Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Designation Systems / Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Last post by simmie on Today at 06:34:27 pm »
A.W.17 (1) (1931) — single-seat monoplane fighter project with two Rolls-Royce  pusher engines (not built)
A.W.17 Aries  (2) (1930) — two-seat army co-operation biplane; improved Atlas I with easier access for maintenance,
increased dimensions, one 460 hp  A.S. Panther IV - 20/25 (1 built)

Am I the only one to spot the apparnt contradiction in the above entries.  the designation AW.17's second use is the year before the first.
2
So an aircraft with ornithopter slats! Neat.

Thanks Borovik! You are a bringer of mysteries, revelations and miracles! :)
3
Aerospace / Re: F-35 for Canada
« Last post by Avimimus on Today at 06:30:41 pm »
First, I wanted to thank you guys for the info, there is stuff I didn't know. I find Dragon029's arguments particularly compelling.

I can see a situation where the HAL Tejas could be a suitable fit.

Now you're just trying to wind us up.

:) Maybe. But only because it is easy.

But I'm actually quite serious that the Tejas makes a lot of sense.

If you are willing to forgo range and twin-engined requirements it provides a lot of capabilities:

The aircraft can be operated off of short-strips. It can achieve the super-sonic speeds needed to intercept high-subsonic patrol aircraft or off-course airliners. It has sufficient air-to-ground capabilities to provide precision air-support during foreign operations. A military contract of that scale with India would also be politically useful. So basically, it could do everything that we'd ask the CF-35 to do at a lower price-point. A major goal for Canada is to maintain experience with operating an air-force in case we should ever need to seriously re-arm and it would accomplish that along with provide the basic air-to-ground role that the CF-188/CF-18 has most often been used for (at least since we stopped intercepting Tu-95s on a regular basis).

4
https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/21/one-of-these-3-missiles-could-be-the-armys-next-interceptor-to-protect-against-indirect-fires/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DFN%20DNR%206/21/18&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Daily%20News%20Roundup

Quote

PARIS — The U.S. Army has awarded three $2.6 million contracts in the first phase of a program to find a second interceptor to defend against rockets, artillery, mortars, cruise missiles and drones.

Lockheed Martin was awarded one contract to mature its Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK) missile out of the science and technology phase and into the development phase.

And Raytheon received two awards: one to qualify Sky Hunter — which is the U.S. version of Israeli company Rafael’s Tamir interceptor — and another based on the Accelerated Improved Interceptor Initiative (AI3).

The U.S. Army indicated in its fiscal year 2019 budget documents that it wanted a new surface-to-air missile to provide capability to counter RAM, cruise missile and drone threats and plans to hold a competition to procure it.

The missile the Army is calling the Expanded Mission Area Missile, or EMAM, will be the second interceptor qualified for the Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2 program, or IFPC Inc. 2, which has been in development to counter RAM threats for years.
5
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Vought 4 Ducted Fan Design
« Last post by Sundog on Today at 04:56:26 pm »
Given that the thrust vectors to the vertical, it would seem that at a minimum it would land vertically.
6
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Vought 4 Ducted Fan Design
« Last post by _Del_ on Today at 04:47:58 pm »
Well, it's set up as a ducted fan. So the assumption is a demonstrator for a configuration.

And you have to have a place to hang ordinance for CAS, and the high-aspect ratio helps squeeze out some range so that makes some sense. Maybe even a ESTOL config as opposed to V/STOL?
7
...
8
Aerospace / Re: North American XB-70
« Last post by Johnbr on Today at 04:20:10 pm »
Two XB-70s were completed and flown, with a third (a YB-70, actually) cancelled while under construction.
9
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by seruriermarshal on Today at 04:12:35 pm »
German and France never buy F-35 .
10
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Vought 4 Ducted Fan Design
« Last post by Orionblamblam on Today at 04:04:51 pm »
The cockpit does have the look of a CAS aircraft, but the relatively small engines would *seem* to indicate a relatively low mass if it's meant for VTOL. Additionally, those are some excessively large wings if it is meant to be a developed, operational aircraft, but they might be just fine for a plane that is expected to land horizontally sometimes because something went amiss.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10