Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: The Admiralty and the Helicopter
« Last post by CJGibson on Yesterday at 10:07:17 pm »
Hoping to have it at the printer soon.

Chris
2
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: The Admiralty and the Helicopter
« Last post by uk 75 on Yesterday at 12:21:17 pm »
Any update on a publication date? I am really looking forward to this book.
3
Added, thanks :)
4
Hi, just re-read my copy and noticed I need to register for more goodies!


Fantastic read, many thanks

5
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: The Admiralty and the Helicopter
« Last post by Hood on August 08, 2018, 11:34:57 am »
Things are progressing well with the production and I'm hopeful that the book will be at the printers for September.
6
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: The Admiralty and the Helicopter
« Last post by Geoff_B on August 08, 2018, 09:20:08 am »
Any more updates James & Chris ?
7
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: BAe P.1216: Supersonic ASTOVL fighter
« Last post by steelpillow on July 24, 2018, 05:48:49 am »
While I am waiting (grin), I have scaled the 3-view of the P.1216-41 on the back endpaper to 1:72. It's big for a Harrier derivative, compare it to the original P.1127 I have put alongside it in this photo:

By the way, if I wanted to publish that 1:72 set, whose permission would I need?
8
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: BAe P.1216: Supersonic ASTOVL fighter
« Last post by steelpillow on July 15, 2018, 12:05:36 pm »
Now you have me on the edge of my seat.  ;)
9
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: BAe P.1216: Supersonic ASTOVL fighter
« Last post by Harrier on July 15, 2018, 10:18:44 am »
BAe knew about the Vought work. They were concerned with using the booms to twist the inner wing, with the ailerons used to do this by affecting the flow over the tail.

They were addressing different problems from Vought - a PCB engine means thrust is never lacking, but in certain flight regimes key control aspects dominated, and a desire to not bleed power from the core for the reaction controls.

I can say more when I dig out that page. Work hectic at the moment.
10
ProjectTech Profiles / Re: BAe P.1216: Supersonic ASTOVL fighter
« Last post by steelpillow on July 15, 2018, 10:09:27 am »
A whole page of comments? Did it say anything else?

I don't think the BAe people can have been fully aware of the outboard tail's characteristics in the way that Vought were. It can easily be positioned in the wing upwash where it will provide a useful reduction in vortex-induced drag, and BAe have indeed moved it forward to a more effective position for that. But I am not sure if they knew what they were doing, or were simply lightening the plane by shortening the booms. Its interaction with the downwash would also have produced useful lift and would have compensated for the loss of the first 15% of the wing area. That leaves around 10% still to recover, which could easily be done by increasing the wing span a little, pushing the booms apart so that the span of the tail now matched the original wing span. Both these effects would also help to restore STOL lift, and good low-speed performance is a characteristic benefit of the outboard tail. That BAe did not realise this suggests that they were not paying attention to the Vought studies, or to the earlier Blohm & Voss studies that Vought did know about. But yes, sustained turn rate would suffer, due to the loss of forward lifting area and reduced tail moment arm. Which should not matter, unless you have by now developed a National allergy to thrust-vectoring during a dogfight. :(
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10