Definite real aircraft project/ concept?

Very much so, yes.

would love to know more....

Then boy are you in luck:

That looks like the answer.  I guess they figure the JDAM doesn't need a wide field of regard so a little window at the tip will work.

I was thinking it might have been an AMSTE JDAM using MTI radar updates to keep the GPS coordinates locked on the target.
AMSTE was what I was thinking of but heard not just updates but internal onboard MMW.
Laser dependence too scary in the modern context.

They were looking at a MMW seeker that is form-factor compatible.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10