Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1

Well the fact that LUVOIR is JWST’s big brother. Half the issue with the JWST is the fact that it has been pioneering a whole host of cutting edge technologies. That means that hopefully that when it comes to LUVOIR things will be easier a second time around.

Those technologies have nothing to do with LUVOIR.  Most of JWST cutting edge technologies have to do with viewing the IR spectrum and not the telescope design
3
The Aviation Historian issue 23 has an extensive article on the compressibility problems of the P-38 and makes a very convincing argument that the cause was the wing/fuselage pod junction. Included are a few pictures from NACA that I havent seen elsewhere.

Also illuminating in this article;

The British manager for the P-38 had W.E.W. Petter of Westland evaluate the problem; "He says that they have invariably had trouble when they have required that the air should expand simultaneously in two planes, as for instance when a body is mounted on a wing and its streamline tail coincides with the trailing edge of a wing, or when a fin and tailplane intersect and their trailing edges are roughly in the same plane."

Lockheed took issue with the testing NACA performed, even though they found the same improvement with extending the center pod over the course of multiple tunnel test. One NACA report on this is still unavailable to the public.

Lockheed started experimenting with a lengthened pod on its own in the fall of 1941, retrofitting two aircraft (!)

Highly recommended issue!
4
While researching the Hecht i've been confused by different lengths given by different sources :

- Luftarchiv.de says it was 1.75m
- A book titled "Warfare and the Third Reich: The Rise and Fall of Hitler's Armed Forces" says 8 feet https://books.google.dz/books?id=pYABCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT90&lpg=PT90&dq=hecht+gliding+bomb&source=bl&ots=BQrMHJjAeX&sig=6EUY_4dwMkOyY1jGhpG1ntR1s9Q&hl=fr&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwii9efboaLcAhWHERQKHRckBLIQ6AEIRTAH#v=onepage&q=hecht%20gliding%20bomb&f=false
- Apparently in  „Typenkompass – Deutsche Raketen und Lenkwaffen“ 5.88m is given.
- At some random blog i've seen 4.8m.

I wonder which one of these numbers you guys think is the correct one.

Thanks.
5
Actually you’d hope they’d learn from the JWST for any future similar telescope.


Learn what?

Please inform us less knowledgable on what could be learned from JWST?   And please leave out the urban and myths of the uninformed.

Well the fact that LUVOIR is JWST’s big brother. Half the issue with the JWST is the fact that it has been pioneering a whole host of cutting edge technologies. That means that hopefully that when it comes to LUVOIR things will be easier a second time around.
6
Actually you’d hope they’d learn from the JWST for any future similar telescope.


Learn what?

Please inform us less knowledgable on what could be learned from JWST?   And please leave out the urban and myths of the uninformed.
7
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: The very last Curtiss-Wright proposals?
« Last post by hesham on Today at 11:33:21 am »
Hi,

here is an Info about Curtiss Proposals I & II arrowhead research planes for the USN of 1948;

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=1306

By the way,

the Proposal "I" had not the same shape,but it was a high-mid swept narrow wing,and a T-tail
swept,also with a slender nose of the fuselage.
8
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Sipa S-300R and S-300M
« Last post by hesham on Today at 10:52:23 am »
Thank you my dear Toura.
9
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Sipa S-300R and S-300M
« Last post by toura on Today at 09:38:39 am »
hi all
10
That would make production quite a bit cheaper (and spares).
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10